1. Stimulated urine C-peptide creatinine ratio vs serum C-peptide level for monitoring of β-cell function in the first year after diagnosis of Type 1 diabetes.
- Author
-
Tatovic D, Luzio S, Dunseath G, Liu Y, Alhadj Ali M, Peakman M, and Dayan CM
- Subjects
- Adult, Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1 blood, Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1 drug therapy, Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1 urine, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Male, Meals, Postprandial Period, Proinsulin therapeutic use, Time Factors, Urinalysis, Young Adult, C-Peptide blood, C-Peptide urine, Creatinine urine, Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1 diagnosis, Insulin-Secreting Cells physiology, Monitoring, Physiologic methods
- Abstract
Aims: To determine if urine C-peptide/creatinine ratio is a useful tool for monitoring β-cell function in new-onset Type 1 diabetes., Methods: Data were obtained from a prospective immunomodulation study in people with Type 1 diabetes ≤ 3 months from diagnosis, with a standard mixed-meal tolerance test and measurement of urine C-peptide/creatinine ratio carried out at 0, 3, 6, 9 and 12 months. The change in the insulin-dose-adjusted HbA
1c level was also correlated with the change in serum/urine C-peptide level during the 12-month follow-up period., Results: A significant reduction in urine C-peptide/creatinine ratio, measured after a mixed-meal, was reached at 9 months (-45.4%), whilst the reduction in stimulated serum C-peptide level reached significance after 3 months (-54.7%) in placebo-treated participants. Neither change in stimulated serum C-peptide nor change in urine C-peptide level correlated with each other, and nor did change in insulin-dose-adjusted HbA1c level in the first 6 months, but all measures correlated significantly in the second half of the 12-month follow-up period., Conclusion: Mixed-meal-stimulated urine C-peptide/creatinine ratio was similar to, although less sensitive than, stimulated serum C-peptide level in monitoring β-cell function during the first year after diagnosis. Because the former is significantly less invasive, it warrants inclusion in further studies in Type 1 diabetes and may represent an attractive alternative outcome measure in cohort studies and in children., (© 2016 Diabetes UK.)- Published
- 2016
- Full Text
- View/download PDF