Trial reportPediatric diabetes2016
Changes in beta cell function during the proximate post-diagnosis period in persons with type 1 diabetes.
Trial report in Pediatric diabetes, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Gut microbiota-modulating interventions in paediatric type 1 diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis.European journal of pediatrics · 2026Pooled it
- Higher risk of severe hypoglycemia in children and adolescents with a rapid loss of C-peptide during the first 6 years after type 1 diabetes diagnosis.BMJ open diabetes research & care · 2022Article
- Cell type-specific immune phenotypes predict loss of insulin secretion in new-onset type 1 diabetes.JCI insight · 2019Article
- Residual beta-cell function in diabetes children followed and diagnosed in the TEDDY study compared to community controls.Pediatric diabetes · 2017Article
- Type 1 Diabetes: Disease Stratification.Biomedicine hubReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectivePrior studies examining beta-cell preservation in type 1 diabetes have predominantly assessed stimulated C-peptide concentrations approximately 10 wk after diagnosis. We examined whether earlier assessments might aid in prediction of beta cell function over time.
methodsUsing data from a multi-center randomized trial assessing the effect of intensive diabetes management initiated within 1 wk of diagnosis, we assessed which clinical factors predicted 90-min mixed-meal tolerance test (MMTT) stimulated C-peptide values obtained 2 and 6 wk after diagnosis. We also studied associations of these factors with C-peptide values at 1- and 2-year post-diagnosis. Data from intervention and control groups were pooled.
resultsAmong 67 study participants (mean age 13.3 ± 5.7 yr, range 7.8-45.7 yr) in multivariable analyses, C-peptide increased from baseline to 2 wks and then 6 wk. C-peptide levels at these times were significantly correlated with 1- and 2-yr C-peptide concentrations (all p < 0.001), with the strongest observed associations between 6-wk C-peptide and the 1- and 2-yr values (r = 0.66 and r = 0.61, respectively). In multivariable analyses, greater baseline and 6-wk C-peptide, and older age independently predicted greater 1- and 2-yr C-peptide concentrations.
conclusionsC-peptide assessments close to diagnosis were predictive of subsequent C-peptide production. Our data demonstrate a clear increase in C-peptide over the initial 6 wk after diabetes diagnosis followed by a plateau. Our data do not suggest that MMTT assessments performed closer to diagnosis than 6 wk would improve prediction of subsequent residual beta cell function.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.