Endocrine practice : official journal of the American College of Endocrinology and the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists · 2023
Children and Adolescents With Hybrid Diabetes: A Management Conundrum.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Gagnon Charles A, Schmitt Jessica A, Ashraf Ambika P
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: Hybrid diabetes (HD); ie, insulin resistance with positive diabetes-associated autoantibodies (DAAs) is increasing in children. We aimed to compare the characteristics of children with HD with those with type 1 diabetes (T1DM) and type 2 diabetes (T2DM) at diagnosis and after 2 years.
METHODS: A retrospective review of patients aged 0 to 19 years, with C-peptide and 4 DAA measurements available, who were diangosed with new-onset diabetes from 2016 to 2020 were included in the analysis.
RESULTS: Overall, 102 subjects were included, 32 with T1DM, 21 with HD, and 49 with T2DM. Amongst the groups (T1DM vs HD vs T2DM), there were differences in the proportion of non-Hispanic Whites (81.3% vs 47.6% vs 16.4%, P < .001), frequency of family history of T2DM (37.5% vs 100% vs 85.4%, P < .001), acanthosis nigricans (0% vs 42.9% vs 93.9%, P <.001), median body mass index z-score (-0.55 vs 1.8 vs 2.4, P <.001), and median C-peptide (0.4 ng/mL vs 0.9 ng/mL vs 2.4 ng/mL, P <.001). At 2 years, differences were seen in median body mass index z-scores (0.3 vs 1.9 vs 2.3, P <.001), mean HDL-cholesterol (58.0 mg/dL vs 48.2 mg/dL vs 39.5 mg/dL, P <.001), and the use of basal insulin (100% vs 100% vs 74.4%, P <.001).
CONCLUSION: Phenotypic and metabolic differences were seen in youth with T1DM, HD, and T2DM at diagnosis and follow-up. At 2 years, all subjects with HD remained insulin dependent whereas some with T2DM were not, indicating the need for targeted interventions to address the etiopathogenesis.
METHODS: A retrospective review of patients aged 0 to 19 years, with C-peptide and 4 DAA measurements available, who were diangosed with new-onset diabetes from 2016 to 2020 were included in the analysis.
RESULTS: Overall, 102 subjects were included, 32 with T1DM, 21 with HD, and 49 with T2DM. Amongst the groups (T1DM vs HD vs T2DM), there were differences in the proportion of non-Hispanic Whites (81.3% vs 47.6% vs 16.4%, P < .001), frequency of family history of T2DM (37.5% vs 100% vs 85.4%, P < .001), acanthosis nigricans (0% vs 42.9% vs 93.9%, P <.001), median body mass index z-score (-0.55 vs 1.8 vs 2.4, P <.001), and median C-peptide (0.4 ng/mL vs 0.9 ng/mL vs 2.4 ng/mL, P <.001). At 2 years, differences were seen in median body mass index z-scores (0.3 vs 1.9 vs 2.3, P <.001), mean HDL-cholesterol (58.0 mg/dL vs 48.2 mg/dL vs 39.5 mg/dL, P <.001), and the use of basal insulin (100% vs 100% vs 74.4%, P <.001).
CONCLUSION: Phenotypic and metabolic differences were seen in youth with T1DM, HD, and T2DM at diagnosis and follow-up. At 2 years, all subjects with HD remained insulin dependent whereas some with T2DM were not, indicating the need for targeted interventions to address the etiopathogenesis.