Type 1 diabetes recurrence after SARS-CoV-2 infection in a subject with pancreas transplantation.

BACKGROUND: During COVID-19 pandemic, several studies have demonstrated a strong link between SARS-CoV-2 infection and diabetes mellitus. Hyperglycaemia is a frequent event during the infection, also in patients without a history of diabetes. Furthermore, several cases of diabetic ketoacidosis during COVID-19 disease have been described. No data are available about the effects of SARS-CoV-2 infection on glycaemic control in pancreas transplant patients. CASE PRESENTATION: A 45-year-old woman affected by type 1 diabetes mellitus was treated with kidney-pancreas transplantation in 2015, 6 years before COVID-19 infection. After transplantation, insulin therapy was stopped with a good glycaemic control during the following years.After SARS-CoV-2 infection, she developed severe hyperglycaemia requiring insulin therapy again. During the acute phase of the infection, the detection of antibodies against islet cells (ICA) and against glutamic acid decarboxylase (GAD) was found positive. CONCLUSIONS: The onset of hyperglycaemia after SARS-CoV-2 infection might be the result of a direct virus-induced toxicity or the effect of a virus-mediated activation of autoimmunity.

Teleassistance for Patients With Type 1 Diabetes During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Results of a Pilot Study.

BACKGROUND: Telemedicine use in chronic disease management has markedly increased during health emergencies due to COVID-19. Diabetes and technologies supporting diabetes care, including glucose monitoring devices, software analyzing glucose data, and insulin delivering systems, would facilitate remote and structured disease management. Indeed, most of the currently available technologies to store and transfer web-based data to be shared with health care providers. OBJECTIVE: During the COVID-19 pandemic, we provided our patients the opportunity to manage their diabetes remotely by implementing technology. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of 2 virtual visits on glycemic control parameters among patients with type 1 diabetes (T1D) during the lockdown period. METHODS: This prospective observational study included T1D patients who completed 2 virtual visits during the lockdown period. The glucose outcomes that reflected the benefits of the virtual consultation were time in range (TIR), time above range, time below range, mean daily glucose, glucose management indicator (GMI), and glycemic variability. This metric was generated using specific computer programs that automatically upload data from the devices used to monitor blood or interstitial glucose levels. If needed, we changed the ongoing treatment at the first virtual visit. RESULTS: Among 209 eligible patients with T1D, 166 completed 2 virtual visits, 35 failed to download glucose data, and 8 declined the visit. Among the patients not included in the study, we observed a significantly lower proportion of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) and continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) users (n=7/43, 16% vs n=155/166, 93.4% and n=9/43, 21% vs n=128/166, 77.1%, respectively; P<.001) compared to patients who completed the study. TIR significantly increased from the first (62%, SD 18%) to the second (65%, SD 16%) virtual visit (P=.02); this increase was more marked among patients using the traditional meter (n=11; baseline TIR=55%, SD 17% and follow-up TIR=66%, SD 13%; P=.01) than among those using CGM, and in those with a baseline GMI of ≥7.5% (n=46; baseline TIR=45%, SD 15% and follow-up TIR=53%, SD 18%; P<.001) than in those with a GMI of <7.5% (n=120; baseline TIR=68%, SD 15% and follow-up TIR=69%, SD 15%; P=.98). The only variable independently associated with TIR was the change of ongoing therapy. The unstandardized beta coefficient (B) and 95% CI were 5 (95% CI 0.7-8.0) (P=.02). The type of glucose monitoring device and insulin delivery systems did not influence glucometric parameters. CONCLUSIONS: These findings indicate that the structured virtual visits help maintain and improve glycemic control in situations where in-person visits are not feasible.

SARS-CoV-2 and DPP4 inhibition: Is it time to pray for Janus Bifrons?

Diabetes could be a risk factor for severity and mortality in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 COVID-19. It has been hypothesized that DPP4 inhibition, a therapy currently available for type 2 diabetes, might represent a target for decreasing the risk of the acute respiratory complications of the COVID-19 infection but (1) lack of demonstration of SARS-CoV2 binding to DPP4 (2) possible protective role of sDPP4 in Middle East respiratory Syndrome (MERS-CoV) (3) demonstrated inhibition and downregulation of DPP4 by HIV1 and MERS-CoV and (4) not exclusive role of the receptor binding in tropism of the Coronavirus family, support that DPP4 inhibition at present doesn't represent a plausible approach to mitigate COVID-19.