Type 1 and type 2 diabetes mellitus: are they mutually exclusive?

INTRODUCTION: With advancement in the understanding of the pathogenesis underlying diabetes mellitus (DM), the boundary between type 1 and type 2 DM (T1DM and T2DM) does not seem to be as clear cut as previously thought. This study was designed to test the possibility of overlap between the spectra of immune-mediated DM and insulin resistance. METHODS: To test for the possibility of overlap, we looked for autoantibodies typical of T1DM in patients with classical T2DM, and insulin resistance in patients with T1DM. Autoantibodies against islet cell antigen, glutamic acid decarboxylase-65 and insulinoma-associated antigen-2 were tested in 82 patients with T2DM and 27 patients with T1DM. The patients had been diagnosed on clinical criteria using standard laboratory techniques. Clinical parameters of diagnostic importance were noted, and homeostatic model assessment of insulin resistance (HOMA-IR) was calculated using fasting insulin and fasting blood glucose ratio. RESULTS: Autoantibodies against one or more beta cell antigens were detected in 12.19% of patients clinically diagnosed to have T2DM, and insulin resistance (HOMA-IR > 2.5) was diagnosed in 37.03% of patients with T1DM. It was not possible to identify any combination of clinical or biochemical markers that could predict autoantibody positivity in T2DM patients. T1DM patients with insulin resistance had a significantly higher body mass index than their insulin-sensitive counterparts (p = 0.02). CONCLUSION: Autoantibodies against beta cell antigens are detectable in insulin-resistant T2DM patients, and insulin resistance may be present in relatively overweight T1DM patients. No differentiating clinical features that might predict autoantibody positivity in T2DM patients were found.

Glycaemic, insulin and ghrelin responses to traditional South Asian flatbreads in diabetic and healthy subjects.

In the South-East Asian subcontinent, flatbreads contribute the main portion of carbohydrate to a meal. There are no specific data on the effect of different flatbreads on satiety and recurrent hunger, as indicated by the duration of ghrelin suppression after a meal. The present study was designed to examine the glycaemic, insulin and ghrelin responses to traditional subcontinental breads in type 2 diabetic subjects and healthy volunteers. For this purpose, twelve normoglycaemic healthy volunteers and ten type 2 diabetic patients, in the fasting state, consumed one of five common flatbreads on consecutive days. Capillary blood glucose was examined in the fasting state and serially for 5 h after a meal. Serum insulin and ghrelin levels were determined at hourly intervals for 5 h after the consumption of bran and plain chapatti flatbreads. The incremental area under the curve (iAUC) was calculated for glycaemic and insulin responses, while the net AUC was used to assess the ghrelin response. The results showed that glycaemic and insulin iAUC were lowest for bran chapatti, and highest for plain chapatti. Furthermore, bran chapatti showed maximum ghrelin suppression in both normal and diabetic groups. In conclusion, the low-glycaemic index bran chapatti flatbread had a lower postprandial glycaemic excursion and insulin response, and a more prolonged suppression of ghrelin levels, compared with the plain chapatti flatbread, and in each case, the difference was greater for the diabetic subjects than for the normal subjects. The inclusion of these flatbreads in the diabetic/weight-reducing diet may help weight loss by promoting satiety and reducing hyperinsulinaemia.