Long-term Outcomes With Islet-Alone and Islet-After-Kidney Transplantation for Type 1 Diabetes in the Clinical Islet Transplantation Consortium: The CIT-08 Study.

OBJECTIVE: To determine long-term outcomes for islet-alone and islet-after-kidney transplantation in adults with type 1 diabetes complicated by impaired awareness of hypoglycemia. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: This was a prospective interventional and observational cohort study of islet-alone (n = 48) and islet-after-kidney (n = 24) transplant recipients followed for up to 8 years after intraportal infusion of one or more purified human pancreatic islet products under standardized immunosuppression. Outcomes included duration of islet graft survival (stimulated C-peptide ≥0.3 ng/mL), on-target glycemic control (HbA1c <7.0%), freedom from severe hypoglycemia, and insulin independence. RESULTS: Of the 48 islet-alone and 24 islet-after-kidney transplantation recipients, 26 and 8 completed long-term follow-up with islet graft function, 15 and 7 withdrew from follow-up with islet graft function, and 7 and 9 experienced islet graft failure, respectively. Actuarial islet graft survival at median and final follow-up was 84% and 56% for islet-alone and 69% and 49% for islet-after-kidney (P = 0.007) with 77% and 49% of islet-alone and 57% and 35% of islet-after-kidney transplantation recipients maintaining posttransplant HbA1c <7.0% (P = 0.0017); freedom from severe hypoglycemia was maintained at >90% in both cohorts. Insulin independence was achieved by 74% of islet-alone and islet-after-kidney transplantation recipients, with more than one-half maintaining insulin independence during long-term follow-up. Kidney function remained stable during long-term follow-up in both cohorts, and rates of sensitization against HLA were low. Severe adverse events occurred at 0.31 per patient-year for islet-alone and 0.43 per patient-year for islet-after-kidney transplantation. CONCLUSIONS: Islet transplantation results in durable islet graft survival permitting achievement of glycemic targets in the absence of severe hypoglycemia for most appropriately indicated recipients having impaired awareness of hypoglycemia, with acceptable safety of added immunosuppression for both islet-alone and islet-after-kidney transplantation.

Phase 3 trial of human islet-after-kidney transplantation in type 1 diabetes.

Allogeneic islet transplant offers a minimally invasive option for ß cell replacement in the treatment of type 1 diabetes (T1D). The CIT consortium trial of purified human pancreatic islets (PHPI) in patients with T1D after kidney transplant (CIT06), a National Institutes of Health-sponsored phase 3, prospective, open-label, single-arm pivotal trial of PHPI, was conducted in 24 patients with impaired awareness of hypoglycemia while receiving intensive insulin therapy. PHPI were manufactured using standardized processes. PHPI transplantation was effective with 62.5% of patients achieving the primary endpoint of freedom from severe hypoglycemic events and HbA1c  ≤ 6.5% or reduced by ≥ 1 percentage point at 1 year posttransplant. Median HbA1c declined from 8.1% before to 6.0% at 1 year and 6.3% at 2 and 3 years following transplant (P < .001 for all vs baseline), with related improvements in hypoglycemia awareness and glucose variability. The improved metabolic control was associated with better health-related and diabetes-related quality of life. The procedure was safe and kidney allograft function remained stable after 3 years. These results add to evidence establishing allogeneic islet transplant as a safe and effective treatment for patients with T1D and unstable glucose control despite intensive insulin treatment, supporting the indication for PHPI in the post-renal transplant setting.

Final Results of the RHAPSODY Trial: A Multi-Center, Phase 2 Trial Using a Continual Reassessment Method to Determine the Safety and Tolerability of 3K3A-APC, A Recombinant Variant of Human Activated Protein C, in Combination with Tissue Plasminogen Activator, Mechanical Thrombectomy or both in Moderate to Severe Acute Ischemic Stroke.

OBJECTIVE: Agonism of protease-activated receptor (PAR) 1 by activated protein C (APC) provides neuro- and vasculoprotection in experimental neuroinjury models. The pleiotropic PAR1 agonist, 3K3A-APC, reduces neurological injury and promotes vascular integrity; 3K3A-APC proved safe in human volunteers. We performed a randomized, controlled, blinded trial to determine the maximally tolerated dose (MTD) of 3K3A-APC in ischemic stroke patients. METHODS: The NeuroNEXT trial, RHAPSODY, used a novel continual reassessment method to determine the MTD using tiers of 120, 240, 360, and 540 µg/kg of 3K3A-APC. After intravenous tissue plasminogen activator, intra-arterial mechanical thrombectomy, or both, patients were randomized to 1 of the 4 doses or placebo. Vasculoprotection was assessed as microbleed and intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) rates. RESULTS: Between January 2015 and July 2017, we treated 110 patients. Demographics resembled a typical stroke population. The MTD was the highest-dose 3K3A-APC tested, 540 µg/kg, with an estimated toxicity rate of 7%. There was no difference in prespecified ICH rates. In exploratory analyses, 3K3A-APC reduced ICH rates compared to placebo from 86.5% to 67.4% in the combined treatment arms (p = 0.046) and total hemorrhage volume from an average of 2.1 ± 5.8 ml in placebo to 0.8 ± 2.1 ml in the combined treatment arms (p = 0.066). INTERPRETATION: RHAPSODY is the first trial of a neuroprotectant for acute ischemic stroke in a trial design allowing thrombectomy, thrombolysis, or both. The MTD was 540 µg/kg for the PAR1 active cytoprotectant, 3K3A-APC. A trend toward lower hemorrhage rate in an exploratory analysis requires confirmation. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical Trial Registration-URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT02222714. ANN NEUROL 2019;85:125-136.

Consistency of quantitative scores of hypoglycemia severity and glycemic lability and comparison with continuous glucose monitoring system measures in long-standing type 1 diabetes.

BACKGROUND: In long-standing type 1 diabetes (T1D), loss of endogenous insulin secretion and glucose dysregulation can lead to severe hypoglycemia and associated complications. Here, we report the serial consistency and the correlation between different scores that characterize glucose dysregulation using self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG), in a cohort of T1D individuals being evaluated for transplant eligibility in Clinical Islet Transplantation Consortium trials. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: In total, 152 C-peptide-negative T1D subjects with at least one severe hypoglycemia episode in the prior year documented SMBG at enrollment and every 6 months until deemed ineligible or transplanted. SMBG was used to calculate the HYPO score, Lability Index (LI), and mean amplitude of glycemic excursion (MAGE). Additionally, a blinded continuous glucose monitoring system (CGMS) was worn for 72 h at enrollment and every 12 months. RESULTS: In this cohort, LI was the most consistent (intraclass correlation coefficient=0.70) over time, followed by the HYPO score (0.51), with MAGE being the least consistent (0.36). Although MAGE and LI were highly correlated with each other, neither correlated with CGMS SD or glucose coefficient of variation (CV). Subjects spent a median of 97 min/day at <54 mg/dL using CGMS. The HYPO score correlated with CGMS time below 54 mg/dL and glucose CV. CONCLUSIONS: The HYPO score and LI are more consistent than MAGE in patients with established T1D experiencing severe hypoglycemic events and may be especially useful both for identifying subjects experiencing the greatest difficulty in maintaining glycemic control and for longitudinal assessment of novel interventions.

Sedation, cognition, and antihistamines.

First-generation antihistamines are well-known to cause subjective drowsiness. A myriad of studies has also been published that suggest a clear relationship between the use of these drugs and objective performance impairment. Although not all of the tests used in these studies have been validated, the data are fairly consistent, and suggest a difference between earlier (first-generation) sedating antihistamines and the newer (second-generation) nonsedating antihistamines.