Skip to main content
main-content
Top

05-20-2022 | Immunotherapy | Hot topic review | Article

How far has immunotherapy for type 1 diabetes progressed?

Author: Eleanor McDermid

medwireNews Hot Topic Reviews provide up-to-date overviews of fast-moving areas of research to help healthcare providers keep abreast of the latest developments that may influence patient care.

Given the huge and unrelenting glucose management demands of type 1 diabetes, it is not surprising that prevention, or at the very least early stabilization, of the condition has long been a holy grail for researchers.

In this Hot Topic Review, we provide a whistle-stop tour of the many immunotherapies that have been tested to date, recount the successes and failures, and outline what’s on the horizon.

What is the rationale for immunotherapy in type 1 diabetes?

Type 1 diabetes is believed to result from the autoimmune destruction of beta cells, a process seemingly driven largely by T cells in its earliest stages, but with evidence for the involvement of B cells, cytokines, and other important elements of the immune response.

Thus, interventions that dampen the immune response by directly targeting effector cells or boosting regulatory cells will in theory prevent or at least slow the destruction of beta cells. A multitude of immune-modulating therapies have been developed for other autoimmune diseases and cancers, and these have well-established safety profiles, facilitating rapid testing in people with type 1 diabetes; the authors of a 2019 review identified nearly 70 studies in people with diabetes [1].

A second major strand of enquiry is whether antigen-based interventions could restore immune tolerance and halt the attack on beta cells.

In newly diagnosed people this could minimize insulin doses and reduce hypoglycemia risk; for high-risk people with autoantibodies it could delay the time to diabetes diagnosis or even prevent them from ever needing to inject insulin.

How have immunotherapies fared in clinical trials?

General immunosuppressants

Some of the earliest agents to be tested were the glucocorticoid prednisone [2]; azathioprine alone [3, 4] and in combination with prednisone [5]; mycophenolate mofetil [6]; and cyclosporine [7,8]. All of these treatments had positive effects on C-peptide decline, indicating that they slowed the decline in beta-cell function, but this did not necessarily come with improved metabolic control. Three of 20 study participants given azathioprine plus prednisone for at least a year had little or no need for insulin after 2 years of continued therapy, but this was also the case for one of the 20 people in the placebo group.

T- and B-cell targeted immunosuppressants

Most medications in this category tested thus far target T cells, with one of the earliest efforts involving antithymocyte globulin (ATG), which binds to multiple T-cell antigens. In the START trial a dose of 6.5 mg/kg had no significant effect on beta-cell function [9], yet in a later study a low dose of 2.5 mg/kg significantly slowed C-peptide decline [10], with the effect persisting 2 years after the single dose was administered [11].

More recent candidate drugs with specific mechanisms include the fusion protein abatacept, which prevents full T-cell activation by binding to two receptors expressed by antigen-presenting cells. People with new-onset diabetes given monthly abatacept infusions in a phase 2 trial had significantly improved C-peptide responses at the 2-year follow-up, but this was due to a slower rate of decline during the first 6 months only, leading the researchers to suggest that the role of the T cells in type 1 diabetes pathogenesis becomes less critical over time [12]. A phase 2 study in autoantibody-positive relatives of people with type 1 diabetes is ongoing.

Another fusion protein, alefacept, has a portion that binds a receptor expressed by T cells, particularly memory T cells, preventing their full activation, and a portion that binds a receptor on natural killer cells, resulting in the selective depletion of memory T cells. In the phase 2 T1DAL trial, two 12-week courses of alefacept did not significantly improve 2-hour C-peptide in participants with new-onset type 1 diabetes, but there was a trend toward an improvement and several secondary outcomes were significantly improved [13].

CD3 is a cell-surface receptor involved in the activation of cytotoxic T cells and T-helper cells, and the anti-CD3 antibodies otelixizumab and teplizumab produced promising results in people with recent-onset diabetes in phase 2 trials [14, 15]. But at phase 3 neither otelixizumab, in the DEFEND trial [16], nor teplizumab, in the Protégé study [17], significantly slowed C-peptide decline. However, exploratory analyses by the Protégé investigators suggested that success could be more likely very early after diagnosis and in children. This led directly to a trial in high-risk relatives of people with diabetes, which reported positive results at phase 2 [18], and a phase 3 trial of teplizumab in recently diagnosed children and adolescents – the PROTECT trial  – is ongoing.

Depletion of B cells with rituximab was tested in a phase 2 trial of new-onset type 1 diabetes published in 2009 [19]; four infusions over 22 days led to significantly slower C-peptide decline over 1 year, confirming an important role for B cells in type 1 diabetes pathogenesis.

Researchers are now looking at suppressing both B and T cells, by giving 4 weeks of rituximab followed by 2 years of abatacept to people at high risk for developing type 1 diabetes. Another ongoing study of note involves the anti-malarial drug hydroxychloroquine, which reduces T-cell activation, also in high-risk individuals.

Other targeted immune-modulating agents

Beyond T and B cells, many of the efforts to modulate the immune response in people with type 1 diabetes have focused on agents targeting specific pro-inflammatory molecules. Two notable trials attempted to promote anti-inflammatory molecules, by giving interferon-α (to boost interleukin [IL]-4 and IL-10) and the endogenous anti-inflammatory protein alpha‐1 antitrypsin, both of which appeared promising in preclinical research. The former study showed positive effects on beta-cell function [20] at the highest interferon-α dose used; the latter – the RETAIN trial – failed to identify a dose likely to be efficacious [21].

Direct antagonism of pro-inflammatory molecules has also produced mixed results. Two trials (published in one paper) used canakinumab and anakinra to block IL-1, but without seeing an effect on beta-cell function [22].

On the other hand, use of etanercept, which blocks tumor necrosis factor (TNF) and is widely used for the treatment of a variety of inflammatory diseases, significantly improved beta-cell function relative to placebo in a 24-week pilot randomized trial of newly diagnosed children [23]. In a similar vein, the TNF inhibitor golimumab is being tested in children and adults with a recent diabetes diagnosis, as is tocilizumab, which targets the pro-inflammatory mediator IL-6, in the EXTEND study.

Other studies showed preserved beta-cell function in adults with recent-onset diabetes given the tyrosine kinase inhibitor imatinib  [24], and those given an anti–IL-21 antibody in combination with liraglutide [25].

Vitamin D

Several trials have investigated the effects of boosting vitamin D in people with or at risk for diabetes, based on its ability to protect beta cells and help promote an anti-inflammatory immune response in preclinical studies.

Some of these clinical trials reported positive outcomes, such as enhanced T-regulatory cell activity [26], the disappearance of autoantibodies [27], and a slowed decline in beta-cell function [28]. But others showed no effect on C-peptide decline [29, 30], and all studies were small with the largest having 59 participants.

Agents to support beta-cell survival and regeneration

Another line of scientific inquiry is focused on medications that help beta cells to remain viable in the face of an autoimmune response. Again, trials of these agents in people with recent-onset diabetes have met with mixed success.

The REPAIR-T1D trial tested sitagliptin alongside the proton-pump inhibitor lansoprazole, aiming to increase levels of glucagon-like peptide-1 and gastrin, which are thought to help beta cells regenerate [31]. However, the combination treatment had no effect on C-peptide decline. Another trial involved gamma aminobutyric acid (GABA), a neurotransmitter with positive effects on beta-cell function and survival in preclinical studies [32, 33]. It again had no significant effect on diabetes progression, although a question mark remains over the study limitations, including an FDA-mandated limitation on the dose used. At least one ongoing study is testing a higher dose.

A notable success, albeit in a preliminary study of a small number of participants, is the antihypertensive calcium-channel blocker verapamil, which inhibited beta-cell apoptosis and promoted survival in preclinical studies. In a phase 2 trial it significantly slowed C-peptide decline during 12 months of treatment [34] and follow-up of the participants for an additional year showed stable beta-cell function in those who continued to take verapamil versus a marked decline in those who stopped [35].

In 2007, researchers published a paper in JAMA describing a phase 1/2 study in which they isolated peripheral hematopoietic stem cells from 15 people with type 1 diabetes diagnosed within the preceding 6 weeks, and reinfused them after a period of immunoablation [36]. In other words, they aimed to destroy the patients’ self-destructing immune cells and replace them with naïve cells that could mature into self-tolerant cells.

This resulted in 14 of the participants becoming independent of insulin for at least 1 month, and in a later study expanded to 23 people, 20 experienced at least some time free of insulin, and one had remained off treatment for more than 4 years at the time of the publication [37].

Several groups have now replicated these original findings [38–40], and there have been many variations on the theme, most commonly infusions of bone marrow stem cells with or without mesenchymal stromal cells derived from sources such as adipose tissue or umbilical cord blood, but without the preceding immune ablation [41–46]. The majority of these studies produced positive results, usually in the form of a reduced decline in C-peptide; notably, this was the case in people with long-established diabetes, as well as in the newly diagnosed.

Other approaches involved isolating, expanding, and reinfusing patients’ own T-regulatory cells, which showed promising results [47, 48]; giving granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (GCSF) alone to mobilize stem cells, which failed to influence diabetes progression [49]; and “re-educating” patients’ immune cells by extracting them and briefly incubating them with umbilical cord blood-derived multipotent stem cells [50]. This latter procedure allows interaction with the autoimmune regulator protein, promoting the elimination of self-reactive immune cells, and during 40 weeks of follow-up resulted in significant improvements in C-peptide in 12 patients with long-standing type 1 diabetes, including six who had no residual beta-cell function at baseline.

None of these alternative methods resulted in patients achieving sustained insulin independence, however, although all the studies were small, including those testing stem cell transplantation with immunoablation.

Antigen-based therapies

The presence of autoantibodies prior to the onset of clinical type 1 diabetes offers both obvious targets for intervention with antigen-based therapies, and a clearly defined group of people who could benefit from treatment.

Prophylactic subcutaneous insulin was an early promising example [51], but the studies following it produced more mixed results. In the DPT-1 trial neither subcutaneous [52] nor oral insulin [53] were able to prevent or delay the onset of type 1 diabetes in people at high risk, and a trial of nasal insulin produced similar results [54].

A hypothesis-generating subgroup analysis of the DPT-1 oral insulin arm suggested that people with confirmed insulin autoantibodies might benefit from the intervention, but a follow-up study in this subgroup was also negative, with the possible exception of a response in a subgroup with the poorest beta-cell function [55].

However, the oral insulin dose used in this study was 7.5 mg/day. The Pre-POINT study investigators conducted a pilot trial of oral insulin in children at high genetic risk but without islet autoantibodies, the results of which suggested that a dose of 67.5 mg/day would be necessary to provoke an immune response in the majority of children [56].

The subsequent phase 1/2 Pre-POINT-Early study, however, found that 67.5 mg/day oral insulin did not in fact provoke an immune response in antibody-negative children at high risk for diabetes [57]. A very similar TrialNet study in children and adults is in progress and the much larger GPPAD-POInT study, not scheduled to complete until 2025, is examining the effects of the higher dose on autoantibody status and progression to type 1 diabetes from infanthood. Another trial of nasal insulin, using a much higher dose than the previous negative study, has reportedly not met its primary endpoint of a reduced risk for type 1 diabetes diagnosis.

An additional notable in-progress study is the intervention part of the Fr1da population screening study, in which children with islet autoantibodies will receive oral insulin at 7.5 or 67.5 mg/day or placebo.

A few recent studies have introduced variations on the prophylactic insulin theme. The largest of these, looking at the insulin B peptide, showed no effect on beta-cell function [58], but a much smaller study of this peptide from the Immune Tolerance Network showed a “lasting, robust” effect on T-regulatory cells, leading the researchers to recommend further studies of the optimal dose, timing, and other relevant parameters that might result in a successful intervention [59]. Another study tested a DNA plasmid encoding proinsulin, and found this significantly improved C-peptide levels and reduced the numbers of proinsulin-reactive cytotoxic (CD8+) T cells [60].

Researchers have also looked at treatment with an alternative autoantigen, in the shape of glutamic acid decarboxylase (GAD) in a standard vaccine formulation with alum (GAD-alum). There were initial promising results when administered to people with new-onset diabetes [61], but a phase 3 trial failed to confirm this benefit [62].

Nevertheless, several ongoing trials are continuing to test GAD-alum in people with new-onset type 1 diabetes in combination with other interventions including GABA, etanercept plus vitamin D, and vitamin D alone, the latter being a phase 3 trial specifically in people with the HLA DR3-DQ2 haplotype, following phase 2 results suggesting benefits in this subgroup [63].

In a nutshell

Multiple therapies have been tested, spilt broadly into increasingly refined attempts to dampen the immune response and efforts to induce immune tolerance. A respectable proportion of interventions have met with success, but so far only partially or transiently, or in a small proportion of participants.

This is tending to push research into specific subgroups, to an earlier phase of the disease, or to multiple therapies, with one study for example offering combination treatment with ATG, GCSF, IL-2, etanercept, and exenatide.

However, the field is at a relatively early stage, with the vast majority of published studies being phase 2 or earlier. Not helping is the still poorly defined and seemingly highly heterogeneous pathogenesis of type 1 diabetes, with recent findings as likely to reveal more complexity as to clarify known processes.

That said, the results so far support the notion that immunotherapy – with the right interventions given to the right people at the right time – could one day stop type 1 diabetes in its tracks.

medwireNews is an independent medical news service provided by Springer Healthcare. © 2022 Springer Healthcare part of the Springer Nature group

Literature
  1. The challenge of modulating β-cell autoimmunity in type 1 diabetes. Atkinson MA, Roep BO, Posgai A, et al. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol 2019; 7: 52–64 https://doi.org/10.1016/S2213-8587(18)30112-8
  2. Elliott RB, Berryman CC, Crossley JR, James AG. Partial preservation of pancreatic β-cell function in children with diabetes. Lancet 1981; 318: 1–4 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(81)90249-X
  3. Harrison LC, Colman PG, Dean B, et al. Increase in remission rate in newly diagnosed type I diabetic subjects treated with azathioprine. Diabetes 1985; 34: 1306–1308 https://doi.org/10.2337/diab.34.12.1306
  4. Double-Blind Controlled Trial of Azathioprine in Children With Newly Diagnosed Type I Diabetes. Cook JJ, Hudson I, Harrison LC, et al. Diabetes 1989; 38: 779–783 https://doi.org/10.2337/diab.38.6.779
  5. Silverstein J, Maclaren N, Riley W, et al. Immunosuppression with azathioprine and prednisone in recent-onset insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus. N Engl J Med 1988; 319: 599–604 https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJM198809083191002
  6. Gottlieb PA, Quinlan S, Krause-Steinrauf H, et al. Failure to Preserve β-Cell Function With Mycophenolate Mofetil and Daclizumab Combined Therapy in Patients With New- Onset Type 1 Diabetes. Diabetes Care 2010; 33: 826–832 https://doi.org/10.2337/dc09-1349
  7. The Canadian-European Randomized Control Trial Group. Cyclosporin-Induced Remission of IDDM After Early Intervention: Association of 1 yr of Cyclosporin Treatment With Enhanced Insulin Secretion. Diabetes 1988; 37: 1574–1582 https://doi.org/10.2337/diab.311.1574
  8. Feutren G, Assan R, et al. Cyclosporin increases the rate and length of remissions in insulin-dependent diabetes of recent onset. Results of a multicentre double-blind trial. Lancet 1986; 328: 119–124 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(86)91943-4
  9. Gitelman SE, Gottlieb PA, Rigby MR, et al. Antithymocyte globulin treatment for patients with recent-onset type 1 diabetes: 12-month results of a randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 2 trial. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol 2013; 1: 306–316 https://doi.org/10.1016/S2213-8587(13)70065-2
  10. Haller MJ, Schatz DA, Skyler JS, et al. Low-Dose Anti-Thymocyte Globulin (ATG) Preserves β-Cell Function and Improves HbA1c in New-Onset Type 1 Diabetes. Diabetes Care 2018; 41: 1917–1925 https://doi.org/2337/dc18-0494
  11. Haller MJ, Long SA, Blanchfield JL, et al. Low-Dose Anti-Thymocyte Globulin Preserves C-Peptide, Reduces HbA1c, and Increases Regulatory to Conventional T-Cell Ratios in New-Onset Type 1 Diabetes: Two-Year Clinical Trial Data. Diabetes 2019; 68: 1267–1276 https://doi.org/10.2337/db19-0057
  12. Orban T, Bundy B, Becker DJ, et al. Co-stimulation modulation with abatacept in patients with recent-onset type 1 diabetes: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Lancet 2011; 378: 412–419 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(11)60886-6
  13. Rigby MR, DiMeglio LA, Rendell MS, et al. Targeting of memory T cells with alefacept in new-onset type 1 diabetes (T1DAL study): 12 month results of a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 2 trial. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol 2013; 1: 284–294 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2213858713701116
  14. Keymeulen B, Vandemeulebroucke E, Ziegler AG, et al. Insulin Needs after CD3-Antibody Therapy in New-Onset Type 1 Diabetes. N Engl J Med 2005; 352: 2598–2608 https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/nejmoa043980 
  15. Herold KC, Hagopian W, Auger JA, et al. Anti-CD3 Monoclonal Antibody in New-Onset Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus. N Engl J Med 2002; 346: 1692–1698 https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/nejmoa012864
  16. Aronson R, Gottlieb PA, Christiansen JS, et al. Low-Dose Otelixizumab Anti-CD3 Monoclonal Antibody DEFEND-1 Study: Results of the Randomized Phase III Study in Recent-Onset Human Type 1 Diabetes. Diabetes Care 2014; 37: 2746–2754 https://doi.org/10.2337/dc13-0327
  17. Sherry N, Hagopian W, Ludvigsson J, et al. Teplizumab for treatment of type 1 diabetes (Protégé study): 1-year results from a randomised, placebo-controlled trial. Lancet 2011; 378: 487–497 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(11)60931-8
  18. An Anti-CD3 Antibody, Teplizumab, in Relatives at Risk for Type 1 Diabetes. Herold KC, Bundy BN, Long SA, et al. N Engl J Med 2019; 381: 603–613 https://www.nejm.org/doi/10.1056/NEJMoa1902226
  19. Pescovitz MD, Greenbaum CJ, Krause-Steinrauf H, et al. Rituximab, B-Lymphocyte Depletion, and Preservation of Beta-Cell Function. N Engl J Med 2009; 361: 2143–2152 https://www.nejm.org/doi/10.1056/NEJMoa0904452
  20. Rother KI, Brown RJ, Morales MM, et al. Effect of Ingested Interferon-α on β-Cell Function in Children With New-Onset Type 1 Diabetes. Diabetes Care 2009; 32: 1250–1255 https://doi.org/10.2337/dc08-2029
  21. Weir GC, Ehlers MR, Harris KM, et al. Alpha‐1 antitrypsin treatment of new‐onset type 1 diabetes: An open‐label, phase I clinical trial (RETAIN) to assess safety and pharmacokinetics. Pediatr Diabetes 2018; 19: 945–954 https://doi.org/10.1111/pedi.12660
  22. Moran A, Bundy B, Becker DJ, et al. Interleukin-1 antagonism in type 1 diabetes of recent onset: two multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials. Lancet 2013; 381: 1905–1915 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(13)60023-9
  23. Mastrandrea L, Yu J, Behrens T, et al. Etanercept Treatment in Children With New-Onset Type 1 Diabetes. Pilot randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind study. Diabetes Care 2009; 32: 1244–1249 https://doi.org/10.2337/dc09-0054
  24. Gitelman SE, Bundy BN, Ferrannini E, et al. Imatinib therapy for patients with recent-onset type 1 diabetes: a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2 trial. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol 2021; 9: 502–514 https://www.thelancet.com/journals/landia/article/PIIS2213-8587(21)00139-X/fulltext 
  25. von Herrath M, Bain SC, Bode B, et al. Anti-interleukin-21 antibody and liraglutide for the preservation of β-cell function in adults with recent-onset type 1 diabetes: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2 trial. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol 2021; 9: 212–224 https://www.thelancet.com/journals/landia/article/PIIS2213-8587(21)00019-X/fulltext 
  26. Treiber G, Prietl B, Fröhlich-Reiterer E, et al. Cholecalciferol supplementation improves suppressive capacity of regulatory T-cells in young patients with new-onset type 1 diabetes mellitus — A randomized clinical trial. Clin Immunol 2015; 161: 217–224 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clim.2015.08.002
  27. Papadimitriou DT, Marakaki C, Fretzayas A, et al. Negativation of type 1 diabetes‐associated autoantibodies to glutamic acid decarboxylase and insulin in children treated with oral calcitriol. J Diabetes 2013; 5: 344–348 https://doi.org/10.1111/1753-0407.12023
  28. Gabbay MAL, Sato MN, Finazzo C, et al. Effect of Cholecalciferol as Adjunctive Therapy With Insulin on Protective Immunologic Profile and Decline of Residual β-Cell Function in New-Onset Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 2012; 166: 601–607 https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapediatrics/fullarticle/1212223
  29. Bock G, Prietl B, Mader JK, et al. The effect of vitamin D supplementation on peripheral regulatory T cells and β cell function in healthy humans: a randomized controlled trial. Diabetes Metab Res Rev 2011; 27: 942–945 https://doi.org/10.1002/dmrr.1276
  30. Walter M, Kaupper T, Adler K, et al. No Effect of the 1α,25-Dihydroxyvitamin D3 on β-Cell Residual Function and Insulin Requirement in Adults With New-Onset Type 1 Diabetes. Diabetes Care 2010; 33: 1443–1448 https://doi.org/10.2337/dc09-2297
  31. Griffin KJ, Thompson PA, Gottschalk M, et al. Combination therapy with sitagliptin and lansoprazole in patients with recent-onset type 1 diabetes (REPAIR-T1D): 12-month results of a multicentre, randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 2 trial. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol 2014; 2: 710–718 https://doi.org/10.1016/S2213-8587(14)70115-9
  32. Purwana I, Zheng J, Li X, et al. GABA Promotes Human β-Cell Proliferation and Modulates Glucose Homeostasis. Diabetes 2014; 63: 4197–4205 https://doi.org/10.2337/db14-0153
  33. Ben-Othman N, Vieira A, Courtney M, et al. Long-Term GABA Administration Induces Alpha Cell-Mediated Beta-like Cell Neogenesis. Cell 2017; 168: 73–85.e11 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2016.11.002
  34. Ovalle F, Grimes T, Xu G, et al Verapamil and beta cell function in adults with recent-onset type 1 diabetes. Nat Med 2018; 24: 1108–1112 https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-018-0089-4
  35. Xu G, Grimes TD, Grayson TB, et al. Exploratory study reveals far reaching systemic and cellular effects of verapamil treatment in subjects with type 1 diabetes. Nat Commun 2022; 13: 1159 https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-022-28826-3 
  36. Voltarelli JC, Couri CEB, Stracieri ABPL, et al. Autologous Nonmyeloablative Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation in Newly Diagnosed Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus. JAMA 2007; 297: 1568–1576 https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/206540
  37. Couri CEB, Oliveira MCB, Stracieri ABPL, et al. C-Peptide Levels and Insulin Independence Following Autologous Nonmyeloablative Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation in Newly Diagnosed Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus. JAMA 2009; 301: 1573–1579 https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/183753
  38. Snarski E, Milczarczyk A, Hałaburda K, et al. Immunoablation and autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation in the treatment of new-onset type 1 diabetes mellitus: long-term observations. Bone Marrow Transplant 2016; 51: 398–402 https://www.nature.com/articles/bmt2015294
  39. Gu W, Hu J, Wang W, et al. Diabetic Ketoacidosis at Diagnosis Influences Complete Remission After Treatment With Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation in Adolescents With Type 1 Diabetes. Diabetes Care 2012; 35: 1413–1419 https://doi.org/10.2337/dc11-2161
  40. Li L, Shen S, Ouyang J, et al. Autologous Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation Modulates Immunocompetent Cells and Improves β-Cell Function in Chinese Patients with New Onset of Type 1 Diabetes. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2012; 97: 1729–1736 https://doi.org/10.1210/jc.2011-2188
  41. Cai J, Wu Z, Xu X, et al. Umbilical Cord Mesenchymal Stromal Cell With Autologous Bone Marrow Cell Transplantation in Established Type 1 Diabetes: A Pilot Randomized Controlled Open-Label Clinical Study to Assess Safety and Impact on Insulin Secretion. Diabetes Care 2016; 39: 149–157 https://doi.org/10.2337/dc15-0171
  42. Thakkar UG, Trivedi HL, Vanikar AV, Dave SD. Insulin-secreting adipose-derived mesenchymal stromal cells with bone marrow–derived hematopoietic stem cells from autologous and allogenic sources for type 1 diabetes mellitus. Cytotherapy 2015; 17: 940–947 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcyt.2015.03.608
  43. Carlsson P-O, Schwarcz E, Korsgren O, Le Blanc K. Preserved β-Cell Function in Type 1 Diabetes by Mesenchymal Stromal Cells. Diabetes 2015; 64: 587–592 https://doi.org/10.2337/db14-0656
  44. Dave SD, Vanikar AV, Trivedi HL, et al. Novel therapy for insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus: infusion of in vitro-generated insulin-secreting cells. Clin Exp Med 2015; 15: 41–45 https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs10238-013-0266-1
  45. Giannopoulou EZ, Puff R, Beyerlein A, et al. Effect of a single autologous cord blood infusion on beta-cell and immune function in children with new onset type 1 diabetes: a non-randomized, controlled trial. Pediatr Diabetes 2014; 15: 100–109 https://doi.org/10.1111/pedi.12072
  46. Hu J, Yu X, Wang Z, et al. Long term effects of the implantation of Wharton’s jelly-derived mesenchymal stem cells from the umbilical cord for newly-onset type 1 diabetes mellitus. Endocr J 2013; 60: 347–357 https://doi.org/10.1507/endocrj.EJ12-0343
  47. Marek-Trzonkowska N, Myśliwiec M, Iwaszkiewicz-Grześ D, et al. Factors affecting long-term efficacy of T regulatory cell-based therapy in type 1 diabetes. J Transl Med 2016; 14 : 332 https://translational-medicine.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12967-016-1090-7
  48. Bluestone JA, Buckner JH, Fitch M, et al. Type 1 diabetes immunotherapy using polyclonal regulatory T cells. Sci Transl Med 2015; 7: 315ra189 https://stm.sciencemag.org/content/7/315/315ra189.short
  49. Haller MJ, Atkinson MA, Wasserfall CH, et al. Mobilization without immune depletion fails to restore immunological tolerance or preserve beta cell function in recent onset type 1 diabetes. Clin Exp Immunol 2016; 183: 350–357 https://doi.org/10.1111/cei.12731
  50. Zhao Y, Jiang Z, Zhao T, et al. Reversal of type 1 diabetes via islet β cell regeneration following immune modulation by cord blood-derived multipotent stem cells. BMC Med 2012; 10: 3 https://bmcmedicine.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1741-7015-10-3
  51. Keller RJ, Jackson RA, Eisenbarth GS, Eisenbarth G. Insulin prophylaxis in individuals at high risk of type 1 diabetes. Lancet 1993; 341: 927–928 https://doi.org/10.1016/0140-6736(93)91215-8
  52. The Diabetes Prevention Trial–Type 1 Diabetes Study Group. Effects of insulin in relatives of patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus. N Engl J Med 2002; 346: 1685–1691 https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa012350
  53. The Diabetes Prevention TrialType 1 Study Group. Effects of oral insulin in relatives of patients with type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Care 2005; 28: 1068–1076 https://doi.org/10.2337/diacare.28.5.1068
  54. Näntö-Salonen K, Kupila A, Simell S, et al. Nasal insulin to prevent type 1 diabetes in children with HLA genotypes and autoantibodies conferring increased risk of disease: a double-blind, randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2008; 372: 1746–1755 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(08)61309-4
  55. The Type 1 Diabetes TrialNet Oral Insulin Study Group. Effect of Oral Insulin on Prevention of Diabetes in Relatives of Patients With Type 1 Diabetes. A Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA 2017; 318: 1891–1902 https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2664040
  56. Bonifacio E, Ziegler A-G, Klingensmith G, et al. Effects of high-dose oral insulin on immune responses in children at high risk for type 1 diabetes. The Pre-POINT randomized clinical trial. JAMA 2015; 313: 1541–1549 https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2275446
  57. Assfalg R, Knoop J, Hoffman KL, et al. Oral insulin immunotherapy in children at risk for type 1 diabetes in a randomised controlled trial. Diabetologia 2021; 64: 1079–1092 https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00125-020-05376-1 
  58. Walter M, Philotheou A, Bonnici F, et al. No Effect of the Altered Peptide Ligand NBI-6024 on β-Cell Residual Function and Insulin Needs in New-Onset Type 1 Diabetes. Diabetes Care 2009; 32: 2036–2040 https://doi.org/10.2337/dc09-0449
  59. Orban T, Farkas K, Jalahej H, et al. Autoantigen-specific regulatory T cells induced in patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus by insulin B-chain immunotherapy. J Autoimmun 2010; 34: 408–415 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaut.2009.10.005
  60. Roep BO, Solvason N, Gottlieb PA, et al. Plasmid-Encoded Proinsulin Preserves C-Peptide While Specifically Reducing Proinsulin-Specific CD8+ T Cells in Type 1 Diabetes. Sci Transl Med 2013; 5: 191ra82 https://stm.sciencemag.org/content/5/191/191ra82.long
  61. Ludvigsson J, Faresjö M, Hjorth M, et al. GAD Treatment and Insulin Secretion in Recent-Onset Type 1 Diabetes. N Engl J Med 2008; 359: 1909–1920 https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa0804328
  62. Ludvigsson J, Krisky D, Casas R, et al. GAD65 Antigen Therapy in Recently Diagnosed Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus. N Engl J Med 2012; 366: 433–442 https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa1107096
  63. Ludvigsson J, Sumnik Z, Pelikanova T, et al. Intralymphatic Glutamic Acid Decarboxylase With Vitamin D Supplementation in Recent-Onset Type 1 Diabetes: A Double-Blind, Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Phase IIb Trial. Diabetes Care 2021; 44: 1604–1612 https://diabetesjournals.org/care/article/44/7/1604/138800/Intralymphatic-Glutamic-Acid-Decarboxylase-With