Østoft Signe Harring
Diabetes Research Center, Medical Department, Gentofte Hospital, Niels Andersens Vej 65, 2900 Hellerup, Denmark.
Dan Med J. 2015 Sep;62(9).
Maturity onset diabetes of the young (MODY) designates monogenic forms of non-autoimmune diabetes characterised by autosomal dominant inheritance, non-insulin dependent diabetes at onset and diagnosis often before 25 years of age. MODY constitutes genetically and clinically heterogeneous forms of diabetes. More than 8 different genes are known to cause MODY, among which hepatocyte nuclear factor 1 alpha (HNF1A) (MODY3) and glucokinase (GCK) (MODY2) mutations are the most common. Both forms of MODY are characterised by specific beta cell dysfunction, with patients with HNF1A-diabetes having a reduced insulin secretory capacity, while patients with GCK-diabetes have a glucose-sensing defect, but preserved insulin secretory capacity. Patients with MODY are effectively treated with sulphonylurea (SU) due to very high sensitivity to these drugs, but they are also prone to develop hypoglycaemia. The objectives of this thesis were to study the pathophysiology of GCK-diabetes and HNF1A-diabetes by investigating the incretin effect, the physiological response to food ingestion and to estimate the treatment potential of a glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1RA) in patients with HNF1A-diabetes. In Study I we investigated the incretin effect and the responses of islet hormones and incretin hormones to oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) and isoglycaemic IV glucose infusion (IIGI) in patients with GCK-diabetes, in patients with HNF1A-diabetes, and in BMI and age matched healthy individuals (CTRLs). In Study II we investigated responses of islet hormones and incretin hormones to a more physiological stimulus consisting of a standardised meal test in patients with GCK-diabetes, in patients with HNF1A--diabetes, and in BMI and age matched CTRLs. In Study III we conducted a randomised, double-blind, crossover trial investigating the glucose lowering effect and risk of hypoglycaemia during 6 weeks of treatment with the GLP-1RA, liraglutide compared to the SU, glimepiride in 16 patients with HNF1A-diabetes. At baseline and at the end of each treatment period a standardised meal test followed by a light bicycling test was performed. The results of the studies showed that patients with HNF1A-diabetes were less glucose tolerant than patients with GCK-diabetes, but both groups were more glucose intolerant than CTRLs. In spite of glucose intolerance patients with GCK-diabetes showed normal incretin effect, whereas patients with HNF1A-diabetes showed an impaired incretin effect. Patients with HNF1A-diabetes were also characterised by an inappropriate insulin response. Normal insulin sensitivity was found in both groups of diabetes patients. In the prospective intervention trial a glucose lowering effect on fasting plasma glucose (FPG) was demonstrated with both treatments without significant difference between the treatments. The postprandial plasma glucose responses were also lower with both glimepiride and liraglutide compared to baseline without significant difference between treatments. In spite of these findings glimepiride seems to have superior glucose lowering effects according to both FPG and postprandial glucose responses. Hypoglycaemic events (plasma glucose ≤ 3.9 mM) occurred 18 times during glimepiride treatment and once during liraglutide treatment. No differences between treatments were demonstrated according to insulin and glucagon responses and gastric emptying, and counter-regulatory responses were preserved during both treatments. No effect of either treatment was seen on fructosamine or HbA1c. In conclusion, patients with GCK-diabetes show normal incretin and glucagon physiology, thus resembling healthy individuals, in spite of fasting hyperglycaemia and subtle glucose intolerance. In contrast, patients with HNF1A-diabetes exhibited noticeable glucose intolerance, beta cell dysfunction, impaired incretin effect, and inappropriate glucagon response to oral stimuli, hence resembling patients with type 2 diabetes. However, normal responses of incretin hormones and normal insulin sensitivity were found in patients with HNF1A-diabetes. Six weeks of treatment with glimepiride or liraglutide demonstrated glucose lowering effects. This effect was greater with glimepiride, although insignificant, but at the expense of a higher risk of hypoglycaemia (predominantly mild). GLP-1RAs may have a place in treatment of patients with HNF1A-diabetes, especially when hypoglycaemia is a problem. Future studies are required to clarify this.
青年发病的成年型糖尿病(MODY)指非自身免疫性糖尿病的单基因形式,其特征为常染色体显性遗传、起病时及诊断时常为非胰岛素依赖型糖尿病,且发病年龄通常在25岁之前。MODY构成了遗传和临床异质性的糖尿病形式。已知有超过8种不同基因可导致MODY,其中肝细胞核因子1α(HNF1A)(MODY3)和葡萄糖激酶(GCK)(MODY2)突变最为常见。两种形式的MODY均具有特定的β细胞功能障碍,HNF1A糖尿病患者的胰岛素分泌能力降低,而GCK糖尿病患者存在葡萄糖感知缺陷,但胰岛素分泌能力保留。由于对这些药物高度敏感,MODY患者使用磺脲类药物(SU)治疗有效,但他们也容易发生低血糖。本论文的目的是通过研究肠促胰岛素效应、对食物摄入的生理反应,并评估胰高血糖素样肽-1受体激动剂(GLP-1RA)对HNF1A糖尿病患者的治疗潜力,来研究GCK糖尿病和HNF1A糖尿病的病理生理学。在研究I中,我们调查了GCK糖尿病患者、HNF1A糖尿病患者以及体重指数(BMI)和年龄匹配的健康个体(对照组)在口服葡萄糖耐量试验(OGTT)和等血糖静脉输注葡萄糖(IIGI)时的肠促胰岛素效应以及胰岛激素和肠促胰岛素激素的反应。在研究II中,我们调查了GCK糖尿病患者、HNF1A糖尿病患者以及BMI和年龄匹配的对照组在进行标准化餐食试验(一种更接近生理状态的刺激)时胰岛激素和肠促胰岛素激素的反应。在研究III中,我们进行了一项随机、双盲、交叉试验,研究了16例HNF1A糖尿病患者使用GLP-1RA利拉鲁肽与SU格列美脲治疗6周期间的降糖效果和低血糖风险。在基线和每个治疗期结束时,进行了标准化餐食试验,随后进行轻度骑行试验。研究结果表明,HNF1A糖尿病患者的葡萄糖耐量低于GCK糖尿病患者,但两组均比对照组更不耐受葡萄糖。尽管存在葡萄糖不耐受,GCK糖尿病患者的肠促胰岛素效应正常,而HNF1A糖尿病患者的肠促胰岛素效应受损。HNF1A糖尿病患者还表现出不适当的胰岛素反应。两组糖尿病患者的胰岛素敏感性均正常。在前瞻性干预试验中,两种治疗方法均显示出对空腹血糖(FPG)的降糖效果,且治疗之间无显著差异。与基线相比,格列美脲和利拉鲁肽治疗后的餐后血糖反应也较低,治疗之间无显著差异。尽管有这些发现,但根据FPG和餐后血糖反应,格列美脲似乎具有更好的降糖效果。格列美脲治疗期间发生低血糖事件(血糖≤3.9 mM)18次,利拉鲁肽治疗期间发生1次。在胰岛素和胰高血糖素反应以及胃排空方面,治疗之间未显示出差异,且在两种治疗期间均保留了反调节反应。两种治疗方法对果糖胺或糖化血红蛋白(HbA1c)均无影响。总之,尽管存在空腹高血糖和轻微的葡萄糖不耐受,GCK糖尿病患者的肠促胰岛素和胰高血糖素生理功能正常,因此类似于健康个体。相比之下,HNF1A糖尿病患者表现出明显的葡萄糖不耐受、β细胞功能障碍、肠促胰岛素效应受损以及对口服刺激的胰高血糖素反应不适当,因此类似于2型糖尿病患者。然而,HNF1A糖尿病患者的肠促胰岛素激素反应正常且胰岛素敏感性正常。格列美脲或利拉鲁肽治疗6周显示出降糖效果。格列美脲的效果更大,尽管不显著,但代价是低血糖风险更高(主要为轻度)。GLP-1RA可能在HNF1A糖尿病患者的治疗中占有一席之地,尤其是当低血糖是一个问题时。需要进一步的研究来阐明这一点。