- Browse by Author
Browsing by Author "Miller, Kellee M."
Now showing 1 - 10 of 13
Results Per Page
Sort Options
Item Autoimmune Diseases in Children and Adults With Type 1 Diabetes From the T1D Exchange Clinic Registry(Oxford University Press, 2016-09-27) Hughes, Jing W.; Riddlesworth, Tonya D.; DiMeglio, Linda A.; Miller, Kellee M.; Rickels, Michael R.; McGill, Janet B.; Pediatrics, School of MedicineBackground and Aims: Type 1 diabetes (T1D) is associated with other autoimmune diseases (AIDs), but the prevalence and associated predictive factors for these comorbidities of T1D across all age groups have not been fully characterized. Materials and Methods: Data obtained from 25 759 participants with T1D enrolled in the T1D Exchange Registry were used to analyze the types and frequency of AIDs as well as their relationships to gender, age, and race/ethnicity. Diagnoses of autoimmune diseases, represented as ordinal categories (0, 1, 2, 3, or more AIDs) were obtained from medical records of Exchange Registry participants. Results: Among the 25 759 T1D Exchange participants, 50% were female, 82% non-Hispanic white, mean age was 23.0 ± 16.9 years and mean duration of diabetes was 11 years. Of these participants, 6876 (27%) were diagnosed with at least one AID. Frequency of two or more AIDs increased from 4.3% in participants aged younger than 13 years to 10.4% in those aged 50 years or older. The most common AIDs were thyroid (6097, 24%), gastrointestinal (1530, 6%), and collagen vascular diseases (432, 2%). Addison’s disease was rare (75, 0.3%). The prevalence of one or more AIDs was increased in females and non-Hispanic whites and with older age. Conclusions: In the T1D Exchange Clinic Registry, a diagnosis of one or more AIDs in addition to T1D is common, particularly in women, non-Hispanic whites, and older individuals. Results of this study have implications for both primary care and endocrine practice and will allow clinicians to better anticipate and manage the additional AIDs that develop in patients with T1D.Item Consensus guidance for monitoring individuals with islet autoantibody-positive pre-stage 3 type 1 diabetes(Springer, 2024-09) Phillip, Moshe; Achenbach, Peter; Addala, Ananta; Albanese-O'Neill, Anastasia; Battelino, Tadej; Bell, Kirstine J.; Besser, Rachel E. J.; Bonifacio, Ezio; Colhoun, Helen M.; Couper, Jennifer J.; Craig, Maria E.; Danne, Thomas; de Beaufort, Carine; Dovc, Klemen; Driscoll, Kimberly A.; Dutta, Sanjoy; Ebekozien, Osagie; Elding Larsson, Helena; Feiten, Daniel J.; Frohnert, Brigitte I.; Gabbay, Robert A.; Gallagher, Mary P.; Greenbaum, Carla J.; Griffin, Kurt J.; Hagopian, William; Haller, Michael J.; Hendrieckx, Christel; Hendriks, Emile; Holt, Richard I. G.; Hughes, Lucille; Ismail, Heba M.; Jacobsen, Laura M.; Johnson, Suzanne B.; Kolb, Leslie E.; Kordonouri, Olga; Lange, Karin; Lash, Robert W.; Lernmark, Åke; Libman, Ingrid; Lundgren, Markus; Maahs, David M.; Marcovecchio, M. Loredana; Mathieu, Chantal; Miller, Kellee M.; O'Donnell, Holly K.; Oron, Tal; Patil, Shivajirao P.; Pop-Busui, Rodica; Rewers, Marian J.; Rich, Stephen S.; Schatz, Desmond A.; Schulman-Rosenbaum, Rifka; Simmons, Kimber M.; Sims, Emily K.; Skyler, Jay S.; Smith, Laura B.; Speake, Cate; Steck, Andrea K.; Thomas, Nicholas P. B.; Tonyushkina, Ksenia N.; Veijola, Riitta; Wentworth, John M.; Wherrett, Diane K.; Wood, Jamie R.; Ziegler, Anette-Gabriele; DiMeglio, Linda A.; Pediatrics, School of MedicineGiven the proven benefits of screening to reduce diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) likelihood at the time of stage 3 type 1 diabetes diagnosis, and emerging availability of therapy to delay disease progression, type 1 diabetes screening programmes are being increasingly emphasised. Once broadly implemented, screening initiatives will identify significant numbers of islet autoantibody-positive (IAb+) children and adults who are at risk of (confirmed single IAb+) or living with (multiple IAb+) early-stage (stage 1 and stage 2) type 1 diabetes. These individuals will need monitoring for disease progression; much of this care will happen in non-specialised settings. To inform this monitoring, JDRF in conjunction with international experts and societies developed consensus guidance. Broad advice from this guidance includes the following: (1) partnerships should be fostered between endocrinologists and primary-care providers to care for people who are IAb+; (2) when people who are IAb+ are initially identified there is a need for confirmation using a second sample; (3) single IAb+ individuals are at lower risk of progression than multiple IAb+ individuals; (4) individuals with early-stage type 1 diabetes should have periodic medical monitoring, including regular assessments of glucose levels, regular education about symptoms of diabetes and DKA, and psychosocial support; (5) interested people with stage 2 type 1 diabetes should be offered trial participation or approved therapies; and (6) all health professionals involved in monitoring and care of individuals with type 1 diabetes have a responsibility to provide education. The guidance also emphasises significant unmet needs for further research on early-stage type 1 diabetes to increase the rigour of future recommendations and inform clinical care.Item Correction to: Consensus guidance for monitoring individuals with islet autoantibody‑positive pre‑stage 3 type 1 diabetes(Springer, 2024) Phillip, Moshe; Achenbach, Peter; Addala, Ananta; Albanese-O'Neill, Anastasia; Battelino, Tadej; Bell, Kirstine J.; Besser, Rachel E. J.; Bonifacio, Ezio; Colhoun, Helen M.; Couper, Jennifer J.; Craig, Maria E.; Danne, Thomas; de Beaufort, Carine; Dovc, Klemen; Driscoll, Kimberly A.; Dutta, Sanjoy; Ebekozien, Osagie; Elding Larsson, Helena; Feiten, Daniel J.; Frohnert, Brigitte I.; Gabbay, Robert A.; Gallagher, Mary P.; Greenbaum, Carla J.; Griffin, Kurt J.; Hagopian, William; Haller, Michael J.; Hendrieckx, Christel; Hendriks, Emile; Holt, Richard I. G.; Hughes, Lucille; Ismail, Heba M.; Jacobsen, Laura M.; Johnson, Suzanne B.; Kolb, Leslie E.; Kordonouri, Olga; Lange, Karin; Lash, Robert W.; Lernmark, Åke; Libman, Ingrid; Lundgren, Markus; Maahs, David M.; Marcovecchio, M. Loredana; Mathieu, Chantal; Miller, Kellee M.; O'Donnell, Holly K.; Oron, Tal; Patil, Shivajirao P.; Pop-Busui, Rodica; Rewers, Marian J.; Rich, Stephen S.; Schatz, Desmond A.; Schulman-Rosenbaum, Rifka; Simmons, Kimber M.; Sims, Emily K.; Skyler, Jay S.; Smith, Laura B.; Speake, Cate; Steck, Andrea K.; Thomas, Nicholas P. B.; Tonyushkina, Ksenia N.; Veijola, Riitta; Wentworth, John M.; Wherrett, Diane K.; Wood, Jamie R.; Ziegler, Anette-Gabriele; DiMeglio, Linda A.; Pediatrics, School of MedicineItem Development and delivery of a brief family behavioral intervention to support continuous glucose monitor use in young children with type 1 diabetes(Wiley, 2022) Hilliard, Marisa E.; Commissariat, Persis V.; Kanapka, Lauren; Laffel, Lori M.; Levy, Wendy; Harrington, Kara; Anderson, Barbara J.; Miller, Kellee M.; DiMeglio, Linda A.; Pediatrics, School of MedicineBackground: Despite potential glycemic benefits of continuous glucose monitor (CGM) use in young children with type 1 diabetes, psychosocial and behavioral challenges may interfere with sustained use. We developed a 5-session family behavioral intervention (FBI) to support CGM use. Objective: We report on the multi-step development of the FBI, training interventionists, implementation in a 14-site clinical trial, and participant satisfaction. Methods: A multidisciplinary team created the FBI based on mixed-methods (i.e., survey data, qualitative research) preliminary work with parents of young children. Investigators trained non-physician staff to deliver the 5 sessions per an intervention manual. Trial participants received the FBI either during the first (FBI group, n = 50) or second 6-months (Crossover group, n = 44) of the 1-year trial. Investigators listened to session recordings to rate intervention fidelity, and participants rated satisfaction with the FBI. Results: The complete 5-session FBI was delivered to 89% of participants, in-person (73%) or by telephone (23%). Sessions lasted 23 min on average, and fidelity was high across sessions. Over 80% of participants rated very high satisfaction with all aspects of the FBI and offered few recommendations for improvement. Conclusions: Having been developed based on experiences and input of families of young children with type 1 diabetes, the FBI represented a novel behavioral approach to enhance sustained CGM use during a challenging developmental period. Evidence of strong feasibility and acceptability supports its potential for implementation in research and clinical care. As diabetes technologies evolve, the FBI may continue to be refined to address parents' most relevant concerns.Item Effect of Metformin Added to Insulin on Glycemic Control Among Overweight/Obese Adolescents With Type 1 Diabetes: A Randomized Clinical Trial(AMA, 2015-12) Libman, Ingrid M.; Miller, Kellee M.; DiMeglio, Linda A.; Bethin, Kathleen E.; Katz, Michelle L.; Shah, Avni; Simmons, Jill H.; Haller, Michael J.; Raman, Sripriya; Tamborlane, William V.; Coffey, Julie K.; Saenz, Ashleigh M.; Beck, Roy W.; Nadeau, Kristen J.; Department of Pediatrics, IU School of MedicineImportance Previous studies assessing the effect of metformin on glycemic control in adolescents with type 1 diabetes have produced inconclusive results. Objective To assess the efficacy and safety of metformin as an adjunct to insulin in treating overweight adolescents with type 1 diabetes. Design, Setting, and Participants Multicenter (26 pediatric endocrinology clinics), double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized clinical trial involving 140 adolescents aged 12.1 to 19.6 years (mean [SD] 15.3 [1.7] years) with mean type 1 diabetes duration 7.0 (3.3) years, mean body mass index (BMI) 94th (4) percentile, mean total daily insulin 1.1 (0.2) U/kg, and mean HbA1c 8.8% (0.7%). Interventions Randomization to receive metformin (n = 71) (≤2000 mg/d) or placebo (n = 69). Main Outcomes and Measures Primary outcome was change in HbA1c from baseline to 26 weeks adjusted for baseline HbA1c. Secondary outcomes included change in blinded continuous glucose monitor indices, total daily insulin, BMI, waist circumference, body composition, blood pressure, and lipids. Results Between October 2013 and February 2014, 140 participants were enrolled. Baseline HbA1c was 8.8% in each group. At 13-week follow-up, reduction in HbA1c was greater with metformin (−0.2%) than placebo (0.1%; mean difference, −0.3% [95% CI, −0.6% to 0.0%]; P = .02). However, this differential effect was not sustained at 26-week follow up when mean change in HbA1c from baseline was 0.2% in each group (mean difference, 0% [95% CI, −0.3% to 0.3%]; P = .92). At 26-week follow-up, total daily insulin per kg of body weight was reduced by at least 25% from baseline among 23% (16) of participants in the metformin group vs 1% (1) of participants in the placebo group (mean difference, 21% [95% CI, 11% to 32%]; P = .003), and 24% (17) of participants in the metformin group and 7% (5) of participants in the placebo group had a reduction in BMI z score of 10% or greater from baseline to 26 weeks (mean difference, 17% [95% CI, 5% to 29%]; P = .01). Gastrointestinal adverse events were reported by more participants in the metformin group than in the placebo group (mean difference, 36% [95% CI, 19% to 51%]; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance Among overweight adolescents with type 1 diabetes, the addition of metformin to insulin did not improve glycemic control after 6 months. Of multiple secondary end points, findings favored metformin only for insulin dose and measures of adiposity; conversely, use of metformin resulted in an increased risk for gastrointestinal adverse events. These results do not support prescribing metformin to overweight adolescents with type 1 diabetes to improve glycemic control.Item High residual C-peptide likely contributes to glycemic control in type 1 diabetes(American Society for Clinical Investigation, 2020-01-02) Rickels, Michael R.; Evans-Molina, Carmella; Bahnson, Henry T.; Ylescupidez, Alyssa; Nadeau, Kristen J.; Hao, Wei; Clements, Mark A.; Sherr, Jennifer L.; Pratley, Richard E.; Hannon, Tamara S.; Shah, Viral N.; Miller, Kellee M.; Greenbaum, Carla J.; Medicine, School of MedicineBACKGROUND Residual C-peptide is detected in many people for years following the diagnosis of type 1 diabetes; however, the physiologic significance of low levels of detectable C-peptide is not known. METHODS We studied 63 adults with type 1 diabetes classified by peak mixed-meal tolerance test (MMTT) C-peptide as negative (<0.007 pmol/mL; n = 15), low (0.017–0.200; n = 16), intermediate (>0.200–0.400; n = 15), or high (>0.400; n = 17). We compared the groups’ glycemia from continuous glucose monitoring (CGM), β cell secretory responses from a glucose-potentiated arginine (GPA) test, insulin sensitivity from a hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic (EU) clamp, and glucose counterregulatory responses from a subsequent hypoglycemic (HYPO) clamp. RESULTS Low and intermediate MMTT C-peptide groups did not exhibit β cell secretory responses to hyperglycemia, whereas the high C-peptide group showed increases in both C-peptide and proinsulin (P ≤ 0.01). All groups with detectable MMTT C-peptide demonstrated acute C-peptide and proinsulin responses to arginine that were positively correlated with peak MMTT C-peptide (P < 0.0001 for both analytes). During the EU-HYPO clamp, C-peptide levels were proportionately suppressed in the low, intermediate, and high C-peptide compared with the negative group (P ≤ 0.0001), whereas glucagon increased from EU to HYPO only in the high C-peptide group compared with negative (P = 0.01). CGM demonstrated lower mean glucose and more time in range for the high C-peptide group. CONCLUSION These results indicate that in adults with type 1 diabetes, β cell responsiveness to hyperglycemia and α cell responsiveness to hypoglycemia are observed only at high levels of residual C-peptide that likely contribute to glycemic control. FUNDING Funding for this work was provided by the Leona M. and Harry B. Helmsley Charitable Trust, the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences, and the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases.Item “I’m essentially his pancreas”: Parent perceptions of diabetes burden and opportunities to reduce burden in the care of children <8 years old with type 1 diabetes(Wiley, 2020-03) Commissariat, Persis V.; Harrington, Kara R.; Whitehouse, Amanda L.; Miller, Kellee M.; Hilliard, Marisa E.; Van Name, Michelle; DeSalvo, Daniel J.; Tamborlane, William V.; Anderson, Barbara J.; DiMeglio, Linda A.; Laffel, Lori M.; Medicine, School of MedicineBackground: Across all age groups, management of type 1 diabetes (T1D) places substantial responsibility and emotional burden upon families. This study explored parent perceptions of the burdens of caring for very young children with T1D. Methods: Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with parents (85% mothers) of 79 children with T1D, aged 1 to <8 years old, from four diverse pediatric diabetes clinical centers. Interviews were transcribed, coded, and analyzed using hybrid thematic analysis to derive central themes. Results: Youth (77% White) had T1D for ≥6 months: age (M ± SD) 5.2 ± 1.5 years, diabetes duration 2.4 ± 1.3 years, and A1c 63 ± 10 mmol/mol (7.9 ± 0.9%); 66% used an insulin pump and 61% used CGM. Three major themes emerged related to diabetes burdens: (a) the emotional burden of diabetes on themselves and their children, (b) the burden of finding, training, and trusting effective secondary caregivers to manage the child's diabetes, and (c) suggestions for how more comprehensive, personalized diabetes education from healthcare providers for parents and secondary caregivers could help reduce parent burden and worry. Conclusions: In families with very young children with T1D, parental perceptions of the burden of managing diabetes are common and could be mitigated by tailored education programs that increase parent knowledge, bolster parents' confidence in themselves, and increase trust in their secondary caregivers to manage diabetes. Reduced parental burden and increased caregiver knowledge may positively impact child's glycemic control, as well as improve parent and child quality of life.Item Long-term Continuous Glucose Monitor Use in Very Young Children With Type 1 Diabetes: One-Year Results From the SENCE Study(Sage, 2023) Van Name, Michelle A.; Kanapka, Lauren G.; DiMeglio, Linda A.; Miller, Kellee M.; Albanese-O’Neill, Anastasia; Commissariat, Persis; Corathers, Sarah D.; Harrington, Kara R.; Hilliard, Marisa E.; Anderson, Barbara J.; Kelley, Jennifer C.; Laffel, Lori M.; MacLeish, Sarah A.; Nathan, Brandon M.; Tamborlane, William V.; Wadwa, R. Paul; Willi, Steven M.; Williams, Kristen M.; Wintergerst, Kupper A.; Woerner, Stephanie; Wong, Jenise C.; DeSalvo, Daniel J.; Pediatrics, School of MedicineObjectives: Achieving optimal glycemic outcomes in young children with type 1 diabetes (T1D) is challenging. This study examined the durability of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) coupled with a family behavioral intervention (FBI) to improve glycemia. Study design: This one-year study included an initial 26-week randomized controlled trial of CGM with FBI (CGM+FBI) and CGM alone (Standard-CGM) compared with blood glucose monitoring (BGM), followed by a 26-week extension phase wherein the BGM Group received the CGM+FBI (BGM-Crossover) and both original CGM groups continued this technology. Results: Time in range (70-180 mg/dL) did not improve with CGM use (CGM+FBI: baseline 37%, 52 weeks 41%; Standard-CGM: baseline 41%, 52 weeks 44%; BGM-Crossover: 26 weeks 38%, 52 weeks 40%). All three groups sustained decreases in hypoglycemia (<70 mg/dL) with CGM use (CGM+FBI: baseline 3.4%, 52 weeks 2.0%; Standard-CGM: baseline 4.1%, 52 weeks 2.1%; BGM-Crossover: 26 weeks 4.5%, 52 weeks 1.7%, P-values <.001). Hemoglobin A1c was unchanged with CGM use (CGM+FBI: baseline 8.3%, 52 weeks 8.2%; Standard-CGM: baseline 8.2%, 52 weeks 8.0%; BGM-Crossover: 26 weeks 8.1%, 52 weeks 8.3%). Sensor use remained high (52-week study visit: CGM+FBI 91%, Standard-CGM 92%, BGM-Crossover 88%). Conclusion: Over 12 months young children with T1D using newer CGM technology sustained reductions in hypoglycemia and, in contrast to prior studies, persistently wore CGM. However, pervasive hyperglycemia remained unmitigated. This indicates an urgent need for further advances in diabetes technology, behavioral support, and diabetes management educational approaches to optimize glycemia in young children.Item Nighttime is the worst time: Parental fear of hypoglycemia in young children with type 1 diabetes(Wiley, 2018-02) Van Name, Michelle A.; Hilliard, Marisa E.; Boyle, Claire T.; Miller, Kellee M.; DeSalvo, Daniel J.; Anderson, Barbara J.; Laffel, Lori M.; Woerner, Stephanie E.; DiMeglio, Linda A.; Tamborlane, William V.; Pediatrics, School of MedicineBACKGROUND: Fear of hypoglycemia is common in parents of young children with type 1 diabetes (T1D), but little is known about the specific fears that parents most often experience. Hypoglycemia fear has been associated with poorer glycemic control in older children, though not yet studied in a large cohort of very young children. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Parents of 549 children <7 years (mean 5.2 ± 1.2 years [19% <3 years]) with a mean diabetes duration of 2.4 ± 1.0 years (range 1-6 years) and mean HbA1c 8.2% ± 1.1% (66 ± 12 mmol/mol) registered in the T1D Exchange completed the worry scale of the Hypoglycemia Fear Survey modified for parents (HFS-P). RESULTS: Mean parental fear of hypoglycemia worry score was 36.1 ± 23.1 (possible range 0-100), with most frequent worries related to the child having a low while asleep and the child not recognizing a low. The mean worry score was not associated with the child's age, glycemic control, or recent severe hypoglycemic event. Parental worries about lows while sleeping were significantly higher in pump users than non-users (61% vs. 45%; P < .001), and tended to be higher in CGM users than non-users (62% vs 51%; P = .02). CONCLUSIONS: The greatest worries of parents of young children with T1D were related to hypoglycemia during sleep and other times/circumstances during which it would be difficult to detect hypoglycemia. Using advanced diabetes technologies may be an effort to temper fears about hypoglycemia during sleep, though the directionality of this relationship is undetermined. Additional studies can clarify this association and leverage use of diabetes technologies to improve glycemic control.Item Sources and Valence of Information Impacting Parents' Decisions to Use Diabetes Technologies in Young Children <8 Years Old with Type 1 Diabetes(Mary Ann Liebert, Inc., 2020-09) Commissariat, Persis V.; Whitehouse, Amanda L.; Hilliard, Marisa E.; Miller, Kellee M.; Harrington, Kara R.; Levy, Wendy; DeSalvo, Daniel J.; Van Name, Michelle A.; Anderson, Barbara J.; Tamborlane, William V.; DiMeglio, Linda A.; Laffel, Lori M.; Pediatrics, School of MedicineThere are multiple information sources available to assist families in learning about rapidly advancing diabetes technologies as care options for their children. This study explored where and from whom families of young children with type 1 diabetes get information about diabetes technologies and the valence (positive vs. negative) of that information. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with parents (86% mothers) of 79 youth <8 years old with type 1 diabetes for ≥6 months, ([mean ± standard deviation] age 5.2 ± 1.5 years, diabetes duration 2.4 ± 1.3 years, 77% white, A1c 63 ± 10 mmol/mol [7.9 ± 0.9%], 66% pump-treated, 58% using continuous glucose monitors [CGMs]). Interviews were transcribed and underwent content analysis to derive central themes. Most parents reported learning about new technologies from three direct sources: diabetes care providers, people with diabetes, and caregivers of children with diabetes. Parents also cited three indirect sources of information: online forums, publications, and diabetes-specific conferences. Parents reported hearing primarily positive things about technologies. Families not using pump and/or CGM noted reluctance to use technology due to family-specific concerns (e.g., cost, child's unwillingness to wear device) rather than information from outside sources. In this subset of parents, many still expressed willingness to initiate use once family-specific concerns were resolved. Parents of young children received largely positive information about diabetes technologies, primarily from health care providers and others familiar with using devices personally or for their children. To maximize diabetes technology use in young children, it is incumbent upon providers to ensure families receive balanced realistic information about benefits and barriers.