4.5 Article

Exendin-4 improves reversal of diabetes in NOD mice treated with Anti-CD3 monoclonal antibody by enhancing recovery of β-cells

期刊

ENDOCRINOLOGY
卷 148, 期 11, 页码 5136-5144

出版社

ENDOCRINE SOC
DOI: 10.1210/en.2007-0358

关键词

-

资金

  1. NIAID NIH HHS [AI98010] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NIDDK NIH HHS [P30 DK063608, K08 DK064101, DK068678, DK57846] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Immune modulators can arrest loss of insulin secretion in type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM), but they have not caused permanent disease remission or restored normal insulin secretion. We tested whether exendin-4, a glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist, would enhance remission of T1DM in NOD mice treated with anti-CD3 monoclonal antibody (mAb) and studied the effects of exendin-4 treatment on cellular and metabolic responses of beta-cells. Diabetic NOD mice treated with anti-CD3 mAb and exendin-4 had a higher rate of remission (44%) than mice treated with anti-CD3 mAb alone (37%) or exendin-4 (0%) or insulin or IgG alone ( 0%) (P < 0.01). The effect of exendin-4 on reversal of diabetes after anti-CD3 mAb was greatest in mice with a glucose level of less than 350 mg/dl at diagnosis ( 63 vs. 39%, P < 0.05). Exendin-4 did not affect beta-cell area, replication, or apoptosis or reduce the frequency of diabetogenic or regulatory T cells or modulate the antigenicity of islet cells. Reversal of T1DM with anti-CD3 mAb was associated with recovery of insulin in glucose transporter-2(+)/insulin(-) islet cells that were identified at diagnosis. Glucose tolerance and insulin responses improved in mice treated with combination therapy, and exendin-4 increased insulin content and insulin release from beta-cells. We conclude that treatment with glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist enhances remission of T1DMinNOD mice treated with anti-CD3mAb by enhancing the recovery of the residual islets. This combinatorial approach may be useful in treatment of patients with new-onset T1DM.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据