Background Intensified insulin delivery using multiple daily injections (MDI) or continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) is recommended in children with type 1 diabetes (T1D) to achieve good metabolic control. Objective To examine the frequency of pump usage in T1D children treated in SWEET (Better control in Paediatric and Adolescent diabeteS: Working to crEate CEnTers of Reference) centers and to compare metabolic control between patients treated with CSII vs MDI. Methods This study included 16 570 T1D children participating in the SWEET prospective, multicenter, standardized diabetes patient registry. Datasets were aggregated over the most recent year of treatment for each patient. Data were collected until March 2016. To assess the organization of pump therapy a survey was carried out. Results Overall, 44.4% of T1D children were treated with CSII. The proportion of patients with pump usage varied between centers and decreased with increasing age compared with children treated with MDI. In a logistic regression analysis adjusting for age, gender and diabetes duration, the use of pump was associated with both: center size [odd ratio 1.51 (1.47‐1.55), P < .0001) and the diabetes‐related expenditure per capita [odd ratio 1.55 (1.49‐1.61), P < .0001]. Linear regression analysis, adjusted for age, gender, and diabetes duration showed that both HbA1c and daily insulin dose (U/kg/d) remained decreased in children treated with CSII compared to MDI (P < .0001). Conclusions Insulin pump therapy is offered by most Sweet centers. The differences between centers affect the frequency of use of modern technology. Despite the heterogeneity of centers, T1D children achieve relatively good metabolic control, especially those treated with insulin pumps and those of younger age.

No abstract

OBJECTIVETransient neonatal diabetes mellitus 1 (TNDM1) is the most common cause of diabetes presenting at birth. Approximately 5% of the cases are due to recessive ZFP57 mutations, causing hypomethylation at the TNDM locus and other imprinted loci (HIL). This has consequences for patient care because it has impact on the phenotype and recurrence risk for families. We have determined the genotype, phenotype, and epigenotype of the first 10 families to alert health professionals to this newly described genetic subgroup of diabetes.RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODSThe 10 families (14 homozygous/compound heterozygous individuals) with ZFP57 mutations were ascertained through TNDM1 diagnostic testing. ZFP57 was sequenced in probands and their relatives, and the methylation levels at multiple maternally and paternally imprinted loci were determined. Medical and family histories were obtained, and clinical examination was performed.RESULTSThe key clinical features in probands were transient neonatal diabetes, intrauterine growth retardation, macroglossia, heart defects, and developmental delay. However, the finding of two homozygous relatives without diabetes and normal intelligence showed that the phenotype could be very variable. The epigenotype always included total loss of methylation at the TNDM1 locus and reproducible combinations of differential hypomethylation at other maternally imprinted loci, including tissue mosaicism.CONCLUSIONSThere is yet no clear genotype–epigenotype–phenotype correlation to explain the variable clinical presentation, and this results in difficulties predicting the prognosis of affected individuals. However, many cases have a more severe phenotype than seen in other causes of TNDM1. Further cases and global epigenetic testing are needed to clarify this.

No abstract