The link between COVID-19 infection and diabetes has been explored in several studies since the start of the pandemic, with associations between comorbid diabetes and poorer prognosis in patients infected with the virus and reports of diabetic ketoacidosis occurring with COVID-19 infection. As such, significant interest has been generated surrounding mechanisms by which the virus may exert effects on the pancreatic β cells. In this review, we consider possible routes by which SARS-CoV-2 may impact β cells. Specifically, we outline data that either support or argue against the idea of direct infection and injury of β cells by SARS-CoV-2. We also discuss β cell damage due to a "bystander" effect in which infection with the virus leads to damage to surrounding tissues that are essential for β cell survival and function, such as the pancreatic microvasculature and exocrine tissue. Studies elucidating the provocation of a cytokine storm following COVID-19 infection and potential impacts of systemic inflammation and increases in insulin resistance on β cells are also reviewed. Finally, we summarize the existing clinical data surrounding diabetes incidence since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Aim/hypothesis The risk of progressing from autoantibody positivity to type 1 diabetes is inversely related to age. Separately, whether age influences patterns of C-peptide loss or changes in insulin sensitivity in autoantibody-positive individuals who progress to stage 3 type 1 diabetes is unclear. Methods Beta cell function and insulin sensitivity were determined by modelling of OGTTs performed in 658 autoantibody-positive participants followed longitudinally in the Diabetes Prevention Trial–Type 1 (DPT-1). In this secondary analysis of DPT-1 data, time trajectories of beta cell function and insulin sensitivity were analysed in participants who progressed to type 1 diabetes (progressors) to address the impact of age on patterns of metabolic progression to diabetes. Results Among the entire DPT-1 cohort, the highest discriminant age for type 1 diabetes risk was 14 years, with participants aged <14 years being twice as likely to progress to type 1 diabetes as those aged ≥14 years. At study entry, beta cell glucose sensitivity was impaired to a similar extent in progressors aged <14 years and progressors aged ≥14 years. From study entry to stage 3 type 1 diabetes onset, beta cell glucose sensitivity and insulin sensitivity declined in both progressor groups. However, there were no significant differences in the yearly rate of decline in either glucose sensitivity (−13.7 [21.2] vs −11.9 [21.5] pmol min−1 m−2 [mmol/l]−1, median [IQR], p=0.52) or insulin sensitivity (−22 [37] vs −14 [40] ml min−1 m−2, median [IQR], p=0.07) between progressors aged <14 years and progressors aged ≥14 years. Conclusions/interpretation Our data indicate that during progression to stage 3 type 1 diabetes, rates of change in declining glucose and insulin sensitivity are not significantly different between progressors aged <14 years and progressors aged ≥14 years. These data suggest there is a predictable course of declining metabolic function during the progression to type 1 diabetes that is not influenced by age. Graphical abstract

Background/Objective: Individuals with a family history of type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1D) are at increased genetic risk for T1D. Previous studies identified the presence of β-cell dysfunction before clinical onset and diagnosis of T1D. However, it is unclear if β-cell dysfunction predates islet autoimmunity in individuals at high genetic risk. Our objective was to test β-cell function in islet antibody negative adults who have a first-degree relative with T1D. We hypothesized that individuals at genetic risk for T1D would exhibit β-cell dysfunction even without detectable islet autoimmunity.Methods: We used ordinary one-way and Brown-Forsythe ANOVA to compare the repeated mixed meal tolerance test (MMTT) and hyperglycemic clamp glucose-stimulated β-cell response and function measures between three groups of individuals: normoglycemic adults without T1D family history age, sex, and BMI-matched islet antibody negative first-degree relatives of individuals with T1D, and islet antibody positive first-degree relatives of individuals with T1D.Results: Neither the MMTT first-phase insulin secretion measures (c-peptide0-15 minutes, c-peptide0-30 minutes, insulin0-15 minutes, insulin0-30 minutes), nor second-phase measures (c-peptide0-120 minutes, insulin0-120 minutes, and glucose0-120 minutes) showed a statistically significant difference between groups. The clamp acute c-peptide response to glucose, insulin sensitivity, c-peptide steady state, first-phase β-cell function, and second-phase β-cell function were similar between subject groups in both visits. Fasting proinsulin:c-peptide ratios, a biomarker of β-cell stress, were also similar between participant groups.Conclusion and Impact: Our data suggest that genetically at-risk autoantibody negative adult relatives of individuals with T1D do not demonstrate β-cell dysfunction compared to controls. Studies show that β-cell ER dysfunction preceding T1D onset is more striking in younger children. Thus, our findings may reflect the use of an adult study population. Alternatively, β-cell dysfunction in T1D may require initial autoimmune activation. This study will contribute to the growing understanding of risk factors contributing to T1D development.This project was funded, in part, with support from the Research Training Program in Diabetes and Obesity funded, in part by grant 3T32DK064466 from the National Institutes of Health. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health. Funding also provided by JDRF grant 2-SRA-2017-498-M-B.

Background Type 1 diabetes (T1D) results from immune-mediated destruction of insulin-producing beta cells. Efforts to prevent T1D have focused on modulating immune responses and supporting beta cell health; however, heterogeneity in disease progression and responses to therapies have made these efforts difficult to translate to clinical practice, highlighting the need for precision medicine approaches to T1D prevention. Methods To understand the current state of knowledge regarding precision approaches to T1D prevention, we performed a systematic review of randomized-controlled trials from the past 25 years testing disease-modifying therapies in T1D and/or identifying features linked to treatment response, analyzing bias using a Cochrane-risk-of-bias instrument. Results We identified 75 manuscripts, 15 describing 11 prevention trials for individuals with increased risk for T1D, and 60 describing treatments aimed at preventing beta cell loss in individuals at disease onset. Seventeen agents tested, mostly immunotherapies, showed benefit compared to placebo (only two prior to T1D onset). Fifty-seven studies employed precision analyses to assess features linked to treatment response. Age, measures of beta cell function and immune phenotypes were most frequently tested. However, analyses were typically not prespecified, with inconsistent methods reporting, and tended to report positive findings. Conclusions While the quality of prevention and intervention trials was overall high, low quality of precision analyses made it difficult to draw meaningful conclusions that inform clinical practice. Thus, prespecified precision analyses should be incorporated into the design of future studies and reported in full to facilitate precision medicine approaches to T1D prevention.