HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Abstract Full Text (PDF) Purchase Article View Shopping Cart Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Request Permissions Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Hamilton, J. Articles by Daneman, D. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Hamilton, J. Articles by Daneman, D. Social Bookmarking                What's this?

Metformin as an Adjunct Therapy in Adolescents With Type 1 Diabetes and Insulin Resistance

A randomized controlled trial

¹ Division of Endocrinology, Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Ontario
² Department of Pediatrics, Izaak Walton Killam Health Centre, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada
³ School of Kinesiology, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, British Columbia, Canada

	ABSTRACT

TOP ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS RESULTS CONCLUSIONS References

 
OBJECTIVE—To evaluate whether, in adolescents with type 1 diabetes, the addition of metformin to insulin and standard diabetes management results in 1) higher insulin sensitivity and 2) lower HbA_1c, fasting glucose, insulin dosage (units per kilogram per day) and BMI.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS—This was a randomized, placebo-controlled 3-month trial of metformin therapy in 27 adolescents with type 1 diabetes, high insulin dosage (>1 unit · kg^-1 · day^-1), and HbA_1c >8%, with measurements of insulin sensitivity (by frequently sampled intravenous glucose tolerance test [FSIGT]), HbA_1c, insulin dosage, and BMI at the onset and end of treatment.

RESULTS—At t = 0, HbA_1c was 9.2 ± 0.9%, insulin dosage was 1.2 ± 0.2 units · kg^-1 · day^-1, fasting glucose was 10.6 ± 2.4 mmol/l, and BMI was 24.2 ± 3.9 kg/m² (means ± SD), with no difference between the metformin and placebo groups. At the end of the study, HbA_1c was 0.6% lower in the metformin group than in the placebo group (P < 0.05). This was achieved at lower daily insulin dosages (metformin group –0.14 ± 0.1 vs. placebo group 0.02 ± 0.2 units · kg^-1 · day^-1; P < 0.05), with no significant change in BMI. Fasting glucose levels improved significantly in the metformin group (P < 0.05). Change in insulin sensitivity, measured by FSIGT, was not significantly different between the two groups at study end. Mild hypoglycemia occurred more frequently in the metformin-treated than in the placebo subjects (1.75 ± 0.8 vs. 0.9 ± 0.4 events · patient^-1 · week^-1; P = 0.03). There were no differences in frequency of severe hypoglycemic episodes or gastrointestinal complaints between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS—Metformin treatment lowered HbA_1c and decreased insulin dosage with no weight gain in teens with type 1 diabetes in poor metabolic control. Changes in insulin sensitivity were not documented in this study using the FSIGT. Long-term studies will determine whether these improvements are sustained and whether certain subgroups accrue greater benefit from this therapy.

Abbreviations: DCCT, Diabetes Control and Complications Trial • FSIGT, frequently sampled intravenous glucose tolerance test • GH, growth hormone • GHBP, GH binding protein • MINMOD, minimal model • S_I, insulin sensitivity.

	INTRODUCTION

TOP ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS RESULTS CONCLUSIONS References

 
Insulin resistance of puberty is well documented in both nondiabetic and diabetic adolescents (1–4). In those with diabetes, it likely plays a role in the deterioration of metabolic control seen in this age group (3–6). In the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial (DCCT), adolescents achieved HbA_1c levels that were on average 1% higher than in adults in both the conventional and intensive treatment groups, despite receiving more insulin (units per kilogram body weight) and having increased weight gain (7). This triad of high HbA_1c, high insulin dosage, and weight gain suggests that the insulin administered was less effective in maintaining glycemic control (i.e., insulin resistance) in the adolescent cohort.

The increase in growth hormone (GH) secretion during puberty is exaggerated in teens with type 1 diabetes compared with their nondiabetic peers, and contributes to the greater insulin resistance in this population (4,8,9). Insulin given subcutaneously bypasses the portal circulation and decreases the intrahepatic insulin effect on GH binding protein (GHBP) synthesis (10). This decrease in GHBP leads to decreased GH action, lower IGF-I levels, and, because of the lack of feedback inhibition, exaggerated GH secretion, together resulting in insulin resistance (11,12). Sex steroids and the hyperglycemia associated with noncompliance may also contribute to insulin resistance in adolescents (3,14,15).

Oral agents used to treat type 2 diabetes may be useful adjunctive therapy in individuals with type 1 diabetes and insulin resistance. The biguanide, metformin, acts primarily to decrease hepatic glucose output, but also effects insulin sensitivity (S_I). Both mechanisms may benefit the insulin-resistant individual with type 1 diabetes (16). A few reports of metformin added to insulin therapy in type 1 diabetic adults documented that the subjects showed a reduction in insulin requirements and variable changes in glycemic control (17–19). Preliminary results of two studies of metformin use in teens with type 1 diabetes have yielded conflicting results (20,21). No studies have measured physiological changes in S_I in response to metformin in adolescents with type 1 diabetes. The purpose of this study was to determine if the addition of metformin to standard diabetes care in teens with type 1 diabetes and insulin resistance would improve S_I, as assessed by the frequently sampled intravenous glucose tolerance test (FSIGT) and by clinical outcomes of lowered HbA_1c and insulin dosage and lack of weight gain.

	RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

TOP ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS RESULTS CONCLUSIONS References

 
This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial recruited adolescents with type 1 diabetes attending the diabetes clinic at The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Canada. Inclusion criteria were the following: age 12–17 years; Tanner stage 2–5 (assessed by the method of Marshall and Tanner) (22,23); duration of diabetes of >3 years; suboptimal metabolic control, defined as a HbA_1c >8.0 but < 11.0% (nondiabetic range 4.0–6.0%) for the prior 6 months; and insulin dosage 1 unit · kg^-1 · day^-1. Exclusion criteria included nephropathy (albumin excretion rate >200 µg/min), proliferative retinopathy, recurrent diabetic ketoacidosis (more than two episodes in the past year), recurrent severe hypoglycemia (more than two episodes of hypoglycemia with altered level of consciousness, requiring assistance to treat in the past year), renal or hepatic dysfunction, another serious medical illness, the presence of a known eating disorder, or, if female, being sexually active and unwilling to take birth control. The protocol was approved by the Research Ethics Board of The Hospital for Sick Children. Written informed consent was obtained from all participants and their parents. The primary outcome was change in S_I.

Protocol
Subjects underwent a 2-month run-in period to screen for complications and to update patient education, optimize insulin therapy, and assess the subjects’ ability to comply with the protocol. At the end of the run-in, subjects were randomized to either placebo or metformin using a computer-generated block random number table by sex and pubertal status (Tanner 2–3 vs. Tanner 4–5). The investigators were masked to patient allocation. The subjects were assessed monthly during the 3-month active phase of the trial. Medication (metformin or placebo) was taken with meals to minimize gastrointestinal side effects. Starting dosage was 500 mg/day (at breakfast), and was increased by 500 mg/day each week to a maximum of 1,000 mg/day (500 mg twice daily) for those weighing <50 kg, 1,500 mg/day (one 1,000- and one 500-mg dose) for those weighing 50–75 kg, or 2,000 mg/day (1,000 mg twice daily) for those weighing >75 kg.

Subjects were asked to monitor home premeal glucose three to four times daily (and at other times if they experienced symptomatic hypoglycemia) and to record glucose levels and insulin dosage in a diary. Insulin dosage adjustments were made by the subjects following guidelines currently used in our practice (24). Briefly, fast acting insulin (insulin Lispro, Humalog; Lilly) was adjusted at each injection using a scale based on ambient blood glucose concentrations. Adjustments to the intermediate-acting insulin dosage (NPH insulin) were made in 10% increments or decrements when premeal blood sugars were above the target range (4–8 mmol/l) for 3 days in a row or below for 2 days in a row, respectively. Phone contact was made weekly with the study physician for review of side effects and to facilitate insulin dosage adjustment. Subjects were asked to return pill containers for pill counts at each monthly visit. Compliance was defined as acceptable if <25% of the prescribed pills were returned at each assessment.

At each visit, height, weight, BMI, and blood pressure were recorded, and screening blood work (hepatic alanine aminotransferase and aspartate aminotransferase, creatinine, complete blood count, lactate) was performed to monitor for adverse effects. The mean total daily insulin dosage (in units per kilogram per day) for the 7 days preceding each visit was calculated from the subjects’ diaries. Mean fasting glucose was also calculated from the home readings for the 7 days before each monthly clinic visit. Subjects notified the study physician immediately about severe hypoglycemic episodes, defined according to DCCT criteria (25). All episodes of mild symptomatic hypoglycemia were recorded in the diaries. Only glucose concentrations <4.0 mmol/l were used to calculate the mild hypoglycemic event rate. All meter readings were downloaded to a computer to ensure reliability of blood glucose monitoring, and simultaneous laboratory and meter glucose measurements were compared at each visit to ensure accuracy of the meter (defined as the meter reading within 15% of the laboratory value).

HbA_1c (determined using Biorad Variant II; nondiabetic range 4.0–6.0%; intrassay coefficient of variation 1%), cholesterol, and triglyceride levels were measured at the start of the run-in period, randomization, and study end. Insulin sensitivity was measured using the insulin-modified FSIGT at randomization and study end (26). Individuals received their usual insulin dosage the night before the test and underwent the insulin-modified FSIGT in the fasting state the next morning. The FSIGT involved administration of 300 mg/kg of 50% dextrose followed by a 20-mU/kg insulin injection, according to the method of Finegood et al. (26). FSIGT samples were placed in potassium oxalate sodium fluoride tubes, centrifuged at 2,000 rpm for 10 min at 4° C, and stored at –20° C until assayed for insulin and glucose. Plasma glucose was measured by the Vitros 950 Chemistry System Analyzer. Plasma insulin was measured by the double-antibody radioimmunoassay technique (Pharmacia and Upjohn Diagnostics AB, Uppsala, Sweden) with inter- and intra-assay coefficient of variations of 6.6–8.8% and 5.4–5.8%, respectively. The S_I (minutes per micro units per milliliter) was calculated according to minimal model (MINMOD) formulas (27) using MINMOD computer software.

Sample size calculation and statistical analysis
The planned sample size of 32 subjects (16 subjects per treatment) was estimated to provide 80% power to detect a difference of change in S_I of 0.6 x 10^-4 min · µU^-1 · ml^-1 between metformin and placebo groups at a two-sided 0.05 significance level, assuming a SD of 0.6 x 10^-4 min · µU^-1 · ml^-1. This change represents a 30% improvement in insulin sensitivity, which has been reported in metformin therapy and is clinically important enough to justify larger, long-term trials if significant (16).

Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS 8.0 (SPSS, Inc.) software. The mean changes in S_I, HbA_1c, fasting blood glucose, insulin dosage (units per kilogram per day), BMI, blood pressure, and lipids between the 0 and 12 week visits for each group along with their 95% CIs were compared using the unpaired Student’s t test. Repeated-measures ANOVA was performed to assess the change in insulin dosage and fasting glucose concentration over the study period. The S_I data were not normative and were analyzed by the nonparametric Mann-Whitney U test. The S_I data were also log transformed, and the mean change in S_I was analyzed with an unpaired t test. P <0.05 was considered statistically significant. Pearson’s correlation was performed to identify parameters that significantly influenced S_I results. ANCOVA was performed with adjustment for the significant covariate of fasting glucose. The frequency of severe hypoglycemic episodes was compared in the two groups using a binomial test of two independent proportions. The proportion of subjects in each group experiencing all other adverse events was compared using Fisher’s exact test.

	RESULTS

TOP ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS RESULTS CONCLUSIONS References

 
In all, 85 subjects were eligible for the study, and 38 (45%) agreed to participate. Age, sex, and HbA_1c were not different between those who consented and those who did not. During the run-in period, eight subjects withdrew because of their unwillingness to comply with the protocol. During the study period, three subjects dropped out or were withdrawn: one because of unwillingness to undergo a second FSIGT (placebo group), one because of gastrointestinal discomfort (metformin group), and the third because of an episode of acute hepatitis with an elevation of hepatic transaminases (placebo group). Age, sex, HbA_1c, BMI, and insulin dosage were similar in those who completed the study and those who withdrew. The remaining 27 subjects completed the study (14 in the metformin group and 13 in the placebo group). Of these, 11 (79%) of the metformin-treated subjects and 8 (62%) of the placebo-treated subjects were compliant with the tablets. All subjects received three daily injections of insulin as a mixture of NPH and Humalog at breakfast, Humalog at supper, and NPH at bedtime.

Table 1 shows baseline characteristics of all subjects. All subjects were Caucasian. Although adolescents in the placebo group had a slightly higher BMI and shorter duration of diabetes than those in the metformin group, these differences were not statistically significant.

View larger version (8K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Figure 1— Changes in HbA1c levels (A), insulin dosage (unit/kg; B), and BMI (C) in metformin () and placebo () groups over 3-month active study period.

In all, 11 subjects complained of gastrointestinal discomfort (6 from the metformin group, 5 from the placebo group), with no significant differences between the groups. In addition, two subjects experienced brief episodes of vomiting (both metformin group; one withdrew from the study), and three subjects (two metformin group, one placebo group) experienced severe hypoglycemic events (two had seizures and one experienced an altered level of consciousness). In all, the events were clearly related to missing meals. During the run-in period, there was a mean of 1.0 ± 0.6 mild hypoglycemic episodes · patient^-1 · week^-1. Over the 3-month treatment period, the number of mild hypoglycemic events in the metformin group increased compared with the placebo group (1.75 ± 0.8 vs. 0.9 ± 0.4 events · patient^-1 · week^-1; P = 0.03).

	CONCLUSIONS

TOP ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS RESULTS CONCLUSIONS References

 
In this study, we demonstrated that adolescents with type 1 diabetes and insulin resistance receiving metformin had a lower HbA_1c, decreased their insulin requirements by 10%, and had no significant weight gain over the 3-month study period, compared with those in the placebo group. These changes suggest a clinical improvement in S_I and overall diabetes control in the metformin-treated subjects. All subject received standardized advice regarding insulin dosage adjustment in response to glucose monitoring, yet only the metformin group improved metabolic control significantly. Metformin may have lowered HbA_1c by smoothing out glycemic excursions over a 24-h period, perhaps by decreasing hepatic glucose output. Two findings support this view: first, the decrease in insulin requirement was significant only for NPH, and, secondly, a significantly lowered fasting glucose was documented in the metformin group. S_I, as measured by FSIGT, was not improved, although S_I did show a trend toward improvement in the metformin group after adjustment for ambient glucose. Within the metformin group, there were three girls with BMI >28 kg/m² (all Tanner stage 4) who responded particularly well; two had decreases in HbA_1c of 1.2 and 0.4% with concurrent decreased daily insulin dosages of 10–15 units (-0.15 units/kg) and stable or decreased BMI (from 28.5 to 27.2 kg/m²). The third subject had no change in her HbA_1c, but decreased her daily insulin dosage by 22 units (-0.22 units/kg) and her BMI from 30 to 27.9 kg/m². In contrast, two females in the placebo arm, who had similar BMI and Tanner stage, experienced improved HbA_1c (1 and 0.1%) at the expense of increased insulin dosage requirements (0.13 and 0.17 units/kg, respectively) and increased BMI (both 0.8 kg/m²). Although the number of subjects in this study was too small to perform subgroup analysis, there may have been certain subjects (e.g., females in advanced puberty with BMI >28 kg/m²) who responded particularly well to the addition of metformin to their usual insulin therapy.

The inclusion criteria for this study were set out to minimize the likelihood of recruiting subjects with type 2 diabetes. All subjects were Caucasian, had diabetes onset between ages 1.5 and 12.0 years, and had a diabetes duration of 8.3 ± 4.3 years. Their mean BMI was 24.2 kg/m² (range 17–30 kg/m²), much lower than that reported in studies of teens with type 2 diabetes (28,29). Patients were stratified at randomization by early and late pubertal development, and pubertal stage did not change appreciably over the 3-month study period. GH secretion or IGF-I levels, which are believed to be responsible for the insulin resistance of puberty, were not measured (4,8,9). The short study duration and lack of clinical pubertal progression make it highly unlikely that changes in GH alone could account for the benefits accrued in the metformin-treated, but not placebo-treated subjects. Exercise has been shown to improve insulin sensitivity and could theoretically have resulted in improved metabolic control (30). Subjects’ activity was not restricted; however, they were asked to keep a detailed log of blood glucose recordings, insulin dosages, and comments related to changes in diet and activity. In addition, during weekly phone contact, a review of blood glucose excursions and a specific discussion about physical activity as one factor that may modify blood glucose levels took place. None of the subjects reported an increase in his or her activity during the study period.

Preliminary results of two studies examining metformin treatment in teens with type 1 diabetes have been presented (20,21). The first, an open-label, nonrandomized study of five adolescents taking 500–1,000 mg metformin daily found no improvement in HbA_1c or decrease in insulin dosage after 6 months (21). This study was limited because it was small, uncontrolled, and used low metformin dosages. The second was a larger randomized controlled trial, with metformin administered as 500 mg twice daily for 6 months in 80 adolescents with poor metabolic control and type 1 diabetes (20). After 3 months, there was a beneficial effect on HbA_1c in the metformin group (decrease from 9.6 to 8.7% compared with a decrease of 9.6 to 9.4% in those taking placebo), but by 6 months the former group’s HbA_1c had returned to baseline. Weight and insulin dosage also decreased (males only) in the metformin group at 3 months. In the current study, we have also demonstrated a beneficial effect of metformin over a 3-month study period; whether this will be sustained in the longer term at the higher dosages of metformin that we used remains to be tested.

Technical issues related to the performance of FSIGT in individuals with type 1 diabetes without residual pancreatic insulin secretion may have interfered with our ability to show significant differences in S_I between our study groups. The SD in our population was much wider than anticipated and likely was related to difficulties in calculating S_I in this population by the MINMOD analysis method. Ambient glucose at the start of the study correlated with S_I; thus, for this test to be improved upon in type 1 diabetes, strict stabilization of blood glucose at the onset may be necessary. The original protocol modified for type 1 diabetes by Finegood et al. (26) has only been tested in individuals with diabetes within the first year of diagnosis, with a much narrower range of fasting glucose, reflecting residual insulin secretion. The most significant issue we detected related to a significant and continuing increase in glucose level at the end of the 180-min test that interferes with the ability of the MINMOD program to accurately calculate parameters, as the model assumes the 180-min glucose level to be at steady state. In those subjects with a rise in glucose beyond 80–100 min, this results in a false "undershoot" of glucose in response to insulin earlier in the test. Consequently, the calculated S_I may be falsely high. Further work to determine the most appropriate modifications of this technique in type 1 diabetes may make it a more reliable tool in this setting (31,32).

Although we could not document improved S_I by FSIGT, clinical indicators such as decreased insulin dosage, decreased BMI, and lowered HbA_1c suggested an improvement in S_I in those receiving metformin. This improvement may have been attributable to the direct impact of metformin on peripheral tissues, but more likely was secondary to metformin’s effects on decreased hepatic glucose output or, possibly, as a consequence of weight loss subsequent to a decreased appetite. The potential therapeutic benefit of potent insulin sensitizers, such as the thiazolidinediones, should also be investigated. This pilot study demonstrated that targeting insulin resistance with metformin, traditionally used to treat type 2 diabetes, improves metabolic control in teens with type 1 diabetes and represents a novel adjunctive therapy worthy of further investigation.

	Acknowledgments

 
This work was supported by grants from the Hospital for Sick Children Research Institute and the Order of the Eastern Star of Ontario. Drug and placebo were provided by Aventis Pharma.

We thank Drs. Denice Feig, Bernard Zinman, Etienne Sochett, and Derek Stevens for their advice and support and Azar Azad and Saghi Kowsari for assistance with the MINMOD analyses. We are indebted to the teens who participated in this study.

	Footnotes

 
Address correspondence and reprint requests to Jill Hamilton, MD, Division of Endocrinology, Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. E-mail: jill.hamilton{at}sickkids.ca .

Received for publication 13 March 2002 and accepted in revised form 7 October 2002.

A table elsewhere in this issue shows conventional and Système International (SI) units and conversion factors for many substances.

	References

TOP ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS RESULTS CONCLUSIONS References

 

1. Moran A, Jacobs DR, Steinberger J, Hong CP, Prineas R, Luepker R, Sinaiko AR: Insulin resistance during puberty: results from clamp studies in 357 children. Diabetes 48:2039–2044, 1999[Abstract]
   
2. Caprio S: Insulin: the other anabolic hormone of puberty. Acta Paediatr 88:84–87, 1999
   
3. Arslanian SA, Heil BV, Becker DJ, Drash AL: Sexual dimorphism in insulin sensitivity in adolescents with insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 72:920–926, 1991[Abstract]
   
4. Amiel SA, Sherwin RS, Simonson DC, Lauritano AA, Tamborlane WV: Impaired insulin action in puberty: a contributing factor to poor control in adolescents with diabetes. N Engl J Med 315:215–219, 1986[Abstract]
   
5. Daneman D, Wolfson DH, Becker DJ, Drash AL: Factors affecting glycosylated hemoglobin values in children with insulin-dependent diabetes. J Pediatr 99:847–853, 1981[Medline]
   
6. Mortensen HB, Hougaard P: Comparison of metabolic control in a cross-sectional study of 2,873 children and adolescents with IDDM from 18 countries: the Hvidore Study Group on Childhood Diabetes [published erratum appears in Diabetes Care 20:1216, 1997]. Diabetes Care 20:714–720, 1997[Abstract]
   
7. DCCT Research Group: Effect of intensive diabetes treatment on the development and progression of long-term complications in adolescents with insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus: Diabetes Control and Complications Trial. J Pediatr 125:177–188, 1994[Medline]
   
8. Edge JA, Dunger DB, Matthews DR, Gilbert JP, Smith CP: Increased overnight growth hormone concentrations in diabetic compared with normal adolescents. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 71:1356–1362, 1990[Abstract]
   
9. Tapanainen P, Kaar ML, Leppaluoto J, Huttunen NP, Knip M: Normal stimulated growth hormone secretion but low peripheral levels of insulin-like growth factor I in prepubertal children with insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus. Acta Paediatr 84:646–650, 1995[Medline]
   
10. Connors MH: Growth in the diabetic child. Pediatr Clin North Am 44:301–306, 1997[Medline]
    
11. Clayton KL, Holly JM, Carlsson LM, Jones J, Cheetham TD, Taylor AM, Dunger DB: Loss of the normal relationships between growth hormone, growth hormone-binding protein and insulin-like growth factor-I in adolescents with insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus. Clin Endocrinol 41:517–524, 1994[Medline]
    
12. Bereket A, Lang CH, Wilson TA: Alterations in the growth hormone-insulin-like growth factor axis in insulin dependent diabetes mellitus. Horm Metab Res31:172–181, 1999[Medline]
    
14. Yki-Jarvinen H, Makimattila S: Insulin resistance due to hyperglycaemia: an adaptation protecting insulin-sensitive tissues. Diabetologia 40:S141-S144, 1997
    
15. Zierath JR, Krook A, Wallberg-Henriksson H: Insulin action and insulin resistance in human skeletal muscle. Diabetologia 43:821–835, 2000[Medline]
    
16. Cusi K, DeFronzo RA: Metformin: a review of its metabolic effects. Diabetes Rev 6:89–131, 1998
    
17. Coscelli C, Palmari V, Saccardi F, Alpi O, Bonora E: Evidence that metformin addition to insulin induces an amelioration of glycaemic profile in type 1 (insulin-dependent) diabetes mellitus. Current Therapeutic Research 35:1058–1064, 1984
    
18. Janssen M, Rillaerts E, De Leeuw I: Effects of metformin on haemorheology, lipid parameters and insulin resistance in insulin-dependent diabetic patients (IDDM). Biomed Pharmacother 45:363–367, 1991[Medline]
    
19. Meyer L, Delbachian I, Lehert P, Cugnardey N, Drouin P, Guerci B: Continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion in type 1 diabetes mellitus: insulin-sparing effect of metformin. American Diabetes Association Scientific Sessions, Abstract 1538, 1999
    
20. Walravens PA, Chase PH, Klingensmith GJ, Essison M, Cornell C, Monahan K: Low dose metformin in adolescents with type 1 diabetes mellitus: a double-blind, controlled study. American Diabetes Association 60th Scientific Sessions, Abstract 128, 2000
    
21. Desmangles J, Buchlis JG, Shine B, Quattrin T: Is Metformin a useful adjunct to insulin therapy in adolescents with type 1 diabetes in poor control? Endocrine Society Meeting, Abstract 1833, 2000
    
22. Marshall WA, Tanner JM: Variations in the pattern of pubertal changes in girls. Arch Dis Child 44:291–303, 1969
    
23. Marshall WA, Tanner JM: Variations in the pattern of pubertal changes in boys. Arch Dis Child 45:13–23, 1970
    
24. Daneman D, Frank M, Perlman K: When a Child Has Diabetes. Toronto, Canada, Key Porter Books, 1999
    
25. DCCT Research Group: Epidemiology of severe hypoglycemia in the diabetes control and complications trial. Am J Med 90:450–459, 1991[Medline]
    
26. Finegood DT, Hramiak IM, Dupre J: A modified protocol for estimation of insulin sensitivity with the minimal model of glucose kinetics in patients with insulin-dependent diabetes. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 70:1538–1549, 1990[Abstract]
    
27. Bergman RN: Lilly Lecture 1989: Toward physiological understanding of glucose tolerance: minimal-model approach (Review). Diabetes 38:1512–1527, 1989[Abstract]
    
28. Fagot-Campagna A, Pettitt DJ, Engelgau MM, Burrows NR, Geiss LS, Valdez R, Beckles GL, Saaddine J, Gregg EW, Williamson DF, Narayan KM: Type 2 diabetes among North American children and adolescents: an epidemiologic review and a public health perspective. J Pediatr 136:664–672, 2000[Medline]
    
29. Jones KL, Arslanian S, Peterokova VA, Park JS, Tomlinson MJ: Effect of metformin in pediatric patients with type 2 diabetes: a randomized controlled trial. Diabetes Care 25:89–94, 2002[Abstract/Free Full Text]
    
30. Goodyear LJ, Kahn BB: Exercise, glucose transport, and insulin sensitivity (Review). Annu Rev Med 49:235–261, 1998[Medline]
    
31. Cutfield WS, Bergman RN, Menon RK, Sperling MA: The modified minimal model: application to measurement of insulin sensitivity in children. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 70:1644–1650, 1990[Abstract]
    
32. Godsland IF, Walton C: Maximizing the success rate of minimal model insulin sensitivity measurement in humans: the importance of basal glucose levels. Clin Sci 101:1–9, 2001[Medline]
    

CiteULike

Del.icio.us

Digg

Reddit

Technorati

This article has been cited by other articles:

				K. L. Jones Role of Obesity in Complicating and Confusing the Diagnosis and Treatment of Diabetes in Children Pediatrics, February 1, 2008; 121(2): 361 - 368. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. A. Altschuler, S. J. Casella, T. A. MacKenzie, and K. M. Curtis The Effect of Cinnamon on A1C Among Adolescents With Type 1 Diabetes Diabetes Care, April 1, 2007; 30(4): 813 - 816. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				E. Codner and H. F. Escobar-Morreale Hyperandrogenism and Polycystic Ovary Syndrome in Women with Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab., April 1, 2007; 92(4): 1209 - 1216. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				S. Srinivasan, G. R. Ambler, L. A. Baur, S. P. Garnett, M. Tepsa, F. Yap, G. M. Ward, and C. T. Cowell Randomized, Controlled Trial of Metformin for Obesity and Insulin Resistance in Children and Adolescents: Improvement in Body Composition and Fasting Insulin J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab., June 1, 2006; 91(6): 2074 - 2080. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				R. D. G. Leslie, R. Williams, and P. Pozzilli Type 1 Diabetes and Latent Autoimmune Diabetes in Adults: One End of the Rainbow J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab., May 1, 2006; 91(5): 1654 - 1659. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				S. M. Strowig and P. Raskin The Effect of Rosiglitazone on Overweight Subjects With Type 1 Diabetes Diabetes Care, July 1, 2005; 28(7): 1562 - 1567. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				I. M. Libman, M. Pietropaolo, S. A. Arslanian, R. E. LaPorte, and D. J. Becker Evidence for Heterogeneous Pathogenesis of Insulin-Treated Diabetes in Black and White Children Diabetes Care, October 1, 2003; 26(10): 2876 - 2882. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				H. L. Gassner and S. E. Gitelman Case Study: Type 1 and Type 2, Too? Clin. Diabetes, July 1, 2003; 21(3): 140 - 141. [Full Text] [PDF]

This Article Abstract Full Text (PDF) Purchase Article View Shopping Cart Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Request Permissions Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Hamilton, J. Articles by Daneman, D. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Hamilton, J. Articles by Daneman, D. Social Bookmarking                What's this?