Skip to main content
  • More from ADA
    • Diabetes
    • Clinical Diabetes
    • Diabetes Spectrum
    • ADA Standards of Medical Care
    • ADA Scientific Sessions Abstracts
    • BMJ Open Diabetes Research & Care
  • Subscribe
  • Log in
  • My Cart
  • Follow ada on Twitter
  • RSS
  • Visit ada on Facebook
Diabetes Care

Advanced Search

Main menu

  • Home
  • Current
    • Current Issue
    • Online Ahead of Print
    • Special Article Collections
    • ADA Standards of Medical Care
  • Browse
    • By Topic
    • Issue Archive
    • Saved Searches
    • Special Article Collections
    • ADA Standards of Medical Care
  • Info
    • About the Journal
    • About the Editors
    • ADA Journal Policies
    • Instructions for Authors
    • Guidance for Reviewers
  • Reprints/Reuse
  • Advertising
  • Subscriptions
    • Individual Subscriptions
    • Institutional Subscriptions and Site Licenses
    • Access Institutional Usage Reports
    • Purchase Single Issues
  • Alerts
    • E­mail Alerts
    • RSS Feeds
  • Podcasts
    • Diabetes Core Update
    • Special Podcast Series: Therapeutic Inertia
    • Special Podcast Series: Influenza Podcasts
    • Special Podcast Series: SGLT2 Inhibitors
    • Special Podcast Series: COVID-19
  • Submit
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Journal Policies
    • Instructions for Authors
    • ADA Peer Review
  • More from ADA
    • Diabetes
    • Clinical Diabetes
    • Diabetes Spectrum
    • ADA Standards of Medical Care
    • ADA Scientific Sessions Abstracts
    • BMJ Open Diabetes Research & Care

User menu

  • Subscribe
  • Log in
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Diabetes Care
  • Home
  • Current
    • Current Issue
    • Online Ahead of Print
    • Special Article Collections
    • ADA Standards of Medical Care
  • Browse
    • By Topic
    • Issue Archive
    • Saved Searches
    • Special Article Collections
    • ADA Standards of Medical Care
  • Info
    • About the Journal
    • About the Editors
    • ADA Journal Policies
    • Instructions for Authors
    • Guidance for Reviewers
  • Reprints/Reuse
  • Advertising
  • Subscriptions
    • Individual Subscriptions
    • Institutional Subscriptions and Site Licenses
    • Access Institutional Usage Reports
    • Purchase Single Issues
  • Alerts
    • E­mail Alerts
    • RSS Feeds
  • Podcasts
    • Diabetes Core Update
    • Special Podcast Series: Therapeutic Inertia
    • Special Podcast Series: Influenza Podcasts
    • Special Podcast Series: SGLT2 Inhibitors
    • Special Podcast Series: COVID-19
  • Submit
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Journal Policies
    • Instructions for Authors
    • ADA Peer Review
Commentary

Crisis in Care: Limited Treatment Options for Type 2 Diabetes in Adolescents and Youth

  1. William V. Tamborlane, MD1⇑ and
  2. Georgeanna Klingensmith, MD2
  1. 1Department of Pediatrics, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut
  2. 2Barbara Davis Center for Childhood Diabetes, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, Colorado.
  1. Corresponding author: William V. Tamborlane, william.tamborlane{at}yale.edu.
Diabetes Care 2013 Jun; 36(6): 1777-1778. https://doi.org/10.2337/dc13-0743
PreviousNext
  • Article
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Until two decades ago, children and adolescents were automatically assumed to have insulin-dependent type 1 diabetes. However, type 2 diabetes emerged as a “new type” of childhood diabetes in the 1990s in association with the epidemic of childhood obesity. It quickly became apparent that this new pediatric disease disproportionally affected disadvantaged minority children and was associated with comorbidities that increased the risk of future cardiovascular disease.

After more than 20 years, the optimal approach to the treatment of childhood type 2 diabetes remains largely unknown. Besides insulin, metformin remains the only other antidiabetic medication that is approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the European Medicines Agency (EMA) for use in youth with type 2 diabetes. Glimepiride and rosiglitazone failed noninferiority tests versus metformin as initial monotherapy in company-sponsored clinical trials. While the primary study results of the randomized phase of the TODAY (Treatment Options for type 2 Diabetes in Adolescents and Youth) study showed that combination therapy with metformin plus rosiglitazone was more effective than metformin plus intensive lifestyle intervention and metformin alone (1), rosiglitazone will not be used with any frequency in young patients with type 2 diabetes because of concerns about the cardiovascular and other adverse effects of this class of medications. Once again, pediatric diabetes practitioners are left with just metformin and insulin for adolescents with type 2 diabetes.

Why haven’t glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP-1) agonists and dipeptidyl peptidase 4 (DPP-4) inhibitors that have been approved for use in adults with type 2 diabetes been approved for the treatment of adolescents with the same condition? What about newer agents in the pipeline, such as sodium glucose cotransport inhibitors? Isn’t the basic pathophysiology of type 2 diabetes very similar in pediatric and adult populations with abnormal glucose metabolism the result of severe insulin resistance and progressive β-cell dysfunction? Aren’t adolescents with type 2 diabetes just “big adults” who are physically mature and often more obese than adults with type 2 diabetes? Where is the sense of urgency in making newer medications available to treat this very challenging condition?

A number of major obstacles have severely limited the successful completion of randomized clinical trials designed to test the efficacy and safety of the newer classes of drugs for adolescents with type 2 diabetes. First and foremost, the epidemic of type 2 diabetes in adolescents is an epidemic in relative rather than absolute terms. Although type 2 diabetes is the most rapidly increasing type of diabetes in pediatrics, the absolute number of patients remains small compared with the prevalence of type 1 diabetes. Based on data collected in 2002, the SEARCH for Diabetes in Youth Study estimated that there would be between 20,000 and 23,000 patients with type 2 diabetes who were <20 years of age in 2010 (2). Even under the best of circumstances, finding qualified and compliant subjects for clinical trials among adolescents with diabetes is difficult. These challenges are heightened in the disadvantaged populations that are over-represented among adolescents with type 2 diabetes and by other confounding factors such as concomitant treatment with atypical antipsychotic drugs that are diabetogenic. In addition, teenaged girls, who are the most difficult and noncompliant patients with type 1 diabetes to treat (3), make up two-thirds of the type 2 diabetes population.

Many of the study requirements imposed by the FDA and the EMA have made the completion of pivotal labeling studies in children and adolescents with type 2 diabetes nearly impossible. For example, virtually all of the early clinical trials in pediatrics mandated a comparison of the experimental drug against metformin as initial monotherapy in drug-naïve patients with elevated A1c levels. Since virtually all patients with type 2 diabetes and elevated A1c levels are immediately treated with metformin or insulin (to rapidly clear glucotoxicity), subjects who met these criteria were few and far between. Moreover, treatment guidelines recently published by the American Academy of Pediatrics state that all youth with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes should be treated immediately with metformin and/or insulin (4).

As a result of its low cost and efficacy in early type 2 diabetes, metformin is well-established as initial monotherapy in youth with type 2 diabetes. On the other hand, the efficacy of newer antidiabetic agents as add-on therapies in pediatric type 2 diabetes patients with elevated A1c levels on metformin alone, metformin plus insulin, and other antidiabetic medications is an open question. The Pediatric Diabetes Consortium (5) has established a Type 2 Diabetes Clinic Registry, which has collected data that underscore the need for new second and third lines of treatments for type 2 diabetes in adolescents. Patients enrolled in the registry who were treated with insulin alone or insulin with metformin had mean HbA1c levels of ∼9.0%.

While the supply of appropriate pediatric type 2 diabetes patients for randomized clinical trials of the newer drug classes is limited, the regulatory agencies have exaggerated the problem by cutting the pool of potential subjects in half by excluding patients being treated with insulin or other drugs besides metformin. At the same time, the demand for subjects for pediatric type 2 diabetes trials has sharply increased. All of the companies with recently approved GLP-1 agonists and DPP-4 inhibitors are required to carry out studies of their medications in youth with type 2 diabetes as part of mandatory pediatric investigation plans. As a result, the number of subjects that are required for these studies may be greater than the total number of potentially eligible children and adolescents with type 2 diabetes in the U.S. and Europe combined. Immediate steps that could increase the pool of potential subjects for such add-on trials is to include patients who are being treated with metformin and/or insulin and/or any other antidiabetic drug of a different class and to expand the age range of eligible subjects from 10–17 years to 10–21 years.

The EMA convened a group of pediatric diabetes clinicians and industry representatives in February 2013 in London, England, to discuss steps that could be taken to facilitate the approval of new drugs for the treatment of youth with type 2 diabetes. During these discussions, an exciting solution to the problems of carrying out many large-scale, long-term randomized clinical trials in adolescents with type 2 diabetes was suggested. Where the course of a disease and the effects of a drug are sufficiently similar in adults and pediatric patients, both the FDA and the EMA may conclude that pediatric effectiveness can be extrapolated from well-controlled studies in adults, even though the details of this process differ slightly between the two agencies. The acquisition of supplemented data, such as the results of pharmacokinetic studies, is usually requested. Postapproval safety studies would likely be required, and pediatric type 2 diabetes registries could be used for the collection of additional safety and effectiveness information. Another innovative suggestion was to combine the study of several new drugs into a single study with separate experimental drug arms and a single control group. Let’s hope that the EMA and the FDA can use these and other suggestions to come up with a workable and mutually agreeable plan to break up the logjam of unapproved drugs for adolescents with type 2 diabetes. Otherwise, we will have to continue to strive to treat this condition with one or two hands tied behind our backs.

Acknowledgments

W.V.T. has been a consultant for LifeScan/Animas, Medtronic Diabetes, Novo Nordisk, and Sanofi. G.K. has been a consultant for Novo Nordisk. No other potential conflicts of interest relevant to this article were reported.

Footnotes

  • See accompanying articles beginning on p. 1732

  • © 2013 by the American Diabetes Association.

Readers may use this article as long as the work is properly cited, the use is educational and not for profit, and the work is not altered. See http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/ for details.

References

  1. ↵
    1. Zeitler P,
    2. Hirst K,
    3. Pyle L,
    4. et al.,
    5. TODAY Study Group
    . A clinical trial to maintain glycemic control in youth with type 2 diabetes. N Engl J Med 2012;366:2247–2256pmid:22540912
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  2. ↵
    1. Imperatore G,
    2. Boyle JP,
    3. Thompson TJ,
    4. et al.,
    5. SEARCH for Diabetes in Youth Study Group
    . Projections of type 1 and type 2 diabetes burden in the U.S. population aged <20 years through 2050: dynamic modeling of incidence, mortality, and population growth. Diabetes Care 2012;35:2515–2520pmid:23173134
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  3. ↵
    1. Springer D,
    2. Dziura J,
    3. Tamborlane WV,
    4. et al
    . Optimal control of type 1 diabetes mellitus in youth receiving intensive treatment. J Pediatr 2006;149:227–232pmid:16887440
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  4. ↵
    1. Copeland KC,
    2. Silverstein J,
    3. Moore KR,
    4. et al
    . Management of newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) in children and adolescents. Pediatrics 2013;131:364–382pmid:23359574
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  5. ↵
    1. Pediatric Diabetes Consortium
    . The Pediatric Diabetes Consortium: improving care of children with type 1 diabetes through collaborative research. Diabetes Technol Ther 2010;12:685–688pmid:20687862
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
View Abstract
PreviousNext
Back to top
Diabetes Care: 36 (6)

In this Issue

June 2013, 36(6)
  • Table of Contents
  • About the Cover
  • Index by Author
Sign up to receive current issue alerts
View Selected Citations (0)
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word about Diabetes Care.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Crisis in Care: Limited Treatment Options for Type 2 Diabetes in Adolescents and Youth
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from Diabetes Care
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from the Diabetes Care web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Crisis in Care: Limited Treatment Options for Type 2 Diabetes in Adolescents and Youth
William V. Tamborlane, Georgeanna Klingensmith
Diabetes Care Jun 2013, 36 (6) 1777-1778; DOI: 10.2337/dc13-0743

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Add to Selected Citations
Share

Crisis in Care: Limited Treatment Options for Type 2 Diabetes in Adolescents and Youth
William V. Tamborlane, Georgeanna Klingensmith
Diabetes Care Jun 2013, 36 (6) 1777-1778; DOI: 10.2337/dc13-0743
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Acknowledgments
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

Cited By...

More in this TOC Section

  • How Valid Are the New Hypoglycemia Definitions for Use in Clinical Trials?
  • Taking the Air Out of Oxygen Supplementation in Individuals With Diabetes and Acute Coronary Syndromes
  • The Cardiovascular Legacy of Good Glycemic Control: Clues About Mediators From the DCCT/EDIC Study
Show more Commentary

Similar Articles

Navigate

  • Current Issue
  • Standards of Care Guidelines
  • Online Ahead of Print
  • Archives
  • Submit
  • Subscribe
  • Email Alerts
  • RSS Feeds

More Information

  • About the Journal
  • Instructions for Authors
  • Journal Policies
  • Reprints and Permissions
  • Advertising
  • Privacy Policy: ADA Journals
  • Copyright Notice/Public Access Policy
  • Contact Us

Other ADA Resources

  • Diabetes
  • Clinical Diabetes
  • Diabetes Spectrum
  • Scientific Sessions Abstracts
  • Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes
  • BMJ Open - Diabetes Research & Care
  • Professional Books
  • Diabetes Forecast

 

  • DiabetesJournals.org
  • Diabetes Core Update
  • ADA's DiabetesPro
  • ADA Member Directory
  • Diabetes.org

© 2021 by the American Diabetes Association. Diabetes Care Print ISSN: 0149-5992, Online ISSN: 1935-5548.