Evidence for C-Peptide as a Validated Surrogate to Predict Clinical Benefits in Trials of Disease-Modifying Therapies for Type 1 Diabetes
Abstract
Type 1 diabetes is a chronic autoimmune disease in which destruction of pancreatic β-cells causes life-threatening metabolic dysregulation. Numerous approaches are envisioned for new therapies, but limitations of current clinical outcome measures are significant disincentives to development efforts. C-peptide, a direct byproduct of proinsulin processing, is a quantitative biomarker of β-cell function that is not cleared by the liver and can be measured in the peripheral blood. Studies of quantitative measures of β-cell function have established a predictive relationship between stimulated C-peptide as a measure of β-cell function and clinical benefits. C-peptide levels at diagnosis are often high enough to afford glycemic control benefits associated with protection from end-organ complications of diabetes, and even lower levels offer protection from severe hypoglycemia in type 1 diabetes, as observed in large prospective cohort studies and interventional trials of islet transplantation. These observations support consideration of C-peptide not just as a biomarker of β-cell function but also as a specific, sensitive, feasible, and clinically meaningful outcome defining β-cell preservation or restoration for clinical trials of disease-modifying therapies. Regulatory acceptance of C-peptide as a validated surrogate for demonstration of efficacy would greatly facilitate development of disease-modifying therapies for type 1 diabetes. Article highlights
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Natural history studies, intervention trials, and transplantation studies consistently show that higher C-peptide responses to a mixed meal are associated with improved glycaemic control, fewer hypoglycaemic episodes, and reduced long-term complications.
“natural history studies, intervention trials, and transplantation studies consistently show that higher Cpeptide responses to a mixed meal are associated with improved glycaemic control, fewer hypoglycaemic episodes, and reduced longterm complications.[55][56][57]”
From The future of type 1 diabetes therapy (2025) · cites this paper as [55]
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 47 · Cited by 35
- Authors
- Latres, E., Greenbaum, C. J., Oyaski, M. L., Dayan, C. M., Colhoun, H. M., Lachin, J. M., Skyler, J. S., Rickels, M. R., Ahmed, S. T., Dutta, S., Herold, K. C., & Marinac, M.
- Affiliations
- Breakthrough T1D (US)
- Benaroya Research Institute (US)
- Cardiff University (GB)
- Institute of Genetics and Cancer (GB)
- George Washington University (US)
- University of Miami (US)
- University of Pennsylvania (US)
- New York Stem Cell Foundation (US)
- Yale University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Latres, Esther
- ORCID
- Venue
- Diabetes
- Publisher
- American Diabetes Association
- Published
- 2024-02-13
- Volume
- 73
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 823-833
- ISSN
- 0012-1797 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W4391774384
- Cited by
- 35
- References
- 47
- Citations by year
- 2026: 10 · 2025: 20 · 2024: 5
- FWCI
- 2.41
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Diabetes (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Diabetes and associated disorders
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Research
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Pancreatic function and diabetes
- Keywords
- C-peptide, type 1 diabetes, disease-modifying therapy, surrogate endpoints, beta-cell function, beta-cell preservation, clinical trial outcome measures, hypoglycemia, islet transplantation, end-organ complications, regulatory acceptance, biomarkers
- MeSH terms
- C-Peptide, Clinical Trials as Topic, Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1, Humans, Biomarkers, Insulin-Secreting Cells
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review