BACKGROUND: The incidence of diabetes mellitus type 1 (DM1) has been rising worldwide because of improvements in diagnostic techniques and improved access to care in countries with lower socioeconomic status. A new anti-CD4 antibody, Tep-lizumab, has been shown to delay the progression of DM1 and is the only medication approved for this indication. However, more information is needed about the safety profile of this drug.
OBJECTIVE: To identify the odds ratios (OR) of systems-based adverse effects for Teplizumab when compared to Placebo.
METHODS: An extensive systematic review was conducted from the inception of the medication until December 31, 2023. All clinical trials and studies that evaluated Teplizumab vs placebo were included in the initial review. The study protocol was designed using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines guidelines and was registered in PROSPERO (ID: CRD42024496169). Crude OR were generated using RevMan Software version 5.4.
RESULTS: After screening and review, 5 studies were selected to determine the risk of adverse effects of teplizumab compared to placebo. A total of 561 patients were included in the study population. Total adverse effects and system-based adverse effects were studied and reported. We determined that patients receiving Teplizumab had a higher risk of developing gastrointestinal (GI) (OR = 1.60, 95%CI: 1.01-2.52, P = 0.04), dermatological (OR = 6.33, 95%CI: 4.05-9.88, P < 0.00001) and hematological adverse effects (OR = 19.03, 95%CI: 11.09-32.66, P < 0.00001). These patients were also significantly likely to have active Epstein-Barr Virus infection (OR = 3.16, 95%CI: 1.51-6.64, P < 0.002). While our data showed that patients receiving Teplizumab did have a higher incidence of total adverse effects vs placebo, this finding did not reach statistical significance (OR = 2.25, 95%CI: 0.80-6.29, P = 0.12).
CONCLUSIONS: Our systematic review suggests that Teplizumab patients are at risk for significant adverse effects, primarily related to GI, dermatological, and hematological systems. The total adverse effect data is limited as study populations are small. More studies should be conducted on this medication to better inform the target population of potential adverse effects.

Recent advancements in immunology and islet biology have unveiled remarkable prospects for the postponement of Type 1 diabetes (T1D) through the strategic modulation of the immune system. In this Perspective, we discuss the pharmaceutical strides achieved, traversing from pre-clinical validation to the execution of impactful clinical trials. We begin with the initial investigations involving cyclosporine and glucocorticoids in rodent models, such as the non-obese diabetic (NOD) mouse, which guided early clinical trials. We then discuss the pre-clinical studies using suitable mouse models that eventually led to contemporary clinical trials targeting immune cell functionality and cytokine signaling pathways. Collectively, these discoveries promote the exciting paradigm of immune system modulation to mitigate autoimmunity, which continues to broaden. Notably, the use of baricitinib, a potent JAK1/2 inhibitor, and teplizumab, an anti-CD3 monoclonal antibody, represent discrete methodologies converging upon a singular outcome: the preservation of islet beta-cell functionality. The latter interventional strategies build on the original idea that tempering specific facets of the immune system will generate therapeutic benefit. Enthusiasm from these discoveries stems from efficacy with reduced side effects when compared with past approaches. The success of therapeutic intervention(s) in pre-clinical studies, combined with knowledge about stages of progression to clinical T1D, have ultimately encouraged the design of more successful clinical trials targeting highly specific populations at risk. Collectively, these findings instill a profound sense of optimism, suggesting that the prevention and even reversal of T1D may soon be within reach.

This review explores the immunomodulatory potential of Teplizumab and its impact on pancreatic β-cell function in T1D. Characterized by the autoimmune destruction of insulin-producing beta cells, T1D\'s management involves maintaining glycemic control through exogenous insulin. Teplizumab, a humanized monoclonal antibody targeting the CD3 antigen, has shown promise in delaying T1D onset and preserving residual β-cell function. The review employs a narrative approach, synthesizing evidence from diverse clinical trials and studies gathered through a meticulous literature search. It scrutinizes Teplizumab\'s mechanisms of action, including its influence on autoreactive CD8 + T cells and regulatory T cells, offering insights into its immunological pathways. The synthesis of findings from various trials demonstrates Teplizumab\'s efficacy in preserving C-peptide levels and reducing exogenous insulin requirements, particularly in recent-onset T1D. Considering Teplizumab\'s real-world implications, the paper addresses potential obstacles, including side effects, patient selection criteria, and logistical challenges. It also emphasizes exploring combination therapies and personalized treatment strategies to maximize Teplizumab\'s benefits. The review contributes a nuanced perspective on Teplizumab\'s clinical implications and future directions in T1D management, bridging theoretical understanding with practical considerations.

Despite the effectiveness of insulin injections in managing hyperglycemia in type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM), they fall short in addressing autoimmunity and regenerating damaged islets. This review aims to explore the potential and prospects of emerging treatment modalities for T1DM, including mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs), MSC-derived exosomes, gene therapy, islet allotransplantation, pancreatic islet cell transplantation, and teplizumab. We review emerging treatment modalities for T1DM, highlighting several promising strategies with varied mechanisms and outcomes. Mesenchymal stem cells demonstrate potential in modulating the immune response and preserving or restoring beta-cell function, although variability in sources and administration routes necessitates further standardization. Similarly, MSC-derived exosomes show promise in promoting beta-cell regeneration and immune regulation, supported by early-stage studies showing improved glucose homeostasis in animal models, albeit with limited clinical data. Gene therapy, utilizing techniques like CRISPR-Cas9, offers targeted correction of genetic defects and immune modulation; however, challenges in precise delivery and ensuring long-term safety persist. Islet allotransplantation and pancreatic islet cell transplantation have achieved some success in restoring insulin independence, yet challenges such as donor scarcity and immunosuppression-related complications remain significant. Teplizumab, an anti-CD3 monoclonal antibody, has demonstrated potential in delaying T1DM onset by modulating immune responses and preserving beta-cell function, with clinical trials indicating prolonged insulin production capability. Despite significant progress, standardization, long-term efficacy, and safety continue to pose challenges across these modalities. Conclusion: While these therapies demonstrate significant potential, challenges persist. Future research should prioritize optimizing these treatments and validating them through extensive clinical trials to enhance T1DM management and improve patient outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Islets of Langerhans beta cells diminish in autoimmune type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM). Teplizumab, a humanized anti-CD3 monoclonal antibody, may help T1DM. Its long-term implications on clinical T1DM development, safety, and efficacy are unknown.
OBJECTIVE: To assess the effectiveness and safety of teplizumab as a therapeutic intervention for individuals with T1DM.
METHODS: A systematic search was conducted using four electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Cochrane Library) to select publications published in peer-reviewed journals written in English. The odds ratio (OR) and risk ratio (RR) were calculated, along with their 95%CI. We assessed heterogeneity using Cochrane Q and I 2 statistics and the appropriate P value.
RESULTS: There were 8 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in the current meta-analysis with a total of 1908 T1DM patients from diverse age cohorts, with 1361 patients receiving Teplizumab and 547 patients receiving a placebo. Teplizumab was found to have a substantial link with a decrease in insulin consumption, with an OR of 4.13 (95%CI: 1.72 to 9.90). Teplizumab is associated with an improved C-peptide response (OR 2.49; 95%CI: 1.62 to 3.81) and a significant change in Glycated haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) levels in people with type 1 diabetes [OR 1.75 (95%CI: 1.03 to 2.98)], and it has a RR of 0.71 (95%CI: 0.53 to 0.95).
CONCLUSIONS: In type 1 diabetics, teplizumab decreased insulin consumption, improved C-peptide response, and significantly changed HbA1c levels with negligible side effects. Teplizumab appears to improve glycaemic control and diabetes management with good safety and efficacy.

Type 1 diabetes mellitus is an autoimmune condition characterized by insulin deficiency resulting from loss of function of beta cells in the pancreas, leading to hyperglycemia and associated long-term systemic complications and even death. Immunotherapy demonstrates beta cell function-preserving potential; however, its impact on C-peptide levels, a definitive biomarker of beta cell function, and endogenous insulin secretion remain unclear. A systematic review of various immunotherapeutic interventions is hence needed for a comprehensive assessment of their effectiveness as well as identifying research gaps and influencing future research and clinical decisions. An extensive literature search was done in PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane Library databases using precise keywords and filters to identify relevant studies. Three independent reviewers assessed eligibility according to predetermined eligibility criteria, and data was extracted. The Cochrane risk of bias assessment tool (RoB 2.0) was used to evaluate the quality and validity of the included studies. A senior reviewer resolved discrepancies and differences of opinion between independent reviewers. A total of 11 studies were included, with 1464 study participants. Both Phase II and III trials were included. Within the included studies, four studies assessed the anti-CD3 monoclonal antibody otelixizumab as an intervention. Another anti-CD3 monoclonal antibody, teplizumab, was assessed as an intervention in four studies, whereas two studies assessed the anti-CD20 antibody rituximab and one study assessed abatacept as its interventional drug. Otelixizumab demonstrated benefits at higher doses but was associated with adverse effects like Ebstein-Barr virus reactivation and cytomegalovirus infection, while at lower doses it failed to show a significant difference in C-peptide levels or glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c). Teplizumab, on the other hand, showed promise in reducing C-peptide loss and exogenous insulin requirements and was associated with adverse events such as rash, lymphopenia, urinary tract infection, and cytokine release syndrome. However, these reactions were only associated with therapy initiation, and they subsided on their own. Rituximab improved C-peptide responses, and abatacept therapy demonstrated reduced loss of C-peptide, improved C-peptide levels, and lowered HbA1c. Teplizumab, rituximab, otelixizumab, and abatacept show potential for preserving beta cell function by reducing C-peptide loss in patients with type I diabetes mellitus. However, careful monitoring of adverse reactions, particularly viral infections and cytokine release syndrome, is necessary for the safe implementation of these therapies.

BACKGROUND: The management of Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus (T1DM) is a significant clinical challenge. This study evaluated the efficacy of teplizumab, an immunomodulatory drug, in patients with T1DM, using a systematic review and meta-analysis approach.
METHODS: We systematically searched multiple databases including Medline, Scopus, and others up to 10 January 2024, without language or regional restrictions. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing teplizumab with placebo in T1DM patients.
RESULTS: Our analysis incorporated 8 RCTs, predominantly involving participants aged 7-35 years, diagnosed with T1DM and treated with 14-day courses of teplizumab. The primary outcomes included insulin use, C-peptide levels, and HbA1c levels. We observed a significant reduction in insulin use in the teplizumab group standardised mean difference of -0.50 (95% Confidence Interval [CI]: -0.76 to -0.23, p < 0.001; I2 = 49%). C-peptide levels were consistently higher in the teplizumab group, indicating improved endogenous insulin production. However, no significant change was noted in HbA1c levels between the groups. Quality assessment indicated a low risk of bias in most studies.
CONCLUSIONS: Teplizumab has a significant impact on reducing insulin dependence and enhancing endogenous insulin production in T1DM patients. However, its effect on long-term glycaemic control, as indicated by HbA1c levels, remains inconclusive.

Teplizumab (TzieldTM, Provention Bio), a monoclonal antibody directed at T-cell marker CD3, is the first medication approved by the FDA to delay progression from stage 2 to stage 3 type 1 diabetes. To date, the overwhelming majority of pediatric endocrinologists do not have experience using immunotherapeutics and seek guidance on the use of teplizumab in clinical practice. To address this need, the Pediatric Endocrine Society (PES) Diabetes Special Interest Group (Diabetes SIG) and Drug and Therapeutics Committee assembled a task force to review clinical trial data and solicit expert recommendations on the approach to teplizumab infusions. We present considerations on all aspects of teplizumab administration, utilizing evidence where possible and providing a spectrum of expert opinions on unknown aspects. We discuss patient selection and prescreening, highlighting the safety and considerations for monitoring and treatment of side effects. We propose a schedule of events, a protocol for administration, and discuss practice management aspects. We advocate for the need for further long-term systematic surveillance studies to continue evaluating the efficacy and safety of teplizumab.

OBJECTIVE: To provide updated efficacy and safety information for teplizumab in the treatment of Stage 3 type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM).
METHODS: The PubMed, Embase and Cochrane databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing teplizumab to placebo for T1DM that reported any of the following outcomes: (1) C-peptide area under the curve (AUC); (2) glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) levels; (3) insulin requirements; and (4) adverse events. Heterogeneity was examined with I2 statistics. p values <0.05 were taken to indicate statistical significance. The continuous endpoints were compared through the pooled mean difference (MD) and binary endpoints were assessed using risk ratios, both with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Statistical analyses were performed using Review Manager Web software.
RESULTS: Eight RCTs with 1052 patients (754 receiving teplizumab) were included. Teplizumab significantly increased the AUC of C-peptide levels at 6 (MD 0.10 nmol/L, 95% CI 0.05, 0.16), 12 (MD 0.13 nmol/L, 95% CI 0.06, 0.20), 18 (MD 0.18 nmol/L, 95% CI 0.09, 0.27) and 24 months (MD 0.16 nmol/L, 95% CI 0.02, 0.31), significantly reduced HbA1c levels at 6 (MD -0.57%, 95% CI -1.07, -0.08) and 12 months (MD -0.31%, 95% CI -0.59, -0.02), and significantly reduced insulin requirements at 6 (MD -0.12 U/kg, 95% CI -0.16, -0.08), 12 (MD -0.11 U/kg, 95% CI -0.15, -0.07), 18 (MD -0.17 U/kg, 95% CI -0.26, -0.09) and 24 months (MD -0.11 U/kg, 95% CI -0.22, -0.01).
CONCLUSIONS: Teplizumab increases AUC of C-peptide levels and decreases HbA1c levels and insulin use, without raising serious adverse event risk.

OBJECTIVE: Teplizumab has emerged as a potential disease-modifying drug in type 1 diabetes (T1D). This meta-analysis sought to summarize the therapeutic effect of teplizumab in newly diagnosed patients with T1D.
METHODS: Randomized controlled trials involving patients with T1D receiving teplizumab in the intervention arm and placebo (or no active intervention) in the control arm were searched throughout the electronic databases. The primary outcome was the change in area under the curve of C-peptide levels from baseline.
RESULTS: Seven reports from 6 studies involving 834 subjects met the inclusion criteria. Compared to teplizumab, greater reductions in area under the curve of C-peptide from the baseline values were observed in the control group after 6 months (mean difference [MD] 0.07 nmol/L [0.01, 0.13], P = .02), after 12 months (MD 0.07 nmol/L [0.04, 0.11], P = .0001), after 18 months (MD 0.10 nmol/L [0.06, 0.14], P < .00001), and after 24 months (MD 0.07 nmol/L [0.01, 0.14], P = .03) of interventions. Moreover, fewer patients treated with teplizumab had a decreased C-peptide response after 6 months (odds ratio [OR] 0.21), after 12 months (OR 0.17), after 18 months (OR 0.30), and after 24 months (OR 0.12) of treatment. The preservation of endogenous insulin production was supported by reduced use of exogenous insulin with maintenance of comparable glycemic control for up to 18 months post-treatment. Teplizumab imparted higher risks of grade 3 or higher adverse events, adverse events leading to study medication discontinuation, nausea, rash, and lymphopenia.
CONCLUSIONS: The results of the meta-analysis support teplizumab as a promising disease-modifying therapy for newly diagnosed T1D.