Yield of a Public Health Screening of Children for Islet Autoantibodies in Bavaria, Germany

Beyond Stages: Predicting Individual Time Dependent Risk for Type 1 Diabetes

BACKGROUND

Essentially all individuals with multiple autoantibodies will develop clinical type 1 diabetes. Multiple autoantibodies (AABs) and normal glucose tolerance define stage 1 diabetes; abnormal glucose tolerance defines stage 2. However, the rate of progression within these stages is heterogeneous, necessitating personalized risk calculators to improve clinical implementation.

METHODS

We developed 3 models using TrialNet's Pathway to Prevention data to accommodate the reality that not all risk variables are clinically available. The small model included AAB status, fasting glucose, hemoglobin A1c, and age, while the medium and large models added predictors of disease progression measured via oral glucose tolerance testing.

FINDINGS

All models markedly improved granularity regarding personalized risk missing from current categories of stages of type 1 diabetes. Model-derived risk calculations are consistent with the expected reduction of risk with increasing age and increase in risk with higher glucose and lower insulin secretion, illustrating the suitability of the models. Adding glucose and insulin secretion data altered model predicted probabilities within stages. In those with high 2-hour glucose, a high C-peptide markedly decreased predicted risk; a lower C-peptide obviated the age-dependent risk of 2-hour glucose alone, providing a more nuanced estimate of the rate of disease progression within stage 2.

CONCLUSION

While essentially all those with multiple AABs will develop type 1 diabetes, the rate of progression is heterogeneous and not explained by any individual single risk variable. The model-based probabilities developed here provide an adaptable personalized risk calculator to better inform decisions about how and when to monitor disease progression in clinical practice.

Evolving Concepts in Pathophysiology, Screening, and Prevention of Type 1 Diabetes: Report of Diabetes Mellitus Interagency Coordinating Committee Workshop

The approval of teplizumab to delay the onset of type 1 diabetes is an important inflection point in the decades-long pursuit to treat the cause of the disease rather than its symptoms. The National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases convened a workshop of the Diabetes Mellitus Interagency Coordinating Committee titled "Evolving Concepts in Pathophysiology, Screening, and Prevention of Type 1 Diabetes" to review this accomplishment and identify future goals. Speakers representing Type 1 Diabetes TrialNet (TrialNet) and the Immune Tolerance Network emphasized that the ability to robustly identify individuals destined to develop type 1 diabetes was essential for clinical trials. The presenter from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration described how regulatory approval relied on data from the single clinical trial of TrialNet with testing of teplizumab for delay of clinical diagnosis, along with confirmatory evidence from studies in patients after diagnosis. The workshop reviewed the etiology of type 1 diabetes as a disease involving multiple immune pathways, highlighting the current understanding of prognostic markers and proposing potential strategies to improve the therapeutic response of disease-modifying therapies based on the mechanism of action. While celebrating these achievements funded by the congressionally appropriated Special Diabetes Program, panelists from professional organizations, nonprofit advocacy/funding groups, and industry also identified significant hurdles in translating this research into clinical care.

Revisiting the Pattern of Loss of β-Cell Function in Preclinical Type 1 Diabetes

Type 1 diabetes (T1D) results from β-cell destruction due to autoimmunity. It has been proposed that β-cell loss is relatively quiescent in the early years after seroconversion to islet antibody positivity (stage 1), with accelerated β-cell loss only developing around 6-18 months prior to clinical diagnosis. This construct implies that immunointervention in this early stage will be of little benefit, since there is little disease activity to modulate. Here, we argue that the apparent lack of progression in early-stage disease may be an artifact of the modality of assessment used. When substantial β-cell function remains, the standard assessment, the oral glucose tolerance test, represents a submaximal stimulus and underestimates the residual function. In contrast, around the time of diagnosis, glucotoxicity exerts a deleterious effect on insulin secretion, giving the impression of disease acceleration. Once glucotoxicity is relieved by insulin therapy, β-cell function partially recovers (the honeymoon effect). However, evidence from recent trials suggests that glucose control has little effect on the underlying disease process. We therefore hypothesize that the autoimmune destruction of β-cells actually progresses at a more or less constant rate through all phases of T1D and that early-stage immunointervention will be both beneficial and desirable.

ARTICLE HIGHLIGHTS

Protocol for the Australian Type 1 Diabetes National Screening Pilot: Assessing the feasibility and acceptability of three general population screening models in children

AIM

One third of Australian children diagnosed with type 1 diabetes present with life-threatening diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) at diagnosis. Screening for early-stage, presymptomatic type 1 diabetes, with ongoing follow-up, can substantially reduce this risk (<5% risk). Several screening models are being trialled internationally, without consensus on the optimal approach. This pilot study aims to assess three models for a routine, population-wide screening programme in Australia.

METHODS

An implementation science-guided pilot study to evaluate the feasibility, acceptability and costs of three screening models in children will be conducted between July 2022 and June 2024. These models are as follows: (1) Genetic risk-stratified screening using newborn heel prick dried bloodspots, followed by autoantibody testing from 11 months of age; (2) genetic risk-stratified screening of infant (6-12 months) saliva followed by autoantibody testing from 10 months of age; and (3) autoantibody screening using capillary dried bloodspots collected from children aged 2, 6 or 10 years. Cohorts for each model will be recruited from targeted geographic areas across Australia involving ≥2 states per cohort, with a recruitment target of up to 3000 children per cohort (total up to 9000 children). The primary outcome is screening uptake for each cohort. Secondary outcomes include programme feasibility, costs, parental anxiety, risk perception, satisfaction, well-being and quality of life, and health professional attitudes and satisfaction.

CONCLUSIONS

This pilot is the first direct comparison of three screening implementation models for general population screening. Findings will provide evidence to inform a potential national screening programme for Australian children.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ACTRN12622000381785.

Presentation and characteristics of children with screen-detected type 1 diabetes: learnings from the ELSA general population pediatric screening study

INTRODUCTION

We describe the identification and management of general population screen-detected type 1 diabetes (T1D) and share learnings for best practice.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

Children diagnosed with T1D through a general population screening initiative, the EarLy Surveillance for Autoimmune diabetes (ELSA) study, were reviewed and described.Parents provided written, informed consent for inclusion in the case series.

RESULTS

14 children with insulin requiring (stage 3) T1D are described. These cases offer unique insights into the features of screen-detected T1D. T1D is identified sooner through screening programs, characterized by absent/short symptom duration, median presenting glycated hemoglobin 6.6% (49 mmol/mol) and insulin requirements<0.5 units/kg/day. ELSA identified four children at stage 3 and another 4 progressed within 4 months of ELSA completion, including two single seropositive children. Six children developed stage 3 T1D prior to ELSA completion, including two children (14%, n=2/14) with diabetic ketoacidosis prior to confirmed antibody status.

CONCLUSIONS

There are three main learnings from this case series. First, T1D identified through screening is at an earlier stage of its natural history and requires personalized insulin regimens with lower total daily insulin doses. Second, single autoantibody seropositivity can rapidly progress to stage 3. Finally, insulin requirement can manifest at any stage of the T1D screening pathway, and therefore early education around symptom recognition is essential for families participating in screening programs.

General population screening for type 1 diabetes using islet autoantibodies at the preschool vaccination visit: a proof-of-concept study (the T1Early study)

OBJECTIVE

Type 1 diabetes (T1D) screening programmes testing islet autoantibodies (IAbs) in childhood can reduce life-threatening diabetic ketoacidosis. General population screening is required to detect the majority of children with T1D, since in >85% there is no family history. Age 3-5 years has been proposed as an optimal age for a single screen approach.

DESIGN

Capillary samples were collected from children attending their preschool vaccination and analysed for IAbs to insulin, glutamic acid decarboxylase, islet antigen-2 and zinc transporter 8 using radiobinding/luciferase immunoprecipitation system assays. Acceptability was assessed using semistructured interviews and open-ended postcard questionnaires with parents.

SETTING

Two primary care practices in Oxfordshire, UK.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The ability to collect capillary blood to test IAbs in children at the routine preschool vaccination (3.5-4 years).

RESULTS

Of 134 parents invited, 66 (49%) were recruited (median age 3.5 years (IQR 3.4-3.6), 26 (39.4%) male); 63 provided a sample (97% successfully), and one participant was identified with a single positive IAb. Parents (n=15 interviews, n=29 postcards) were uniformly positive about screening aligned to vaccination and stated they would have been less likely to take part had screening been a separate visit. Themes identified included preparedness for T1D and the long-term benefit outweighing short-term upset. The perceived volume of the capillary sample was a potential concern and needs optimising.

CONCLUSIONS

Capillary IAb testing is a possible method to screen children for T1D. Aligning collection to the preschool vaccination visit can be convenient for families without the need for an additional visit.

Consensus guidance for monitoring individuals with islet autoantibody-positive pre-stage 3 type 1 diabetes

Given the proven benefits of screening to reduce diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) likelihood at the time of stage 3 type 1 diabetes diagnosis, and emerging availability of therapy to delay disease progression, type 1 diabetes screening programmes are being increasingly emphasised. Once broadly implemented, screening initiatives will identify significant numbers of islet autoantibody-positive (IAb+) children and adults who are at risk of (confirmed single IAb+) or living with (multiple IAb+) early-stage (stage 1 and stage 2) type 1 diabetes. These individuals will need monitoring for disease progression; much of this care will happen in non-specialised settings. To inform this monitoring, JDRF in conjunction with international experts and societies developed consensus guidance. Broad advice from this guidance includes the following: (1) partnerships should be fostered between endocrinologists and primary-care providers to care for people who are IAb+; (2) when people who are IAb+ are initially identified there is a need for confirmation using a second sample; (3) single IAb+ individuals are at lower risk of progression than multiple IAb+ individuals; (4) individuals with early-stage type 1 diabetes should have periodic medical monitoring, including regular assessments of glucose levels, regular education about symptoms of diabetes and DKA, and psychosocial support; (5) interested people with stage 2 type 1 diabetes should be offered trial participation or approved therapies; and (6) all health professionals involved in monitoring and care of individuals with type 1 diabetes have a responsibility to provide education. The guidance also emphasises significant unmet needs for further research on early-stage type 1 diabetes to increase the rigour of future recommendations and inform clinical care.

Progression From Presymptomatic to Clinical Type 1 Diabetes After COVID-19 Infection

This study examines whether an association exists between COVID-19 infection and progression to clinical diabetes among youth with presymptomatic type 1 diabetes.

Risk for progression to type 1 diabetes in first-degree relatives under 50 years of age

Introduction

The detection of pancreatic autoantibodies in first-degree relatives of patients with type 1 diabetes (T1D) is considered a risk factor for disease. Novel available immunotherapies to delay T1D progression highlight the importance of identifying individuals at risk who might benefit from emerging treatments. The objective was to assess the autoimmunity in first-degree relatives of patients with T1D, estimate the time from autoimmunity detection to the onset of clinical diabetes, and identify the associated risk factors.

Methods

Retrospective multicenter study of 3,015 first-degree relatives of patients with T1D recruited between 1992 and 2018. Pancreatic autoantibodies (IAA, GADA, IA2A, and ZnT8A) were determined by radioimmunoassay, starting the analyses at diagnosis of the proband. All those with positive autoimmunity and normal fasting blood glucose without clinical symptoms of diabetes were followed up in the study. The progression rate to T1D was assessed according to sex, relationship with the proband, age at autoimmunity detection, type/number of autoantibodies, and HLA-DRB1 genotype. Cox proportional-hazard models and Kaplan-Meier survival plots were used for statistical analyses.

Results

Among the relatives, 21 progenitors [43.7 years (IQR: 38.1-47.7)] and 27 siblings [7.6 years (IQR: 5.8-16.1)] had positive autoantibodies. Of these, 54.2% (95% CI: 39.2%-68.6%) developed T1D (age at autoimmunity detection 11 months to 39 years) in a median of 5 years (IQR: 3.6-8.7; ranged from 0.9 to 22.6 years). Risk factors associated with faster progression to T1D were multiple autoimmunity and <20 years at autoimmunity detection. Younger relatives (<20 years) with multiple autoantibodies had a 5-year cumulative risk of developing diabetes of 52.9% (95% CI: 22.1%-71.6%) and a 20-year risk of 91.2% (95% CI: 50.5%-98.4%). The 20-year risk decreased to 59.9% (95% CI: 21.9%-79.5%) if only one risk factor was met and to 35.7% (95% CI: 0.0%-66.2%) if the relative was older than 20 years with one autoantibody.

Conclusions

In first-degree relatives with autoimmunity, the time to progression to T1D is faster in children and adolescents with multiple autoantibodies. Young adults are also at risk, which supports their consideration in screening strategies for people at risk of developing T1D.

Preferences for Peer Support Amongst Families Engaged in Paediatric Screening Programmes: The Perspectives of Parents Involved in Screening for Type 1 Diabetes in Children Aged 3-13

INTRODUCTION

This work describes a secondary analysis of a qualitative data set originally used to understand parent participants' preferences for the design and implementation of a screening programme for paediatric Type 1 diabetes (T1D). From this, their spontaneous preferences for peer support emerged, described here in the context of existing peer support programmes for the newly diagnosed alongside suggestions for their incorporation into screening programmes for T1D and a range of other conditions.

METHODS

Data were collected from semi-structured interviews conducted with parents of children aged 3-13 years to explore their expectations, perceptions and preferences of a T1D paediatric screening programme. A secondary analysis of interviews from participants who spontaneously raised preferences for peer support was used to populate a novel framework informed by NHS England's key principles for the same, namely, Shared experiences and reciprocated support, Accessibility and inclusivity and Person-centred and integrated peer support.

RESULTS

Parents in 29 of 33 interviews spontaneously described the potential value of peer support if receiving a result indicating a positive (presymptomatic T1D result) from a screening programme. Specifically, the value of 'Shared experiences and reciprocated support' in terms of emotional support and reassurance, and access to more directly interpretable and relevant information related to the condition; 'Accessibility and inclusivity' relating to access to a community of similar individuals, whether in person or online; 'Person-centred and integrated peer-support' and the need for support reflecting the changing need of the child and the integration of peer support with clinical care.

CONCLUSIONS

The needs of peer support described by parents involved in T1D paediatric screening appear to be shared with those of families with children diagnosed with a range of life-altering conditions. Although the needs of peer support for paediatric screening may differ across conditions, our findings are a valuable starting point for its design both in T1D and other examples of similar population screening programmes.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

Patients and the public have been involved throughout the design of the ELSA study and have worked with us to inform the study process. They contributed to the design and content of patient-facing materials, the content of our topic guides and the analysis and interpretation of our findings.

Consensus Guidance for Monitoring Individuals With Islet Autoantibody-Positive Pre-Stage 3 Type 1 Diabetes

Given the proven benefits of screening to reduce diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) likelihood at the time of stage 3 type 1 diabetes diagnosis, and emerging availability of therapy to delay disease progression, type 1 diabetes screening programs are being increasingly emphasized. Once broadly implemented, screening initiatives will identify significant numbers of islet autoantibody-positive (IAb+) children and adults who are at risk for (confirmed single IAb+) or living with (multiple IAb+) early-stage (stage 1 and stage 2) type 1 diabetes. These individuals will need monitoring for disease progression; much of this care will happen in nonspecialized settings. To inform this monitoring, JDRF, in conjunction with international experts and societies, developed consensus guidance. Broad advice from this guidance includes the following: 1) partnerships should be fostered between endocrinologists and primary care providers to care for people who are IAb+; 2) when people who are IAb+ are initially identified, there is a need for confirmation using a second sample; 3) single IAb+ individuals are at lower risk of progression than multiple IAb+ individuals; 4) individuals with early-stage type 1 diabetes should have periodic medical monitoring, including regular assessments of glucose levels, regular education about symptoms of diabetes and DKA, and psychosocial support; 5) interested people with stage 2 type 1 diabetes should be offered trial participation or approved therapies; and 6) all health professionals involved in monitoring and care of individuals with type 1 diabetes have a responsibility to provide education. The guidance also emphasizes significant unmet needs for further research on early-stage type 1 diabetes to increase the rigor of future recommendations and inform clinical care.

[Early Detection Of Type 1 Diabetes By Islet Autoantibody Screening: A Position Paper Of The Fr1daplex Project Leaders And Training Centres, Bvkj Bavaria And Paednetz (Registered) Bavaria]

This position paper is based on the authors' many years of clinical experience and basic science research on the diagnosis and treatment of children and adolescents with a presymptomatic early stage of type 1 diabetes. The benefits as well as potential disadvantages of early detection of type 1 diabetes by islet autoantibody screening are critically discussed. In addition, the perspectives of delaying the onset of the clinical metabolic disease through treatment with teplizumab are addressed. Today, we see the chance for a relevant improvement in therapeutic options and life perspectives of affected children and adolescents. Important next steps for the implementation of islet autoantibody screening in Germany are the training of pediatricians who should inform families about the screening, establishment of a few transregional laboratories that carry out the test, and expansion of regional capacities for the training and care of children with an early stage of type 1 diabetes.

Estimation of Individual Positive Anti-Islet Autoantibodies from 3 Screen ICA Titer

The 3 Screen ICA ELISA is a novel assay capable of simultaneously measuring autoantibodies to glutamic acid decarboxylase (GADA), insulinoma-associated antigen-2 (IA-2A), and zinc transporter 8 (ZnT8A), making it a valuable tool for screening type 1 diabetes. Despite its advantages, it cannot specify which individual autoantibodies are positive or negative. This study aimed to estimate individual positive autoantibodies based on the 3 Screen ICA titer. Six hundred seventeen patients with type 1 diabetes, simultaneously measured for 3 Screen ICA and three individual autoantibodies, were divided into five groups based on their 3 Screen ICA titer. The sensitivities and contribution rates of the individual autoantibodies were then examined. The study had a cross-sectional design. Sixty-nine percent (424 of 617) of patients with type 1 diabetes had 3 Screen ICA titers exceeding the 99th percentile cut-off level (20 index). The prevalence of GADA ranged from 80% to 100% in patients with a 3 Screen ICA over 30 index and 97% of patients with a 3 Screen ICA ≥300 index. Furthermore, the prevalence of all individual autoantibodies being positive was 0% for ≤80 index and as high as 92% for ≥300 index. Significant associations were observed in specific titer groups: the 20-29.9 index group when all the individual autoantibodies were negative, the 30-79.9 index group when positive for GADA alone or IA-2A alone, the 30-299.9 index group when positive for ZnT8A alone, the 80-299.9 index group when positive for both IA-2A and ZnT8A, the 300-499.9 index group when positive for both GADA and ZnT8A, and the ≥300 index group when positive for all individual autoantibodies. These results suggest that the 3 Screen ICA titer may be helpful in estimating individual positive autoantibodies.

Recommendations for Screening and Monitoring the Stages of Type 1 Diabetes in the Immune Therapy Era

Type 1 diabetes (T1D) is a complex, chronic autoimmune disease that affects over 1.6 million people in the United States. It is now understood that T1D may be undetected for many years while the disease progresses quietly without producing symptoms. T1D can be identified through diabetes-related autoantibody screening and staged accordingly, enabling healthcare providers to identify high-risk individuals in the early stages of the disease and either provide a stage-specific intervention or offer clinical trial opportunities to preserve beta cell function and anticipate the onset of clinical T1D. Evidence-based clinical practice guidelines currently do not exist for routine diabetes-related autoantibody screening of individuals at risk of developing T1D or of the general population. The purpose of this article is to help clinicians acquire an understanding of the rationale and protocols recommended for identifying patients at risk of developing T1D and monitoring such patients for autoimmune markers and progression of disease from Stage 1 to Stage 3 (clinical disease).

Diabetes treatment by conversion of gut epithelial cells to insulin-producing cells

Insulin-deficient (type 1) diabetes is treated by providing insulin to maintain euglycemia. The current standard of care is a quasi-closed loop integrating automated insulin delivery with a continuous glucose monitoring sensor. Cell replacement technologies are advancing as an alternative treatment and have been tested as surrogates to cadaveric islets in transplants. In addition, immunomodulatory treatments to delay the onset of type 1 diabetes in high-risk (stage 2) individuals have gained regulatory approval. We have pioneered a cell conversion approach to restore insulin production through pharmacological conversion of intestinal epithelial cells into insulin-producing cells. We have advanced this approach along a translational trajectory through the discovery of small molecule forkhead box protein O1 inhibitors. When administered to different rodent models of insulin-deficient diabetes, these inhibitors have resulted in robust glucose-lowering responses and generation of insulin-producing cells in the gut epithelium. We review past work and delineate a path to human clinical trials.

Childhood screening for type 1 diabetes comparing automated multiplex Antibody Detection by Agglutination-PCR (ADAP) with single plex islet autoantibody radiobinding assays

BACKGROUND

Two or more autoantibodies against either insulin (IAA), glutamic acid decarboxylase (GADA), islet antigen-2 (IA-2A) or zinc transporter 8 (ZnT8A) denote stage 1 (normoglycemia) or stage 2 (dysglycemia) type 1 diabetes prior to stage 3 type 1 diabetes. Automated multiplex Antibody Detection by Agglutination-PCR (ADAP) assays in two laboratories were compared to single plex radiobinding assays (RBA) to define threshold levels for diagnostic specificity and sensitivity.

METHODS

IAA, GADA, IA-2A and ZnT8A were analysed in 1504 (54% females) population based controls (PBC), 456 (55% females) doctor's office controls (DOC) and 535 (41% females) blood donor controls (BDC) as well as in 2300 (48% females) patients newly diagnosed (1-10 years of age) with stage 3 type 1 diabetes. The thresholds for autoantibody positivity were computed in 100 10-fold cross-validations to separate patients from controls either by maximizing the χ2-statistics (chisq) or using the 98th percentile of specificity (Spec98). Mean and 95% CI for threshold, sensitivity and specificity are presented.

FINDINGS

The ADAP ROC curves of the four autoantibodies showed comparable AUC in the two ADAP laboratories and were higher than RBA. Detection of two or more autoantibodies using chisq showed 0.97 (0.95, 0.99) sensitivity and 0.94 (0.91, 0.97) specificity in ADAP compared to 0.90 (0.88, 0.95) sensitivity and 0.97 (0.94, 0.98) specificity in RBA. Using Spec98, ADAP showed 0.92 (0.89, 0.95) sensitivity and 0.99 (0.98, 1.00) specificity compared to 0.89 (0.77, 0.86) sensitivity and 1.00 (0.99, 1.00) specificity in the RBA. The diagnostic sensitivity and specificity were higher in PBC compared to DOC and BDC.

INTERPRETATION

ADAP was comparable in two laboratories, both comparable to or better than RBA, to define threshold levels for two or more autoantibodies to stage type 1 diabetes.

FUNDING

Supported by The Leona M. and Harry B. Helmsley Charitable Trust (grant number 2009-04078), the Swedish Foundation for Strategic Research (Dnr IRC15-0067) and the Swedish Research Council, Strategic Research Area (Dnr 2009-1039). AL was supported by the DiaUnion collaborative study, co-financed by EU Interreg ÖKS, Capital Region of Denmark, Region Skåne and the Novo Nordisk Foundation.

Assisting the implementation of screening for type 1 diabetes by using artificial intelligence on publicly available data

The type 1 diabetes community is coalescing around the benefits and advantages of early screening for disease risk. To be accepted by healthcare providers, regulatory authorities and payers, screening programmes need to show that the testing variables allow accurate risk prediction and that individualised risk-informed monitoring plans are established, as well as operational feasibility, cost-effectiveness and acceptance at population level. Artificial intelligence (AI) has the potential to contribute to solving these issues, starting with the identification and stratification of at-risk individuals. ASSET (AI for Sustainable Prevention of Autoimmunity in the Society; www.asset.healthcare ) is a public/private consortium that was established to contribute to research around screening for type 1 diabetes and particularly to how AI can drive the implementation of a precision medicine approach to disease prevention. ASSET will additionally focus on issues pertaining to operational implementation of screening. The authors of this article, researchers and clinicians active in the field of type 1 diabetes, met in an open forum to independently debate key issues around screening for type 1 diabetes and to advise ASSET. The potential use of AI in the analysis of longitudinal data from observational cohort studies to inform the design of improved, more individualised screening programmes was also discussed. A key issue was whether AI would allow the research community and industry to capitalise on large publicly available data repositories to design screening programmes that allow the early detection of individuals at high risk and enable clinical evaluation of preventive therapies. Overall, AI has the potential to revolutionise type 1 diabetes screening, in particular to help identify individuals who are at increased risk of disease and aid in the design of appropriate follow-up plans. We hope that this initiative will stimulate further research on this very timely topic.

Modeling type 1 diabetes progression using machine learning and single-cell transcriptomic measurements in human islets

Type 1 diabetes (T1D) is a chronic condition in which beta cells are destroyed by immune cells. Despite progress in immunotherapies that could delay T1D onset, early detection of autoimmunity remains challenging. Here, we evaluate the utility of machine learning for early prediction of T1D using single-cell analysis of islets. Using gradient-boosting algorithms, we model changes in gene expression of single cells from pancreatic tissues in T1D and non-diabetic organ donors. We assess if mathematical modeling could predict the likelihood of T1D development in non-diabetic autoantibody-positive donors. While most autoantibody-positive donors are predicted to be non-diabetic, select donors with unique gene signatures are classified as T1D. Our strategy also reveals a shared gene signature in distinct T1D-associated models across cell types, suggesting a common effect of the disease on transcriptional outputs of these cells. Our study establishes a precedent for using machine learning in early detection of T1D.

Home capillary sampling and screening for type 1 diabetes, celiac disease, and autoimmune thyroid disease in a Swedish general pediatric population: the TRIAD study

Objective

To screen a general pediatric population for type 1 diabetes (T1D), celiac disease (CD), and autoimmune thyroid disease (AITD) after home capillary sampling.

Methods

Swedish schoolchildren between 6-9 years and 13-16 years of age were invited to screening by taking a capillary sample at home. Samples were returned by mail and assessed for autoantibodies associated with T1D, CD, and AITD. Persistently autoantibody-positive children were referred for clinical follow-up.

Results

Of 19,593 invited, 3,527 (18.0%) consented to participate and 2,315/3,527 (65.6%) returned a blood sample of sufficient volume. Hemolysis occurred in 830/2,301 (36.1%) samples. After exclusion of 42 children with previously known T1D, CD, or AITD, and two autoantibody-positive children who declined a confirmatory sample, 2,271/19,593 (11.6%) were included. 211/2,271 (9.3%) had persistent autoantibodies: 60/2,271 (2.6%) with T1D autoantibodies, 61/2,271 (2.7%) with CD autoantibodies, and 99/2,271 (4.4%) with AITD autoantibodies; 9/2,271 (0.4%) were autoantibody positive for ≥1 disease. After clinical follow-up, 3/2,271 (0.1%) were diagnosed with T1D, 26/2,271 (1.1%) with CD, and 6/2,271 (0.3%) with AITD. Children with a first-degree relative (FDR) with T1D, CD, and/or AITD, had higher occurrence of autoantibodies compared to children without an FDR (63/344, 18.3%, vs. 148/1,810, 8.2%) (p < 0.0001, OR 2.52, 95% CI 1.83-3.47), and higher occurrence of screening-detected diagnosis (14/344, 4.1%, vs. 21/1,810, 1.2%) (p < 0.0001, OR 3.61, 95% CI 1.82-7.18). Half of these children screened positive for another disease than the FDR.

Conclusion

Screening for T1D, CD, and AITD by home capillary sampling in a Swedish general pediatric population detected autoimmunity in 9.3% and undiagnosed disease in 1.5%.

Universal screening for early detection of chronic autoimmune, metabolic and cardiovascular diseases in the general population using capillary blood (UNISCREEN): low-risk interventional, single-centre, pilot study protocol

INTRODUCTION

Chronic autoimmune (type 1 diabetes and coeliac disease) and metabolic/cardiovascular (type 2 diabetes, dyslipidaemia, hypertension) diseases are highly prevalent across all age ranges representing a major public health burden. Universal screening for prediction/early identification of these conditions is a potential tool for reducing their impact on the general population. The aim of this study is to assess whether universal screening using capillary blood sampling is feasible at a population-based level.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This is a low-risk interventional, single-centre, pilot study for a population-based screening programme denominated UNISCREEN. Participants are volunteers aged 1-100 who reside in the town of Cantalupo (Milan, Italy) undergoing: (1) interview collecting demographics, anthropometrics and medical history; (2) capillary blood collection for measurement of type 1 diabetes and coeliac disease-specific autoantibodies and immediate measurement of glucose, glycated haemoglobin and lipid panel by point-of-care devices; (3) venous blood sampling to confirm autoantibody-positivity; (4) blood pressure measurement; (5) fulfilment of a feasibility and acceptability questionnaire. The outcomes are the assessment of feasibility and acceptability of capillary blood screening, the prevalence of presymptomatic type 1 diabetes and undiagnosed coeliac disease, distribution of glucose categories, lipid panel and estimate of cardiovascular risk in the study population. With approximately 3000 inhabitants, the screened population is expected to encompass at least half of its size, approaching nearly 1500 individuals.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This protocol and the informed consent forms have been reviewed and approved by the San Raffaele Hospital Ethics Committee (approval number: 131/INT/2022). Written informed consent is obtained from all study participants or their parents if aged <18. Results will be published in scientific journals and presented at meetings.

CONCLUSIONS

If proven feasible and acceptable, this universal screening model would pave the way for larger-scale programmes, providing an opportunity for the implementation of innovative public health programmes in the general population.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT05841719.

A novel, high-performance, low-volume, rapid luciferase immunoprecipitation system (LIPS) assay to detect autoantibodies to zinc transporter 8

BACKGROUND

Zinc transporter 8 autoantibodies (ZnT8A) are thought to appear close to type 1 diabetes (T1D) onset and can identify high-risk multiple (≥2) autoantibody positive individuals. Radiobinding assays (RBA) are widely used for ZnT8A measurement but have limited sustainability. We sought to develop a novel, high-performance, non-radioactive luciferase immunoprecipitation system (LIPS) assay to replace RBA.

METHODS

A custom dual C-terminal ZnT8 (aa268-369; R325/W325) heterodimeric antigen, tagged with a NanoluciferaseTM (Nluc-ZnT8) reporter, and LIPS assay was developed. Assay performance was evaluated by testing sera from new onset T1D (n = 573), healthy schoolchildren (n = 521), and selected first-degree relatives (FDRs) from the Bart's Oxford family study (n = 617; 164 progressed to diabetes).

RESULTS

In new-onset T1D, ZnT8A levels by LIPS strongly correlated with RBA (Spearman's r = 0.89; P < 0.0001), and positivity was highly concordant (94.3%). At a high specificity (95%), LIPS and RBA had comparable assay performance [LIPS pROC-AUC(95) 0.032 (95% CI: 0.029-0.036); RBA pROC-AUC(95) 0.031 (95% CI: 0.028-0.034); P = 0.376]. Overall, FDRs found positive by LIPS or RBA had a comparable 20-year diabetes risk (52.6% and 59.7%, respectively), but LIPS positivity further stratified T1D risk in FDRs positive for at least one other islet autoantibody detected by RBA (P = 0.0346).

CONCLUSION

This novel, high-performance, cheaper, quicker, higher throughput, low blood volume Nluc-ZnT8 LIPS assay is a safe, non-radioactive alternative to RBA with enhanced sensitivity and ability to discriminate T1D progressors. This method offers an advanced approach to current strategies to screen the general population for T1D risk for immunotherapy trials and to reduce rates of diabetic ketoacidosis at diagnosis.

Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists as a possible intervention to delay the onset of type 1 diabetes: A new horizon

Type 1 diabetes (T1D) is a chronic autoimmune condition that destroys insulin-producing beta cells in the pancreas, leading to insulin deficiency and hyper-glycemia. The management of T1D primarily focuses on exogenous insulin replacement to control blood glucose levels. However, this approach does not address the underlying autoimmune process or prevent the progressive loss of beta cells. Recent research has explored the potential of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) as a novel intervention to modify the disease course and delay the onset of T1D. GLP-1RAs are medications initially developed for treating type 2 diabetes. They exert their effects by enhancing glucose-dependent insulin secretion, suppressing glucagon secretion, and slowing gastric emptying. Emerging evidence suggests that GLP-1RAs may also benefit the treatment of newly diagnosed patients with T1D. This article aims to highlight the potential of GLP-1RAs as an intervention to delay the onset of T1D, possibly through their potential immunomodulatory and anti-inflammatory effects and preservation of beta-cells. This article aims to explore the potential of shifting the paradigm of T1D management from reactive insulin replacement to proactive disease modification, which should open new avenues for preventing and treating T1D, improving the quality of life and long-term outcomes for individuals at risk of T1D.

Implementation of type 1 diabetes genetic risk screening in children in diverse communities: the Virginia PrIMeD project

BACKGROUND

Population screening for risk of type 1 diabetes (T1D) has been proposed to identify those with islet autoimmunity (presence of islet autoantibodies). As islet autoantibodies can be transient, screening with a genetic risk score has been proposed as an entry into autoantibody testing.

METHODS

Children were recruited from eight general pediatric and specialty clinics across Virginia with diverse community settings. Recruiters in each clinic obtained informed consent/assent, a medical history, and a saliva sample for DNA extraction in children with and without a history of T1D. A custom genotyping panel was used to define T1D genetic risk based upon associated SNPs in European- and African-genetic ancestry. Subjects at "high genetic risk" were offered a separate blood collection for screening four islet autoantibodies. A follow-up contact (email, mail, and telephone) in one half of the participants determined interest and occurrence of subsequent T1D.

RESULTS

A total of 3818 children aged 2-16 years were recruited, with 14.2% (n = 542) having a "high genetic risk." Of children with "high genetic risk" and without pre-existing T1D (n = 494), 7.0% (34/494) consented for autoantibody screening; 82.4% (28/34) who consented also completed the blood collection, and 7.1% (2/28) of them tested positive for multiple autoantibodies. Among children with pre-existing T1D (n = 91), 52% (n = 48) had a "high genetic risk." In the sample of children with existing T1D, there was no relationship between genetic risk and age at T1D onset. A major factor in obtaining islet autoantibody testing was concern over SARS-CoV-2 exposure.

CONCLUSIONS

Minimally invasive saliva sampling implemented using a genetic risk score can identify children at genetic risk of T1D. Consent for autoantibody screening, however, was limited largely due to the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic and need for blood collection.

Advances in risk predictive performance of pre-symptomatic type 1 diabetes via the multiplex Antibody-Detection-by-Agglutination-PCR assay

Introduction

Achieving early diagnosis of pre-symptomatic type 1 diabetes is critical to reduce potentially life-threatening diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) at symptom onset, link patients to FDA approved therapeutics that can delay disease progression and support novel interventional drugs development. The presence of two or more islet autoantibodies in pre-symptomatic type 1 diabetes patients indicates high-risk of progression to clinical manifestation.

Method

Herein, we characterized the capability of multiplex ADAP assay to predict type 1 diabetes progression. We obtained retrospective coded sera from a cohort of 48 progressors and 44 non-progressors from the NIDDK DPT-1 study.

Result

The multiplex ADAP assay and radiobinding assays had positive predictive value (PPV)/negative predictive value (NPV) of 68%/92% and 67%/66% respectively. The improved NPV stemmed from 12 progressors tested positive for multiple islet autoantibodies by multiplex ADAP assay but not by RBA. Furthermore, 6 out of these 12 patients tested positive for multiple islet autoantibodies by RBA in subsequent sampling events with a median delay of 2.8 years compared to multiplex ADAP assay.

Discussion

In summary, multiplex ADAP assay could be an ideal tool for type 1 diabetes risk testing due to its sample-sparing nature (4µL), non-radioactiveness, compatibility with widely available real-time qPCR instruments and favorable risk prediction capability.

Feasibility and Validity of In-Home Self-Collected Capillary Blood Spot Screening for Type 1 Diabetes Risk

Aims: Self-collection of a blood sample for autoantibody testing has potential to facilitate screening for type 1 diabetes risk. We sought to determine the feasibility and acceptability of this approach and the performance of downstream antibody assays. Methods: People living with type 1 diabetes and their family members (N = 97) provided paired capillary blood spot and serum samples collected, respectively, by themselves and a health worker. They provided feedback on the ease, convenience, and painfulness of blood spot collection. Islet antibodies were measured in blood spots by antibody detection by agglutination PCR (ADAP) or multiplex enzyme-linked immunoassay (ELISA), and in serum by radioimmunoassay (RIA) or ELISA. Results: Using serum RIA and ELISA to define antibody status, 50 antibody-negative (Abneg) and 47 antibody-positive (Abpos) participants enrolled, of whom 43 and 47, respectively, returned testable blood spot samples. The majority indicated that self-collection was easier, more convenient, and less painful than formal venesection. The sensitivity and specificity for detection of Abpos by blood spot were, respectively, 85% and 98% for ADAP and 87% and 100% for multiplex ELISA. The specificities by ADAP for each of the four antigen specificities ranged from 98% to 100% and areas under the receiver operator curve from 0.841 to 0.986. Conclusions: Self-collected blood spot sampling is preferred over venesection by research participants. ADAP and multiplex ELISA are highly specific assays for islet antibodies in blood spots with acceptable performance for use alone or in combination to facilitate screening for type 1 diabetes risk. Clinical Trial Registration number: ACTRN12620000510943.

Clinical care advice for monitoring of islet autoantibody positive individuals with presymptomatic type 1 diabetes

BACKGROUND/AIM

Type 1 diabetes is an autoimmune disease that involves the development of autoantibodies against pancreatic islet beta-cell antigens, preceding clinical diagnosis by a period of preclinical disease activity. As screening activity to identify autoantibody-positive individuals increases, a rise in presymptomatic type 1 diabetes individuals seeking medical attention is expected. Current guidance on how to monitor these individuals in a safe but minimally invasive way is limited. This article aims to provide clinical guidance for monitoring individuals with presymptomatic type 1 diabetes to reduce the risk of diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) at diagnosis.

METHODS

Expert consensus was obtained from members of the Fr1da, GPPAD, and INNODIA consortia, three European diabetes research groups. The guidance covers both specialist and primary care follow-up strategies.

RESULTS

The guidance outlines recommended monitoring approaches based on age, disease stage and clinical setting. Individuals with presymptomatic type 1 diabetes are best followed up in specialist care. For stage 1, biannual assessments of random plasma glucose and HbA1c are suggested for children, while annual assessments are recommended for adolescents and adults. For stage 2, 3-monthly clinic visits with additional home monitoring are advised. The value of repeat OGTT in stage 1 and the use of continuous glucose monitoring in stage 2 are discussed. Primary care is encouraged to monitor individuals who decline specialist care, following the guidance presented.

CONCLUSIONS

As type 1 diabetes screening programs become more prevalent, effective monitoring strategies are essential to mitigate the risk of complications such as DKA. This guidance serves as a valuable resource for clinicians, providing practical recommendations tailored to an individual's age and disease stage, both within specialist and primary care settings.

Continuous glucose monitoring has an increasing role in pre-symptomatic type 1 diabetes: advantages, limitations, and comparisons with laboratory-based testing

Type 1 diabetes (T1D) is well-recognised as a continuum heralded by the development of islet autoantibodies, progression to islet autoimmunity causing beta cell destruction, culminating in insulin deficiency and clinical disease. Abnormalities of glucose homeostasis are known to exist well before the onset of typical symptoms. Laboratory-based tests such as the oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) and glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) have been used to stage T1D and assess the risk of progression to clinical T1D. Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) can detect early glycaemic abnormalities and can therefore be used to monitor for metabolic deterioration in pre-symptomatic, islet autoantibody positive, at-risk individuals. Early identification of these children can not only reduce the risk of presentation with diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA), but also determine eligibility for prevention trials, which aim to prevent or delay progression to clinical T1D. Here, we describe the current state with regard to the use of the OGTT, HbA1c, fructosamine and glycated albumin in pre-symptomatic T1D. Using illustrative cases, we present our clinical experience with the use of CGM, and advocate for an increased role of this diabetes technology, for monitoring metabolic deterioration and disease progression in children with pre-symptomatic T1D.

2. Diagnosis and Classification of Diabetes: Standards of Care in Diabetes-2024

The American Diabetes Association (ADA) "Standards of Care in Diabetes" includes the ADA's current clinical practice recommendations and is intended to provide the components of diabetes care, general treatment goals and guidelines, and tools to evaluate quality of care. Members of the ADA Professional Practice Committee, an interprofessional expert committee, are responsible for updating the Standards of Care annually, or more frequently as warranted. For a detailed description of ADA standards, statements, and reports, as well as the evidence-grading system for ADA's clinical practice recommendations and a full list of Professional Practice Committee members, please refer to Introduction and Methodology. Readers who wish to comment on the Standards of Care are invited to do so at professional.diabetes.org/SOC.

Understanding Islet Autoantibodies in Prediction of Type 1 Diabetes

As screening studies and preventive interventions for type 1 diabetes (T1D) advance rapidly, the utility of islet autoantibodies (IAbs) in T1D prediction comes with challenges for early and accurate disease progression prediction. Refining features of IAbs can provide more accurate risk assessment. The advances in islet autoantibodies assay techniques help to screen out islet autoantibodies with high efficiency and high disease specificity. Exploring new islet autoantibodies to neoepitopes/neoantigens remains a hot research field for improving prediction and disease pathogenesis. We will review the recent research progresses of islet autoantibodies to better understand the utility of islet autoantibodies in prediction of T1D.

Relative Frequency of Islet Autoimmunity in Children and Adolescents with Autoimmune Thyroid Disease

Objective

The aim of the present study was to investigate islet autoimmunity and susceptibility to type 1 diabetes (T1D) in children/adolescents with autoimmune thyroid disease (AITD, and in family members of AITD patients with islet autoimmunity.

Methods

Islet-cell cytoplasmic, glutamic-acid decarboxylase, and tyrosine-phosphatase autoantibodies (AAbs) were measured in 161 AITD patients [127 with autoimmune thyroiditis (AT); 34 with Graves’ disease (GD)], 20 family members of AITD patients with islet autoimmunity, and 155 age-matched controls.

Results

Islet autoimmunity was found in 10.6% of AITD patients, significantly more frequent than in controls (1.9%; p=0.002). A higher prevalence of islet AAbs was found in females with AITD (p=0.011) but not in males (p=0.16) and in AT (p=0.013) but not in GD patients (p=0.19), compared to corresponding controls. Two or three islet AAbs were found concurrently in six AITD patients with islet autoimmunity. They all developed T1D and had significantly higher islet AAbs titers (p=0.01) than AITD patients with single islet AAbs but normal glucose metabolism. T1D was found in 3.7% of AITD patients compared to 0.2% of the age-matched, general Croatian population. Islet AAbs were found in 5/20 family members of AITD patients with islet autoimmunity, among whom two developed T1D. None of the controls was positive for more than one islet AAb or developed T1D.

Conclusion

Children/adolescents with AITD, particularly females and patients with AT, appear to represent a risk group for islet autoimmunity and T1D, as do family members of AITD patients with positive islet AAbs. However, these findings should be validated in larger studies.

Refining the Definition of Stage 1 Type 1 Diabetes: An Ontology-Driven Analysis of the Heterogeneity of Multiple Islet Autoimmunity

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the risk of progression to stage 3 type 1 diabetes based on varying definitions of multiple islet autoantibody positivity (mIA).

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

Type 1 Diabetes Intelligence (T1DI) is a combined prospective data set of children from Finland, Germany, Sweden, and the U.S. who have an increased genetic risk for type 1 diabetes. Analysis included 16,709 infants-toddlers enrolled by age 2.5 years and comparison between groups using Kaplan-Meier survival analysis.

RESULTS

Of 865 (5%) children with mIA, 537 (62%) progressed to type 1 diabetes. The 15-year cumulative incidence of diabetes varied from the most stringent definition (mIA/Persistent/2: two or more islet autoantibodies positive at the same visit with two or more antibodies persistent at next visit; 88% [95% CI 85-92%]) to the least stringent (mIA/Any: positivity for two islet autoantibodies without co-occurring positivity or persistence; 18% [5-40%]). Progression in mIA/Persistent/2 was significantly higher than all other groups (P < 0.0001). Intermediate stringency definitions showed intermediate risk and were significantly different than mIA/Any (P < 0.05); however, differences waned over the 2-year follow-up among those who did not subsequently reach higher stringency. Among mIA/Persistent/2 individuals with three autoantibodies, loss of one autoantibody by the 2-year follow-up was associated with accelerated progression. Age was significantly associated with time from seroconversion to mIA/Persistent/2 status and mIA to stage 3 type 1 diabetes.

CONCLUSIONS

The 15-year risk of progression to type 1 diabetes risk varies markedly from 18 to 88% based on the stringency of mIA definition. While initial categorization identifies highest-risk individuals, short-term follow-up over 2 years may help stratify evolving risk, especially for those with less stringent definitions of mIA.

Guidelines and Recommendations for Laboratory Analysis in the Diagnosis and Management of Diabetes Mellitus

BACKGROUND

Numerous laboratory tests are used in the diagnosis and management of diabetes mellitus. The quality of the scientific evidence supporting the use of these assays varies substantially.

APPROACH

An expert committee compiled evidence-based recommendations for laboratory analysis in screening, diagnosis, or monitoring of diabetes. The overall quality of the evidence and the strength of the recommendations were evaluated. The draft consensus recommendations were evaluated by invited reviewers and presented for public comment. Suggestions were incorporated as deemed appropriate by the authors (see Acknowledgments). The guidelines were reviewed by the Evidence Based Laboratory Medicine Committee and the Board of Directors of the American Association for Clinical Chemistry and by the Professional Practice Committee of the American Diabetes Association.

CONTENT

Diabetes can be diagnosed by demonstrating increased concentrations of glucose in venous plasma or increased hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) in the blood. Glycemic control is monitored by the people with diabetes measuring their own blood glucose with meters and/or with continuous interstitial glucose monitoring (CGM) devices and also by laboratory analysis of HbA1c. The potential roles of noninvasive glucose monitoring, genetic testing, and measurement of ketones, autoantibodies, urine albumin, insulin, proinsulin, and C-peptide are addressed.

SUMMARY

The guidelines provide specific recommendations based on published data or derived from expert consensus. Several analytes are found to have minimal clinical value at the present time, and measurement of them is not recommended.

General population screening for paediatric type 1 diabetes-A qualitative study of UK professional stakeholders

AIMS

Identifying children at risk of type 1 diabetes allows education for symptom recognition and monitoring to reduce the risk of diabetic ketoacidosis at presentation. We aimed to explore stakeholder views towards paediatric general population screening for type 1 diabetes in the United Kingdom (UK).

METHODS

Qualitative interviews were undertaken with 25 stakeholders, including diabetes specialists, policymakers and community stakeholders who could be involved in a future type 1 diabetes screening programme in the UK. A thematic framework analysis was performed using the National Screening Committee's evaluative criteria as the overarching framework.

RESULTS

Diabetic ketoacidosis prevention was felt to be a priority and proposed benefits of screening included education, monitoring and helping the family to better prepare for a future with type 1 diabetes. However, diabetes specialists were cautious about general population screening because of lack of evidence for public acceptability. Concerns were raised about the harms of living with risk, provoking health anxiety and threatening the child's right to an 'open future'. Support systems that met the clinical and psychological needs of the family living with risk were considered essential. Stakeholders were supportive of research into general population screening and acknowledged this would be a priority if an immunoprevention agent were licensed in the UK.

CONCLUSIONS

Although stakeholders suggested the harms of UK paediatric general population screening currently outweigh the benefits, this view would potentially be altered if prevention therapies were licensed. In this case, an evidence-based screening strategy would need to be formulated and public acceptability explored.

Outdoor Light at Night and Children's Body Mass: A Cross-Sectional Analysis in the Fr1da Study

BACKGROUND

Emerging evidence supports an association between light at night (LAN) exposure with obesity or overweight in adults. However, effects of LAN exposure during childhood have yet to be further investigated.

OBJECTIVE

In this study, we aimed to determine whether LAN exposure is associated with body mass in young children.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHOD

We used data from the Fr1da cohort study which screened children for early-stage islet autoimmunity in Bavaria, Germany from February 2015 to March 2019. A total of 62,212 children aged <11 years with complete residential information was included in the analysis. Self-reported weight and height were used to calculate age- and sex-specific body mass index (BMI) z-scores. LAN exposure was based on remotely sensed images from Visible Infrared Imaging Radiometer Suite and assigned to the children's residencies. We used generalized additive models to estimate the associations between LAN exposure and BMI adjusting for potential confounders.

RESULTS

We observed an increase in BMI z-scores of 34.0% (95% confidence interval (CI): 25.4-42.6) per 10 nW/cm2/sr increment in LAN exposure at baseline (2015) and of 32.6% (24.3-41.0) for LAN exposure one year prior to screening, both adjusted for age and sex. Similar associations were observed after adjustment for socioeconomic status and urbanization degree.

CONCLUSION

Our findings suggest that outdoor light exposure may be a risk factor for weight gain during childhood.

Utility of genetic risk scores in type 1 diabetes

Iterative advances in understanding of the genetics of type 1 diabetes have identified >70 genetic regions associated with risk of the disease, including strong associations across the HLA class II region that account for >50% of heritability. The increased availability of genetic data combined with the decreased costs of generating these data, have facilitated the development of polygenic scores that aggregate risk variants from associated loci into a single number: either a genetic risk score (GRS) or a polygenic risk score (PRS). PRSs incorporate the risk of many possibly correlated variants from across the genome, even if they do not reach genome-wide significance, whereas GRSs estimate the cumulative contribution of a smaller subset of genetic variants that reach genome-wide significance. Type 1 diabetes GRSs have utility in diabetes classification, aiding discrimination between type 1 diabetes, type 2 diabetes and MODY. Type 1 diabetes GRSs are also being used in newborn screening studies to identify infants at risk of future presentation of the disease. Most early studies of type 1 diabetes genetics have been conducted in European ancestry populations, but, to develop accurate GRSs across diverse ancestries, large case-control cohorts from non-European populations are still needed. The current barriers to GRS implementation within healthcare are mainly related to a lack of guidance and knowledge on integration with other biomarkers and clinical variables. Once these limitations are addressed, there is huge potential for 'test and treat' approaches to be used to tailor care for individuals with type 1 diabetes.

Children diagnosed with presymptomatic type 1 diabetes through public health screening have milder diabetes at clinical manifestation

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS

We aimed to determine whether disease severity was reduced at onset of clinical (stage 3) type 1 diabetes in children previously diagnosed with presymptomatic type 1 diabetes in a population-based screening programme for islet autoantibodies.

METHODS

Clinical data obtained at diagnosis of stage 3 type 1 diabetes were evaluated in 128 children previously diagnosed with presymptomatic early-stage type 1 diabetes between 2015 and 2022 in the Fr1da study and compared with data from 736 children diagnosed with incident type 1 diabetes between 2009 and 2018 at a similar age in the DiMelli study without prior screening.

RESULTS

At the diagnosis of stage 3 type 1 diabetes, children with a prior early-stage diagnosis had lower median HbA1c (51 mmol/mol vs 91 mmol/mol [6.8% vs 10.5%], p<0.001), lower median fasting glucose (5.3 mmol/l vs 7.2 mmol/l, p<0.05) and higher median fasting C-peptide (0.21 nmol/l vs 0.10 nmol/l, p<0.001) compared with children without previous early-stage diagnosis. Fewer participants with prior early-stage diagnosis had ketonuria (22.2% vs 78.4%, p<0.001) or required insulin treatment (72.3% vs 98.1%, p<0.05) and only 2.5% presented with diabetic ketoacidosis at diagnosis of stage 3 type 1 diabetes. Outcomes in children with a prior early-stage diagnosis were not associated with a family history of type 1 diabetes or diagnosis during the COVID-19 pandemic. A milder clinical presentation was observed in children who participated in education and monitoring after early-stage diagnosis.

CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION

Diagnosis of presymptomatic type 1 diabetes in children followed by education and monitoring improved clinical presentation at the onset of stage 3 type 1 diabetes.

Guidelines and Recommendations for Laboratory Analysis in the Diagnosis and Management of Diabetes Mellitus

BACKGROUND

Numerous laboratory tests are used in the diagnosis and management of diabetes mellitus. The quality of the scientific evidence supporting the use of these assays varies substantially.

APPROACH

An expert committee compiled evidence-based recommendations for laboratory analysis in screening, diagnosis, or monitoring of diabetes. The overall quality of the evidence and the strength of the recommendations were evaluated. The draft consensus recommendations were evaluated by invited reviewers and presented for public comment. Suggestions were incorporated as deemed appropriate by the authors (see Acknowledgments). The guidelines were reviewed by the Evidence Based Laboratory Medicine Committee and the Board of Directors of the American Association of Clinical Chemistry and by the Professional Practice Committee of the American Diabetes Association.

CONTENT

Diabetes can be diagnosed by demonstrating increased concentrations of glucose in venous plasma or increased hemoglobin A1c (Hb A1c) in the blood. Glycemic control is monitored by the people with diabetes measuring their own blood glucose with meters and/or with continuous interstitial glucose monitoring (CGM) devices and also by laboratory analysis of Hb A1c. The potential roles of noninvasive glucose monitoring, genetic testing, and measurement of ketones, autoantibodies, urine albumin, insulin, proinsulin, and C-peptide are addressed.

SUMMARY

The guidelines provide specific recommendations based on published data or derived from expert consensus. Several analytes are found to have minimal clinical value at the present time, and measurement of them is not recommended.

Autoantibody test for type 1 diabetes in children: are there reasons to implement a screening program in the general population? A statement endorsed by the Italian Society for Paediatric Endocrinology and Diabetes (SIEDP-ISPED) and the Italian Society of Paediatrics (SIP)

In recent years screening of type 1 diabetes (T1D) in both at risk children and general population has been widely discussed with the aim of increasing awareness of the importance to early detect (and possibly treat) at-risk children in early stages of the chronic autoimmune progression to T1D.In fact, it is well known that first-degree relatives have the highest risk of T1D, but up to 90% of children who develop T1D do not have a family history and belong to the general population.The reasons for screening children well before the clinical onset of T1D include prevention of DKA (still up to 60% children are diagnosed with DKA) and related morbidities and mortality, reducing the need for hospitalisation, time to provide emotional support and education to ensure a smooth transition to insulin treatment, and opportunities for new treatments to prevent or delay progression.There are pros and cons of screening of T1D in children, but recent evidences suggest that it is now time to consider possible a screening for T1D in children.Recently, the European Society for Paediatric Endocrinology (ESPE) has endorsed a Position Statement, discussing the pros and cons of screening for T1D in the general population; ESPE supports national Societies for Paediatric Endocrinology to spread information on this important issue in various countries throughout Europe; the Italian Society for Paediatric Endocrinology and Diabetes (SIEDP-ISPED) and the Italian Society of Paediatrics (SIP) endorse this document with the specific aim of increasing awareness on screening for paediatric T1D in the general population.

Type 1 diabetes

Type 1 diabetes is a chronic disease caused by autoimmune destruction of pancreatic β cells. Individuals with type 1 diabetes are reliant on insulin for survival. Despite enhanced knowledge related to the pathophysiology of the disease, including interactions between genetic, immune, and environmental contributions, and major strides in treatment and management, disease burden remains high. Studies aimed at blocking the immune attack on β cells in people at risk or individuals with very early onset type 1 diabetes show promise in preserving endogenous insulin production. This Seminar will review the field of type 1 diabetes, highlighting recent progress within the past 5 years, challenges to clinical care, and future directions in research, including strategies to prevent, manage, and cure the disease.

Prevention of Type 1 Diabetes in Children: A Worthy Challenge?

Nowadays, the development of new immuno-therapeutic drugs has made it possible to alter the course of many autoimmune diseases. Type 1 diabetes is a chronic disease with a progressive dependence on exogenous insulin administration. The ability to intercept individuals at high risk of developing type 1 diabetes is the first step toward the development of therapies that can delay the process of β-cell destruction, thus permitting a better glycemic control and reducing the incidence of ketoacidosis. The knowledge of the main pathogenetic mechanisms underlying the three stages of the disease may be helpful to identify the best immune therapeutic approach. In this review, we aim to give an overview of the most important clinical trials conducted during the primary, secondary and tertiary phases of prevention.

The countdown to type 1 diabetes: when, how and why does the clock start?

'The clock to type 1 diabetes has started when islet antibodies are first detected', commented George Eisenbarth with regard to the pathogenesis of type 1 diabetes. This review focuses on 'starting the clock', i.e. the initiation of pre-symptomatic islet autoimmunity/the first appearance of islet autoantibodies. In particular, this review addresses why susceptibility to developing islet autoimmunity is greatest in the first 2 years of life and why beta cells are a frequent target of the immune system during this fertile period. A concept for the development of beta cell autoimmunity in childhood is discussed and three factors are highlighted that contribute to this early predisposition: (1) high beta cell activity and potential vulnerability to stress; (2) high rates of and first exposures to infection; and (3) a heightened immune response, with a propensity for T helper type 1 (Th1) immunity. Arguments are presented that beta cell injury, accompanied by activation of an inflammatory immune response, precedes the initiation of autoimmunity. Finally, the implications for strategies aimed at primary prevention for a world without type 1 diabetes are discussed.

Lessons and Gaps in the Prediction and Prevention of Type 1 Diabetes

Type 1 diabetes (T1D) is a serious chronic autoimmune condition. Even though the root cause of T1D development has yet to be determined, enough is known about the natural history of T1D pathogenesis to allow study of interventions that may delay or even prevent the onset of hyperglycemia and clinical T1D. Primary prevention aims to prevent the onset of beta cell autoimmunity in asymptomatic people at high genetic risk for T1D. Secondary prevention strategies aim to preserve functional beta cells once autoimmunity is present, and tertiary prevention aims to initiate and extend partial remission of beta cell destruction after the clinical onset of T1D. The approval of teplizumab in the United States to delay the onset of clinical T1D marks an impressive milestone in diabetes care. This treatment opens the door to a paradigm shift in T1D care. People with T1D risk need to be identified early by measuring T1D related islet autoantibodies. Identifying people with T1D before they have symptoms will facilitate better understanding of pre-symptomatic T1D progression and T1D prevention strategies that may be effective.

Clostridia and Enteroviruses as Synergistic Triggers of Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus

What triggers type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM)? One common assumption is that triggers are individual microbes that mimic autoantibody targets such as insulin (INS). However, most microbes highly associated with T1DM pathogenesis, such as coxsackieviruses (COX), lack INS mimicry and have failed to induce T1DM in animal models. Using proteomic similarity search techniques, we found that COX actually mimicked the INS receptor (INSR). Clostridia were the best mimics of INS. Clostridia antibodies cross-reacted with INS in ELISA experiments, confirming mimicry. COX antibodies cross-reacted with INSR. Clostridia antibodies further bound to COX antibodies as idiotype-anti-idiotype pairs conserving INS-INSR complementarity. Ultraviolet spectrometry studies demonstrated that INS-like Clostridia peptides bound to INSR-like COX peptides. These complementary peptides were also recognized as antigens by T cell receptor sequences derived from T1DM patients. Finally, most sera from T1DM patients bound strongly to inactivated Clostridium sporogenes, while most sera from healthy individuals did not; T1DM sera also exhibited evidence of anti-idiotype antibodies against idiotypic INS, glutamic acid decarboxylase, and protein tyrosine phosphatase non-receptor (islet antigen-2) antibodies. These results suggest that T1DM is triggered by combined enterovirus-Clostridium (and possibly combined Epstein-Barr-virus-Streptococcal) infections, and the probable rate of such co-infections approximates the rate of new T1DM diagnoses.