C-Peptide and 24-Hour Urinary C-Peptide as Markers to Help Classify Types of Childhood Diabetes

The Predictive Potential of C-Peptide in Differentiating Type 1 Diabetes From Type 2 Diabetes in an Outpatient Population in Abu Dhabi

PURPOSE

We aimed to investigate the predictive potential of plasma connecting peptide (C-peptide) in differentiating type 1 diabetes (T1D) from type 2 diabetes (T2D) and to inform evidence-based diabetes classification criteria.

METHODS

A retrospective review was performed of all the patients with diabetes visiting an outpatient diabetology, endocrinology, general practice and family medicine tertiary health care center between January 2016 and December 2021.

FINDINGS

Two hundred twelve individuals with diabetes were included, 85 (44.8%) with T1D and 127 (55.2%) with T2D. Mean (SD) age at diagnosis was 35.9 (15.1) years, and 112 (52.8%) men. Median (interquartile range [IQR]) duration of diabetes was 3.8 (3.0-4.5) years (T1D, 3.9 [3.5-4.6]; T2D, 3.4 [2.4-4.4]; P = 0.001). Body mass index was <18.5 kg/m2 in 5 (2.5%) individuals (T1D, 5; T2D, none), 18.5 to <25 kg/m2 in 57 (28.5%) (T1D, 32; T2D, 25), 25 to <30 kg/m2 in 58 (29%) (T1D, 28; T2D, 30), and >30 kg/m2 in 80 (40.0%) (T1D, 20; T2D, 60). Median (IQR) glycosylated hemoglobin was 7.4% (6.7%-8.5%) (T1D, 8.3% [7.2%-9.9%]; T2D, 7% [6.3%-7.6%]; P = 0.0001). Median (IQR) C-peptide concentration was 0.59 nmol/L (0.01-1.14 nmol/L) (T1D, 0.01 nmol/L [0.003-0.05 nmol/L]; T2D, 1.03 nmol/L [0.70-1.44 nmol/L]; P = 0.0001). C-peptide concentration of ≤0.16 nmol/L showed 92.9% sensitivity, 1-specificity of 2.4%, and AUC of 97.2% (CI, 94.7%-99.6%; P = 0.0001) in differentiating T1D from T2D.

IMPLICATIONS

To our knowledge, this is the first study in the Middle East and North Africa region highlighting the role of C-peptide in diabetes classification. The estimated cutoff point for C-peptide concentration (≤0.16 nmol/L) will certainly help in accurately classifying the T1D and will rule out the routine clinical judgmental approaches in the region, especially in those scenarios and periods where it is always difficult to diagnose the diabetes type. Quantifying the cutoff for C-peptide is among the vital strengths of this study that will provide a better treatment plan in diabetes care management. Also, we evaluated concomitant glucose levels to rule out the phenomenon of falsely low C-peptide values in the setting of hypoglycemia or severe glucose toxicity. Based on our findings, C-peptide testing could be included in postulating an evidence-based guideline that differentiates T1D from T2D. Despite this, our study has some limitations, including the selection bias due to the retrospective design and low C-peptide levels could be indicative of low pancreatic reserves due to other causes or long-standing T2D, and quantifying these reasons requires additional resources and time.

Utility of Fasting C-Peptide for the Diagnostic Differentiation of Patients with Type 1, Type 2 Diabetes, MODY, and LADA

BACKGROUND

The prevalence of obesity has increased in patients with type 1 diabetes (T1D) and latent autoimmune diabetes of the adult (LADA), limiting the use of clinical features such as the body mass index for its differentiation with type 2 diabetes (T2D). Additionally, some patients with maturity-onset diabetes of the young (MODY) or LADA are misdiagnosed as having T2D. The evaluation of autoantibodies and genetic testing are not fully available. We aimed to evaluate the utility of a widely available and less expensive diagnostic tool such as C-peptide to differentiate between T1D, T2D, MODY, and LADA.

METHODS

Our study included 38 patients with T1D, 49 with T2D, 13 with MODY, and 61 with LADA. We recorded anthropometric measurements, biochemical profiles, and antidiabetic treatment and determined C-peptide, anti-GAD65, and anti-IA2 antibodies.

RESULTS

C-peptide concentration differed significantly among populations (T1D: 0.2 ng/mL; T2D: 2.4 ng/mL; MODY: 1.14 ng/mL; LADA: 1.87 ng/mL). Through a ROC curve, we observed that the C-peptide cut-off point of 0.95 ng/mL allows differentiation between T1D and T2D (sensitivity 82%, specificity 77%); 0.82 ng/mL between T1D and LADA (sensitivity 82%, specificity 77%); and 1.65 ng/mL between T2D and MODY (sensitivity 72%, specificity 72%).

CONCLUSIONS

C-peptide is useful for the diagnostic differentiation of patients with type 1, type 2 diabetes, MODY, and LADA.

Pediatric Type 2 Diabetes: Not a Mini Version of Adult Type 2 Diabetes

Pediatric type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is increasing in incidence, with risk factors including obesity, puberty, family history of T2DM in a first-degree or second-degree relative, history of small-for-gestational-age at birth, child of a gestational diabetes pregnancy, minority racial group, and lower socioeconomic status. The pathophysiology of T2DM consists of insulin resistance and progression to pancreatic beta-cell failure, which is more rapid in pediatric T2DM compared with adult T2DM. Treatment options are limited. Treatment failure and nonadherence rates are high in pediatric T2DM; therefore, early diagnosis and treatment and new pharmacologic options and/or effective behavioral interventions are needed.