Who Is Enrolling? The Path to Monitoring in Type 1 Diabetes TrialNet's Pathway to Prevention

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.

Comparisons of Metabolic Measures to Predict T1D vs Detect a Preventive Treatment Effect in High-Risk Individuals

CONTEXT

Metabolic measures are frequently used to predict type 1 diabetes (T1D) and to understand effects of disease-modifying therapies.

OBJECTIVE

Compare metabolic endpoints for their ability to detect preventive treatment effects and predict T1D.

METHODS

Six-month changes in metabolic endpoints were assessed for (1) detecting treatment effects by comparing placebo and treatment arms from the randomized controlled teplizumab prevention trial, a multicenter clinical trial investigating 14-day intravenous teplizumab infusion and (2) predicting T1D in the TrialNet Pathway to Prevention natural history study. For each metabolic measure, t-Values from t tests for detecting a treatment effect were compared with chi-square values from proportional hazards regression for predicting T1D. Participants in the teplizumab prevention trial and participants in the Pathway to Prevention study selected with the same inclusion criteria used for the teplizumab trial were studied.

RESULTS

Six-month changes in glucose-based endpoints predicted diabetes better than C-peptide-based endpoints, yet the latter were better at detecting a teplizumab effect. Combined measures of glucose and C-peptide were more balanced than measures of glucose alone or C-peptide alone for predicting diabetes and detecting a teplizumab effect.

CONCLUSION

The capacity of a metabolic endpoint to detect a treatment effect does not necessarily correspond to its accuracy for predicting T1D. However, combined glucose and C-peptide endpoints appear to be effective for both predicting diabetes and detecting a response to immunotherapy. These findings suggest that combined glucose and C-peptide endpoints should be incorporated into the design of future T1D prevention trials.

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.

Teplizumab: promises and challenges of a recently approved monoclonal antibody for the prevention of type 1 diabetes or preservation of residual beta cell function

INTRODUCTION

Type 1 diabetes (T1D) is a chronic autoimmune endocrinopathy with increasing incidence that results in the depletion of pancreatic beta cells and exogenous insulin dependence. Despite technological advances in insulin delivery, disease control remains suboptimal, while previous immunotherapy options have failed to prevent T1D. Recently, teplizumab, an immunomodulating monoclonal antibody, was approved to delay or prevent T1D.

AREAS COVERED

Five randomized controlled trials have tested different regimens of administration, mostly 14-day schemes with dose escalation. In participants with new-onset T1D, teplizumab delayed C-peptide decline, improved glycemic control, and reduced insulin demand for a median of 1 or 2 years. Studies in at-risk relatives of patients showed a decrease in T1D incidence during 2 years of follow-up. Subgroups of responders with unique metabolic and immunological characteristics were identified. Mild to moderate adverse effects were reported, including transient rash, cytopenia, nausea, vomiting, and infections.

EXPERT OPINION

Teplizumab marks a turning point in T1D therapy. Areas of future research include the ideal population for screening, cost-effectiveness, and challenges in treatment accessibility. More studies are essential to evaluate the ideal duration of the regimen, the potential benefit of combinations with other drugs, and to identify endophenotypes with a high probability of response.

High proinsulin:C-peptide ratio identifies individuals with stage 2 type 1 diabetes at high risk for progression to clinical diagnosis and responses to teplizumab treatment

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS

Tractable precision biomarkers to identify immunotherapy responders are lacking in type 1 diabetes. We hypothesised that proinsulin:C-peptide (PI:C) ratios, a readout of beta cell stress, could provide insight into type 1 diabetes progression and responses to immunotherapy.

METHODS

In this post hoc analysis, proinsulin and C-peptide levels were determined in baseline serum samples from 63 participants with stage 2 type 1 diabetes in the longitudinal TrialNet Teplizumab Prevention Study (n=41 in the teplizumab arm; n=22 in the placebo arm). In addition, previously tested demographic, C-peptide, glucose and proinsulin data were used for the new data analyses. The ratio of intact (unprocessed) proinsulin to C-peptide was analysed and relationships with progression to stage 3 diabetes were investigated.

RESULTS

Elevated baseline PI:C was strongly associated with more rapid progression of diabetes in both the placebo and teplizumab treatment groups, but teplizumab abrogated the impact of high pre-treatment PI:C on type 1 diabetes progression. Differential responses of drug treatment in those with high vs low PI:C ratios were independent of treatment effects of teplizumab on the PI:C ratio or on relevant immune cells.

CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION

High pre-treatment PI:C identified individuals with stage 2 type 1 diabetes who were exhibiting rapid progression to stage 3 disease and who displayed benefit from teplizumab treatment. These data suggest that readouts of active disease, such as PI:C ratio, could serve to identify optimal candidates or timing for type 1 diabetes disease-modifying therapies.

Screening and Prevention of Type 1 Diabetes: Where Are We?

A diagnosis of type 1 diabetes (T1D) and the subsequent requirement for exogenous insulin treatment is associated with considerable acute and chronic morbidity and a substantial effect on patient quality of life. Importantly, a large body of work suggests that early identification of presymptomatic T1D can accurately predict clinical disease, and when paired with education and monitoring, can yield improved health outcomes. Furthermore, a growing cadre of effective disease-modifying therapies provides the potential to alter the natural history of early stages of T1D. In this mini review, we highlight prior work that has led to the current landscape of T1D screening and prevention, as well as challenges and next steps moving into the future of these rapidly evolving areas of patient care.

Disease-modifying therapies and features linked to treatment response in type 1 diabetes prevention: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Type 1 diabetes (T1D) results from immune-mediated destruction of insulin-producing beta cells. Prevention efforts have focused on immune modulation and supporting beta cell health before or around diagnosis; however, heterogeneity in disease progression and therapy response has limited translation to clinical practice, highlighting the need for precision medicine approaches to T1D disease modification.

METHODS

To understand the state of knowledge in this area, we performed a systematic review of randomized-controlled trials with ≥50 participants cataloged in PubMed or Embase from the past 25 years testing T1D disease-modifying therapies and/or identifying features linked to treatment response, analyzing bias using a Cochrane-risk-of-bias instrument.

RESULTS

We identify and summarize 75 manuscripts, 15 describing 11 prevention trials for individuals with increased risk for T1D, and 60 describing treatments aimed at preventing beta cell loss at disease onset. Seventeen interventions, mostly immunotherapies, show benefit compared to placebo (only two prior to T1D onset). Fifty-seven studies employ precision analyses to assess features linked to treatment response. Age, beta cell function measures, and immune phenotypes are most frequently tested. However, analyses are typically not prespecified, with inconsistent methods of reporting, and tend to report positive findings.

CONCLUSIONS

While the quality of prevention and intervention trials is overall high, the low quality of precision analyses makes it difficult to draw meaningful conclusions that inform clinical practice. To facilitate precision medicine approaches to T1D prevention, considerations for future precision studies include the incorporation of uniform outcome measures, reproducible biomarkers, and prespecified, fully powered precision analyses into future trial design.

Disease progression joint model predicts time to type 1 diabetes onset: Optimizing future type 1 diabetes prevention studies

Clinical trials seeking type 1 diabetes prevention are challenging in terms of identifying patient populations likely to progress to type 1 diabetes within limited (i.e., short-term) trial durations. Hence, we sought to improve such efforts by developing a quantitative disease progression model for type 1 diabetes. Individual-level data obtained from the TrialNet Pathway to Prevention and The Environmental Determinants of Diabetes in the Young natural history studies were used to develop a joint model that links the longitudinal glycemic measure to the timing of type 1 diabetes diagnosis. Baseline covariates were assessed using a stepwise covariate modeling approach. Our study focused on individuals at risk of developing type 1 diabetes with the presence of two or more diabetes-related autoantibodies (AAbs). The developed model successfully quantified how patient features measured at baseline, including HbA1c and the presence of different AAbs, alter the timing of type 1 diabetes diagnosis with reasonable accuracy and precision (<30% RSE). In addition, selected covariates were statistically significant (p < 0.0001 Wald test). The Weibull model best captured the timing to type 1 diabetes diagnosis. The 2-h oral glucose tolerance values assessed at each visit were included as a time-varying biomarker, which was best quantified using the sigmoid maximum effect function. This model provides a framework to quantitatively predict and simulate the time to type 1 diabetes diagnosis in individuals at risk of developing the disease and thus, aligns with the needs of pharmaceutical companies and scientists seeking to advance therapies aimed at interdicting the disease process.

Type 1 Diabetes Prevention: a systematic review of studies testing disease-modifying therapies and features linked to treatment response

Background

Type 1 diabetes (T1D) results from immune-mediated destruction of insulin-producing beta cells. Efforts to prevent T1D have focused on modulating immune responses and supporting beta cell health; however, heterogeneity in disease progression and responses to therapies have made these efforts difficult to translate to clinical practice, highlighting the need for precision medicine approaches to T1D prevention.

Methods

To understand the current state of knowledge regarding precision approaches to T1D prevention, we performed a systematic review of randomized-controlled trials from the past 25 years testing disease-modifying therapies in T1D and/or identifying features linked to treatment response, analyzing bias using a Cochrane-risk-of-bias instrument.

Results

We identified 75 manuscripts, 15 describing 11 prevention trials for individuals with increased risk for T1D, and 60 describing treatments aimed at preventing beta cell loss in individuals at disease onset. Seventeen agents tested, mostly immunotherapies, showed benefit compared to placebo (only two prior to T1D onset). Fifty-seven studies employed precision analyses to assess features linked to treatment response. Age, measures of beta cell function and immune phenotypes were most frequently tested. However, analyses were typically not prespecified, with inconsistent methods reporting, and tended to report positive findings.

Conclusions

While the quality of prevention and intervention trials was overall high, low quality of precision analyses made it difficult to draw meaningful conclusions that inform clinical practice. Thus, prespecified precision analyses should be incorporated into the design of future studies and reported in full to facilitate precision medicine approaches to T1D prevention.

Plain Language Summary

Type 1 diabetes (T1D) results from the destruction of insulin-producing cells in the pancreas, necessitating lifelong insulin dependence. T1D prevention remains an elusive goal, largely due to immense variability in disease progression. Agents tested to date in clinical trials work in a subset of individuals, highlighting the need for precision medicine approaches to prevention. We systematically reviewed clinical trials of disease-modifying therapy in T1D. While age, measures of beta cell function, and immune phenotypes were most commonly identified as factors that influenced treatment response, the overall quality of these studies was low. This review reveals an important need to proactively design clinical trials with well-defined analyses to ensure that results can be interpreted and applied to clinical practice.

CGM Metrics Identify Dysglycemic States in Participants From the TrialNet Pathway to Prevention Study

OBJECTIVE

Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) parameters may identify individuals at risk for progression to overt type 1 diabetes. We aimed to determine whether CGM metrics provide additional insights into progression to clinical stage 3 type 1 diabetes.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

One hundred five relatives of individuals in type 1 diabetes probands (median age 16.8 years; 89% non-Hispanic White; 43.8% female) from the TrialNet Pathway to Prevention study underwent 7-day CGM assessments and oral glucose tolerance tests (OGTTs) at 6-month intervals. The baseline data are reported here. Three groups were evaluated: individuals with 1) stage 2 type 1 diabetes (n = 42) with two or more diabetes-related autoantibodies and abnormal OGTT; 2) stage 1 type 1 diabetes (n = 53) with two or more diabetes-related autoantibodies and normal OGTT; and 3) negative test for all diabetes-related autoantibodies and normal OGTT (n = 10).

RESULTS

Multiple CGM metrics were associated with progression to stage 3 type 1 diabetes. Specifically, spending ≥5% time with glucose levels ≥140 mg/dL (P = 0.01), ≥8% time with glucose levels ≥140 mg/dL (P = 0.02), ≥5% time with glucose levels ≥160 mg/dL (P = 0.0001), and ≥8% time with glucose levels ≥160 mg/dL (P = 0.02) were all associated with progression to stage 3 disease. Stage 2 participants and those who progressed to stage 3 also exhibited higher mean daytime glucose values; spent more time with glucose values over 120, 140, and 160 mg/dL; and had greater variability.

CONCLUSIONS

CGM could aid in the identification of individuals, including those with a normal OGTT, who are likely to rapidly progress to stage 3 type 1 diabetes.

Barriers to Screening: An Analysis of Factors Impacting Screening for Type 1 Diabetes Prevention Trials

Context

Participants with stage 1 or 2 type 1 diabetes (T1D) qualify for prevention trials, but factors involved in screening for such trials are largely unknown.

Objective

To identify factors associated with screening for T1D prevention trials.

Methods

This study included TrialNet Pathway to Prevention participants who were eligible for a prevention trial: oral insulin (TN-07, TN-20), teplizumab (TN-10), abatacept (TN-18), and oral hydroxychloroquine (TN-22). Univariate and multivariate logistic regression models were used to examine participant, site, and study factors at the time of prevention trial accrual.

Results

Screening rates for trials were: 50% for TN-07 (584 screened/1172 eligible), 9% for TN-10 (106/1249), 24% for TN-18 (313/1285), 17% for TN-20 (113/667), and 28% for TN-22 (371/1336). Younger age and male sex were associated with higher screening rates for prevention trials overall and for oral therapies. Participants with an offspring with T1D showed lower rates of screening for all trials and oral drug trials compared with participants with other first-degree relatives as probands. Site factors, including larger monitoring volume and US site vs international site, were associated with higher prevention trial screening rates.

Conclusions

Clear differences exist between participants who screen for prevention trials and those who do not screen and between the research sites involved in prevention trial screening. Participant age, sex, and relationship to proband are significantly associated with prevention trial screening in addition to key site factors. Identifying these factors can facilitate strategic recruitment planning to support rapid and successful enrollment into prevention trials.

Evaluating T cell responses prior to the onset of type 1 diabetes

AIMS

In the current study we aimed to evaluat T cell phenotypes and metabolic profiles in high-risk individuals who progressed to type 1 diabetes compared to those remaining disease free.

METHODS

A Fluorspot assay was used to examine T cell responses to a panel of islet autoantigen peptides in samples obtained 6- and 30-months preceding disease onset and at the same timepoints in non-progressors.

RESULTS

We noted a significant increase in the magnitude of the proinflammatory interferon-γ response to proinsulin and insulin peptides in individuals who progressed to type 1 diabetes. In contrast, in the non-progressors, we observed an increase in the regulatory IL-10 response to proinsulin peptides. Furthermore, the T cell responses to the islet peptide panel predisposed towards a proinflammatory interferon-γ bias in the progressors.

CONCLUSIONS

Collectively, these data suggest that a proinflammatory T cell response is prevalent in high-risk individuals who progress to type 1 diabetes and can be detected up to 6 months prior to onset of disease. This observation, albeit in a small cohort, can potentially be harnessed in disease staging, particularly in identifying autoantibody-positive individuals transitioning from stage 2 (dysglycemia present and pre-symptomatic) to stage 3 (dysglycemia present and symptomatic). The detection of these different T cell phenotypes in progressors and non-progressors suggests the presence of disease endotypes.

Screening for Type 1 Diabetes in the General Population: A Status Report and Perspective

Most screening programs to identify individuals at risk for type 1 diabetes have targeted relatives of people living with the disease to improve yield and feasibility. However, ∼90% of those who develop type 1 diabetes do not have a family history. Recent successes in disease-modifying therapies to impact the course of early-stage disease have ignited the consideration of the need for and feasibility of population screening to identify those at increased risk. Existing population screening programs rely on genetic or autoantibody screening, and these have yielded significant information about disease progression and approaches for timing for screening in clinical practice. At the March 2021 Type 1 Diabetes TrialNet Steering Committee meeting, a session was held in which ongoing efforts for screening in the general population were discussed. This report reviews the background of these efforts and the details of those programs. Additionally, we present hurdles that need to be addressed for successful implementation of population screening and provide initial recommendations for individuals with positive screens so that standardized guidelines for monitoring and follow-up can be established.

Exocrine pancreas function is impaired in adult relatives of patients with type 1 diabetes

AIMS

Alterations of the exocrine pancreas have been reported in type 1 diabetes, but their contribution to the pathogenesis of the disease is poorly understood. Here, we investigated markers of exocrine pancreas dysfunction in individuals at-risk of developing type 1 diabetes.

METHODS

Serum P-amylase and lipase levels were assessed in samples obtained from healthy controls, patients with new onset type 1 diabetes, relatives participating to the TrialNet Pathway to Prevention who were, at blood collection, autoantibody negative or positive for a single autoantibody (low-risk individuals), and positive for multiple autoantibodies (high-risk individuals). Linear mixed models were adopted to estimate variation of pancreatic enzymes among the groups and to evaluate the influence of high-risk HLA genotypes and residual beta cell function on exocrine pancreas function.

RESULTS

In adults, but not children, reduced levels of P-amylase and lipase were shown in at-risk individuals, including (for P-amylase levels only) those at low-risk, and in T1Dnew. Furthermore, while high-risk HLA genotypes negatively affected P-amylase levels in autoantibody negative adult individuals, fasting C-peptide levels did not correlate with pancreatic enzyme levels.

CONCLUSIONS

Exocrine pancreas dysfunction precedes the onset of type 1 diabetes in adult at-risk individuals and may be unrelated to fasting C-peptide levels.

Circulating platelet-neutrophil aggregates characterize the development of type 1 diabetes in humans and NOD mice

Platelet-neutrophil aggregates (PNAs) facilitate neutrophil activation and migration and could underpin the recruitment of neutrophils to the pancreas during type 1 diabetes (T1D) pathogenesis. PNAs, measured by flow cytometry, were significantly elevated in the circulation of autoantibody-positive (Aab⁺) children and new-onset T1D children, as well as in pre-T1D (at 4 weeks and 10–12 weeks) and T1D-onset NOD mice, compared with relevant controls, and PNAs were characterized by activated P-selectin⁺ platelets. PNAs were similarly increased in pre-T1D and T1D-onset NOD isolated islets/insulitis, and immunofluorescence staining revealed increased islet-associated neutrophil extracellular trap (NET) products (myeloperoxidase [MPO] and citrullinated histones [CitH3]) in NOD pancreata. In vitro, cell-free histones and NETs induced islet cell damage, which was prevented by the small polyanionic drug methyl cellobiose sulfate (mCBS) that binds to histones and neutralizes their pathological effects. Elevated circulating PNAs could, therefore, act as an innate immune and pathogenic biomarker of T1D autoimmunity. Platelet hyperreactivity within PNAs appears to represent a previously unrecognized hematological abnormality that precedes T1D onset. In summary, PNAs could contribute to the pathogenesis of T1D and potentially function as a pre-T1D diagnostic.

How Do We Move Type 1 Diabetes Immunotherapies Forward During the Current COVID-19 Pandemic?

Research-based immunotherapy trials seeking to prevent or reverse a number of autoimmune diseases, including type 1 diabetes, have seen near universal suspension due to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Diabetes and hyperglycemia are now appreciated as significant risk factors for COVID-19 morbidity and mortality; however, the vast majority of studies have reported on adults. Recent data in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes suggest no increased risk of COVID-19. Even with immense appreciation for COVID-19 morbidity and mortality, we believe compelling arguments exist to carefully and thoughtfully resume certain type 1 diabetes phase 2-3 immunotherapy trials. In this Perspective, we consider the experience of trials that never halted or have resumed in the oncology and rheumatology fields, and advocate for staged type 1 diabetes immunotherapy trial resumption. With this, we present recommendations to achieve equipoise and mitigate risks for SARS-CoV-2 infection in the weeks surrounding infusion. Given the fact that the COVID-19 pandemic is expected to persist for some time, it is in the best interest of our patients that we find ways to safely move our field forward.

Typ-1-Diabetes: Früherkennung und Ansätze zur Prävention

Die Inzidenz des Typ-1-Diabetes nimmt zu, besonders bei Kleinkindern. Die Erkrankung kann effektiv bereits im asymptomatischen Frühstadium der Inselautoimmunität erkannt werden. Ein Screening ist nicht nur für Risikofamilien, sondern auch in bevölkerungsweiten Studien wie Fr1da^plus in Bayern möglich und sinnvoll. Komplikationen bei der Manifestation kann durch eine frühe Diagnosestellung vorgebeugt werden. Die Teilnahme an experimentellen Interventionen zur Verzögerung der Stadienprogression ist möglich. Unterschiedliche Ansätze zur sekundären Prävention werden verfolgt. Mit dem monoklonalen Antikörper Teplizumab gelang es erstmals, bei Patienten in Stadium 2 den Zeitpunkt der Manifestation hinauszuzögern. Säuglinge mit einem hohen Risiko für die Entwicklung eines Typ-1-Diabetes können durch genetisches Screening identifiziert werden. Bei der Primärprävention wird u. a. das Ziel verfolgt, das Entstehen der Autoimmunreaktion zu verhindern. In der POInT-Studie sollen bei Risikokindern durch frühe orale Exposition zu Insulin die Immuntoleranz verbessert und das Auftreten eines Frühstadiums verzögert oder verhindert werden.

Anknüpfend an das Leitthemenheft Früherkennung und präventive Behandlung des Typ-1-Diabetes dieser Zeitschrift von 2018 werden in diesem Beitrag ausgewählte Entwicklungen als Update der letzten 2 Jahre vorgestellt.

Failed Genetic Protection: Type 1 Diabetes in the Presence of HLA-DQB1*06:02

Certain HLA class II genes increase the risk for type 1 diabetes (T1D) development while others provide protection from disease development. HLA class II alleles encode MHC proteins on antigen-presenting cells, which function to present peptides and activate CD4 T cells. The DRB1*15:01 (DR15)-DQA1*01:02-DQB1*06:02 (DQ6) haplotype provides dominant protection across all stages of T1D and is a common haplotype found in Caucasians. However, it is present in <1% of people with T1D. Knowing which metabolic, immunologic, and genetic features are unique to individuals who fail genetic protection and develop T1D is important for defining the underlying mechanisms of DQB1*06:02-mediated protection. We describe a T1D cohort with DQB1*06:02 (n = 50) and compare them to individuals with T1D and without DQB1*06:02 (n = 2,759) who were identified over the last 26 years at the Barbara Davis Center for Diabetes. The age at diagnosis was similar between the cohorts and normally distributed throughout childhood and early adulthood. The average hemoglobin A_1c was 10.8 ± 2.8% (95 ± 7 mmol/mol) at diagnosis in those DQB1*06:02 positive. The majority of T1D DQB1*06:02 ⁺ individuals were positive for one or more islet autoantibodies; however, there was a greater proportion who were islet autoantibody negative compared with those T1D DQB1*06:02 ^- individuals. Interestingly, DQB1*03:02, which confers significant T1D risk, was present in only those DQB1*06:02 ⁺ individuals with islet autoantibodies. This is one of the largest studies examining patients presenting with clinical T1D in the presence of DQB1*06:02, which provides a population to study the mechanisms of failed genetic protection against T1D.