Predicting and elucidating the etiology of fatty liver disease : A machine learning modeling and validation study in the IMI DIRECT cohorts

Background Non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) is highly prevalent and causes serious health complications in individuals with and without type 2 diabetes (T2D). Early diagnosis of NAFLD is important, as this can help prevent irreversible damage to the liver and, ultimately, hepatocellular carcinomas. We sought to expand etiological understanding and develop a diagnostic tool for NAFLD using machine learning. Methods and findings We utilized the baseline data from IMI DIRECT, a multicenter prospective cohort study of 3,029 European-ancestry adults recently diagnosed with T2D (n= 795) or at high risk of developing the disease (n= 2,234). Multi-omics (genetic, transcriptomic, proteomic, and metabolomic) and clinical (liver enzymes and other serological biomarkers, anthropometry, measures of beta-cell function, insulin sensitivity, and lifestyle) data comprised the key input variables. The models were trained on MRI-image-derived liver fat content (= 5%) available for 1,514 participants. We applied LASSO (least absolute shrinkage and selection operator) to select features from the different layers of omics data and random forest analysis to develop the models. The prediction models included clinical and omics variables separately or in combination. A model including all omics and clinical variables yielded a cross-validated receiver operating characteristic area under the curve (ROCAUC) of 0.84 (95% CI 0.82, 0.86;p = 5%) rather than a continuous one. Conclusions In this study, we developed several models with different combinations of clinical and omics data and identified biological features that appear to be associated with liver fat accumulation. In general, the clinical variables showed better prediction ability than the complex omics variables. However, the combination of omics and clinical variables yielded the highest accuracy. We have incorporated the developed clinical models into a web interface (see:) and made it available to the community.Peer reviewe

App-based COVID-19 syndromic surveillance and prediction of hospital admissions in COVID Symptom Study Sweden

The app-based COVID Symptom Study was launched in Sweden in April 2020 to contribute to real-time COVID-19 surveillance. We enrolled 143,531 study participants (≥18 years) who contributed 10.6 million daily symptom reports between April 29, 2020 and February 10, 2021. Here, we include data from 19,161 self-reported PCR tests to create a symptom-based model to estimate the individual probability of symptomatic COVID-19, with an AUC of 0.78 (95% CI 0.74–0.83) in an external dataset. These individual probabilities are employed to estimate daily regional COVID-19 prevalence, which are in turn used together with current hospital data to predict next week COVID-19 hospital admissions. We show that this hospital prediction model demonstrates a lower median absolute percentage error (MdAPE: 25.9%) across the five most populated regions in Sweden during the first pandemic wave than a model based on case notifications (MdAPE: 30.3%). During the second wave, the error rates are similar. When we apply the same model to an English dataset, not including local COVID-19 test data, we observe MdAPEs of 22.3% and 19.0% during the first and second pandemic waves, respectively, highlighting the transferability of the prediction model

Pharmacogenomics of GLP-1 receptor agonists: a genome-wide analysis of observational data and large randomised controlled trials

Background: In the treatment of type 2 diabetes, GLP-1 receptor agonists lower blood glucose concentrations, body weight, and have cardiovascular benefits. The efficacy and side effects of GLP-1 receptor agonists vary between people. Human pharmacogenomic studies of this inter-individual variation can provide both biological insight into drug action and provide biomarkers to inform clinical decision making. We therefore aimed to identify genetic variants associated with glycaemic response to GLP-1 receptor agonist treatment. Methods: In this genome-wide analysis we included adults (aged ≥18 years) with type 2 diabetes treated with GLP-1 receptor agonists with baseline HbA1c of 7% or more (53 mmol/mol) from four prospective observational cohorts (DIRECT, PRIBA, PROMASTER, and GoDARTS) and two randomised clinical trials (HARMONY phase 3 and AWARD). The primary endpoint was HbA1c reduction at 6 months after starting GLP-1 receptor agonists. We evaluated variants in GLP1R, then did a genome-wide association study and gene-based burden tests. Findings: 4571 adults were included in our analysis, of these, 3339 (73%) were White European, 449 (10%) Hispanic, 312 (7%) American Indian or Alaskan Native, and 471 (10%) were other, and around 2140 (47%) of the participants were women. Variation in HbA1c reduction with GLP-1 receptor agonists treatment was associated with rs6923761G→A (Gly168Ser) in the GLP1R (0·08% [95% CI 0·04–0·12] or 0·9 mmol/mol lower reduction in HbA1c per serine, p=6·0 × 10−5) and low frequency variants in ARRB1 (optimal sequence kernel association test p=6·7 × 10−8), largely driven by rs140226575G→A (Thr370Met; 0·25% [SE 0·06] or 2·7 mmol/mol [SE 0·7] greater HbA1c reduction per methionine, p=5·2 × 10−6). A similar effect size for the ARRB1 Thr370Met was seen in Hispanic and American Indian or Alaska Native populations who have a higher frequency of this variant (6–11%) than in White European populations. Combining these two genes identified 4% of the population who had a 30% greater reduction in HbA1c than the 9% of the population with the worse response. Interpretation: This genome-wide pharmacogenomic study of GLP-1 receptor agonists provides novel biological and clinical insights. Clinically, when genotype is routinely available at the point of prescribing, individuals with ARRB1 variants might benefit from earlier initiation of GLP-1 receptor agonists. Funding: Innovative Medicines Initiative and the Wellcome Trus

Replication and cross-validation of type 2 diabetes subtypes based on clinical variables: an IMI-RHAPSODY study

Aims/hypothesis Five clusters based on clinical characteristics have been suggested as diabetes subtypes: one autoimmune and four subtypes of type 2 diabetes. In the current study we replicate and cross-validate these type 2 diabetes clusters in three large cohorts using variables readily measured in the clinic.Methods In three independent cohorts, in total 15,940 individuals were clustered based on age, BMI, HbA(1c), random or fasting C-peptide, and HDL-cholesterol. Clusters were cross-validated against the original clusters based on HOMA measures. In addition, between cohorts, clusters were cross-validated by re-assigning people based on each cohort's cluster centres. Finally, we compared the time to insulin requirement for each cluster.Results Five distinct type 2 diabetes clusters were identified and mapped back to the original four All New Diabetics in Scania (ANDIS) clusters. Using C-peptide and HDL-cholesterol instead of HOMA2-B and HOMA2-IR, three of the clusters mapped with high sensitivity (80.6-90.7%) to the previously identified severe insulin-deficient diabetes (SIDD), severe insulin-resistant diabetes (SIRD) and mild obesity-related diabetes (MOD) clusters. The previously described ANDIS mild age-related diabetes (MARD) cluster could be mapped to the two milder groups in our study: one characterised by high HDL-cholesterol (mild diabetes with high HDL-cholesterol [MDH] cluster), and the other not having any extreme characteristic (mild diabetes [MD]). When these two milder groups were combined, they mapped well to the previously labelled MARD cluster (sensitivity 79.1%). In the cross-validation between cohorts, particularly the SIDD and MDH clusters cross-validated well, with sensitivities ranging from 73.3% to 97.1%. SIRD and MD showed a lower sensitivity, ranging from 36.1% to 92.3%, where individuals shifted from SIRD to MD and vice versa. People belonging to the SIDD cluster showed the fastest progression towards insulin requirement, while the MDH cluster showed the slowest progression.Conclusions/interpretation Clusters based on C-peptide instead of HOMA2 measures resemble those based on HOMA2 measures, especially for SIDD, SIRD and MOD. By adding HDL-cholesterol, the MARD cluster based upon HOMA2 measures resulted in the current clustering into two clusters, with one cluster having high HDL levels. Cross-validation between cohorts showed generally a good resemblance between cohorts. Together, our results show that the clustering based on clinical variables readily measured in the clinic (age, HbA(1c), HDL-cholesterol, BMI and C-peptide) results in informative clusters that are representative of the original ANDIS clusters and stable across cohorts. Adding HDL-cholesterol to the clustering resulted in the identification of a cluster with very slow glycaemic deterioration.Molecular Epidemiolog

Genotype-stratified treatment for monogenic insulin resistance: a systematic review

This is the final version. Available from Nature Research via the DOI in this record. Data availability: All data used in this review is available from publicly available and herein referenced sources. A list of included studies is provided in Supplementary Data 1. All data generated or analyzed during this study are included in this published article and its supplementary information files. Source data for the figures are available as Supplementary Data 2.BACKGROUND: Monogenic insulin resistance (IR) includes lipodystrophy and disorders of insulin signalling. We sought to assess the effects of interventions in monogenic IR, stratified by genetic aetiology. METHODS: Systematic review using PubMed, MEDLINE and Embase (1 January 1987 to 23 June 2021). Studies reporting individual-level effects of pharmacologic and/or surgical interventions in monogenic IR were eligible. Individual data were extracted and duplicates were removed. Outcomes were analysed for each gene and intervention, and in aggregate for partial, generalised and all lipodystrophy. RESULTS: 10 non-randomised experimental studies, 8 case series, and 23 case reports meet inclusion criteria, all rated as having moderate or serious risk of bias. Metreleptin use is associated with the lowering of triglycerides and haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) in all lipodystrophy (n = 111), partial (n = 71) and generalised lipodystrophy (n = 41), and in LMNA, PPARG, AGPAT2 or BSCL2 subgroups (n = 72,13,21 and 21 respectively). Body Mass Index (BMI) is lowered in partial and generalised lipodystrophy, and in LMNA or BSCL2, but not PPARG or AGPAT2 subgroups. Thiazolidinediones are associated with improved HbA1c and triglycerides in all lipodystrophy (n = 13), improved HbA1c in PPARG (n = 5), and improved triglycerides in LMNA (n = 7). In INSR-related IR, rhIGF-1, alone or with IGFBP3, is associated with improved HbA1c (n = 17). The small size or absence of other genotype-treatment combinations preclude firm conclusions. CONCLUSIONS: The evidence guiding genotype-specific treatment of monogenic IR is of low to very low quality. Metreleptin and Thiazolidinediones appear to improve metabolic markers in lipodystrophy, and rhIGF-1 appears to lower HbA1c in INSR-related IR. For other interventions, there is insufficient evidence to assess efficacy and risks in aggregated lipodystrophy or genetic subgroups.Wellcome TrustWellcome Trus

A global overview of precision medicine in type 2 diabetes

The detailed characterization of human biology and behaviors is now possible at scale owing to innovations in biomarker, bioimaging, and wearable technologies; ‘big data’ from electronic medical records, health insurance databases and other platforms is also becoming increasingly accessible, and computational power and bioinformatics methods are evolving rapidly. Collectively, these advances are creating unprecedented opportunities to better understanding diabetes and many other complex traits. Identifying hidden structures within these complex datasets and linking these structures to outcome data may yield unique insights into the risk factors and natural history of diabetes, which may in turn help optimize the prevention and management of the disease. This emerging area is broadly termed ‘precision medicine’. In this perspective, we overview the evidence and barriers to the development and implementation of precision medicine in type 2 diabetes. We also discuss recently presented paradigms through which complex data might enhance our understanding of diabetes and ultimately our ability to tackle the disease more effectively than ever before

Discovery of drug–omics associations in type 2 diabetes with generative deep-learning models

The application of multiple omics technologies in biomedical cohorts has the potential to reveal patient-level disease characteristics and individualized response to treatment. However, the scale and heterogeneous nature of multi-modal data makes integration and inference a non-trivial task. We developed a deep-learning-based framework, multi-omics variational autoencoders (MOVE), to integrate such data and applied it to a cohort of 789 people with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes with deep multi-omics phenotyping from the DIRECT consortium. Using in silico perturbations, we identified drug–omics associations across the multi-modal datasets for the 20 most prevalent drugs given to people with type 2 diabetes with substantially higher sensitivity than univariate statistical tests. From these, we among others, identified novel associations between metformin and the gut microbiota as well as opposite molecular responses for the two statins, simvastatin and atorvastatin. We used the associations to quantify drug–drug similarities, assess the degree of polypharmacy and conclude that drug effects are distributed across the multi-omics modalities. © 2023, The Author(s)

Distinct molecular signatures of clinical clusters in people with Type 2 diabetes: an IMIRHAPSODY study.

Type 2 diabetes is a multifactorial disease with multiple underlying aetiologies. To address this heterogeneity a previous study clustered people with diabetes into five diabetes subtypes. The aim of the current study is to investigate the aetiology of these clusters by comparing their molecular signatures. In three independent cohorts, in total 15,940 individuals were clustered based on five clinical characteristics. In a subset, genetic- (N=12828), metabolomic- (N=2945), lipidomic- (N=2593) and proteomic (N=1170) data were obtained in plasma. In each datatype each cluster was compared with the other four clusters as the reference. The insulin resistant cluster showed the most distinct molecular signature, with higher BCAAs, DAG and TAG levels and aberrant protein levels in plasma enriched for proteins in the intracellular PI3K/Akt pathway. The obese cluster showed higher cytokines. A subset of the mild diabetes cluster with high HDL showed the most beneficial molecular profile with opposite effects to those seen in the insulin resistant cluster. This study showed that clustering people with type 2 diabetes can identify underlying molecular mechanisms related to pancreatic islets, liver, and adipose tissue metabolism. This provides novel biological insights into the diverse aetiological processes that would not be evident when type 2 diabetes is viewed as a homogeneous disease

Aspirin and NSAID use and the risk of COVID-19

Early reports raised concern that use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) may increase risk of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) disease (COVID-19). Users of the COVID Symptom Study smartphone application reported use of aspirin and other NSAIDs between March 24 and May 8, 2020. Users were queried daily about symptoms, COVID-19 testing, and healthcare seeking behavior. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to determine the risk of COVID-19 among according to aspirin or non-aspirin NSAID users. Among 2,736,091 individuals in the U.S., U.K., and Sweden, we documented 8,966 incident reports of a positive COVID-19 test over 60,817,043 person-days of follow-up. Compared to non-users and after stratifying by age, sex, country, day of study entry, and race/ethnicity, non-aspirin NSAID use was associated with a modest risk for testing COVID-19 positive (HR 1.23 [1.09, 1.32]), but no significant association was observed among aspirin users (HR 1.13 [0.92, 1.38]). After adjustment for lifestyle factors, comorbidities and baseline symptoms, any NSAID use was not associated with risk (HR 1.02 [0.94, 1.10]). Results were similar for those seeking healthcare for COVID-19 and were not substantially different according to lifestyle and sociodemographic factors or after accounting for propensity to receive testing. Our results do not support an association of NSAID use, including aspirin, with COVID-19 infection. Previous reports of a potential association may be due to higher rates of comorbidities or use of NSAIDs to treat symptoms associated with COVID-19.One Sentence Summary NSAID use is not associated with COVID-19 risk.Competing Interest StatementJW, RD, and JC are employees of Zoe Global Ltd. TDS is a consultant to Zoe Global Ltd. DAD and ATC previously served as investigators on a clinical trial of diet and lifestyle using a separate mobile application that was supported by Zoe Global Ltd. Other authors have no conflict of interest to declare.Clinical TrialNCT04331509Funding StatementZoe provided in kind support for all aspects of building running and supporting the app and service to all users worldwide. DAD is supported by the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases K01DK120742. CGG is supported by the Bau Tsu Zung Bau Kwan Yeu Hing Research and Clinical Fellowship. LHN is supported by the American Gastroenterological Association Research Scholars Award. ATC is the Stuart and Suzanne Steele MGH Research Scholar and Stand Up to Cancer scientist. The Massachusetts Consortium on Pathogen Readiness (MassCPR) and Mark and Lisa Schwartz supported MGH investigators (DAD CGG LHN ADJ WM RSM CHL SK ATC). CMA is supported by the NIDDK K23 DK120899 and the Boston Childrens Hospital Office of Faculty Development Career Development Award. Kings College of London investigators (KAL MNL TV MSG CHS SO CJS TDS) were supported by the Wellcome Trust and EPSRC (WT212904/Z/18/Z WT203148/Z/16/Z T213038/Z/18/Z) the NIHR GSTT/KCL Biomedical Research Centre MRC/BHF (MR/M016560/1) UK Research and Innovation London Medical Imaging and Artificial Intelligence Centre for Value Based Healthcare and the Alzheimers Society (AS-JF-17-011). MNL is supported by an NIHR Doctoral Fellowship (NIHR300159). Work related to the Swedish elements of the study are supported by grants from the Swedish Research Council, Swedish Heart-Lung Foundation and the Swedish Foundation for Strategic Research (LUDC-IRC 15-0067). Sponsors had no role in study design analysis and interpretation of data report writing and the decision to submit for publication.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:Participants provided informed consent to the use of app data for research purposes and agreed to privacy policies and terms of use. This research study was approved by the Partners Human Research Committee IRB 2020P000909 Kings College London Ethics Committee REMAS ID 18210 Review Reference LRS-19/20-18210 and the central ethics committee in Sweden DNR 2020-01803All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesData collected in the app is being shared with other health researchers through the NHS-funded Health Data Research U.K. (HDRUK)/SAIL consortium, housed in the U.K. Secure Research Platform (UKSeRP) in Swansea. Anonymized data is available to be shared with bonafide researchers HDRUK according to their protocols (https://healthdatagateway.org/detail/9b604483-9cdc-41b2-b82c-14ee3dd705f6). U.S. investigators are encouraged to coordinate data requests through the COPE Consortium (www.monganinstitute.org/cope-consortium). Data updates can be found on https://covid.joinzoe.com