5 research outputs found
Dysglycemia and Index60 as Prediagnostic End Points for Type 1 Diabetes Prevention Trials
OBJECTIVE:
We assessed dysglycemia and a T1D Diagnostic Index60 (Index60) ≥1.00 (on the basis of fasting C-peptide, 60-min glucose, and 60-min C-peptide levels) as prediagnostic end points for type 1 diabetes among Type 1 Diabetes TrialNet Pathway to Prevention Study participants.
RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS:
Two cohorts were analyzed: 1) baseline normoglycemic oral glucose tolerance tests (OGTTs) with an incident dysglycemic OGTT and 2) baseline Index60 <1.00 OGTTs with an incident Index60 ≥1.00 OGTT. Incident dysglycemic OGTTs were divided into those with (DYS/IND+) and without (DYS/IND-) concomitant Index60 ≥1.00. Incident Index60 ≥1.00 OGTTs were divided into those with (IND/DYS+) and without (IND/DYS-) concomitant dysglycemia.
RESULTS:
The cumulative incidence for type 1 diabetes was greater after IND/DYS- than after DYS/IND- (P < 0.01). Within the normoglycemic cohort, the cumulative incidence of type 1 diabetes was higher after DYS/IND+ than after DYS/IND- (P < 0.001), whereas within the Index60 <1.00 cohort, the cumulative incidence after IND/DYS+ and after IND/DYS- did not differ significantly. Among nonprogressors, type 1 diabetes risk at the last OGTT was greater for IND/DYS- than for DYS/IND- (P < 0.001). Hazard ratios (HRs) of DYS/IND- with age and 30- to 0-min C-peptide were positive (P < 0.001 for both), whereas HRs of type 1 diabetes with these variables were inverse (P < 0.001 for both). In contrast, HRs of IND/DYS- and type 1 diabetes with age and 30- to 0-min C-peptide were consistent (all inverse [P < 0.01 for all]).
CONCLUSIONS:
The findings suggest that incident dysglycemia without Index60 ≥1.00 is a suboptimal prediagnostic end point for type 1 diabetes. Measures that include both glucose and C-peptide levels, such as Index60 ≥1.00, appear better suited as prediagnostic end points
Recommended from our members
The development, validation, and utility of the Diabetes Prevention Trial-Type 1 Risk Score (DPTRS)
This report details the development, validation, and utility of the Diabetes Prevention Trial-Type 1 (DPT-1) Risk Score (DPTRS) for type 1 diabetes (T1D). Proportional hazards regression was used to develop the DPTRS model which includes the glucose and C-peptide sums from oral glucose tolerance tests at 30, 60, 90, and 120 min, the log fasting C-peptide, age, and the log BMI. The DPTRS was externally validated in the TrialNet Natural History Study cohort (TNNHS). In a study of the application of the DPTRS, the findings showed that it could be used to identify normoglycemic individuals who were at a similar risk for T1D as those with dysglycemia. The DPTRS could also be used to identify lower risk dysglycemic individuals. Risk estimates of individuals deemed to be at higher risk according to DPTRS values did not differ significantly between the DPT-1 and the TNNHS; whereas, the risk estimates for those with dysglycemia were significantly higher in DPT-1. Individuals with very high DPTRS values were found to be at such marked risk for T1D that they could reasonably be considered to be in a pre-diabetic state. The findings indicate that the DPTRS has utility in T1D prevention trials and for identifying pre-diabetic individuals
Acceleration of the loss of the first-phase insulin response during the progression to type 1 diabetes in diabetes prevention trial-type 1 participants.
We studied the change in the first-phase insulin response (FPIR) during the progression to type 1 diabetes (T1D). Seventy-four oral insulin trial progressors to T1D from the Diabetes Prevention Trial-Type 1 with at least one FPIR measurement after baseline and before diagnosis were studied. The FPIR was examined longitudinally in 26 progressors who had FPIR measurements during each of the 3 years before diagnosis. The association between the change from the baseline FPIR to the last FPIR and time to diagnosis was studied in the remainder (n = 48). The 74 progressors had lower baseline FPIR values than nonprogressors (n = 270), with adjustments made for age and BMI. In the longitudinal analysis of the 26 progressors, there was a greater decline in the FPIR from 1.5 to 0.5 years before diagnosis than from 2.5 to 1.5 years before diagnosis. This accelerated decline was also evident in a regression analysis of the 48 remaining progressors in whom the rate of decline became more marked with the approaching diagnosis. The patterns of decline were similar between the longitudinal and regression analyses. There is an acceleration of decline in the FPIR during the progression to T1D, which becomes especially marked between 1.5 and 0.5 years before diagnosis
The development and utility of a novel scale that quantifies the glycemic progression toward type 1 diabetes over 6 months.
OBJECTIVE: We developed a scale to serve as a potential end point for 6-month glycemic progression (PS6M) toward type 1 diabetes (T1D) in autoantibody-positive relatives of individuals with T1D. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: The PS6M was developed from Diabetes Prevention Trial-Type 1 (DPT-1) data and tested in the TrialNet Pathway to Prevention Study (PTP). It is the difference between 6-month glucose sum values (30-120 min oral glucose tolerance test values) and values predicted for nonprogressors. RESULTS: The PS6M predicted T1D in the PTP (P 7.00 (P < 0.001 for all). CONCLUSIONS: The PS6M is an indicator of short-term glycemic progression to T1D that could be a useful tool for assessing preventive treatments and biomarkers
