Penetrance and expressivity of mitochondrial variants in a large clinically unselected population.

Whole genome sequencing (WGS) from large clinically unselected cohorts provides a unique opportunity to assess the penetrance and expressivity of rare and/or known pathogenic mitochondrial variants in population. Using WGS from 179 862 clinically unselected individuals from the UK Biobank, we performed extensive single and rare variant aggregation association analyses of 15 881 mtDNA variants and 73 known pathogenic variants with 15 mitochondrial disease-relevant phenotypes. We identified 12 homoplasmic and one heteroplasmic variant (m.3243A>G) with genome-wide significant associations in our clinically unselected cohort. Heteroplasmic m.3243A>G (MAF = 0.0002, a known pathogenic variant) was associated with diabetes, deafness and heart failure and 12 homoplasmic variants increased aspartate aminotransferase levels including three low-frequency variants (MAF ~0.002 and beta~0.3 SD). Most pathogenic mitochondrial disease variants (n = 66/74) were rare in the population (<1:9000). Aggregated or single variant analysis of pathogenic variants showed low penetrance in unselected settings for the relevant phenotypes, except m.3243A>G. Multi-system disease risk and penetrance of diabetes, deafness and heart failure greatly increased with m.3243A>G level ≥ 10%. The odds ratio of these traits increased from 5.61, 12.3 and 10.1 to 25.1, 55.0 and 39.5, respectively. Diabetes risk with m.3243A>G was further influenced by type 2 diabetes genetic risk. Our study of mitochondrial variation in a large-unselected population identified novel associations and demonstrated that pathogenic mitochondrial variants have lower penetrance in clinically unselected settings. m.3243A>G was an exception at higher heteroplasmy showing a significant impact on health making it a good candidate for incidental reporting.

Reduced penetrance of MODY-associated HNF1A/HNF4A variants but not GCK variants in clinically unselected cohorts.

The true prevalence and penetrance of monogenic disease variants are often not known because of clinical-referral ascertainment bias. We comprehensively assess the penetrance and prevalence of pathogenic variants in HNF1A, HNF4A, and GCK that account for >80% of monogenic diabetes. We analyzed clinical and genetic data from 1,742 clinically referred probands, 2,194 family members, clinically unselected individuals from a US health system-based cohort (n = 132,194), and a UK population-based cohort (n = 198,748). We show that one in 1,500 individuals harbor a pathogenic variant in one of these genes. The penetrance of diabetes for HNF1A and HNF4A pathogenic variants was substantially lower in the clinically unselected individuals compared to clinically referred probands and was dependent on the setting (32% in the population, 49% in the health system cohort, 86% in a family member, and 98% in probands for HNF1A). The relative risk of diabetes was similar across the clinically unselected cohorts highlighting the role of environment/other genetic factors. Surprisingly, the penetrance of pathogenic GCK variants was similar across all cohorts (89%-97%). We highlight that pathogenic variants in HNF1A, HNF4A, and GCK are not ultra-rare in the population. For HNF1A and HNF4A, we need to tailor genetic interpretation and counseling based on the setting in which a pathogenic monogenic variant was identified. GCK is an exception with near-complete penetrance in all settings. This along with the clinical implication of diagnosis makes it an excellent candidate for the American College of Medical Genetics secondary gene list.

Comparison of Bayesian approaches for developing prediction models in rare disease: application to the identification of patients with Maturity-Onset Diabetes of the Young.

BACKGROUND: Clinical prediction models can help identify high-risk patients and facilitate timely interventions. However, developing such models for rare diseases presents challenges due to the scarcity of affected patients for developing and calibrating models. Methods that pool information from multiple sources can help with these challenges. METHODS: We compared three approaches for developing clinical prediction models for population screening based on an example of discriminating a rare form of diabetes (Maturity-Onset Diabetes of the Young - MODY) in insulin-treated patients from the more common Type 1 diabetes (T1D). Two datasets were used: a case-control dataset (278 T1D, 177 MODY) and a population-representative dataset (1418 patients, 96 MODY tested with biomarker testing, 7 MODY positive). To build a population-level prediction model, we compared three methods for recalibrating models developed in case-control data. These were prevalence adjustment ("offset"), shrinkage recalibration in the population-level dataset ("recalibration"), and a refitting of the model to the population-level dataset ("re-estimation"). We then developed a Bayesian hierarchical mixture model combining shrinkage recalibration with additional informative biomarker information only available in the population-representative dataset. We developed a method for dealing with missing biomarker and outcome information using prior information from the literature and other data sources to ensure the clinical validity of predictions for certain biomarker combinations. RESULTS: The offset, re-estimation, and recalibration methods showed good calibration in the population-representative dataset. The offset and recalibration methods displayed the lowest predictive uncertainty due to borrowing information from the fitted case-control model. We demonstrate the potential of a mixture model for incorporating informative biomarkers, which significantly enhanced the model's predictive accuracy, reduced uncertainty, and showed higher stability in all ranges of predictive outcome probabilities. CONCLUSION: We have compared several approaches that could be used to develop prediction models for rare diseases. Our findings highlight the recalibration mixture model as the optimal strategy if a population-level dataset is available. This approach offers the flexibility to incorporate additional predictors and informed prior probabilities, contributing to enhanced prediction accuracy for rare diseases. It also allows predictions without these additional tests, providing additional information on whether a patient should undergo further biomarker testing before genetic testing.

The relationship between islet autoantibody status and the genetic risk of type 1 diabetes in adult-onset type 1 diabetes.

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: The reason for the observed lower rate of islet autoantibody positivity in clinician-diagnosed adult-onset vs childhood-onset type 1 diabetes is not known. We aimed to explore this by assessing the genetic risk of type 1 diabetes in autoantibody-negative and -positive children and adults. METHODS: We analysed GAD autoantibodies, insulinoma-2 antigen autoantibodies and zinc transporter-8 autoantibodies (ZnT8A) and measured type 1 diabetes genetic risk by genotyping 30 type 1 diabetes-associated variants at diagnosis in 1814 individuals with clinician-diagnosed type 1 diabetes (1112 adult-onset, 702 childhood-onset). We compared the overall type 1 diabetes genetic risk score (T1DGRS) and non-HLA and HLA (DR3-DQ2, DR4-DQ8 and DR15-DQ6) components with autoantibody status in those with adult-onset and childhood-onset diabetes. We also measured the T1DGRS in 1924 individuals with type 2 diabetes from the Wellcome Trust Case Control Consortium to represent non-autoimmune diabetes control participants. RESULTS: The T1DGRS was similar in autoantibody-negative and autoantibody-positive clinician-diagnosed childhood-onset type 1 diabetes (mean [SD] 0.274 [0.034] vs 0.277 [0.026], p=0.4). In contrast, the T1DGRS in autoantibody-negative adult-onset type 1 diabetes was lower than that in autoantibody-positive adult-onset type 1 diabetes (mean [SD] 0.243 [0.036] vs 0.271 [0.026], p<0.0001) but higher than that in type 2 diabetes (mean [SD] 0.229 [0.034], p<0.0001). Autoantibody-negative adults were more likely to have the more protective HLA DR15-DQ6 genotype (15% vs 3%, p<0.0001), were less likely to have the high-risk HLA DR3-DQ2/DR4-DQ8 genotype (6% vs 19%, p<0.0001) and had a lower non-HLA T1DGRS (p<0.0001) than autoantibody-positive adults. In contrast to children, autoantibody-negative adults were more likely to be male (75% vs 59%), had a higher BMI (27 vs 24 kg/m2) and were less likely to have other autoimmune conditions (2% vs 10%) than autoantibody-positive adults (all p<0.0001). In both adults and children, type 1 diabetes genetic risk was unaffected by the number of autoantibodies (p>0.3). These findings, along with the identification of seven misclassified adults with monogenic diabetes among autoantibody-negative adults and the results of a sensitivity analysis with and without measurement of ZnT8A, suggest that the intermediate type 1 diabetes genetic risk in autoantibody-negative adults is more likely to be explained by the inclusion of misclassified non-autoimmune diabetes (estimated to represent 67% of all antibody-negative adults, 95% CI 61%, 73%) than by the presence of unmeasured autoantibodies or by a discrete form of diabetes. When these estimated individuals with non-autoimmune diabetes were adjusted for, the prevalence of autoantibody positivity in adult-onset type 1 diabetes was similar to that in children (93% vs 91%, p=0.4). CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: The inclusion of non-autoimmune diabetes is the most likely explanation for the observed lower rate of autoantibody positivity in clinician-diagnosed adult-onset type 1 diabetes. Our data support the utility of islet autoantibody measurement in clinician-suspected adult-onset type 1 diabetes in routine clinical practice.

SavvyCNV: Genome-wide CNV calling from off-target reads.

Identifying copy number variants (CNVs) can provide diagnoses to patients and provide important biological insights into human health and disease. Current exome and targeted sequencing approaches cannot detect clinically and biologically-relevant CNVs outside their target area. We present SavvyCNV, a tool which uses off-target read data from exome and targeted sequencing data to call germline CNVs genome-wide. Up to 70% of sequencing reads from exome and targeted sequencing fall outside the targeted regions. We have developed a new tool, SavvyCNV, to exploit this 'free data' to call CNVs across the genome. We benchmarked SavvyCNV against five state-of-the-art CNV callers using truth sets generated from genome sequencing data and Multiplex Ligation-dependent Probe Amplification assays. SavvyCNV called CNVs with high precision and recall, outperforming the five other tools at calling CNVs genome-wide, using off-target or on-target reads from targeted panel and exome sequencing. We then applied SavvyCNV to clinical samples sequenced using a targeted panel and were able to call previously undetected clinically-relevant CNVs, highlighting the utility of this tool within the diagnostic setting. SavvyCNV outperforms existing tools for calling CNVs from off-target reads. It can call CNVs genome-wide from targeted panel and exome data, increasing the utility and diagnostic yield of these tests. SavvyCNV is freely available at https://github.com/rdemolgen/SavvySuite.

Congenital beta cell defects are not associated with markers of islet autoimmunity, even in the context of high genetic risk for type 1 diabetes.

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: A key unanswered question in type 1 diabetes is whether beta cells initiate their own destruction or are victims of an aberrant immune response (beta cell suicide or homicide?). To investigate this, we assessed islet autoantibodies in individuals with congenital beta cell defects causing neonatal diabetes mellitus (NDM). METHODS: We measured autoantibodies to GAD (GADA), islet antigen-2 (IA-2A) and zinc transporter 8 (ZnT8A) in 242 individuals with NDM (median age diagnosed 1.8 months [IQR 0.39-2.9 months]; median age collected 4.6 months [IQR 1.8-27.6 months]; median diabetes duration 2 months [IQR 0.6-23 months]), including 75 whose NDM resulted from severe beta cell endoplasmic reticulum (ER) stress. As a control cohort we also tested samples from 69 diabetes-free individuals (median age collected 9.9 months [IQR 9.0-48.6 months]) for autoantibodies. RESULTS: We found low prevalence of islet autoantibodies in individuals with monogenic NDM; 13/242 (5.4% [95% CI 2.9, 9.0%]) had detectable GADA, IA-2A and/or ZnT8A. This was similar to the proportion in the control participants who did not have diabetes (1/69 positive [1.4%, 95% CI 0.03, 7.8%], p=0.3). Importantly, monogenic individuals with beta cell ER stress had a similar rate of GADA/IA-2A/ZnT8A positivity to non-ER stress aetiologies (2.7% [95% CI 0.3, 9.3%] vs 6.6% [95% CI 3.3, 11.5%] p=0.4). We observed no association between islet autoimmunity and genetic risk, age at testing (including 30 individuals >10 years at testing) or diabetes duration (p>0.4 for all). CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: Our data support the hypothesis that beta cell stress/dysfunction alone does not lead to the production of islet autoantibodies, even in the context of high-risk HLA types. This suggests that additional factors are required to trigger an autoimmune response towards beta cells.

Systematic genetic testing for recessively inherited monogenic diabetes: a cross-sectional study in paediatric diabetes clinics.

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: Current clinical guidelines for childhood-onset monogenic diabetes outside infancy are mainly focused on identifying and testing for dominantly inherited, predominantly MODY genes. There are no systematic studies of the recessively inherited causes of monogenic diabetes that are likely to be more common in populations with high rates of consanguinity. We aimed to determine the contribution of recessive causes of monogenic diabetes in paediatric diabetes clinics and to identify clinical criteria by which to select individuals for recessive monogenic diabetes testing. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional study of 1093 children from seven paediatric diabetes clinics across Turkey (a population with high rates of consanguinity). We undertook genetic testing of 50 known dominant and recessive causes of monogenic diabetes for 236 children at low risk of type 1 diabetes. As a comparison, we used monogenic diabetes cases from UK paediatric diabetes clinics (a population with low rates of consanguinity). RESULTS: Thirty-four children in the Turkish cohort had monogenic diabetes, equating to a minimal prevalence of 3.1%, similar to that in the UK cohort (p = 0.40). Forty-one per cent (14/34) had autosomal recessive causes in contrast to 1.6% (2/122) in the UK monogenic diabetes cohort (p < 0.0001). All conventional criteria for identifying monogenic diabetes (parental diabetes, not requiring insulin treatment, HbA1c ≤ 58 mmol/mol [≤7.5%] and a composite clinical probability of MODY >10%) assisted the identification of the dominant (all p ≤ 0.0003) but not recessive cases (all p ≥ 0.2) in Turkey. The presence of certain non-autoimmune extra-pancreatic features greatly assisted the identification of recessive (p < 0.0001, OR 66.9) but not dominant cases. CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: Recessively inherited mutations are a common cause of monogenic diabetes in populations with high rates of consanguinity. Present MODY-focused genetic testing strategies do not identify affected individuals. To detect all cases of monogenic paediatric diabetes, it is crucial that recessive genes are included in genetic panels and that children are selected for testing if they have certain non-autoimmune extra-pancreatic features in addition to current criteria.

DR15-DQ6 remains dominantly protective against type 1 diabetes throughout the first five decades of life.

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: Among white European children developing type 1 diabetes, the otherwise common HLA haplotype DR15-DQ6 is rare, and highly protective. Adult-onset type 1 diabetes is now known to represent more overall cases than childhood onset, but it is not known whether DR15-DQ6 is protective in older-adult-onset type 1 diabetes. We sought to quantify DR15-DQ6 protection against type 1 diabetes as age of onset increased. METHODS: In two independent cohorts we assessed the proportion of type 1 diabetes cases presenting through the first 50 years of life with DR15-DQ6, compared with population controls. In the After Diabetes Diagnosis Research Support System-2 (ADDRESS-2) cohort (n = 1458) clinician-diagnosed type 1 diabetes was confirmed by positivity for one or more islet-specific autoantibodies. In UK Biobank (n = 2502), we estimated type 1 diabetes incidence rates relative to baseline HLA risk for each HLA group using Poisson regression. Analyses were restricted to white Europeans and were performed in three groups according to age at type 1 diabetes onset: 0-18 years, 19-30 years and 31-50 years. RESULTS: DR15-DQ6 was protective against type 1 diabetes through to age 50 years (OR < 1 for each age group, all p < 0.001). The following ORs for type 1 diabetes, relative to a neutral HLA genotype, were observed in ADDRESS-2: age 5-18 years OR 0.16 (95% CI 0.08, 0.31); age 19-30 years OR 0.10 (0.04, 0.23); and age 31-50 years OR 0.37 (0.21, 0.68). DR15-DQ6 also remained highly protective at all ages in UK Biobank. Without DR15-DQ6, the presence of major type 1 diabetes high-risk haplotype (either DR3-DQ2 or DR4-DQ8) was associated with increased risk of type 1 diabetes. CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: HLA DR15-DQ6 confers dominant protection from type 1 diabetes across the first five decades of life.

Type 1 diabetes can present before the age of 6 months and is characterised by autoimmunity and rapid loss of beta cells.

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: Diabetes diagnosed at <6 months of age is usually monogenic. However, 10-15% of affected infants do not have a pathogenic variant in one of the 26 known neonatal diabetes genes. We characterised infants diagnosed at <6 months of age without a pathogenic variant to assess whether polygenic type 1 diabetes could arise at early ages. METHODS: We studied 166 infants diagnosed with type 1 diabetes at <6 months of age in whom pathogenic variants in all 26 known genes had been excluded and compared them with infants with monogenic neonatal diabetes (n = 164) or children with type 1 diabetes diagnosed at 6-24 months of age (n = 152). We assessed the type 1 diabetes genetic risk score (T1D-GRS), islet autoantibodies, C-peptide and clinical features. RESULTS: We found an excess of infants with high T1D-GRS: 38% (63/166) had a T1D-GRS >95th centile of healthy individuals, whereas 5% (8/166) would be expected if all were monogenic (p < 0.0001). Individuals with a high T1D-GRS had a similar rate of autoantibody positivity to that seen in individuals with type 1 diabetes diagnosed at 6-24 months of age (41% vs 58%, p = 0.2), and had markedly reduced C-peptide levels (median <3 pmol/l within 1 year of diagnosis), reflecting rapid loss of insulin secretion. These individuals also had reduced birthweights (median z score -0.89), which were lowest in those diagnosed with type 1 diabetes at <3 months of age (median z score -1.98). CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: We provide strong evidence that type 1 diabetes can present before the age of 6 months based on individuals with this extremely early-onset diabetes subtype having the classic features of childhood type 1 diabetes: high genetic risk, autoimmunity and rapid beta cell loss. The early-onset association with reduced birthweight raises the possibility that for some individuals there was reduced insulin secretion in utero. Comprehensive genetic testing for all neonatal diabetes genes remains essential for all individuals diagnosed with diabetes at <6 months of age. Graphical abstract.

Utility of systematic TSHR gene testing in adults with hyperthyroidism lacking overt autoimmunity and diffuse uptake on thyroid scintigraphy.

OBJECTIVE: Patients with hyperthyroidism lacking autoimmune features but showing diffuse uptake on thyroid scintigram can have either Graves' disease or germline activating TSH receptor (TSHR) mutation. It is important to identify patients with activating TSHR mutation due to treatment implication, but the overlapping clinical features with Graves' disease make it difficult to discriminate these two conditions without genetic testing. Our study aimed to assess the potential of systematic TSHR mutation screening in adults with hyperthyroidism, showing diffuse uptake on thyroid scintigraphy but absence of TSH receptor antibodies (TRAb) and clinical signs of autoimmunity. DESIGN: A cross-sectional study of Caucasian adults with hyperthyroidism, managed at three endocrine centres in the South West, UK, from January 2006 to April 2017. METHODS: We recruited 78 adult Caucasian patients with hyperthyroidism showing diffuse uptake on 99m Tc-pertechnetate thyroid scintigraphy but without TRAb and other autoimmune clinical features of Graves' disease (such as thyroid-associated ophthalmopathy or dermopathy). Genomic DNA of these patients was analysed for variants in the TSHR gene. RESULTS: Genetic analysis identified 11 patients with four variants in TSHR [p.(Glu34Lys), p.(Asp36His), p.(Pro52Thr) and p.(Ile334Thr)]. None of these variants were pathogenic according to the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics guideline. CONCLUSIONS: Activating TSHR mutations are a rare cause of nonautoimmune adult hyperthyroidism. Our study does not support the routine genetic testing in adult patients with hyperthyroidism showing diffuse uptake on scintigraphy but negative TRAb and lacking extrathyroidal manifestations of Graves' disease.

A type 1 diabetes genetic risk score can discriminate monogenic autoimmunity with diabetes from early-onset clustering of polygenic autoimmunity with diabetes.

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: Identifying individuals suitable for monogenic autoimmunity testing and gene discovery studies is challenging: early-onset type 1 diabetes mellitus can cluster with additional autoimmune diseases due to shared polygenic risk and islet- and other organ-specific autoantibodies are present in both monogenic and polygenic aetiologies. We aimed to assess whether a type 1 diabetes genetic risk score (GRS) could identify monogenic autoimmune diabetes and be useful to prioritise individuals for gene discovery studies. METHODS: We studied 79 individuals with diabetes and at least one additional autoimmune disease diagnosed before the age of 5 years. We screened all participants for the seven genes known to cause monogenic autoimmunity that can include diabetes (AIRE, IL2RA, FOXP3, LRBA, STAT1, STAT3, STAT5B). We genotyped the top ten risk alleles for type 1 diabetes, including HLA and non-HLA loci, to generate a type 1 diabetes GRS. RESULTS: Of the 79 individuals studied, 37 (47%) had mutations in the monogenic autoimmunity genes. The type 1 diabetes GRS was lower in these individuals than in those without mutations in these genes (median 9th vs 49th centile of type 1 diabetes controls, p < 0.0001). Age of diabetes diagnosis and type 1 diabetes GRS combined to be highly discriminatory of monogenic autoimmunity (receiver operating characteristic AUC: 0.88). Most individuals without a mutation in a known gene had a high type 1 diabetes GRS, suggesting that they have polygenic clustering of type 1 diabetes and additional autoimmunity and should not be included in gene discovery studies. CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: We have shown that the type 1 diabetes GRS can identify individuals likely to have monogenic autoimmunity, helping both diagnostic testing and novel monogenic autoimmunity gene discovery. Individuals with monogenic autoimmunity have a different clinical course to those with polygenic type 1 diabetes and can respond well to therapies targeting the underlying genetic defect.

A UK nationwide prospective study of treatment change in MODY: genetic subtype and clinical characteristics predict optimal glycaemic control after discontinuing insulin and metformin.

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: Treatment change following a genetic diagnosis of MODY is frequently indicated, but little is known about the factors predicting future treatment success. We therefore conducted the first prospective study to determine the impact of a genetic diagnosis on individuals with GCK-, HNF1A- or HNF4A-MODY in the UK, and to identify clinical characteristics predicting treatment success (i.e. HbA1c ≤58 mmol/mol [≤7.5%]) with the recommended treatment at 2 years. METHODS: This was an observational, prospective, non-selective study of individuals referred to the Exeter Molecular Genetic Laboratory for genetic testing from December 2010 to December 2012. Individuals from the UK with GCK- or HNF1A/HNF4A-MODY who were not on recommended treatment at the time of genetic diagnosis, and who were diagnosed below the age of 30 years and were currently aged less than 50 years, were eligible to participate. RESULTS: A total of 44 of 58 individuals (75.9%) changed treatment following their genetic diagnosis. Eight individuals diagnosed with GCK-MODY stopped all diabetes medication without experiencing any change in HbA1c (49.5 mmol/mol [6.6%] both before the genetic diagnosis and at a median of 1.25 years' follow-up without treatment, p = 0.88). A total of 36 of 49 individuals (73.5%) diagnosed with HNF1A/HNF4A-MODY changed treatment; however, of the 21 of these individuals who were being managed with diet or sulfonylurea alone at 2 years, only 13 (36.1% of the population that changed treatment) had an HbA1c ≤58 mmol/mol (≤7.5%). These individuals had a shorter diabetes duration (median 4.6 vs 18.1 years), lower HbA1c (58 vs 73 mmol/mol [7.5% vs 8.8%]) and lower BMI (median 24.2 vs 26.0 kg/m2) at the time of genetic diagnosis, compared with individuals (n = 23/36) with an HbA1c >58 mmol/mol (>7.5%) (or <58 mmol/mol [<7.5%] on additional treatment) at the 2 year follow-up. Overall, 64% (7/11) individuals with a diabetes duration of ≤11 years and an HbA1c of ≤69 mmol/mol (≤8.5%) at time of the genetic test achieved good glycaemic control (HbA1c ≤58 mmol/mol [≤7.5%]) with diet or sulfonylurea alone at 2 years, compared with no participants with a diabetes duration of >11 years and an HbA1c of >69 mmol/mol (>8.5%) at the time of genetic diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: In participants with GCK-MODY, treatment cessation was universally successful, with no change in HbA1c at follow-up. In those with HNF1A/HNF4A-MODY, a shorter diabetes duration, lower HbA1c and lower BMI at genetic diagnosis predicted successful treatment with sulfonylurea/diet alone, supporting the need for early genetic diagnosis and treatment change. Our study suggests that, in individuals with HNF1A/HNF4A-MODY with a longer duration of diabetes (>11 years) at time of genetic test, rather than ceasing current treatment, a sulfonylurea should be added to existing therapy, particularly in those who are overweight or obese and have a high HbA1c.

Precision diabetes: learning from monogenic diabetes.

The precision medicine approach of tailoring treatment to the individual characteristics of each patient or subgroup has been a great success in monogenic diabetes subtypes, MODY and neonatal diabetes. This review examines what has led to the success of a precision medicine approach in monogenic diabetes (precision diabetes) and outlines possible implications for type 2 diabetes. For monogenic diabetes, the molecular genetics can define discrete aetiological subtypes that have profound implications on diabetes treatment and can predict future development of associated clinical features, allowing early preventative or supportive treatment. In contrast, type 2 diabetes has overlapping polygenic susceptibility and underlying aetiologies, making it difficult to define discrete clinical subtypes with a dramatic implication for treatment. The implementation of precision medicine in neonatal diabetes was simple and rapid as it was based on single clinical criteria (diagnosed <6 months of age). In contrast, in MODY it was more complex and slow because of the lack of single criteria to identify patients, but it was greatly assisted by the development of a diagnostic probability calculator and associated smartphone app. Experience in monogenic diabetes suggests that successful adoption of a precision diabetes approach in type 2 diabetes will require simple, quick, easily accessible stratification that is based on a combination of routine clinical data, rather than relying on newer technologies. Analysing existing clinical data from routine clinical practice and trials may provide early success for precision medicine in type 2 diabetes.

Guidance for estimating penetrance of monogenic disease-causing variants in population cohorts.

Penetrance is the probability that an individual with a pathogenic genetic variant develops a specific disease. Knowing the penetrance of variants for monogenic disorders is important for counseling of individuals. Until recently, estimates of penetrance have largely relied on affected individuals and their at-risk family members being clinically referred for genetic testing, a 'phenotype-first' approach. This approach substantially overestimates the penetrance of variants because of ascertainment bias. The recent availability of whole-genome sequencing data in individuals from very-large-scale population-based cohorts now allows 'genotype-first' estimates of penetrance for many conditions. Although this type of population-based study can underestimate penetrance owing to recruitment biases, it provides more accurate estimates of penetrance for secondary or incidental findings. Here, we provide guidance for the conduct of penetrance studies to ensure that robust genotypes and phenotypes are used to accurately estimate penetrance of variants and groups of similarly annotated variants from population-based studies.

Precision treatment of beta-cell monogenic diabetes: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Beta-cell monogenic forms of diabetes have strong support for precision medicine. We systematically analyzed evidence for precision treatments for GCK-related hyperglycemia, HNF1A-, HNF4A- and HNF1B-diabetes, and mitochondrial diabetes (MD) due to m.3243 A > G variant, 6q24-transient neonatal diabetes mellitus (TND) and SLC19A2-diabetes. METHODS: The search of PubMed, MEDLINE, and Embase for individual and group level data for glycemic outcomes using inclusion (English, original articles written after 1992) and exclusion (VUS, multiple diabetes types, absent/aggregated treatment effect measures) criteria. The risk of bias was assessed using NHLBI study-quality assessment tools. Data extracted from Covidence were summarized and presented as descriptive statistics in tables and text. RESULTS: There are 146 studies included, with only six being experimental studies. For GCK-related hyperglycemia, the six studies (35 individuals) assessing therapy discontinuation show no HbA1c deterioration. A randomized trial (18 individuals per group) shows that sulfonylureas (SU) were more effective in HNF1A-diabetes than in type 2 diabetes. Cohort and case studies support SU's effectiveness in lowering HbA1c. Two cross-over trials (each with 15-16 individuals) suggest glinides and GLP-1 receptor agonists might be used in place of SU. Evidence for HNF4A-diabetes is limited. Most reported patients with HNF1B-diabetes (N = 293) and MD (N = 233) are on insulin without treatment studies. Limited data support oral agents after relapse in 6q24-TND and for thiamine improving glycemic control and reducing/eliminating insulin requirement in SLC19A2-diabetes. CONCLUSION: There is limited evidence, and with moderate or serious risk of bias, to guide monogenic diabetes treatment. Further evidence is needed to examine the optimum treatment in monogenic subtypes.

Monogenic diabetes is a type of diabetes caused by changes in genes that affect how the body makes or responds to insulin. Precision medicine (where knowledge of the gene change directs the selection of treatment) is available for some forms of monogenic diabetes. This study evaluated the published literature for several forms of monogenic diabetes to assess the level of evidence supporting specific precision treatments. Among the 146 small studies that we reviewed, only six compared different treatments. However, we found evidence supporting oral medications for some types of monogenic diabetes, and evidence that treatment is not needed for one particular type. Based on our results, we provide treatment recommendations for certain forms of monogenic diabetes and identify future directions for research to help us optimize precision medicine in monogenic diabetes.

Rare variant associations with birth weight identify genes involved in adipose tissue regulation, placental function and insulin-like growth factor signalling.

Investigating the genetic factors influencing human birth weight may lead to biological insights into fetal growth and long-term health. Genome-wide association studies of birth weight have highlighted associated variants in more than 200 regions of the genome, but the causal genes are mostly unknown. Rare genetic variants with robust evidence of association are more likely to point to causal genes, but to date, only a few rare variants are known to influence birth weight. We aimed to identify genes that harbour rare variants that impact birth weight when carried by either the fetus or the mother, by analysing whole exome sequence data in UK Biobank participants. We annotated rare (minor allele frequency <0.1%) protein-truncating or high impact missense variants on whole exome sequence data in up to 234,675 participants with data on their own birth weight (fetal variants), and up to 181,883 mothers who reported the birth weight of their first child (maternal variants). Variants within each gene were collapsed to perform gene burden tests and for each associated gene, we compared the observed fetal and maternal effects. We identified 8 genes with evidence of rare fetal variant effects on birth weight, of which 2 also showed maternal effects. One additional gene showed evidence of maternal effects only. We observed 10/11 directionally concordant associations in an independent sample of up to 45,622 individuals (sign test P=0.01). Of the genes identified, IGF1R and PAPPA2 (fetal and maternal-acting) have known roles in insulin-like growth factor bioavailability and signalling. PPARG, INHBE and ACVR1C (all fetal-acting) have known roles in adipose tissue regulation and rare variants in the latter two also showed associations with favourable adiposity patterns in adults. We highlight the dual role of PPARG in both adipocyte differentiation and placental angiogenesis. NOS3, NRK, and ADAMTS8 (fetal and maternal-acting) have been implicated in both placental function and hypertension. Analysis of rare coding variants has identified regulators of fetal adipose tissue and fetoplacental angiogenesis as determinants of birth weight, as well as further evidence for the role of insulin-like growth factors.

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

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.

The hormone insulin stimulates nutrient uptake from the bloodstream into tissues. In insulin resistance (IR), this action is blunted. Some rare gene alterations cause severe IR, diabetes that is difficult to control, and early complications. Many treatments have been suggested, but reliable evidence of their risks and benefits is sparse. We analysed all available reports describing treatment outcomes in severe IR. We found that the evidence is of low to very low quality overall. Injections of leptin, a hormone from fat tissue, or thiazolidinedione tablets that increase fat tissue both appear to improve diabetes control in people with reduced ability to make fat tissue. Injections of another treatment, insulin-like growth factor, appear to improve diabetes control in people with direct blockage of insulin action. There is a pressing need to improve evidence for treatment in these rare and severe conditions.