HOMA-IR and the Matsuda Index as predictors of progression to type 1 diabetes in autoantibody-positive relatives.

AIM/HYPOTHESIS: We assessed whether HOMA-IR and the Matsuda Index are associated with transitions through stages of type 1 diabetes. METHODS: Autoantibody (AAb)-positive relatives of individuals with type 1 diabetes (n=6256) from the TrialNet Pathway to Prevention were studied. Associations of indicators of insulin resistance (HOMA-IR) and insulin sensitivity (Matsuda Index) with BMI percentile (BMIp) and age were assessed with adjustments for measures of insulin secretion, Index60 and insulinogenic index (IGI). Cox regression was used to determine if tertiles of HOMA-IR and Matsuda Index predicted transitions from Not Staged (<2 AAbs) to Stage 1 (≥2 AAbs and normoglycaemia), from Stage 1 to Stage 2 (≥2 AAbs with dysglycaemia), and progression to Stage 3 (diabetes as defined by WHO/ADA criteria). RESULTS: There were strong associations of HOMA-IR (positive) and Matsuda Index (inverse) with baseline age and BMIp (p<0.0001). After adjustments for Index60, transitioning from Stage 1 to Stage 2 was associated with higher HOMA-IR and lower Matsuda Index (HOMA-IR: HR=1.71, p<0.0001; Matsuda Index, HR=0.40, p<0.0001), as with progressing from Stages 1 or 2 to Stage 3 (HOMA-IR: HR=1.98, p<0.0001; Matsuda Index: HR=0.46, p<0.0001). Without adjustments, associations of progression to Stage 3 were inverse for HOMA-IR and positive for Matsuda Index, opposite in directionality with adjustments. When IGI was used in place of Index60, the findings were similar. CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: Progression to Stages 2 and 3 of type 1 diabetes increases with HOMA-IR and decreases with the Matsuda Index after adjustments for insulin secretion. Indicators of insulin secretion appear helpful for interpreting associations of progression to type 1 diabetes with HOMA-IR or the Matsuda Index in AAb-positive relatives.

HOMA2-B enhances assessment of type 1 diabetes risk among TrialNet Pathway to Prevention participants.

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: Methods to identify individuals at highest risk for type 1 diabetes are essential for the successful implementation of disease-modifying interventions. Simple metabolic measures are needed to help stratify autoantibody-positive (Aab+) individuals who are at risk of developing type 1 diabetes. HOMA2-B is a validated mathematical tool commonly used to estimate beta cell function in type 2 diabetes using fasting glucose and insulin. The utility of HOMA2-B in association with type 1 diabetes progression has not been tested. METHODS: Baseline HOMA2-B values from single-Aab+ (n = 2652; mean age, 21.1 ± 14.0 years) and multiple-Aab+ (n = 3794; mean age, 14.5 ± 11.2 years) individuals enrolled in the TrialNet Pathway to Prevention study were compared. Cox proportional hazard models were used to determine associations between HOMA2-B tertiles and time to progression to type 1 diabetes, with adjustments for age, sex, HLA status and BMI z score. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis was used to test the association of HOMA2-B with type 1 diabetes development in 1, 2, 5 and 10 years. RESULTS: At study entry, HOMA2-B values were higher in single- compared with multiple-Aab+ Pathway to Prevention participants (91.1 ± 44.5 vs 83.9 ± 38.9; p < 0.001). Single- and multiple-Aab+ individuals in the lowest HOMA2-B tertile had a higher risk and faster rate of progression to type 1 diabetes. For progression to type 1 diabetes within 1 year, area under the ROC curve (AUC-ROC) was 0.685, 0.666 and 0.680 for all Aab+, single-Aab+ and multiple-Aab+ individuals, respectively. When correlation between HOMA2-B and type 1 diabetes risk was assessed in combination with additional factors known to influence type 1 diabetes progression (insulin sensitivity, age and HLA status), AUC-ROC was highest for the single-Aab+ group's risk of progression at 2 years (AUC-ROC 0.723 [95% CI 0.652, 0.794]). CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: These data suggest that HOMA2-B may have utility as a single-time-point measurement to stratify risk of type 1 diabetes development in Aab+ individuals.

Index60 as an additional diagnostic criterion for type 1 diabetes.

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: We aimed to compare characteristics of individuals identified in the peri-diagnostic range by Index60 (composite glucose and C-peptide measure) ≥2.00, 2 h OGTT glucose ≥11.1 mmol/l, or both. METHODS: We studied autoantibody-positive participants in the Type 1 Diabetes TrialNet Pathway to Prevention study who, at their baseline OGTT, had 2 h blood glucose ≥11.1 mmol/l and/or Index60 ≥2.00 (n = 354, median age = 11.2 years, age range = 1.7-46.6; 49% male, 83% non-Hispanic White). Type 1 diabetes-relevant characteristics (e.g., age, C-peptide, autoantibodies, BMI) were compared among three mutually exclusive groups: 2 h glucose ≥11.1 mmol/l and Index60 <2.00 [Glu(+), n = 76], 2 h glucose <11.1 mmol/l and Index60 ≥2.00 [Ind(+), n = 113], or both 2 h glucose ≥11.1 mmol/l and Index60 ≥2.00 [Glu(+)/Ind(+), n = 165]. RESULTS: Participants in Glu(+), vs those in Ind(+) or Glu(+)/Ind(+), were older (mean ages = 22.9, 11.8 and 14.7 years, respectively), had higher early (30-0 min) C-peptide response (1.0, 0.50 and 0.43 nmol/l), higher AUC C-peptide (2.33, 1.13 and 1.10 nmol/l), higher percentage of overweight/obesity (58%, 16% and 30%) (all comparisons, p < 0.0001), and a lower percentage of multiple autoantibody positivity (72%, 92% and 93%) (p < 0.001). OGTT-stimulated C-peptide and glucose patterns of Glu(+) differed appreciably from Ind(+) and Glu(+)/Ind(+). Progression to diabetes occurred in 61% (46/76) of Glu(+) and 63% (71/113) of Ind(+). Even though Index60 ≥2.00 was not a Pathway to Prevention diagnostic criterion, Ind(+) had a 4 year cumulative diabetes incidence of 95% (95% CI 86%, 98%). CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: Participants in the Ind(+) group had more typical characteristics of type 1 diabetes than participants in the Glu(+) did and were as likely to be diagnosed. However, unlike Glu(+) participants, Ind(+) participants were not identified at the baseline OGTT.

The risk of progression to type 1 diabetes is highly variable in individuals with multiple autoantibodies following screening.

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: Young children who develop multiple autoantibodies (mAbs) are at very high risk for type 1 diabetes. We assessed whether a population with mAbs detected by screening is also at very high risk, and how risk varies according to age, type of autoantibodies and metabolic status. METHODS: Type 1 Diabetes TrialNet Pathway to Prevention participants with mAbs (n = 1815; age, 12.35 ± 9.39 years; range, 1-49 years) were analysed. Type 1 diabetes risk was assessed according to age, autoantibody type/number (insulin autoantibodies [IAA], glutamic acid decarboxylase autoantibodies [GADA], insulinoma-associated antigen-2 autoantibodies [IA-2A] or zinc transporter 8 autoantibodies [ZnT8A]) and Index60 (composite measure of fasting C-peptide, 60 min glucose and 60 min C-peptide). Cox regression and cumulative incidence curves were utilised in this cohort study. RESULTS: Age was inversely related to type 1 diabetes risk in those with mAbs (HR 0.97 [95% CI 0.96, 0.99]). Among participants with 2 autoantibodies, those with GADA had less risk (HR 0.35 [95% CI 0.22, 0.57]) and those with IA-2A had higher risk (HR 2.82 [95% CI 1.76, 4.51]) of type 1 diabetes. Those with IAA and GADA had only a 17% 5 year risk of type 1 diabetes. The risk was significantly lower for those with Index60 <1.0 (HR 0.23 [95% CI 0.19, 0.30]) vs those with Index60 values ≥1.0. Among the 12% (225/1815) ≥12.0 years of age with GADA positivity, IA-2A negativity and Index60 <1.0, the 5 year risk of type 1 diabetes was 8%. CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: Type 1 diabetes risk varies substantially according to age, autoantibody type and metabolic status in individuals screened for mAbs. An appreciable proportion of older children and adults with mAbs appear to have a low risk of progressing to type 1 diabetes at 5 years. With this knowledge, clinical trials of type 1 diabetes prevention can better target those most likely to progress.

Early and late C-peptide responses during oral glucose tolerance testing are oppositely predictive of type 1 diabetes in autoantibody-positive individuals.

We examined whether the timing of the C-peptide response during an oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) in relatives of patients with type 1 diabetes (T1D) is predictive of disease onset. We examined baseline 2-h OGTTs from 670 relatives participating in the Diabetes Prevention Trial-Type 1 (age: 13.8 ± 9.6 years; body mass index z-score: 0.3 ± 1.1; 56% male) using univariate regression models. T1D risk increased with lower early C-peptide responses (30-0 min) (χ2 = 28.8, P < 0.001), and higher late C-peptide responses (120-60 min) (χ2 = 23.3, P < 0.001). When both responses were included in a proportional hazards model, they remained independently and oppositely associated with T1D, with a stronger overall association for the combined model than either response alone (χ2 = 41.1; P < 0.001). Using receiver operating characteristic curve analysis, the combined early and late C-peptide response was more accurately predictive of T1D than area under the curve C-peptide (P = 0.005). Our findings demonstrate that lower early and higher late C-peptide responses serve as indicators of increased T1D risk.

Associations of HbA1c with the timing of C-peptide responses during the oral glucose tolerance test at the diagnosis of type 1 diabetes.

BACKGROUND: In new onset type 1 diabetes (T1D), overall C-peptide measures such as area under the curve (AUC) C-peptide and peak C-peptide are useful for estimating the extent of ß-cell dysfunction, and for assessing responses to intervention therapy. However, measures of the timing of C-peptide responsiveness could have additional value. OBJECTIVES: We assessed the contribution of the timing of C-peptide responsiveness during oral glucose tolerance tests (OGTTs) to hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) variation at T1D diagnosis. METHODS: We analyzed data from 85 individuals <18 years with OGTTs and HbA1c measurements at diagnosis. Overall [AUC and peak C-peptide] and timing measures [30-0 minute C-peptide (early); 60 to 120 minute C-peptide sum-30 minutes (late); 120/30 C-peptide; time to peak C-peptide] were utilized. RESULTS: At diagnosis, the mean (±SD) age was 11.2 ± 3.3 years, body mass index (BMI)-z was 0.4 ± 1.1, 51.0% were male. The average HbA1c was 43.54 ± 8.46 mmol/mol (6.1 ± 0.8%). HbA1c correlated inversely with the AUC C-peptide (P < 0.001), peak C-peptide (P < 0.001), early and late C-peptide responses (P < 0.001 each), and 120/30 C-peptide (P < 0.001). Those with a peak C-peptide occurring at ≤60 minutes had higher HbA1c values than those with peaks later (P = 0.003). HbA1c variance was better explained with timing measures added to regression models (R2 = 11.6% with AUC C-peptide alone; R2 = 20.0% with 120/30 C-peptide added; R2 = 13.7% with peak C-peptide alone, R2 = 20.4% with timing of the peak added). Similar associations were seen between the 2-hour glucose and the C-peptide measures. CONCLUSIONS: These findings show that the addition of timing measures of C-peptide responsiveness better explains HbA1c variation at diagnosis than standard measures alone.

Predicting progression to type 1 diabetes from ages 3 to 6 in islet autoantibody positive TEDDY children.

OBJECTIVE: The capacity to precisely predict progression to type 1 diabetes (T1D) in young children over a short time span is an unmet need. We sought to develop a risk algorithm to predict progression in children with high-risk human leukocyte antigen (HLA) genes followed in The Environmental Determinants of Diabetes in the Young (TEDDY) study. METHODS: Logistic regression and 4-fold cross-validation examined 38 candidate predictors of risk from clinical, immunologic, metabolic, and genetic data. TEDDY subjects with at least one persistent, confirmed autoantibody at age 3 were analyzed with progression to T1D by age 6 serving as the primary endpoint. The logistic regression prediction model was compared to two non-statistical predictors, multiple autoantibody status, and presence of insulinoma-associated-2 autoantibodies (IA-2A). RESULTS: A total of 363 subjects had at least one autoantibody at age 3. Twenty-one percent of subjects developed T1D by age 6. Logistic regression modeling identified 5 significant predictors - IA-2A status, hemoglobin A1c, body mass index Z-score, single-nucleotide polymorphism rs12708716_G, and a combination marker of autoantibody number plus fasting insulin level. The logistic model yielded a receiver operating characteristic area under the curve (AUC) of 0.80, higher than the two other predictors; however, the differences in AUC, sensitivity, and specificity were small across models. CONCLUSIONS: This study highlights the application of precision medicine techniques to predict progression to diabetes over a 3-year window in TEDDY subjects. This multifaceted model provides preliminary improvement in prediction over simpler prediction tools. Additional tools are needed to maximize the predictive value of these approaches.

The shape of the glucose concentration curve during an oral glucose tolerance test predicts risk for type 1 diabetes.

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: We aimed to examine: (1) whether specific glucose-response curve shapes during OGTTs are predictive of type 1 diabetes development; and (2) the extent to which the glucose-response curve is influenced by insulin secretion. METHODS: Autoantibody-positive relatives of people with type 1 diabetes whose baseline OGTT met the definition of a monophasic or biphasic glucose-response curve were followed for the development of type 1 diabetes (n = 2627). A monophasic curve was defined as an increase in OGTT glucose between 30 and 90 min followed by a decline of ≥ 0.25 mmol/l between 90 and 120 min. A biphasic response curve was defined as a decrease in glucose after an initial increase, followed by a second increase of ≥ 0.25 mmol/l. Associations of type 1 diabetes risk with glucose curve shapes were examined using cumulative incidence curve comparisons and proportional hazards regression. C-peptide responses were compared with and without adjustments for potential confounders. RESULTS: The majority of participants had a monophasic curve at baseline (n = 1732 [66%] vs n = 895 [34%]). The biphasic group had a lower cumulative incidence of type 1 diabetes (p < 0.001), which persisted after adjustments for age, sex, BMI z score and number of autoantibodies (p < 0.001). Among the monophasic group, the risk of type 1 diabetes was greater for those with a glucose peak at 90 min than for those with a peak at 30 min; the difference persisted after adjustments (p < 0.001). Compared with the biphasic group, the monophasic group had a lower early C-peptide (30-0 min) response, a lower C-peptide index (30-0 min C-peptide/30-0 min glucose), as well as a greater 2 h C-peptide level (p < 0.001 for all). CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: Those with biphasic glucose curves have a lower risk of progression to type 1 diabetes than those with monophasic curves, and the risk among the monophasic group is increased when the glucose peak occurs at 90 min than at 30 min. Differences in glucose curve shapes between the monophasic and biphasic groups appear to be related to C-peptide responses.

The Effect of Age on the Progression and Severity of Type 1 Diabetes: Potential Effects on Disease Mechanisms.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To explore the impact of age on type 1 diabetes (T1D) pathogenesis. RECENT FINDINGS: Children progress more rapidly from autoantibody positivity to T1D and have lower C-peptide levels compared to adults. In histological analysis of post-mortem pancreata, younger age of diagnosis is associated with reduced numbers of insulin containing islets and a hyper-immune CD20hi infiltrate. Moreover compared to adults, children exhibit decreased immune regulatory function and increased engagement and trafficking of autoreactive CD8+ T cells, and age-related differences in ß cell vulnerability may also contribute to the more aggressive immune phenotype observed in children. To account for some of these differences, HLA and non-HLA genetic loci that influence multiple disease characteristics, including age of onset, are being increasingly characterized. The exception of T1D as an autoimmune disease more prevalent in children than adults results from a combination of immune, metabolic, and genetic factors. Age-related differences in T1D pathology have important implications for better tailoring of immunotherapies.

The influence of body mass index and age on C-peptide at the diagnosis of type 1 diabetes in children who participated in the diabetes prevention trial-type 1.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE: The extent of influence of BMI and age on C-peptide at the diagnosis of type 1 diabetes (T1D) is unknown. We thus studied the impact of body mass index Z-scores (BMIZ) and age on C-peptide measures at and soon after the diagnosis of T1D. METHODS: Data from Diabetes Prevention Trial-Type 1 (DPT-1) participants <18.0 years at diagnosis was analyzed. Analyses examined associations of C-peptide measures with BMIZ and age in 2 cohorts: oral glucose tolerance tests (OGTTs) at diagnosis (n = 99) and mixed meal tolerance tests (MMTTs) <6 months after diagnosis (n = 80). Multivariable linear regression was utilized. RESULTS: Fasting and area under the curve (AUC) C-peptide from OGTTs (n = 99) at diagnosis and MMTTs (n = 80) after diagnosis were positively associated with BMIZ and age (P < .001 for all). Associations persisted when BMIZ and age were included as independent variables in regression models (P < .001 for all). BMIZ and age explained 31%-47% of the variance of C-peptide measures. In an example, 2 individuals with identical AUC C-peptide values had an approximate 5-fold difference in values after adjustments for BMIZ and age. The association between fasting glucose and C-peptide decreased markedly when fasting C-peptide values were adjusted (r = 0.30, P < .01 to r = 0.07, n.s.). CONCLUSIONS: C-peptide measures are strongly and independently related to BMIZ and age at and soon after the diagnosis of T1D. Adjustments for BMIZ and age cause substantial changes in C-peptide values, and impact the association between glycemia and C-peptide. Such adjustments can improve assessments of ß-cell impairment at diagnosis.

Association of serum microRNAs with islet autoimmunity, disease progression and metabolic impairment in relatives at risk of type 1 diabetes.

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: MicroRNAs (miRNAs) are key regulators of gene expression and novel biomarkers for many diseases. We investigated the hypothesis that serum levels of some miRNAs would be associated with islet autoimmunity and/or progression to type 1 diabetes. METHODS: We measured levels of 93 miRNAs most commonly detected in serum. This retrospective cohort study included 150 autoantibody-positive and 150 autoantibody-negative family-matched siblings enrolled in the TrialNet Pathway to Prevention Study. This was a young cohort (mean age = 11 years), and most autoantibody-positive relatives were at high risk because they had multiple autoantibodies, with 39/150 (26%, progressors) developing type 1 diabetes within an average 8.7 months of follow-up. We analysed miRNA levels in relation to autoantibody status, future development of diabetes and OGTT C-peptide and glucose indices of disease progression. RESULTS: Fifteen miRNAs were differentially expressed when comparing autoantibody-positive/negative siblings (range -2.5 to 1.3-fold). But receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis indicated low specificity and sensitivity. Seven additional miRNAs were differentially expressed among autoantibody-positive relatives according to disease progression; ROC returned significant AUC values and identified miRNA cut-off levels associated with an increased risk of disease in both cross-sectional and survival analyses. Levels of several miRNAs showed significant correlations (r values range 0.22-0.55) with OGTT outcomes. miR-21-3p, miR-29a-3p and miR-424-5p had the most robust associations. CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: Serum levels of selected miRNAs are associated with disease progression and confer additional risk of the development of type 1 diabetes in young autoantibody-positive relatives. Further studies, including longitudinal assessments, are warranted to further define miRNA biomarkers for prediction of disease risk and progression.

The relationship between BMI and insulin resistance and progression from single to multiple autoantibody positivity and type 1 diabetes among TrialNet Pathway to Prevention participants.

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: The incidence of type 1 diabetes is increasing at a rate of 3-5% per year. Genetics cannot fully account for this trend, suggesting an influence of environmental factors. The accelerator hypothesis proposes an effect of metabolic factors on type 1 diabetes risk. To test this in the TrialNet Pathway to Prevention (PTP) cohort, we analysed the influence of BMI, weight status and insulin resistance on progression from single to multiple islet autoantibodies (Aab) and progression from normoglycaemia to diabetes. METHODS: HOMA1-IR was used to estimate insulin resistance in Aab-positive PTP participants. Cox proportional hazards models were used to evaluate the effects of BMI, BMI percentile (BMI%), weight status and HOMA1-IR on the progression of autoimmunity or the development of diabetes. RESULTS: Data from 1,310 single and 1,897 multiple Aab-positive PTP participants were included. We found no significant relationships between BMI, BMI%, weight status or HOMA1-IR and the progression from one to multiple Aabs. Similarly, among all Aab-positive participants, no significant relationships were found between BMI, weight status or HOMA1-IR and progression to diabetes. Diabetes risk was modestly increased with increasing BMI% among the entire cohort, in obese participants 13-20 years of age and with increasing HOMA1-IR in adult Aab-positive participants. CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: Analysis of the accelerator hypothesis in the TrialNet PTP cohort does not suggest a broad influence of metabolic variables on diabetes risk. Efforts to identify other potentially modifiable environmental factors should continue.

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.

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.

Early Metabolic Endpoints Identify Persistent Treatment Efficacy in Recent-Onset Type 1 Diabetes Immunotherapy Trials.

OBJECTIVE: Mixed-meal tolerance test-stimulated area under the curve (AUC) C-peptide at 12-24 months represents the primary end point for nearly all intervention trials seeking to preserve ß-cell function in recent-onset type 1 diabetes. We hypothesized that participant benefit might be detected earlier and predict outcomes at 12 months posttherapy. Such findings would support shorter trials to establish initial efficacy. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We examined data from six Type 1 Diabetes TrialNet immunotherapy randomized controlled trials in a post hoc analysis and included additional stimulated metabolic indices beyond C-peptide AUC. We partitioned the analysis into successful and unsuccessful trials and analyzed the data both in the aggregate as well as individually for each trial. RESULTS: Among trials meeting their primary end point, we identified a treatment effect at 3 and 6 months when using C-peptide AUC (P = 0.030 and P < 0.001, respectively) as a dynamic measure (i.e., change from baseline). Importantly, no such difference was seen in the unsuccessful trials. The use of C-peptide AUC as a 6-month dynamic measure not only detected treatment efficacy but also suggested long-term C-peptide preservation (R2 for 12-month C-peptide AUC adjusted for age and baseline value was 0.80, P < 0.001), and this finding supported the concept of smaller trial sizes down to 54 participants. CONCLUSIONS: Early dynamic measures can identify a treatment effect among successful immune therapies in type 1 diabetes trials with good long-term prediction and practical sample size over a 6-month period. While external validation of these findings is required, strong rationale and data exist in support of shortening early-phase clinical trials.

Phenotypes Associated With Zones Defined by Area Under the Curve Glucose and C-peptide in a Population With Islet Autoantibodies.

OBJECTIVE: Metabolic zones were developed to characterize heterogeneity of individuals with islet autoantibodies. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Baseline 2-h oral glucose tolerance test data from 6,620 TrialNet Pathway to Prevention Study (TNPTP) autoantibody-positive participants (relatives of individuals with type 1 diabetes) were used to form 25 zones from five area under the curve glucose (AUCGLU) rows and five area under the curve C-peptide (AUCPEP) columns. Zone phenotypes were developed from demographic, metabolic, autoantibody, HLA, and risk data. RESULTS: As AUCGLU increased, changes of glucose and C-peptide response curves (from mean glucose and mean C-peptide values at 30, 60, 90, and 120 min) were similar within the five AUCPEP columns. Among the zones, 5-year risk for type 1 diabetes was highly correlated with islet antigen 2 antibody prevalence (r = 0.96, P < 0.001). Disease risk decreased markedly in the highest AUCGLU row as AUCPEP increased (0.88-0.41; P < 0.001 from lowest AUCPEP column to highest AUCPEP column). AUCGLU correlated appreciably less with Index60 (an indicator of insulin secretion) in the highest AUCPEP column (r = 0.33) than in other columns (r ≥ 0.78). AUCGLU was positively related to "fasting glucose × fasting insulin" and to "fasting glucose × fasting C-peptide" (indicators of insulin resistance) before and after adjustments for Index60 (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Phenotypes of 25 zones formed from AUCGLU and AUCPEP were used to gain insights into type 1 diabetes heterogeneity. Zones were used to examine GCRC changes with increasing AUCGLU, associations between risk and autoantibody prevalence, the dependence of glucose as a predictor of risk according to C-peptide, and glucose heterogeneity from contributions of insulin secretion and insulin resistance.

Oral Glucose Tolerance Test Measures of First-phase Insulin Response and Their Predictive Ability for Type 1 Diabetes.

CONTEXT: Decreased first-phase insulin response (FPIR) during intravenous glucose tolerance testing (IVGTT) is an early indicator of ß-cell dysfunction and predictor of type 1 diabetes (T1D). OBJECTIVE: Assess whether oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) measures could serve as FPIR alternatives in their ability to predict T1D in autoantibody positive (Aab+) subjects. DESIGN: OGTT and IVGTT were performed within 30 days of each other. Eleven OGTT variables were evaluated for (1) correlation with FPIR and (2) T1D prediction. SETTING: Type 1 Diabetes TrialNet "Oral Insulin for Prevention of Diabetes in Relatives at Risk for T1D" (TN-07) and Diabetes Prevention Trial-Type 1 Diabetes (DPT-1) studies clinical sites. PATIENTS: TN-07 (n = 292; age 9.4 ±â€…6.1 years) and DPT-1 (n = 194; age 15.1 ±â€…10.0 years) Aab + relatives of T1D individuals. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: (1) Correlation coefficients of OGTT measures with FPIR and (2) T1D prediction at 2 years using area under receiver operating characteristic (ROCAUC) curves. RESULTS: Index60 showed the strongest correlation in DPT-1 (r = -0.562) but was weaker in TN-07 (r = -0.378). C-peptide index consistently showed good correlation with FPIR across studies (TN-07, r = 0.583; DPT-1, r = 0.544; P < 0.0001). Index60 and C-peptide index had the highest ROCAUCs for T1D prediction (0.778 vs 0.717 in TN-07 and 0.763 vs 0.721 in DPT-1, respectively; P = NS), followed by FPIR (0.707 in TN-07; 0.628 in DPT-1). CONCLUSIONS: C-peptide index was the strongest measure to correlate with FPIR in both studies. Index60 and C-peptide index had the highest predictive accuracy for T1D and were comparable. OGTTs could be considered instead of IVGTTs for subject stratification in T1D prevention trials.

Index60 Is Superior to HbA1c for Identifying Individuals at High Risk for Type 1 Diabetes.

CONTEXT: HbA1c from ≥ 5.7% to < 6.5% (39-46 mmol/mol) indicates prediabetes according to American Diabetes Association guidelines, yet its identification of prediabetes specific for type 1 diabetes has not been assessed. A composite glucose and C-peptide measure, Index60, identifies individuals at high risk for type 1 diabetes. OBJECTIVE: We compared Index60 and HbA1c thresholds as markers for type 1 diabetes risk. METHODS: TrialNet Pathway to Prevention study participants with ≥ 2 autoantibodies (GADA, IAA, IA-2A, or ZnT8A) who had oral glucose tolerance tests and HbA1c measurements underwent 1) predictive time-dependent modeling of type 1 diabetes risk (n = 2776); and 2) baseline comparisons between high-risk mutually exclusive groups: Index60 ≥ 2.04 (n = 268) vs HbA1c ≥ 5.7% (n = 268). The Index60 ≥ 2.04 threshold was commensurate in ordinal ranking with the standard prediabetes threshold of HbA1c ≥ 5.7%. RESULTS: In mutually exclusive groups, individuals exceeding Index60 ≥ 2.04 had a higher cumulative incidence of type 1 diabetes than those exceeding HbA1c ≥ 5.7% (P < 0.0001). Appreciably more individuals with Index60 ≥ 2.04 were at stage 2, and among those at stage 2, the cumulative incidence was higher for those with Index60 ≥ 2.04 (P = 0.02). Those with Index60 ≥ 2.04 were younger, with lower BMI, greater autoantibody number, and lower C-peptide than those with HbA1c ≥ 5.7% (P < 0.0001 for all comparisons). CONCLUSION: Individuals with Index60 ≥ 2.04 are at greater risk for type 1 diabetes with features more characteristic of the disorder than those with HbA1c ≥ 5.7%. Index60 ≥ 2.04 is superior to the standard HbA1c ≥ 5.7% threshold for identifying prediabetes in autoantibody-positive individuals. These findings appear to justify using Index60 ≥ 2.04 as a prediabetes criterion in this population.

Index60 Identifies Individuals at Appreciable Risk for Stage 3 Among an Autoantibody-Positive Population With Normal 2-Hour Glucose Levels: Implications for Current Staging Criteria of Type 1 Diabetes.

OBJECTIVE: We assessed whether Index60, a composite measure of fasting C-peptide, 60-min C-peptide, and 60-min glucose, could improve the metabolic staging of type 1 diabetes for progression to clinical disease (stage 3) among autoantibody-positive (Ab+) individuals with normal 2-h glucose values (<140 mg/dL). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We analyzed 3,058 Type 1 Diabetes TrialNet Pathway to Prevention participants with 2-h glucose <140 mg/dL and Index60 <1.00 values from baseline oral glucose tolerance tests. Characteristics associated with type 1 diabetes (younger age, greater Ab+, higher HLA DR3-DQ2/DR4-DQ8 prevalence, and lower C-peptide) were compared among four mutually exclusive groups: top 2-h glucose quartile only (HI-2HGLU), top Index60 quartile only (HI-IND60), both top quartiles (HI-BOTH), and neither top quartile (LO-BOTH). Additionally, within the 2-h glucose distribution of <140 mg/dL and separately within the Index60 <1.00 distribution, comparisons were made between those above or below the medians. RESULTS: HI-IND60 and HI-BOTH were younger, with greater frequency of more than two Ab+, and lower C-peptide levels, than either HI-2HGLU or LO-BOTH (all P < 0.001). The cumulative incidence for stage 3 was greater for HI-IND60 and HI-BOTH than for either HI-2HGLU or LO-BOTH (all P < 0.001). Those with Index60 values above the median were younger and had higher frequency of two or more Ab+ (P < 0.001) and DR3-DQ2/DR4-DQ8 prevalence (P < 0.001) and lower area under the curve (AUC) C-peptide levels (P < 0.001) than those below. Those above the 2-h glucose median had higher AUC C-peptide levels (P < 0.001), but otherwise did not differ from those below. CONCLUSIONS: Index60 identifies individuals with characteristics of type 1 diabetes at appreciable risk for progression who would otherwise be missed by 2-h glucose staging criteria.