A hormone complex of FABP4 and nucleoside kinases regulates islet function.

The liberation of energy stores from adipocytes is critical to support survival in times of energy deficit; however, uncontrolled or chronic lipolysis associated with insulin resistance and/or insulin insufficiency disrupts metabolic homeostasis1,2. Coupled to lipolysis is the release of a recently identified hormone, fatty-acid-binding protein 4 (FABP4)3. Although circulating FABP4 levels have been strongly associated with cardiometabolic diseases in both preclinical models and humans4-7, no mechanism of action has yet been described8-10. Here we show that hormonal FABP4 forms a functional hormone complex with adenosine kinase (ADK) and nucleoside diphosphate kinase (NDPK) to regulate extracellular ATP and ADP levels. We identify a substantial effect of this hormone on beta cells and given the central role of beta-cell function in both the control of lipolysis and development of diabetes, postulate that hormonal FABP4 is a key regulator of an adipose-beta-cell endocrine axis. Antibody-mediated targeting of this hormone complex improves metabolic outcomes, enhances beta-cell function and preserves beta-cell integrity to prevent both type 1 and type 2 diabetes. Thus, the FABP4-ADK-NDPK complex, Fabkin, represents a previously unknown hormone and mechanism of action that integrates energy status with the function of metabolic organs, and represents a promising target against metabolic disease.

Consensus guidance for monitoring individuals with islet autoantibody-positive pre-stage 3 type 1 diabetes.

Given the proven benefits of screening to reduce diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) likelihood at the time of stage 3 type 1 diabetes diagnosis, and emerging availability of therapy to delay disease progression, type 1 diabetes screening programmes are being increasingly emphasised. Once broadly implemented, screening initiatives will identify significant numbers of islet autoantibody-positive (IAb+) children and adults who are at risk of (confirmed single IAb+) or living with (multiple IAb+) early-stage (stage 1 and stage 2) type 1 diabetes. These individuals will need monitoring for disease progression; much of this care will happen in non-specialised settings. To inform this monitoring, JDRF in conjunction with international experts and societies developed consensus guidance. Broad advice from this guidance includes the following: (1) partnerships should be fostered between endocrinologists and primary-care providers to care for people who are IAb+; (2) when people who are IAb+ are initially identified there is a need for confirmation using a second sample; (3) single IAb+ individuals are at lower risk of progression than multiple IAb+ individuals; (4) individuals with early-stage type 1 diabetes should have periodic medical monitoring, including regular assessments of glucose levels, regular education about symptoms of diabetes and DKA, and psychosocial support; (5) interested people with stage 2 type 1 diabetes should be offered trial participation or approved therapies; and (6) all health professionals involved in monitoring and care of individuals with type 1 diabetes have a responsibility to provide education. The guidance also emphasises significant unmet needs for further research on early-stage type 1 diabetes to increase the rigour of future recommendations and inform clinical care.

First-in-human, double-blind, randomized phase 1b study of peptide immunotherapy IMCY-0098 in new-onset type 1 diabetes: an exploratory analysis of immune biomarkers.

BACKGROUND: IMCY-0098, a synthetic peptide developed to halt disease progression via elimination of key immune cells in the autoimmune cascade, has shown a promising safety profile for the treatment of type 1 diabetes (T1D) in a recent phase 1b trial. This exploratory analysis of data from that trial aimed to identify the patient biomarkers at baseline associated with a positive response to treatment and examined the associations between immune response parameters and clinical efficacy endpoints (as surrogates for mechanism of action endpoints) using an artificial intelligence-based approach of unsupervised explainable machine learning. METHODS: We conducted an exploratory analysis of data from a phase 1b, dose-escalation, randomized, placebo-controlled study of IMCY-0098 in patients with recent-onset T1D. Here, a panel of markers of T cell activation, memory T cells, and effector T cell response were analyzed via descriptive statistics. Artificial intelligence-based analyses of associations between all variables, including immune responses and clinical responses, were performed using the Knowledge Extraction and Management (KEM®) v 3.6.2 analytical platform. RESULTS: The relationship between all available patient data was investigated using unsupervised machine learning implemented in the KEM® environment. Of 15 associations found for the dose C group (450 µg subcutaneously followed by 3 × 225 µg subcutaneously), seven involved human leukocyte antigen (HLA) type, all of which identified improvement/absence of worsening of disease parameters in DR4+ patients and worsening/absence of improvement in DR4- patients. This association with DR4+ and non-DR3 was confirmed using the endpoints normalized area under the curve C-peptide from mixed meal tolerance tests where presence of DR4 HLA haplotype was associated with an improvement in both endpoints. Exploratory immune analysis showed that IMCY-0098 dose B (150 µg subcutaneously followed by 3 × 75 µg subcutaneously) and dose C led to an increase in presumed/potentially protective antigen-specific cytolytic CD4+ T cells and a decrease in pathogenic CD8+ T cells, consistent with the expected mechanism of action of IMCY-0098. The analysis identified significant associations between immune and clinical responses to IMCY-0098. CONCLUSIONS: Promising preliminary efficacy results support the design of a phase 2 study of IMCY-0098 in patients with recent-onset T1D. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03272269; EudraCT: 2016-003514-27.

Clinical care advice for monitoring of islet autoantibody positive individuals with presymptomatic type 1 diabetes.

BACKGROUND/AIM: Type 1 diabetes is an autoimmune disease that involves the development of autoantibodies against pancreatic islet beta-cell antigens, preceding clinical diagnosis by a period of preclinical disease activity. As screening activity to identify autoantibody-positive individuals increases, a rise in presymptomatic type 1 diabetes individuals seeking medical attention is expected. Current guidance on how to monitor these individuals in a safe but minimally invasive way is limited. This article aims to provide clinical guidance for monitoring individuals with presymptomatic type 1 diabetes to reduce the risk of diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) at diagnosis. METHODS: Expert consensus was obtained from members of the Fr1da, GPPAD, and INNODIA consortia, three European diabetes research groups. The guidance covers both specialist and primary care follow-up strategies. RESULTS: The guidance outlines recommended monitoring approaches based on age, disease stage and clinical setting. Individuals with presymptomatic type 1 diabetes are best followed up in specialist care. For stage 1, biannual assessments of random plasma glucose and HbA1c are suggested for children, while annual assessments are recommended for adolescents and adults. For stage 2, 3-monthly clinic visits with additional home monitoring are advised. The value of repeat OGTT in stage 1 and the use of continuous glucose monitoring in stage 2 are discussed. Primary care is encouraged to monitor individuals who decline specialist care, following the guidance presented. CONCLUSIONS: As type 1 diabetes screening programs become more prevalent, effective monitoring strategies are essential to mitigate the risk of complications such as DKA. This guidance serves as a valuable resource for clinicians, providing practical recommendations tailored to an individual's age and disease stage, both within specialist and primary care settings.

Islet Autoantibody Standardization Program: interlaboratory comparison of insulin autoantibody assay performance in 2018 and 2020 workshops.

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: The Islet Autoantibody Standardization Program (IASP) aims to improve the performance of immunoassays measuring autoantibodies in type 1 diabetes and the concordance of results across laboratories. IASP organises international workshops distributing anonymised serum samples to participating laboratories and centralises the collection and analysis of results. In this report, we describe the results of assays measuring IAA submitted to the IASP 2018 and 2020 workshops. METHODS: The IASP distributed uniquely coded sera from individuals with new-onset type 1 diabetes, multiple islet autoantibody-positive individuals, and diabetes-free blood donors in both 2018 and 2020. Serial dilutions of the anti-insulin mouse monoclonal antibody HUI-018 were also included. Sensitivity, specificity, area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC-AUC), partial ROC-AUC at 95% specificity (pAUC95) and concordance of qualitative/quantitative results were compared across assays. RESULTS: Results from 45 IAA assays of seven different formats and from 37 IAA assays of six different formats were submitted to the IASP in 2018 and 2020, respectively. The median ROC-AUC was 0.736 (IQR 0.617-0.803) and 0.790 (IQR 0.730-0.836), while the median pAUC95 was 0.016 (IQR 0.004-0.021) and 0.023 (IQR 0.014-0.026) in the 2018 and 2020 workshops, respectively. Assays largely differed in AUC (IASP 2018 range 0.232-0.874; IASP 2020 range 0.379-0.924) and pAUC95 (IASP 2018 and IASP 2020 range 0-0.032). CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: Assay formats submitted to this study showed heterogeneous performance. Despite the high variability across laboratories, the in-house radiobinding assay (RBA) remains the gold standard for IAA measurement. However, novel non-radioactive IAA immunoassays showed a good performance and, if further improved, might be considered valid alternatives to RBAs.

Quantifying the utility of islet autoantibody levels in the prediction of type 1 diabetes in children.

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: The aim of this study was to explore the utility of islet autoantibody (IAb) levels for the prediction of type 1 diabetes in autoantibody-positive children. METHODS: Prospective cohort studies in Finland, Germany, Sweden and the USA followed 24,662 children at increased genetic or familial risk of developing islet autoimmunity and diabetes. For the 1403 who developed IAbs (523 of whom developed diabetes), levels of autoantibodies against insulin (IAA), glutamic acid decarboxylase (GADA) and insulinoma-associated antigen-2 (IA-2A) were harmonised for analysis. Diabetes prediction models using multivariate logistic regression with inverse probability censored weighting (IPCW) were trained using 10-fold cross-validation. Discriminative power for disease was estimated using the IPCW concordance index (C index) with 95% CI estimated via bootstrap. RESULTS: A baseline model with covariates for data source, sex, diabetes family history, HLA risk group and age at seroconversion with a 10-year follow-up period yielded a C index of 0.61 (95% CI 0.58, 0.63). The performance improved after adding the IAb positivity status for IAA, GADA and IA-2A at seroconversion: C index 0.72 (95% CI 0.71, 0.74). Using the IAb levels instead of positivity indicators resulted in even better performance: C index 0.76 (95% CI 0.74, 0.77). The predictive power was maintained when using the IAb levels alone: C index 0.76 (95% CI 0.75, 0.76). The prediction was better for shorter follow-up periods, with a C index of 0.82 (95% CI 0.81, 0.83) at 2 years, and remained reasonable for longer follow-up periods, with a C index of 0.76 (95% CI 0.75, 0.76) at 11 years. Inclusion of the results of a third IAb test added to the predictive power, and a suitable interval between seroconversion and the third test was approximately 1.5 years, with a C index of 0.78 (95% CI 0.77, 0.78) at 10 years follow-up. CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: Consideration of quantitative patterns of IAb levels improved the predictive power for type 1 diabetes in IAb-positive children beyond qualitative IAb positivity status.

Children diagnosed with presymptomatic type 1 diabetes through public health screening have milder diabetes at clinical manifestation.

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: We aimed to determine whether disease severity was reduced at onset of clinical (stage 3) type 1 diabetes in children previously diagnosed with presymptomatic type 1 diabetes in a population-based screening programme for islet autoantibodies. METHODS: Clinical data obtained at diagnosis of stage 3 type 1 diabetes were evaluated in 128 children previously diagnosed with presymptomatic early-stage type 1 diabetes between 2015 and 2022 in the Fr1da study and compared with data from 736 children diagnosed with incident type 1 diabetes between 2009 and 2018 at a similar age in the DiMelli study without prior screening. RESULTS: At the diagnosis of stage 3 type 1 diabetes, children with a prior early-stage diagnosis had lower median HbA1c (51 mmol/mol vs 91 mmol/mol [6.8% vs 10.5%], p<0.001), lower median fasting glucose (5.3 mmol/l vs 7.2 mmol/l, p<0.05) and higher median fasting C-peptide (0.21 nmol/l vs 0.10 nmol/l, p<0.001) compared with children without previous early-stage diagnosis. Fewer participants with prior early-stage diagnosis had ketonuria (22.2% vs 78.4%, p<0.001) or required insulin treatment (72.3% vs 98.1%, p<0.05) and only 2.5% presented with diabetic ketoacidosis at diagnosis of stage 3 type 1 diabetes. Outcomes in children with a prior early-stage diagnosis were not associated with a family history of type 1 diabetes or diagnosis during the COVID-19 pandemic. A milder clinical presentation was observed in children who participated in education and monitoring after early-stage diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: Diagnosis of presymptomatic type 1 diabetes in children followed by education and monitoring improved clinical presentation at the onset of stage 3 type 1 diabetes.

First-in-human, double-blind, randomized phase 1b study of peptide immunotherapy IMCY-0098 in new-onset type 1 diabetes.

BACKGROUND: Type 1 diabetes (T1D) is a CD4+ T cell-driven autoimmune disease characterized by the destruction of insulin-producing pancreatic ß-cells by CD8+ T cells. Achieving glycemic targets in T1D remains challenging in clinical practice; new treatments aim to halt autoimmunity and prolong ß-cell survival. IMCY-0098 is a peptide derived from human proinsulin that contains a thiol-disulfide oxidoreductase motif at the N-terminus and was developed to halt disease progression by promoting the specific elimination of pathogenic T cells. METHODS: This first-in-human, 24-week, double-blind phase 1b study evaluated the safety of three dosages of IMCY-0098 in adults diagnosed with T1D < 6 months before study start. Forty-one participants were randomized to receive four bi-weekly injections of placebo or increasing doses of IMCY-0098 (dose groups A/B/C received 50/150/450 µg for priming followed by three further administrations of 25/75/225 µg, respectively). Multiple T1D-related clinical parameters were also assessed to monitor disease progression and inform future development. Long-term follow-up to 48 weeks was also conducted in a subset of patients. RESULTS: Treatment with IMCY-0098 was well tolerated with no systemic reactions; a total of 315 adverse events (AEs) were reported in 40 patients (97.6%) and were related to study treatment in 29 patients (68.3%). AEs were generally mild; no AE led to discontinuation of the study or death. No significant decline in C-peptide was noted from baseline to Week 24 for dose A, B, C, or placebo (mean change - 0.108, - 0.041, - 0.040, and - 0.012, respectively), suggesting no disease progression. CONCLUSIONS: Promising safety profile and preliminary clinical response data support the design of a phase 2 study of IMCY-0098 in patients with recent-onset T1D. TRIAL REGISTRATION: IMCY-T1D-001: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03272269; EudraCT: 2016-003514-27; and IMCY-T1D-002: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04190693; EudraCT: 2018-003728-35.

SARS-CoV-2 Infection and Development of Islet Autoimmunity in Early Childhood.

Importance: The incidence of diabetes in childhood has increased during the COVID-19 pandemic. Elucidating whether SARS-CoV-2 infection is associated with islet autoimmunity, which precedes type 1 diabetes onset, is relevant to disease etiology and future childhood diabetes trends. Objective: To determine whether there is a temporal relationship between SARS-CoV-2 infection and the development of islet autoimmunity in early childhood. Design, Setting, and Participants: Between February 2018 and March 2021, the Primary Oral Insulin Trial, a European multicenter study, enrolled 1050 infants (517 girls) aged 4 to 7 months with a more than 10% genetically defined risk of type 1 diabetes. Children were followed up through September 2022. Exposure: SARS-CoV-2 infection identified by SARS-CoV-2 antibody development in follow-up visits conducted at 2- to 6-month intervals until age 2 years from April 2018 through June 2022. Main Outcomes and Measures: The development of multiple (≥2) islet autoantibodies in follow-up in consecutive samples or single islet antibodies and type 1 diabetes. Antibody incidence rates and risk of developing islet autoantibodies were analyzed. Results: Consent was obtained for 885 (441 girls) children who were included in follow-up antibody measurements from age 6 months. SARS-CoV-2 antibodies developed in 170 children at a median age of 18 months (range, 6-25 months). Islet autoantibodies developed in 60 children. Six of these children tested positive for islet autoantibodies at the same time as they tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies and 6 at the visit after having tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. The sex-, age-, and country-adjusted hazard ratio for developing islet autoantibodies when the children tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies was 3.5 (95% CI, 1.6-7.7; P = .002). The incidence rate of islet autoantibodies was 3.5 (95% CI, 2.2-5.1) per 100 person-years in children without SARS-CoV-2 antibodies and 7.8 (95% CI, 5.3-19.0) per 100 person-years in children with SARS-CoV-2 antibodies (P = .02). Islet autoantibody risk in children with SARS-CoV-2 antibodies was associated with younger age (<18 months) of SARS-CoV-2 antibody development (HR, 5.3; 95% CI, 1.5-18.3; P = .009). Conclusion and relevance: In young children with high genetic risk of type 1 diabetes, SARS-CoV-2 infection was temporally associated with the development of islet autoantibodies.

Progression likelihood score identifies substages of presymptomatic type 1 diabetes in childhood public health screening.

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: The aim of this study was to develop strategies that identify children from the general population who have late-stage presymptomatic type 1 diabetes and may, therefore, benefit from immune intervention. METHODS: We tested children from Bavaria, Germany, aged 1.75-10 years, enrolled in the Fr1da public health screening programme for islet autoantibodies (n=154,462). OGTT and HbA1c were assessed in children with multiple islet autoantibodies for diagnosis of presymptomatic stage 1 (normoglycaemia) or stage 2 (dysglycaemia) type 1 diabetes. Cox proportional hazards and penalised logistic regression of autoantibody, genetic, metabolic and demographic information were used to develop a progression likelihood score to identify children with stage 1 type 1 diabetes who progressed to stage 3 (clinical) type 1 diabetes within 2 years. RESULTS: Of 447 children with multiple islet autoantibodies, 364 (81.4%) were staged. Undiagnosed stage 3 type 1 diabetes, presymptomatic stage 2, and stage 1 type 1 diabetes were detected in 41 (0.027% of screened children), 30 (0.019%) and 293 (0.19%) children, respectively. The 2 year risk for progression to stage 3 type 1 diabetes was 48% (95% CI 34, 58) in children with stage 2 type 1 diabetes (annualised risk, 28%). HbA1c, islet antigen-2 autoantibody positivity and titre, and the 90 min OGTT value were predictors of progression in children with stage 1 type 1 diabetes. The derived progression likelihood score identified substages corresponding to ≤90th centile (stage 1a, n=258) and >90th centile (stage 1b, n=29; 0.019%) of stage 1 children with a 4.1% (95% CI 1.4, 6.7) and 46% (95% CI 21, 63) 2 year risk of progressing to stage 3 type 1 diabetes, respectively. CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: Public health screening for islet autoantibodies found 0.027% of children to have undiagnosed clinical type 1 diabetes and 0.038% to have undiagnosed presymptomatic stage 2 or stage 1b type 1 diabetes, with 50% risk to develop clinical type 1 diabetes within 2 years.

Insulin allergy: a diagnostic and therapeutic strategy based on a retrospective cohort and a case-control study.

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: Insulin allergy is a rare but significant clinical challenge. We aimed to develop a management workflow by (1) validating clinical criteria to guide diagnosis, based on a retrospective cohort, and (2) assessing the diagnostic performance of confirmatory tests, based on a case-control study. METHODS: In the retrospective cohort, patients with suspected insulin allergy were classified into three likelihood categories according to the presence of all (likely insulin allergy; 26/52, 50%), some (possible insulin allergy; 9/52, 17%) or none (unlikely insulin allergy; 17/52, 33%) of four clinical criteria: (1) recurrent local or systemic immediate or delayed hypersensitivity reactions; (2) reactions elicited by each injection; (3) reactions centred on the injection sites; and (4) reactions observed by the investigator (i.e. in response to an insulin challenge test). All underwent intradermal reaction (IDR) tests. A subsequent case-control study assessed the diagnostic performance of IDR, skin prick and serum anti-insulin IgE tests in ten clinically diagnosed insulin allergy patients, 24 insulin-treated non-allergic patients and 21 insulin-naive patients. RESULTS: In the retrospective cohort, an IDR test validated the clinical diagnosis in 24/26 (92%), 3/9 (33%) and 0/14 (0%) likely, possible and unlikely insulin allergy patients, respectively. In the case-control study, an IDR test was 80% sensitive and 100% specific and identified the index insulin(s). The skin prick and IgE tests had a marginal diagnostic value. Patients with IDR-confirmed insulin allergy were treated using a stepwise strategy. CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: Subject to validation, clinical likelihood criteria can effectively guide diabetologists towards an insulin allergy diagnosis before undertaking allergology tests. An IDR test shows the best diagnostic performance. A progressive management strategy can subsequently be implemented. Continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion is ultimately required in most patients. CLINICALTRIALS: gov: NCT01407640.

Immune response differs between intralymphatic or subcutaneous administration of GAD-alum in individuals with recent onset type 1 diabetes.

AIMS: Immunomodulation with autoantigens potentially constitutes a specific and safe treatment for type 1 diabetes (T1D). Studies with GAD-alum administrated subcutaneously have shown to be safe, but its efficacy has been inconclusive. Administration of GAD-alum into the lymph nodes, aimed to optimise antigen presentation, has shown promising results in an open-label clinical trial. Herein, we compared the immune response of the individuals included in the trial with a group who received GAD-alum subcutaneously in a previous study. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Samples from T1D individuals collected 15 months after administration of either three doses 1 month apart of 4 µg GAD-alum into lymph nodes (LN, n = 12) or two doses 1 month apart of 20 µg subcutaneously (SC, n = 12) were studied. GADA, GADA subclasses, GAD65 -induced cytokines, peripheral blood mononuclear cell proliferation, and T cells markers were analysed. RESULTS: Low doses of GAD-alum into the lymph nodes induced higher GADA levels than higher doses administrated subcutaneously. Immune response in the LN group was characterised by changes in GADA subclasses, with a relative reduction of IgG1 and enhanced IgG2, IgG3, and IgG4 proportion, higher GAD65 -induced secretion of IL-5, IL-10, and TNF-α, and reduction of cell proliferation and CD8+ T cells. These changes were not observed after subcutaneous (SC) injections of GAD-alum. CONCLUSIONS: GAD-specific immune responses 15 months after lymph node injections of GAD-alum differed from the ones induced by SC administration of the same autoantigen.

Oral insulin immunotherapy in children at risk for type 1 diabetes in a randomised controlled trial.

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: Oral administration of antigen can induce immunological tolerance. Insulin is a key autoantigen in childhood type 1 diabetes. Here, oral insulin was given as antigen-specific immunotherapy before the onset of autoimmunity in children from age 6 months to assess its safety and immune response actions on immunity and the gut microbiome. METHODS: A phase I/II randomised controlled trial was performed in a single clinical study centre in Germany. Participants were 44 islet autoantibody-negative children aged 6 months to 2.99 years who had a first-degree relative with type 1 diabetes and a susceptible HLA DR4-DQ8-containing genotype. Children were randomised 1:1 to daily oral insulin (7.5 mg with dose escalation to 67.5 mg) or placebo for 12 months using a web-based computer system. The primary outcome was immune efficacy pre-specified as induction of antibody or T cell responses to insulin and measured in a central treatment-blinded laboratory. RESULTS: Randomisation was performed in 44 children. One child in the placebo group was withdrawn after the first study visit and data from 22 insulin-treated and 21 placebo-treated children were analysed. Oral insulin was well tolerated with no changes in metabolic variables. Immune responses to insulin were observed in children who received both insulin (54.5%) and placebo (66.7%), and the trial did not demonstrate an effect on its primary outcome (p = 0.54). In exploratory analyses, there was preliminary evidence that the immune response and gut microbiome were modified by the INS genotype Among children with the type 1 diabetes-susceptible INS genotype (n = 22), antibody responses to insulin were more frequent in insulin-treated (72.7%) as compared with placebo-treated children (18.2%; p = 0.03). T cell responses to insulin were modified by treatment-independent inflammatory episodes. CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: The study demonstrated that oral insulin immunotherapy in young genetically at-risk children was safe, but was not associated with an immune response as predefined in the trial primary outcome. Exploratory analyses suggested that antibody responses to oral insulin may occur in children with a susceptible INS genotype, and that inflammatory episodes may promote the activation of insulin-responsive T cells. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02547519 FUNDING: The main funding source was the German Center for Diabetes Research (DZD e.V.).

Yield of a Public Health Screening of Children for Islet Autoantibodies in Bavaria, Germany.

IMPORTANCE: Public health screening for type 1 diabetes in its presymptomatic stages may reduce disease severity and burden on a population level. OBJECTIVE: To determine the prevalence of presymptomatic type 1 diabetes in children participating in a public health screening program for islet autoantibodies and the risk for progression to clinical diabetes. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Screening for islet autoantibodies was offered to children aged 1.75 to 5.99 years in Bavaria, Germany, between 2015 and 2019 by primary care pediatricians during well-baby visits. Families of children with multiple islet autoantibodies (presymptomatic type 1 diabetes) were invited to participate in a program of diabetes education, metabolic staging, assessment of psychological stress associated with diagnosis, and prospective follow-up for progression to clinical diabetes until July 31, 2019. EXPOSURES: Measurement of islet autoantibodies. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome was presymptomatic type 1 diabetes, defined by 2 or more islet autoantibodies, with categorization into stages 1 (normoglycemia), 2 (dysglycemia), or 3 (clinical) type 1 diabetes. Secondary outcomes were the frequency of diabetic ketoacidosis and parental psychological stress, assessed by the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (range, 0-27; higher scores indicate worse depression; ≤4 indicates no to minimal depression; >20 indicates severe depression). RESULTS: Of 90 632 children screened (median [interquartile range {IQR}] age, 3.1 [2.1-4.2] years; 48.5% girls), 280 (0.31%; 95% CI, 0.27-0.35) had presymptomatic type 1 diabetes, including 196 (0.22%) with stage 1, 17 (0.02%) with stage 2, 26 (0.03%) with stage 3, and 41 who were not staged. After a median (IQR) follow-up of 2.4 (1.0-3.2) years, another 36 children developed stage 3 type 1 diabetes. The 3-year cumulative risk for stage 3 type 1 diabetes in the 280 children with presymptomatic type 1 diabetes was 24.9% ([95% CI, 18.5%-30.7%]; 54 cases; annualized rate, 9.0%). Two children had diabetic ketoacidosis. Median (IQR) psychological stress scores were significantly increased at the time of metabolic staging in mothers of children with presymptomatic type 1 diabetes (3 [1-7]) compared with mothers of children without islet autoantibodies (2 [1-4]) (P = .002), but declined after 12 months of follow-up (2 [0-4]) (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Among children aged 2 to 5 years in Bavaria, Germany, a program of primary care-based screening showed an islet autoantibody prevalence of 0.31%. These findings may inform considerations of population-based screening of children for islet autoantibodies.

Islet Autoantibody Standardization Program 2018 Workshop: Interlaboratory Comparison of Glutamic Acid Decarboxylase Autoantibody Assay Performance.

BACKGROUND: The Islet Autoantibody Standardization Program (IASP) aims to improve the performance of immunoassays measuring type 1 diabetes (T1D)-associated autoantibodies and the concordance of results among laboratories. IASP organizes international interlaboratory assay comparison studies in which blinded serum samples are distributed to participating laboratories, followed by centralized collection and analysis of results, providing participants with an unbiased comparative assessment. In this report, we describe the results of glutamic acid decarboxylase autoantibody (GADA) assays presented in the IASP 2018 workshop. METHODS: In May 2018, IASP distributed to participants uniquely coded sera from 43 new-onset T1D patients, 7 multiple autoantibody-positive nondiabetic individuals, and 90 blood donors. Results were analyzed for the following metrics: sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, area under the ROC curve (ROC-AUC), partial ROC-AUC at 95% specificity (pAUC95), and concordance of qualitative and quantitative results. RESULTS: Thirty-seven laboratories submitted results from a total of 48 different GADA assays adopting 9 different formats. The median ROC-AUC and pAUC95 of all assays were 0.87 [interquartile range (IQR), 0.83-0.89] and 0.036 (IQR, 0.032-0.039), respectively. Large differences in pAUC95 (range, 0.001-0.0411) were observed across assays. Of formats widely adopted, bridge ELISAs showed the best median pAUC95 (0.039; range, 0.036-0.041). CONCLUSIONS: Several novel assay formats submitted to this study showed heterogeneous performance. In 2018, the majority of the best performing GADA immunoassays consisted of novel or established nonradioactive tests that proved on a par or superior to the radiobinding assay, the previous gold standard assay format for GADA measurement.

Immunological biomarkers for the development and progression of type 1 diabetes.

Immune biomarkers of type 1 diabetes are many and diverse. Some of these, such as the autoantibodies, are well established but not discriminative enough to deal with the heterogeneity inherent to type 1 diabetes progression. As an alternative, high hopes are placed on T cell assays, which give insight into the cells that actually target the beta cell or play a crucial role in maintaining tolerance. These assays are approaching a level of robustness that may allow for solid conclusions on both disease progression and therapeutic efficacy of immune interventions. In addition, 'omics' approaches to biomarker discovery are rapidly progressing. The potential emergence of novel biomarkers creates a need for the introduction of bioinformatics and 'big data' analysis systems for the integration of the multitude of biomarker data that will be available, to translate these data into clinical tools. It is worth noting that it is unlikely that the same markers will apply to all individuals. Instead, individualised signatures of biomarkers, combining autoantibodies, T cell profiles and other biomarkers, will need to be used to classify at-risk patients into various categories, thus enabling personalised prediction, prevention and treatment approaches. To achieve this goal, the standardisation of assays for biomarker discovery, the integration of analyses and data from biomarker studies and, most importantly, the careful clinical characterisation of individuals providing samples for these studies are critical. Longitudinal sample-collection initiatives, like INNODIA, should lead to novel biomarker discovery, not only providing a better understanding of type 1 diabetes onset and progression, but also yielding biomarkers of therapeutic efficacy of interventions to prevent or arrest type 1 diabetes.

Autoantibodies to N-terminally truncated GAD improve clinical phenotyping of individuals with adult-onset diabetes: Action LADA 12.

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: Adult-onset type 1 diabetes, in which the 65 kDa isoform of GAD (GAD65) is a major autoantigen, has a broad clinical phenotype encompassing variable need for insulin therapy. This study aimed to evaluate whether autoantibodies against N-terminally truncated GAD65 more closely defined a type 1 diabetes phenotype associated with insulin therapy. METHODS: Of 1114 participants with adult-onset diabetes from the Action LADA (latent autoimmune diabetes in adults) study with sufficient sera, we selected those designated type 1 (n = 511) or type 2 diabetes (n = 603) and retested the samples in radiobinding assays for human full-length GAD65 autoantibodies (f-GADA) and N-terminally truncated (amino acids 96-585) GAD65 autoantibodies (t-GADA). Individuals' clinical phenotypes were analysed according to antibody binding patterns. RESULTS: Overall, 478 individuals were f-GADA-positive, 431 were t-GADA-positive and 628 were negative in both assays. Risk of insulin treatment was augmented in t-GADA-positive individuals (OR 4.69 [95% CI 3.57, 6.17]) compared with f-GADA-positive individuals (OR 3.86 [95% CI 2.95, 5.06]), irrespective of diabetes duration. Of 55 individuals who were f-GADA-positive but t-GADA-negative, i.e. with antibody binding restricted to the N-terminus of GAD65, the phenotype was similar to type 2 diabetes with low risk of progression to insulin treatment. Compared with these individuals with N-terminal GAD65-restricted GADA, t-GADA-positive individuals were younger at diagnosis (p = 0.005), leaner (p < 0.0001) and more often had multiple diabetes-associated autoantibodies (28.3% vs 7.3%; p = 0.0005). CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: In individuals with adult-onset diabetes, presence of N-terminally truncated GAD65 autoantibodies is associated with the clinical phenotype of autoimmune type 1 diabetes and predicts insulin therapy.

Characteristics of slow progression to diabetes in multiple islet autoantibody-positive individuals from five longitudinal cohorts: the SNAIL study.

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: Multiple islet autoimmunity increases risk of diabetes, but not all individuals positive for two or more islet autoantibodies progress to disease within a decade. Major islet autoantibodies recognise insulin (IAA), GAD (GADA), islet antigen-2 (IA-2A) and zinc transporter 8 (ZnT8A). Here we describe the baseline characteristics of a unique cohort of 'slow progressors' (n = 132) who were positive for multiple islet autoantibodies (IAA, GADA, IA-2A or ZnT8A) but did not progress to diabetes within 10 years. METHODS: Individuals were identified from five studies (BABYDIAB, Germany; Diabetes Autoimmunity Study in the Young [DAISY], USA; All Babies in Southeast Sweden [ABIS], Sweden; Bart's Oxford Family Study [BOX], UK and the Pittsburgh Family Study, USA). Multiple islet autoantibody characteristics were determined using harmonised assays where possible. HLA class II risk was compared between slow progressors and rapid progressors (n = 348 diagnosed <5 years old from BOX) using the χ2 test. RESULTS: In the first available samples with detectable multiple antibodies, the most frequent autoantibodies were GADA (92%), followed by ZnT8A (62%), IAA (59%) and IA-2A (41%). High risk HLA class II genotypes were less frequent in slow (28%) than rapid progressors (42%, p = 0.011), but only two slow progressors carried the protective HLA DQ6 allele. CONCLUSION: No distinguishing characteristics of slow progressors at first detection of multiple antibodies have yet been identified. Continued investigation of these individuals may provide insights into slow progression that will inform future efforts to slow or prevent progression to clinical diabetes.