Biomarkers and immune-modulating therapies for type 2 diabetes.

Recent advances in understanding the etiology of obesity, metabolic syndrome, and type 2 diabetes (T2D) have established involvement of the immune system. These developments highlight the potential of immunomodulatory therapies for treatment of these conditions. Here, we discuss current and new immunotherapeutic strategies for the treatment of T2D, the need for stratification of patients based on immune and autoimmune status, and biomarkers for evaluating treatment efficiency. The time has come to re-evaluate the clinical management of T2D patients using metabolic parameters alone, and to realize that patients should be stratified based on their immune and/or autoimmune status prior to initiation of therapy to realize fully the potential of immunomodulatory strategies for T2D.

Human islet amyloid polypeptide-induced ß-cell cytotoxicity is linked to formation of α-sheet structure.

Type 2 diabetes (T2D) results from insulin secretory dysfunction arising in part from the loss of pancreatic islet ß-cells. Several factors contribute to ß-cell loss, including islet amyloid formation, which is observed in over 90% of individuals with T2D. The amyloid is comprised of human islet amyloid polypeptide (hIAPP). Here we provide evidence that early in aggregation, hIAPP forms toxic oligomers prior to formation of amyloid fibrils. The toxic oligomers contain α-sheet secondary structure, a nonstandard secondary structure associated with toxic oligomers in other amyloid diseases. De novo, synthetic α-sheet compounds designed to be nontoxic and complementary to the α-sheet structure in the toxic oligomers inhibit hIAPP aggregation and neutralize oligomer-mediated cytotoxicity in cell-based assays. In vivo administration of an α-sheet design to mice for 4 weeks revealed no evidence of toxicity nor did it elicit an immune response. Furthermore, the α-sheet designs reduced endogenous islet amyloid formation and mitigation of amyloid-associated ß-cell loss in cultured islets isolated from an hIAPP transgenic mouse model of islet amyloidosis. Characterization of the involvement of α-sheet in early aggregation of hIAPP and oligomer toxicity contributes to elucidation of the molecular mechanisms underlying amyloid-associated ß-cell loss.

GAD65Abs Are Not Associated With Beta-Cell Dysfunction in Patients With T2D in the GRADE Study.

Context: Autoantibodies directed against the 65-kilodalton isoform of glutamic acid decarboxylase (GAD65Abs) are markers of autoimmune type 1 diabetes (T1D) but are also present in patients with Latent Autoimmune Diabetes of Adults and autoimmune neuromuscular diseases, and also in healthy individuals. Phenotypic differences between these conditions are reflected in epitope-specific GAD65Abs and anti-idiotypic antibodies (anti-Id) against GAD65Abs. We previously reported that 7.8% of T2D patients in the GRADE study have GAD65Abs but found that GAD65Ab positivity was not correlated with beta-cell function, glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c), or fasting glucose levels. Context: In this study, we aimed to better characterize islet autoantibodies in this T2D cohort. This is an ancillary study to NCT01794143. Methods: We stringently defined GAD65Ab positivity with a competition assay, analyzed GAD65Ab-specific epitopes, and measured GAD65Ab-specific anti-Id in serum. Results: Competition assays confirmed that 5.9% of the patients were GAD65Ab positive, but beta-cell function was not associated with GAD65Ab positivity, GAD65Ab epitope specificity or GAD65Ab-specific anti-Id. GAD65-related autoantibody responses in GRADE T2D patients resemble profiles in healthy individuals (low GAD65Ab titers, presence of a single autoantibody, lack of a distinct epitope pattern, and presence of anti-Id to diabetes-associated GAD65Ab). In this T2D cohort, GAD65Ab positivity is likely unrelated to the pathogenesis of beta-cell dysfunction. Conclusion: Evidence for islet autoimmunity in the pathophysiology of T2D beta-cell dysfunction is growing, but T1D-associated autoantibodies may not accurately reflect the nature of their autoimmune process.

Prevention versus intervention of type 1 diabetes.

Type 1 diabetes (T1D) is a cell-mediated autoimmune disease. New cases of T1D are on the increase and exogenous insulin therapy is the only intervention regularly initiated for T1D patients. Though tremendous strides have been made in prediction of T1D, prevention and intervention strategies have not experienced the same success. In this review, we will discuss some possible reasons why new intervention therapies for T1D have not been implemented into the mainstream treatment regimen for T1D patients. We will also discuss potential caveats for why prevention and intervention trials in T1D may not have experienced the same success as prediction trials.

Islet Autoimmunity is Highly Prevalent and Associated With Diminished ß-Cell Function in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes in the Grade Study.

Islet autoimmunity may contribute to ß-cell dysfunction in type 2 diabetes (T2D). Its prevalence and clinical significance have not been rigorously determined. In this ancillary study to the Glycemia Reduction Approaches in Diabetes-A Comparative Effectiveness (GRADE) Study, we investigated the prevalence of cellular and humoral islet autoimmunity in patients with T2D duration 4·0±3·0 y, HbA1c 7·5±0·5% on metformin alone. We measured T cell autoreactivity against islet proteins, islet autoantibodies against GAD65, IA2, ZnT8, and ß-cell function. Cellular islet autoimmunity was present in 41·3%, humoral islet autoimmunity in 13·5%, and both in 5·3%. ß-cell function calculated as iAUC-CG and ΔC-peptide(0- 30)/Δglucose(0-30) from an oral glucose tolerance test was lower among T cell-positives (T+) than T cell-negatives (T-) using two different adjustments for insulin sensitivity (iAUC-CG: 13·2% [95% CI 0·3, 24·4%] or 11·4% [95% CI 0·4, 21·2%] lower; ΔC-peptide(0-30)/Δglucose(0-30)) 19% [95% CI 3·1, 32·3%] or 17·7% [95% CI 2·6, 30·5%] lower). T+ patients had 17% higher HbA1c (95% CI 0·07, 0·28) and 7·7 mg/dL higher fasting plasma glucose levels (95% CI 0·2,15·3) than T- patients. We conclude that islet autoimmunity is much more prevalent in T2D patients than previously reported. T cell-mediated autoimmunity is associated with diminished ß-cell function and worse glycemic control.

Is diabetes mellitus a continuous spectrum?

BACKGROUND: Diabetes mellitus has been historically divided into type 1 and type 2 diabetes, with type 1 being an autoimmune disease and type 2 being primarily a metabolic disease. CONTENT: The current diabetes classification scheme needs to be reevaluated because of the accumulating evidence of immune system involvement in the pathophysiology of type 2 diabetes. SUMMARY: There are similarities and differences between type 1 and type 2 diabetes with regard to pathogenesis, pathophysiology, and genetics. We propose a resolution to the dilemma of the current classification scheme.

Parenteral insulin suppresses T cell proliferation to islet antigens.

The diabetes prevention trial-type 1 (DPT-1) tested whether a combination of SQ and IV insulin therapy would delay the onset of disease in individuals at high risk of progression. We investigated whether this regimen altered T cell responses to human islet proteins using cellular immunoblotting. Among the 10 treated and 7 control subjects studied, we found that there was a significant effect of treatment on cellular immunoblotting responses. We conclude that parenteral insulin may suppress proliferation to islet antigens in individuals at risk for diabetes, but this effect may be transient. Further study is needed to determine whether a therapy that results in sustained suppression of T cell proliferation could yield a measurable clinical benefit.

Islet Autoimmunity in Adults With Impaired Glucose Tolerance and Recently Diagnosed, Treatment Naïve Type 2 Diabetes in the Restoring Insulin SEcretion (RISE) Study.

The presence of islet autoantibodies and islet reactive T cells (T+) in adults with established type 2 diabetes (T2D) have been shown to identify those patients with more severe ß-cell dysfunction. However, at what stage in the progression toward clinical T2D does islet autoimmunity emerge as an important component influencing ß-cell dysfunction? In this ancillary study to the Restoring Insulin SEcretion (RISE) Study, we investigated the prevalence of and association with ß-cell dysfunction of T+ and autoantibodies to the 65 kDa glutamic acid decarboxylase antigen (GADA) in obese pre-diabetes adults with impaired glucose tolerance (IGT) and recently diagnosed treatment naïve (Ndx) T2D. We further investigated the effect of 12 months of RISE interventions (metformin or liraglutide plus metformin, or with 3 months of insulin glargine followed by 9 months of metformin or placebo) on islet autoimmune reactivity. We observed GADA(+) in 1.6% of NdxT2D and 4.6% of IGT at baseline, and in 1.6% of NdxT2D and 5.3% of IGT at 12 months, but no significant associations between GADA(+) and ß-cell function. T(+) was observed in 50% of NdxT2D and 60.4% of IGT at baseline, and in 68.4% of NdxT2D and 83.9% of IGT at 12 months. T(+) NdxT2D were observed to have significantly higher fasting glucose (p = 0.004), and 2 h glucose (p = 0.0032), but significantly lower steady state C-peptide (sscpep, p = 0.007) compared to T(-) NdxT2D. T(+) IGT participants demonstrated lower but not significant (p = 0.025) acute (first phase) C-peptide response to glucose (ACPRg) compared to T(-) IGT. With metformin treatment, T(+) participants were observed to have a significantly lower Hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c, p = 0.002) and fasting C-peptide (p = 0.002) compared to T(-), whereas T(+) treated with liraglutide + metformin had significantly lower sscpep (p = 0.010) compared to T(-) participants. In the placebo group, T(+) participants demonstrated significantly lower ACPRg (p = 0.001) compared to T(-) participants. In summary, T(+) were found in a large percentage of obese pre-diabetes adults with IGT and in recently diagnosed T2D. Moreover, T(+) were significantly correlated with treatment effects and ß-cell dysfunction. Our results demonstrate that T(+) are an important component in T2D.

Setting the Stage for Islet Autoimmunity in Type 2 Diabetes: Obesity-Associated Chronic Systemic Inflammation and Endoplasmic Reticulum (ER) Stress.

Islet autoimmunity has been identified as a component of both type 1 (T1D) and type 2 (T2D) diabetes, but the pathway through which islet autoimmunity develops in T1D and T2D may be different. Acknowledging the presence of islet autoimmunity in the pathophysiology of T2D, a historically nonautoimmune metabolic disease, would pave the way for important changes in classifications of and therapeutic options for T2D. In order to fully appreciate the importance of islet autoimmunity in T2D, the underlying mechanisms for immune system activation need to be explored. In this review, we focus on the potential origin of immune system activation (innate and adaptive) leading to the development of islet autoimmunity in T2D.

Analysis of T-cell assays to measure autoimmune responses in subjects with type 1 diabetes: results of a blinded controlled study.

Type 1 diabetes is a chronic autoimmune disease mediated by autoreactive T-cells. Several experimental therapies targeting T-cells are in clinical trials. To understand how these therapies affect T-cell responses in vivo, assays that directly measure human T-cell function are needed. In a blinded, multicenter, case-controlled study conducted by the Immune Tolerance Network, we tested responses in an immunoblot and T-cell proliferative assay to distinguish type 1 diabetic patients from healthy control subjects. Peripheral blood cells from 39 healthy control subjects selected for DR4 and 23 subjects with recently diagnosed type 1 diabetes were studied. Autoantibody responses were measured in serum samples. Positive responses in both assays were more common in peripheral blood mononuclear cells from new-onset type 1 diabetic patients compared with control subjects. The proliferative, immunoblot, and autoantibody assays had sensitivities of 58, 91, and 78% with specificities of 94, 83, and 85%, respectively. When cellular assays were combined with autoantibody measurements, the sensitivity of the measurements was 75% with 100% specificity. We conclude that cellular assays performed on peripheral blood have a high degree of accuracy in discriminating responses in subjects with type 1 diabetes from healthy control subjects. They may be useful for assessment of cellular autoimmune responses involved in type 1 diabetes.

Equivalent insulin resistance in latent autoimmune diabetes in adults (LADA) and type 2 diabetic patients.

Insulin resistance is a primary component in the pathophysiology of type 2 diabetes. In latent autoimmune diabetes in adults (LADA), insulin resistance has been reported to be significantly lower than in autoantibody-negative type 2 diabetes (T2DM), but whether this might be related to differences in body mass index (BMI) has not been excluded. Furthermore, previous studies have used limiting inclusive criteria for LADA, requiring only the presence of GADA or IA-2A. To apply more inclusive criteria for LADA, consistent with recent recommendations, we defined LADA by clinical manifestations characteristic of T2DM, but with the presence of any combination of GADA, IA-2A, ICA, or IAA. We recruited 43 LADA patients, 70 T2DM patients, and 150 non-diabetic controls. Insulin resistance was assessed by both the homeostasis model assessment and the quantitative insulin sensitivity check index, and BMI was calculated. We found that insulin resistance in LADA is equivalent to that of T2DM. When insulin resistance is assessed as a function of BMI, both diabetic populations demonstrated an insulin resistance equally greater than normal controls. The interaction between insulin resistance and BMI in the two diabetic groups was significantly different from that demonstrated in non-diabetic controls. In summary, LADA demonstrates insulin resistance of similar magnitude to T2DM, but with the concurrent component of an immune attack against the pancreatic beta-cells. LADA patients may be at significant risk for metabolic consequences of insulin resistance other than glucose metabolism, such as those described in the metabolic syndrome. As complications and treatment regimens specific to LADA are realized, improved means of identification of LADA will become increasingly important.

Is latent autoimmune diabetes in adults distinct from type 1 diabetes or just type 1 diabetes at an older age?

Diabetes is classified clinically into two types: type 1 and type 2 diabetes. Type 1 diabetes is an autoimmune diabetes, whereas, in contrast, type 2 diabetes is nonautoimmune. However, there is a group of phenotypic adult type 2 diabetic patients ( approximately 10%) who have islet autoantibodies similar to type 1 diabetes. These patients are said to have latent autoimmune diabetes in adults (LADA) or type 1.5 diabetes. T-cells reacting with islet proteins have been demonstrated in type 1 and type 1.5 diabetic patients. In contrast, classic autoantibody-negative type 2 diabetic patients are also negative for T-cell responses to islet proteins. Therefore, we questioned whether type 1 and type 1.5 diabetes are similar or different autoimmune diseases. We have investigated the immunological and metabolic differences between type 1, type 1.5, and classic type 2 diabetic patients. We have identified autoantibody differences, differences in islet proteins recognized by T-cells, and differences in insulin resistance. We have also identified a small group of patients who have T-cells responsive to islet proteins but who are autoantibody negative. These patients appear to be similar to type 1.5 patients in having decreased stimulated C-peptide values. These immunological differences between type 1 and type 1.5 diabetes suggest at least partially distinct disease processes.

Autoimmunity to islet proteins in children diagnosed with new-onset diabetes.

Autoantibody and T cells reacting with islet proteins have been demonstrated in patients with type 1 diabetes. In recent years an increasing number of children have been clinically classified with type 2 (not ketosis prone, evidence of insulin resistance, presence of acanthosis nigricans, and obesity) or indeterminant diabetes (admixture of clinical features of types 1 and 2). In this study, we compared the islet cell autoantibody and T-cell responses to islet proteins in type 2 (n = 19) and indeterminant (n = 16) children (<18 yr of age) to classic type 1 (n = 37) diabetic patients. We observed that 37 of 37 type 1 diabetic children demonstrated autoantibody and/or T-cell reactivity to islet proteins. Fourteen of the 19 type 2 patients were positive for islet cell autoantibodies, and six of 14 were positive for T-cell responses to islet proteins. For the indeterminant patients, 11 of 16 of the patients were positive for autoantibodies, and six of 16 patients were positive for T-cell responses to islet proteins. These results demonstrate that autoimmunity to islet proteins is present in a high percentage of children classified as indeterminant or type 2 diabetes. Moreover, the presence of obesity or acanthosis nigracans does not reliably distinguish children with or without islet cell autoimmunity.

Impact of islet autoimmunity on the progressive ß-cell functional decline in type 2 diabetes.

OBJECTIVE: Cross-sectional studies have suggested that islet autoimmunity may be more prevalent in type 2 diabetes (T2D) than previously appreciated and may contribute to the progressive decline in ß-cell function. In this study, we longitudinally evaluated the effect of islet autoimmune development on the progressive ß-cell dysfunction in T2D patients. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Twenty-three T2D patients negative for islet autoantibodies (GAD antibody and insulinoma-associated protein 2) and islet-specific T cells were evaluated prospectively for up to 36 months. We investigated the percentage of patients who developed islet autoantibodies (Ab+) and/or islet-reactive T cells (T+) and the effect of the islet autoimmunity on fasting and glucagon-stimulated C-peptide responses. We defined positive islet autoimmunity as Ab+ and/or T+ for at least two study visits. RESULTS: Of the 23 patients, 6 (26%) remained negative for islet autoimmunity (Ab-T-), 14 (61%) developed Ab+ and/or T+, and 3 (13%) were unclassifiable because they developed islet autoimmunity at only one study visit. Islet Ab+ was observed to be less stable than islet-specific T-cell responses. Development of islet autoimmunity was significantly associated with a more rapid decline in fasting (P < 0.0001) and glucagon-stimulated (P < 0.05) C-peptide responses. CONCLUSIONS: These pilot data suggest that the development of islet autoimmunity in T2D is associated with a significantly more rapid ß-cell functional decline.

Islet-specific T-cell responses and proinflammatory monocytes define subtypes of autoantibody-negative ketosis-prone diabetes.

OBJECTIVE: Ketosis-prone diabetes (KPD) is characterized by diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) in patients lacking typical features of type 1 diabetes. A validated classification scheme for KPD includes two autoantibody-negative ("A-") phenotypic forms: "A-ß-" (lean, early onset, lacking ß-cell functional reserve) and "A-ß+" (obese, late onset, with substantial ß-cell functional reserve after the index episode of DKA). Recent longitudinal analysis of a large KPD cohort revealed that the A-ß+ phenotype includes two distinct subtypes distinguished by the index DKA episode having a defined precipitant ("provoked," with progressive ß-cell function loss over time) or no precipitant ("unprovoked," with sustained ß-cell functional reserve). These three A- KPD subtypes are characterized by absence of humoral islet autoimmune markers, but a role for cellular islet autoimmunity is unknown. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Islet-specific T-cell responses and the percentage of proinflammatory (CD14+CD16+) blood monocytes were measured in A-ß- (n = 7), provoked A-ß+ (n = 15), and unprovoked A-ß+ (n = 13) KPD patients. Genotyping was performed for type 1 diabetes-associated HLA class II alleles. RESULTS: Provoked A-ß+ and A-ß- KPD patients manifested stronger islet-specific T-cell responses (P < 0.03) and higher percentages of proinflammatory CD14+CD16+ monocytes (P < 0.01) than unprovoked A-ß+ KPD patients. A significant relationship between type 1 diabetes HLA class II protective alleles and negative T-cell responses was observed. CONCLUSIONS: Provoked A-ß+ KPD and A-ß- KPD are associated with a high frequency of cellular islet autoimmunity and proinflammatory monocyte populations. In contrast, unprovoked A-ß+ KPD lacks both humoral and cellular islet autoimmunity.

Identification of autoantibody-negative autoimmune type 2 diabetic patients.

OBJECTIVE: Islet autoimmunity has long been recognized in the pathogenesis of type 1 diabetes and is becoming increasingly acknowledged as a component in the pathogenesis of type 2 diabetes. Islet reactive T cells and autoantibodies have been demonstrated in type 1 diabetes, whereas islet autoimmunity in type 2 diabetes has been limited to islet autoantibodies. In this study, we investigated whether islet reactive T cells might also be present in type 2 diabetic patients and how islet reactive T cells correlate with ß-cell function. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Adult phenotypic type 2 diabetic patients (n = 36) were screened for islet reactive T-cell responses using cellular immunoblotting and five islet autoantibodies (islet cell antibody, GADA, insulin autoantibody, insulinoma-associated protein-2 autoantibody, and zinc transporter autoantibody). RESULTS: We identified four subgroups of adult phenotypic type 2 diabetic patients based on their immunological status (Ab(-)T(-), Ab(+)T(-), Ab(-)T(+), and Ab(+)T(+)). The Ab(-)T(+) type 2 diabetic patients demonstrated T-cell responses similar to those of the Ab(+)T(+) type 2 diabetic patients. Data were adjusted for BMI, insulin resistance, and duration of diabetes. Significant differences (P < 0.02) were observed among groups for fasting and glucagon-stimulated C-peptide responses. T-cell responses to islet proteins were also demonstrated to fluctuate less than autoantibody responses. CONCLUSIONS: We have identified a group of adult autoimmune phenotypic type 2 diabetic patients who are Ab(-)T(+) and thus would not be detected using autoantibody testing alone. We conclude that islet autoimmunity may be more prevalent in adult phenotypic type 2 diabetic patients than previously estimated.

Improved T cell assay for identification of type 1 diabetes patients.

Diabetes mellitus is comprised primarily of two clinically separate diseases: type 1 (T1D) and type 2 diabetes (T2D). T1D is a cell-mediated autoimmune disease directed against the beta cells and characterized by autoantibody (Ab) and T cell reactivity to islet proteins whereas, T2D is non-autoimmune. Despite the fact that the pathological process in autoimmune diabetes involves T cells, immune markers of diabetes have primarily centered on the presence of circulating serum islet autoantibodies. In two masked NIH sponsored workshops, our cellular immunoblotting T cell assay, which uses isolated human islets separated into 18 molecular weight fractions, has been validated to be able to distinguish T1D patients from controls with excellent specificity and sensitivity. In this study, we utilized the first workshop to select eight molecular weight fractions of human islets that were the most discriminatory between T1D patients and controls. Using these eight molecular weight fractions identified in the first workshop, we validated the preferential recognition of these 8 blot sections in a second workshop. We then re-calculated the sensitivity and specificity of the cellular immunoblotting assay for both workshops using only the data from these 8 blot sections.We observed increases in both sensitivity and specificity compared to the original workshop data for both workshops. The use of 8 instead of 18 molecular weight regions allows for a significant reduction in the amount of blood needed from patients, thus allowing cellular immunoblotting to be performed on pediatric patients participating in immunomodulatory studies. This improved T cell assay, which directly measures islet reactive T cell responses in autoimmune diabetes patients with excellent sensitivity and specificity, will likely improve patient follow-up during intervention studies.

Latent autoimmune diabetes in adults.

CONTEXT: Autoantibodies that are reactive to islet antigens are present at the time of diagnosis in most patients with type 1 diabetes. Additionally, approximately 10% of phenotypic type 2 diabetic patients are positive for at least one of the islet autoantibodies, and this group is often referred to as "latent autoimmune diabetes in adults (LADA)." These patients share many genetic and immunological similarities with type 1 diabetes, suggesting that LADA, like type 1 diabetes, is an autoimmune disease. However, there are differences in autoantibody clustering, T cell reactivity, and genetic susceptibility and protection between type 1 diabetes and LADA, implying important differences in the underlying disease processes. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION AND SYNTHESIS: In this clinical review, we will summarize the current understanding of LADA based on the MEDLINE search of all peer-reviewed publications (original articles and reviews) on this topic between 1974 and 2009. CONCLUSIONS: In LADA, diabetes occurs earlier in the beta-cell-destructive process because of the greater insulin resistance. Complexities arise also because of variable definitions of LADA and type 1 diabetes in adults. As immunomodulatory therapies that slow or halt the type 1 diabetes disease process are discovered, testing these therapies in LADA will be essential.

Validity and reproducibility of measurement of islet autoreactivity by T-cell assays in subjects with early type 1 diabetes.

OBJECTIVE: Type 1 diabetes results from an immunemediated destruction of beta-cells, likely to be mediated by T lymphocytes, but the sensitivity, specificity, and other measures of validity of existing assays for islet autoreactive T-cells are not well established. Such assays are vital for monitoring responses to interventions that may modulate disease progression. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We studied the ability of cellular assays to discriminate responses in patients with type 1 diabetes and normal control subjects in a randomized blinded study in the U.S. and U.K. We evaluated the reproducibility of these measurements overall and to individual analytes from repeat collections. RESULTS: Responses in the cellular immunoblot, U.K.-ELISPOT, and T-cell proliferation assays could differentiate patients from control subjects with odds ratios of 21.7, 3.44, and 3.36, respectively, with sensitivity and specificity as high as 74 and 88%. The class II tetramer and U.S. ELISPOT assays performed less well. Despite the significant association of the responses with type 1 diabetes, the reproducibility of the measured responses, both overall and individual analytes, was relatively low. Positive samples from normal control subjects (i.e., false positives) were generally isolated to single assays. CONCLUSIONS: The cellular immunoblot, U.K.-ELISPOT, and T-cell proliferation assays can distinguish responses from patients with type 1 diabetes and healthy control subjects. The limited reproducibility of the measurements overall and of responses to individual analytes may reflect the difficulty in detection of low frequency of antigen-specific T-cells or variability in their appearance in peripheral blood.