Performance of European prediction models for classification of type 1 and type 2 diabetes in Indians.

AIM: We aimed to determine the performance of European prediction models in an Indian population to classify type 1 diabetes(T1D) and type 2 diabetes(T2D). METHODS: We assessed discrimination and calibration of published models of diabetes classification, using retrospective data from electronic medical records of 83309 participants aged 18-50 years living in India. Diabetes type was defined based on C-peptide measurement and early insulin requirement. Models assessed combinations of clinical measurements: age at diagnosis, body mass index(mean = 26.6 kg/m2), sex(male = 64.9 %), Glutamic acid decarboxylase(GAD) antibody, serum cholesterol, serum triglycerides, and high-density lipoprotein(HDL) cholesterol. RESULTS: 67955 participants met inclusion criteria, of whom 0.8 % had T1D, which was markedly lower than model development cohorts. Model discrimination for clinical features was broadly similar in our Indian cohort compared to the European cohort: area under the receiver operating characteristic curve(AUC ROC) was 0.90 vs. 0.90 respectively, but was lower in the subset of young participants with measured GAD antibodies(n = 2404): and an AUC ROC of 0.87 when clinical features, sex, lipids and GAD antibodies were combined. All models substantially overestimated the likelihood of T1D, reflecting the lower prevalence of T1D in the Indian population. However, good model performance was achieved after recalibration by updating the model intercept and slope. CONCLUSION: Models for diabetes classification maintain the discrimination of T1D and T2D in this Indian population, where T2D is far more common, but require recalibration to obtain appropriate model probabilities. External validation and recalibration are needed before these tools can be used in non-European populations.

Phenotype-based targeted treatment of SGLT2 inhibitors and GLP-1 receptor agonists in type 2 diabetes.

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: A precision medicine approach in type 2 diabetes could enhance targeting specific glucose-lowering therapies to individual patients most likely to benefit. We aimed to use the recently developed Bayesian causal forest (BCF) method to develop and validate an individualised treatment selection algorithm for two major type 2 diabetes drug classes, sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP1-RA). METHODS: We designed a predictive algorithm using BCF to estimate individual-level conditional average treatment effects for 12-month glycaemic outcome (HbA1c) between SGLT2i and GLP1-RA, based on routine clinical features of 46,394 people with type 2 diabetes in primary care in England (Clinical Practice Research Datalink; 27,319 for model development, 19,075 for hold-out validation), with additional external validation in 2252 people with type 2 diabetes from Scotland (SCI-Diabetes [Tayside & Fife]). Differences in glycaemic outcome with GLP1-RA by sex seen in clinical data were replicated in clinical trial data (HARMONY programme: liraglutide [n=389] and albiglutide [n=1682]). As secondary outcomes, we evaluated the impacts of targeting therapy based on glycaemic response on weight change, tolerability and longer-term risk of new-onset microvascular complications, macrovascular complications and adverse kidney events. RESULTS: Model development identified marked heterogeneity in glycaemic response, with 4787 (17.5%) of the development cohort having a predicted HbA1c benefit >3 mmol/mol (>0.3%) with SGLT2i over GLP1-RA and 5551 (20.3%) having a predicted HbA1c benefit >3 mmol/mol with GLP1-RA over SGLT2i. Calibration was good in hold-back validation, and external validation in an independent Scottish dataset identified clear differences in glycaemic outcomes between those predicted to benefit from each therapy. Sex, with women markedly more responsive to GLP1-RA, was identified as a major treatment effect modifier in both the UK observational datasets and in clinical trial data: HARMONY-7 liraglutide (GLP1-RA): 4.4 mmol/mol (95% credible interval [95% CrI] 2.2, 6.3) (0.4% [95% CrI 0.2, 0.6]) greater response in women than men. Targeting the two therapies based on predicted glycaemic response was also associated with improvements in short-term tolerability and long-term risk of new-onset microvascular complications. CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: Precision medicine approaches can facilitate effective individualised treatment choice between SGLT2i and GLP1-RA therapies, and the use of routinely collected clinical features for treatment selection could support low-cost deployment in many countries.

Risk factor associations for severe COVID-19, influenza and pneumonia in people with diabetes to inform future pandemic preparations: UK population-based cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare clinical and sociodemographic risk factors for severe COVID-19, influenza and pneumonia, in people with diabetes. DESIGN: Population-based cohort study. SETTING: UK primary care records (Clinical Practice Research Datalink) linked to mortality and hospital records. PARTICIPANTS: Individuals with type 1 and type 2 diabetes (COVID-19 cohort: n=43 033 type 1 diabetes and n=584 854 type 2 diabetes, influenza and pneumonia cohort: n=42 488 type 1 diabetes and n=585 289 type 2 diabetes). PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: COVID-19 hospitalisation from 1 February 2020 to 31 October 2020 (pre-COVID-19 vaccination roll-out), and influenza and pneumonia hospitalisation from 1 September 2016 to 31 May 2019 (pre-COVID-19 pandemic). Secondary outcomes were COVID-19 and pneumonia mortality. Associations between clinical and sociodemographic risk factors and each outcome were assessed using multivariable Cox proportional hazards models. In people with type 2 diabetes, we explored modifying effects of glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) and body mass index (BMI) by age, sex and ethnicity. RESULTS: In type 2 diabetes, poor glycaemic control and severe obesity were consistently associated with increased risk of hospitalisation for COVID-19, influenza and pneumonia. The highest HbA1c and BMI-associated relative risks were observed in people aged under 70 years. Sociodemographic-associated risk differed markedly by respiratory infection, particularly for ethnicity. Compared with people of white ethnicity, black and south Asian groups had a greater risk of COVID-19 hospitalisation, but a lesser risk of pneumonia hospitalisation. Risk factor associations for type 1 diabetes and for type 2 diabetes mortality were broadly consistent with the primary analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Clinical risk factors of high HbA1c and severe obesity are consistently associated with severe outcomes from COVID-19, influenza and pneumonia, especially in younger people. In contrast, associations with sociodemographic risk factors differed by type of respiratory infection. This emphasises that risk stratification should be specific to individual respiratory infections.

Dirichlet process mixture models to impute missing predictor data in counterfactual prediction models: an application to predict optimal type 2 diabetes therapy.

BACKGROUND: The handling of missing data is a challenge for inference and regression modelling. A particular challenge is dealing with missing predictor information, particularly when trying to build and make predictions from models for use in clinical practice. METHODS: We utilise a flexible Bayesian approach for handling missing predictor information in regression models. This provides practitioners with full posterior predictive distributions for both the missing predictor information (conditional on the observed predictors) and the outcome-of-interest. We apply this approach to a previously proposed counterfactual treatment selection model for type 2 diabetes second-line therapies. Our approach combines a regression model and a Dirichlet process mixture model (DPMM), where the former defines the treatment selection model, and the latter provides a flexible way to model the joint distribution of the predictors. RESULTS: We show that DPMMs can model complex relationships between predictor variables and can provide powerful means of fitting models to incomplete data (under missing-completely-at-random and missing-at-random assumptions). This framework ensures that the posterior distribution for the parameters and the conditional average treatment effect estimates automatically reflect the additional uncertainties associated with missing data due to the hierarchical model structure. We also demonstrate that in the presence of multiple missing predictors, the DPMM model can be used to explore which variable(s), if collected, could provide the most additional information about the likely outcome. CONCLUSIONS: When developing clinical prediction models, DPMMs offer a flexible way to model complex covariate structures and handle missing predictor information. DPMM-based counterfactual prediction models can also provide additional information to support clinical decision-making, including allowing predictions with appropriate uncertainty to be made for individuals with incomplete predictor data.

Clinical Prediction Models Combining Routine Clinical Measures Have High Accuracy in Identifying Youth-Onset Type 2 Diabetes Defined by Maintained Endogenous Insulin Secretion: The SEARCH for Diabetes in Youth Study.

OBJECTIVE: With high prevalence of obesity and overlapping features between diabetes subtypes, accurately classifying youth-onset diabetes can be challenging. We aimed to develop prediction models that, using characteristics available at diabetes diagnosis, can identify youth who will retain endogenous insulin secretion at levels consistent with type 2 diabetes (T2D). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We studied 2,966 youth with diabetes in the prospective SEARCH for Diabetes in Youth study (diagnosis age ≤19 years) to develop prediction models to identify participants with fasting C-peptide ≥250 pmol/L (≥0.75 ng/mL) after >3 years' (median 74 months) diabetes duration. Models included clinical measures at the baseline visit, at a mean diabetes duration of 11 months (age, BMI, sex, waist circumference, HDL cholesterol), with and without islet autoantibodies (GADA, IA-2A) and a Type 1 Diabetes Genetic Risk Score (T1DGRS). RESULTS: Models using routine clinical measures with or without autoantibodies and T1DGRS were highly accurate in identifying participants with C-peptide ≥0.75 ng/mL (17% of participants; 2.3% and 53% of those with and without positive autoantibodies) (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve [AUCROC] 0.95-0.98). In internal validation, optimism was very low, with excellent calibration (slope 0.995-0.999). Models retained high performance for predicting retained C-peptide in older youth with obesity (AUCROC 0.88-0.96) and in subgroups defined by self-reported race/ethnicity (AUCROC 0.88-0.97), autoantibody status (AUCROC 0.87-0.96), and clinically diagnosed diabetes types (AUCROC 0.81-0.92). CONCLUSIONS: Prediction models combining routine clinical measures at diabetes diagnosis, with or without islet autoantibodies or T1DGRS, can accurately identify youth with diabetes who maintain endogenous insulin secretion in the range associated with T2D.

Recent UK type 2 diabetes treatment guidance represents a near whole population indication for SGLT2-inhibitor therapy.

Recent type 2 diabetes guidance from the UK's National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) proposes offering SGLT2-inhibitor therapy to people with established atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) or heart failure, and considering SGLT2-inhibitor therapy for those at high-risk of cardiovascular disease defined as a 10-year cardiovascular risk of > 10% using the QRISK2 algorithm. We used a contemporary population-representative UK cohort of people with type 2 diabetes to assess the implications of this guidance. 93.1% of people currently on anti-hyperglycaemic treatment are now recommended or considered for SGLT2-inhibitor therapy under the new guidance, with the majority (59.6%) eligible on the basis of QRISK2 rather than established ASCVD or heart failure (33.6%). Applying these results to the approximately 2.20 million people in England currently on anti-hyperglycaemic medication suggests 1.75 million people will now be considered for additional SGLT2-inhibitor therapy, taking the total cost of SGLT2-inhibitor therapy in England to over £1 billion per year. Given that older people, those of non-white ethnic groups, and those at lower cardiovascular disease risk were underrepresented in the clinical trials which were used to inform this guidance, careful evaluation of the impact and safety of increased SGLT2-inhibitor prescribing across different populations is urgently required. Evidence of benefit should be weighed against the major cost implications for the UK National Health Service.

Clinical prediction models combining routine clinical measures identify participants with youth-onset diabetes who maintain insulin secretion in the range associated with type 2 diabetes: The SEARCH for Diabetes in Youth Study.

Objective: With the high prevalence of pediatric obesity and overlapping features between diabetes subtypes, accurately classifying youth-onset diabetes can be challenging. We aimed to develop prediction models that, using characteristics available at diabetes diagnosis, can identify youth who will retain endogenous insulin secretion at levels consistent with type 2 diabetes (T2D). Methods: We studied 2,966 youth with diabetes in the prospective SEARCH study (diagnosis age ≤19 years) to develop prediction models to identify participants with fasting c-peptide ≥250 pmol/L (≥0.75ng/ml) after >3 years (median 74 months) of diabetes duration. Models included clinical measures at baseline visit, at a mean diabetes duration of 11 months (age, BMI, sex, waist circumference, HDL-C), with and without islet autoantibodies (GADA, IA-2A) and a Type 1 Diabetes Genetic Risk Score (T1DGRS). Results: Models using routine clinical measures with or without autoantibodies and T1DGRS were highly accurate in identifying participants with c-peptide ≥0.75 ng/ml (17% of participants; 2.3% and 53% of those with and without positive autoantibodies) (area under receiver operator curve [AUCROC] 0.95-0.98). In internal validation, optimism was very low, with excellent calibration (slope=0.995-0.999). Models retained high performance for predicting retained c-peptide in older youth with obesity (AUCROC 0.88-0.96), and in subgroups defined by self-reported race/ethnicity (AUCROC 0.88-0.97), autoantibody status (AUCROC 0.87-0.96), and clinically diagnosed diabetes types (AUCROC 0.81-0.92). Conclusion: Prediction models combining routine clinical measures at diabetes diagnosis, with or without islet autoantibodies or T1DGRS, can accurately identify youth with diabetes who maintain endogenous insulin secretion in the range associated with type 2 diabetes.

Incretin hormone responses to carbohydrate and protein/fat are preserved in adults with sulfonylurea-treated KCNJ11 neonatal diabetes.

The incretin hormones glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) and glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide (GIP), are thought to be the main drivers of insulin secretion in individuals with sulfonylurea (SU)-treated KCNJ11 permanent neonatal diabetes. The aim of this study was to assess for the first time the incretin hormone response to carbohydrate and protein/fat in adults with sulfonylurea-treated KCNJ11 permanent neonatal diabetes compared with that of controls without diabetes. Participants were given a breakfast high in carbohydrate and an isocaloric breakfast high in protein/fat on two different mornings. Incremental area under the curve and total area under the curve (0-240 minutes) for total GLP-1 and GIP were compared between groups, using non-parametric statistical methods. Post-meal GLP-1 and GIP secretion were similar in cases and controls, suggesting this process is adenosine triphosphate-sensitive potassium channel-independent. Future research will investigate whether treatments targeting the incretin pathway are effective in individuals with KCNJ11 permanent neonatal diabetes who do not have good glycemic control on sulfonylurea alone.

Comparison of causal forest and regression-based approaches to evaluate treatment effect heterogeneity: an application for type 2 diabetes precision medicine.

OBJECTIVE: Precision medicine requires reliable identification of variation in patient-level outcomes with different available treatments, often termed treatment effect heterogeneity. We aimed to evaluate the comparative utility of individualized treatment selection strategies based on predicted individual-level treatment effects from a causal forest machine learning algorithm and a penalized regression model. METHODS: Cohort study characterizing individual-level glucose-lowering response (6 month reduction in HbA1c) in people with type 2 diabetes initiating SGLT2-inhibitor or DPP4-inhibitor therapy. Model development set comprised 1,428 participants in the CANTATA-D and CANTATA-D2 randomised clinical trials of SGLT2-inhibitors versus DPP4-inhibitors. For external validation, calibration of observed versus predicted differences in HbA1c in patient strata defined by size of predicted HbA1c benefit was evaluated in 18,741 patients in UK primary care (Clinical Practice Research Datalink). RESULTS: Heterogeneity in treatment effects was detected in clinical trial participants with both approaches (proportion predicted to have a benefit on SGLT2-inhibitor therapy over DPP4-inhibitor therapy: causal forest: 98.6%; penalized regression: 81.7%). In validation, calibration was good with penalized regression but sub-optimal with causal forest. A strata with an HbA1c benefit > 10 mmol/mol with SGLT2-inhibitors (3.7% of patients, observed benefit 11.0 mmol/mol [95%CI 8.0-14.0]) was identified using penalized regression but not causal forest, and a much larger strata with an HbA1c benefit 5-10 mmol with SGLT2-inhibitors was identified with penalized regression (regression: 20.9% of patients, observed benefit 7.8 mmol/mol (95%CI 6.7-8.9); causal forest 11.6%, observed benefit 8.7 mmol/mol (95%CI 7.4-10.1). CONCLUSIONS: Consistent with recent results for outcome prediction with clinical data, when evaluating treatment effect heterogeneity researchers should not rely on causal forest or other similar machine learning algorithms alone, and must compare outputs with standard regression, which in this evaluation was superior.

Genetic effects on the timing of parturition and links to fetal birth weight.

The timing of parturition is crucial for neonatal survival and infant health. Yet, its genetic basis remains largely unresolved. We present a maternal genome-wide meta-analysis of gestational duration (n = 195,555), identifying 22 associated loci (24 independent variants) and an enrichment in genes differentially expressed during labor. A meta-analysis of preterm delivery (18,797 cases, 260,246 controls) revealed six associated loci and large genetic similarities with gestational duration. Analysis of the parental transmitted and nontransmitted alleles (n = 136,833) shows that 15 of the gestational duration genetic variants act through the maternal genome, whereas 7 act both through the maternal and fetal genomes and 2 act only via the fetal genome. Finally, the maternal effects on gestational duration show signs of antagonistic pleiotropy with the fetal effects on birth weight: maternal alleles that increase gestational duration have negative fetal effects on birth weight. The present study provides insights into the genetic effects on the timing of parturition and the complex maternal-fetal relationship between gestational duration and birth weight.

Age of Diagnosis Does Not Alter the Presentation or Progression of Robustly Defined Adult-Onset Type 1 Diabetes.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether presentation, progression, and genetic susceptibility of robustly defined adult-onset type 1 diabetes (T1D) are altered by diagnosis age. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We compared the relationship between diagnosis age and presentation, C-peptide loss (annual change in urine C-peptide-creatinine ratio [UCPCR]), and genetic susceptibility (T1D genetic risk score [GRS]) in adults with confirmed T1D in the prospective StartRight study, 1,798 adults with new-onset diabetes. T1D was defined in two ways: two or more positive islet autoantibodies (of GAD antibody, IA-2 antigen, and ZnT8 autoantibody) irrespective of clinical diagnosis (n = 385) or one positive islet autoantibody and a clinical diagnosis of T1D (n = 180). RESULTS: In continuous analysis, age of diagnosis was not associated with C-peptide loss for either definition of T1D (P > 0.1), with mean (95% CI) annual C-peptide loss in those diagnosed before and after 35 years of age (median age of T1D defined by two or more positive autoantibodies): 39% (31-46) vs. 44% (38-50) with two or more positive islet autoantibodies and 43% (33-51) vs. 39% (31-46) with clinician diagnosis confirmed by one positive islet autoantibody (P > 0.1). Baseline C-peptide and T1D GRS were unaffected by age of diagnosis or T1D definition (P > 0.1). In T1D defined by two or more autoantibodies, presentation severity was similar in those diagnosed before and after 35 years of age: unintentional weight loss, 80% (95% CI 74-85) vs. 82% (76-87); ketoacidosis, 24% (18-30) vs. 19% (14-25); and presentation glucose, 21 mmol/L (19-22) vs. 21 mmol/L (20-22) (all P ≥ 0.1). Despite similar presentation, older adults were less likely to be diagnosed with T1D, insulin-treated, or admitted to hospital. CONCLUSIONS: When adult-onset T1D is robustly defined, the presentation characteristics, progression, and T1D genetic susceptibility are not altered by age of diagnosis.

The impact of population-level HbA1c screening on reducing diabetes diagnostic delay in middle-aged adults: a UK Biobank analysis.

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: Screening programmes can detect cases of undiagnosed diabetes earlier than symptomatic or incidental diagnosis. However, the improvement in time to diagnosis achieved by screening programmes compared with routine clinical care is unclear. We aimed to use the UK Biobank population-based study to provide the first population-based estimate of the reduction in time to diabetes diagnosis that could be achieved by HbA1c-based screening in middle-aged adults. METHODS: We studied UK Biobank participants aged 40-70 years with HbA1c measured at enrolment (but not fed back to participants/clinicians) and linked primary and secondary healthcare data (n=179,923) and identified those with a pre-existing diabetes diagnosis (n=13,077, 7.3%). Among the remaining participants (n=166,846) without a diabetes diagnosis, we used an elevated enrolment HbA1c level (≥48 mmol/mol [≥6.5%]) to identify those with undiagnosed diabetes. For this group, we used Kaplan-Meier analysis to assess the time between enrolment HbA1c measurement and subsequent clinical diabetes diagnosis up to 10 years, and Cox regression to identify clinical factors associated with delayed diabetes diagnosis. RESULTS: In total, 1.0% (1703/166,846) of participants without a diabetes diagnosis had undiagnosed diabetes based on calibrated HbA1c levels at UK Biobank enrolment, with a median HbA1c level of 51.3 mmol/mol (IQR 49.1-57.2) (6.8% [6.6-7.4]). These participants represented an additional 13.0% of diabetes cases in the study population relative to the 13,077 participants with a diabetes diagnosis. The median time to clinical diagnosis for those with undiagnosed diabetes was 2.2 years, with a median HbA1c at clinical diagnosis of 58.2 mmol/mol (IQR 51.0-80.0) (7.5% [6.8-9.5]). Female participants with lower HbA1c and BMI measurements at enrolment experienced the longest delay to clinical diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: Our population-based study shows that HbA1c screening in adults aged 40-70 years can reduce the time to diabetes diagnosis by a median of 2.2 years compared with routine clinical care. The findings support the use of HbA1c screening to reduce the time for which individuals are living with undiagnosed diabetes.

Patient preference for second- and third-line therapies in type 2 diabetes: a prespecified secondary endpoint of the TriMaster study.

Patient preference is very important for medication selection in chronic medical conditions, like type 2 diabetes, where there are many different drugs available. Patient preference balances potential efficacy with potential side effects. As both aspects of drug response can vary markedly between individuals, this decision could be informed by the patient personally experiencing the alternative medications, as occurs in a crossover trial. In the TriMaster (NCT02653209, ISRCTN12039221), randomized double-blind, three-way crossover trial patients received three different second- or third-line once-daily type 2 diabetes glucose-lowering drugs (pioglitazone 30 mg, sitagliptin 100 mg and canagliflozin 100 mg). As part of a prespecified secondary endpoint, we examined patients' drug preference after they had tried all three drugs. In total, 448 participants were treated with all three drugs which overall showed similar glycemic control (HbA1c on pioglitazone 59.5 sitagliptin 59.9, canagliflozin 60.5 mmol mol-1, P = 0.19). In total, 115 patients (25%) preferred pioglitazone, 158 patients (35%) sitagliptin and 175 patients (38%) canagliflozin. The drug preferred by individual patients was associated with a lower HbA1c (mean: 4.6; 95% CI: 3.9, 5.3) mmol mol-1 lower versus nonpreferred) and fewer side effects (mean: 0.50; 95% CI: 0.35, 0.64) fewer side effects versus nonpreferred). Allocating therapy based on the individually preferred drugs, rather than allocating all patients the overall most preferred drug (canagliflozin), would result in more patients achieving the lowest HbA1c for them (70% versus 30%) and the fewest side effects (67% versus 50%). When precision approaches do not predict a clear optimal therapy for an individual, allowing patients to try potential suitable medications before they choose long-term therapy could be a practical alternative to optimizing treatment for type 2 diabetes.

Patient stratification for determining optimal second-line and third-line therapy for type 2 diabetes: the TriMaster study.

Precision medicine aims to treat an individual based on their clinical characteristics. A differential drug response, critical to using these features for therapy selection, has never been examined directly in type 2 diabetes. In this study, we tested two hypotheses: (1) individuals with body mass index (BMI) > 30 kg/m2, compared to BMI ≤ 30 kg/m2, have greater glucose lowering with thiazolidinediones than with DPP4 inhibitors, and (2) individuals with estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) 60-90 ml/min/1.73 m2, compared to eGFR >90 ml/min/1.73 m2, have greater glucose lowering with DPP4 inhibitors than with SGLT2 inhibitors. The primary endpoint for both hypotheses was the achieved HbA1c difference between strata for the two drugs. In total, 525 people with type 2 diabetes participated in this UK-based randomized, double-blind, three-way crossover trial of 16 weeks of treatment with each of sitagliptin 100 mg once daily, canagliflozin 100 mg once daily and pioglitazone 30 mg once daily added to metformin alone or metformin plus sulfonylurea. Overall, the achieved HbA1c was similar for the three drugs: pioglitazone 59.6 mmol/mol, sitagliptin 60.0 mmol/mol and canagliflozin 60.6 mmol/mol (P = 0.2). Participants with BMI > 30 kg/m2, compared to BMI ≤ 30 kg/m2, had a 2.88 mmol/mol (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.98, 4.79) lower HbA1c on pioglitazone than on sitagliptin (n = 356, P = 0.003). Participants with eGFR 60-90 ml/min/1.73 m2, compared to eGFR >90 ml/min/1.73 m2, had a 2.90 mmol/mol (95% CI: 1.19, 4.61) lower HbA1c on sitagliptin than on canagliflozin (n = 342, P = 0.001). There were 2,201 adverse events reported, and 447/525 (85%) randomized participants experienced an adverse event on at least one of the study drugs. In this precision medicine trial in type 2 diabetes, our findings support the use of simple, routinely available clinical measures to identify the drug class most likely to deliver the greatest glycemic reduction for a given patient. (ClinicalTrials.gov registration: NCT02653209 ; ISRCTN registration: 12039221 .).

Development of a treatment selection algorithm for SGLT2 and DPP-4 inhibitor therapies in people with type 2 diabetes: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Current treatment guidelines do not provide recommendations to support the selection of treatment for most people with type 2 diabetes. We aimed to develop and validate an algorithm to allow selection of optimal treatment based on glycaemic response, weight change, and tolerability outcomes when choosing between SGLT2 inhibitor or DPP-4 inhibitor therapies. METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study, we identified patients initiating SGLT2 and DPP-4 inhibitor therapies after Jan 1, 2013, from the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD). We excluded those who received SGLT2 or DPP-4 inhibitors as first-line treatment or insulin at the same time, had estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) of less than 45 mL/min per 1·73 m2, or did not have a valid baseline glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) measure (<53 or ≥120 mmol/mol). The primary efficacy outcome was the HbA1c value reached 6 months after drug initiation, adjusted for baseline HbA1c. Clinical features associated with differential HbA1c outcome on the two therapies were identified in CPRD (n=26 877), and replicated in reanalysis of 14 clinical trials (n=10 414). An algorithm to predict individual-level differential HbA1c outcome on the two therapies was developed in CPRD (derivation; n=14 069) and validated in head-to-head trials (n=2499) and CPRD (independent validation; n=9376). In CPRD, we further explored heterogeneity in 6-month weight change and treatment discontinuation. FINDINGS: Among 10 253 patients initiating SGLT2 inhibitors and 16 624 patients initiating DPP-4 inhibitors in CPRD, baseline HbA1c, age, BMI, eGFR, and alanine aminotransferase were associated with differential HbA1c outcome with SGLT2 inhibitor and DPP-4 inhibitor therapies. The median age of participants was 62·0 years (IQR 55·0-70·0). 10 016 (37·3%) were women and 16 861 (62·7%) were men. An algorithm based on these five features identified a subgroup, representing around four in ten CPRD patients, with a 5 mmol/mol or greater observed benefit with SGLT2 inhibitors in all validation cohorts (CPRD 8·8 mmol/mol [95% CI 7·8-9·8]; CANTATA-D and CANTATA-D2 trials 5·8 mmol/mol [3·9-7·7]; BI1245.20 trial 6·6 mmol/mol [2·2-11·0]). In CPRD, predicted differential HbA1c response with SGLT2 inhibitor and DPP-4 inhibitor therapies was not associated with weight change. Overall treatment discontinuation within 6 months was similar in patients predicted to have an HbA1c benefit with SGLT2 inhibitors over DPP-4 inhibitors (median 15·2% [13·2-20·3] vs 14·4% [12·9-16·7]). A smaller subgroup predicted to have greater HbA1c reduction with DPP-4 inhibitors were twice as likely to discontinue SGLT2 inhibitors than DPP-4 inhibitors (median 26·8% [23·4-31·0] vs 14·8% [12·9-16·8]). INTERPRETATION: A validated treatment selection algorithm for SGLT2 inhibitor and DPP-4 inhibitor therapies can support decisions on optimal treatment for people with type 2 diabetes. FUNDING: BHF-Turing Cardiovascular Data Science Award and the UK Medical Research Council.

Routine Islet Autoantibody Testing in Clinically Diagnosed Adult-Onset Type 1 Diabetes Can Help Identify Misclassification and the Possibility of Successful Insulin Cessation.

OBJECTIVE: Recent joint American Diabetes Association and European Association for the Study of Diabetes guidelines recommend routine islet autoantibody testing in all adults newly diagnosed with type 1 diabetes. We aimed to assess the impact of routine islet autoantibody testing in this population. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We prospectively assessed the relationship between islet autoantibody status (GADA, IA-2A, and ZNT8A), clinical and genetic characteristics, and progression (annual change in urine C-peptide-to-creatinine ratio [UCPCR]) in 722 adults (≥18 years old at diagnosis) with clinically diagnosed type 1 diabetes and diabetes duration <12 months. We also evaluated changes in treatment and glycemia over 2 years after informing participants and their clinicians of autoantibody results. RESULTS: Of 722 participants diagnosed with type 1 diabetes, 24.8% (179) were autoantibody negative. This group had genetic and C-peptide characteristics suggestive of a high prevalence of nonautoimmune diabetes: lower mean type 1 diabetes genetic risk score (islet autoantibody negative vs. positive: 10.85 vs. 13.09 [P < 0.001] [type 2 diabetes 10.12]) and lower annual change in C-peptide (UCPCR), -24% vs. -43% (P < 0.001).After median 24 months of follow-up, treatment change occurred in 36.6% (60 of 164) of autoantibody-negative participants: 22.6% (37 of 164) discontinued insulin, with HbA1c similar to that of participants continuing insulin (57.5 vs. 60.8 mmol/mol [7.4 vs. 7.7%], P = 0.4), and 14.0% (23 of 164) added adjuvant agents to insulin. CONCLUSIONS: In adult-onset clinically diagnosed type 1 diabetes, negative islet autoantibodies should prompt careful consideration of other diabetes subtypes. When routinely measured, negative antibodies are associated with successful insulin cessation. These findings support recent recommendations for routine islet autoantibody assessment in adult-onset type 1 diabetes.

Islet Autoantibody Level Distribution in Type 1 Diabetes and Their Association With Genetic and Clinical Characteristics.

CONTEXT: The importance of the autoantibody level at diagnosis of type 1 diabetes (T1D) is not clear. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to assess the association of glutamate decarboxylase (GADA), islet antigen-2 (IA-2A), and zinc transporter 8 (ZnT8A) autoantibody levels with clinical and genetic characteristics at diagnosis of T1D. METHODS: We conducted a prospective, cross-sectional study. GADA, IA-2A, and ZnT8A were measured in 1644 individuals with T1D at diagnosis using radiobinding assays. Associations between autoantibody levels and the clinical and genetic characteristics for individuals were assessed in those positive for these autoantibodies. We performed replication in an independent cohort of 449 people with T1D. RESULTS: GADA and IA-2A levels exhibited a bimodal distribution at diagnosis. High GADA level was associated with older age at diagnosis (median 27 years vs 19 years, P = 9 × 10-17), female sex (52% vs 37%, P = 1 × 10-8), other autoimmune diseases (13% vs 6%, P = 3 × 10-6), and HLA-DR3-DQ2 (58% vs 51%, P = .006). High IA-2A level was associated with younger age of diagnosis (median 17 years vs 23 years, P = 3 × 10-7), HLA-DR4-DQ8 (66% vs 50%, P = 1 × 10-6), and ZnT8A positivity (77% vs 52%, P = 1 × 10-15). We replicated our findings in an independent cohort of 449 people with T1D where autoantibodies were measured using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays. CONCLUSION: Islet autoantibody levels provide additional information over positivity in T1D at diagnosis. Bimodality of GADA and IA-2A autoantibody levels highlights the novel aspect of heterogeneity of T1D. This may have implications for T1D prediction, treatment, and pathogenesis.