Texas Children's Hospital, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA.
Division of Pediatric Endocrinology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA.
Diabetologia. 2021 Apr;64(4):836-844. doi: 10.1007/s00125-020-05365-4. Epub 2021 Jan 26.
AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: We aimed to compare characteristics of individuals identified in the peri-diagnostic range by Index60 (composite glucose and C-peptide measure) ≥2.00, 2 h OGTT glucose ≥11.1 mmol/l, or both.
We studied autoantibody-positive participants in the Type 1 Diabetes TrialNet Pathway to Prevention study who, at their baseline OGTT, had 2 h blood glucose ≥11.1 mmol/l and/or Index60 ≥2.00 (n = 354, median age = 11.2 years, age range = 1.7-46.6; 49% male, 83% non-Hispanic White). Type 1 diabetes-relevant characteristics (e.g., age, C-peptide, autoantibodies, BMI) were compared among three mutually exclusive groups: 2 h glucose ≥11.1 mmol/l and Index60 <2.00 [Glu(+), n = 76], 2 h glucose <11.1 mmol/l and Index60 ≥2.00 [Ind(+), n = 113], or both 2 h glucose ≥11.1 mmol/l and Index60 ≥2.00 [Glu(+)/Ind(+), n = 165].
Participants in Glu(+), vs those in Ind(+) or Glu(+)/Ind(+), were older (mean ages = 22.9, 11.8 and 14.7 years, respectively), had higher early (30-0 min) C-peptide response (1.0, 0.50 and 0.43 nmol/l), higher AUC C-peptide (2.33, 1.13 and 1.10 nmol/l), higher percentage of overweight/obesity (58%, 16% and 30%) (all comparisons, p < 0.0001), and a lower percentage of multiple autoantibody positivity (72%, 92% and 93%) (p < 0.001). OGTT-stimulated C-peptide and glucose patterns of Glu(+) differed appreciably from Ind(+) and Glu(+)/Ind(+). Progression to diabetes occurred in 61% (46/76) of Glu(+) and 63% (71/113) of Ind(+). Even though Index60 ≥2.00 was not a Pathway to Prevention diagnostic criterion, Ind(+) had a 4 year cumulative diabetes incidence of 95% (95% CI 86%, 98%).
CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: Participants in the Ind(+) group had more typical characteristics of type 1 diabetes than participants in the Glu(+) did and were as likely to be diagnosed. However, unlike Glu(+) participants, Ind(+) participants were not identified at the baseline OGTT.
目的/假设:我们旨在比较 Index60(复合葡萄糖和 C 肽测量值)≥2.00、2 小时 OGTT 葡萄糖≥11.1mmol/l 或两者兼有的个体在诊断前阶段的特征。
我们研究了在 1 型糖尿病试验网途径预防研究中自身抗体阳性的参与者,他们在基线 OGTT 时 2 小时血糖≥11.1mmol/l 和/或 Index60≥2.00(n=354,中位年龄 11.2 岁,年龄范围 1.7-46.6;49%为男性,83%为非西班牙裔白人)。在三个互斥组中比较了与 1 型糖尿病相关的特征(例如年龄、C 肽、自身抗体、BMI):2 小时血糖≥11.1mmol/l 且 Index60<2.00[Glu(+),n=76]、2 小时血糖<11.1mmol/l 且 Index60≥2.00[Ind(+),n=113]或两者 2 小时血糖≥11.1mmol/l 且 Index60≥2.00[Glu(+)/Ind(+),n=165]。
与 Ind(+)或 Glu(+)/Ind(+)相比,Glu(+)组的参与者年龄更大(平均年龄分别为 22.9、11.8 和 14.7 岁),早期(30-0 分钟)C 肽反应更高(1.0、0.50 和 0.43nmol/l),AUC C 肽更高(2.33、1.13 和 1.10nmol/l),超重/肥胖比例更高(58%、16%和 30%)(所有比较,p<0.0001),且多个自身抗体阳性比例更低(72%、92%和 93%)(p<0.001)。与 Ind(+)和 Glu(+)/Ind(+)相比,Glu(+)的 OGTT 刺激 C 肽和葡萄糖模式明显不同。在 Glu(+)中,有 61%(46/76)发生糖尿病,在 Ind(+)中,有 63%(71/113)发生糖尿病。尽管 Index60≥2.00 不是预防途径的诊断标准,但 Ind(+)的 4 年累积糖尿病发病率为 95%(95%CI 86%,98%)。
结论/解释:与 Glu(+)相比,Ind(+)组的参与者具有更典型的 1 型糖尿病特征,并且同样有可能被诊断为 1 型糖尿病。然而,与 Glu(+)参与者不同的是,Ind(+)参与者在基线 OGTT 时未被识别。