4.3 Article

Diabetes autoantibodies do not predict progression to diabetes in adults: the Diabetes Prevention Program

Journal

DIABETIC MEDICINE
Volume 31, Issue 9, Pages 1064-1068

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/dme.12437

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK) of the National Institutes of Health [U01 DK048489]
  2. NIDDK
  3. Indian Health Service
  4. Office of Research on Minority Health
  5. National Institute of Child Health and Human Development
  6. National Institute on Aging
  7. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
  8. Office of Research on Women's Health
  9. Department of Veterans Affairs
  10. American Diabetes Association

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Aims To determine if the presence of diabetes autoantibodies predicts the development of diabetes among participants in the Diabetes Prevention Program. Methods A total of 3050 participants were randomized into three treatment groups: intensive lifestyle intervention, metformin and placebo. Glutamic acid decarboxylase (GAD) 65 autoantibodies and insulinoma-associated-2 autoantibodies were measured at baseline and participants were followed for 3.2 years for the development of diabetes. Results The overall prevalence of GAD autoantibodies was 4.0%, and it varied across racial/ethnic groups from 2.4% among Asian-Pacific Islanders to 7.0% among non-Hispanic black people. There were no significant differences in BMI or metabolic variables (glucose, insulin, HbA(1c), estimated insulin resistance, corrected insulin response) stratified by baseline GAD antibody status. GAD autoantibody positivity did not predict diabetes overall (adjusted hazard ratio 0.98; 95% CI 0.56-1.73) or in any of the three treatment groups. Insulinoma-associated-2 autoantibodies were positive in only one participant (0.033%). Conclusions These data suggest that 'diabetes autoimmunity', as reflected by GAD antibodies and insulinoma-associated-2 autoantibodies, in middle-aged individuals at risk for diabetes is not a clinically relevant risk factor for progression to diabetes.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available