4.8 Review

Environmental Determinants of Type 1 Diabetes: From Association to Proving Causality

期刊

FRONTIERS IN IMMUNOLOGY
卷 12, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2021.737964

关键词

type 1 diabetes (T1D); seroconversion; auto-antibodies; autoimmunity; environmental factors; gut micro biome; obesity; infection; immunology

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This review highlights the importance of environmental factors in the development of type 1 diabetes (T1D), focusing on infections, growth and obesity in infancy, the gut microbiome, and lifestyle choices. Evidence suggests that enterovirus infection, rapid weight gain in early life, and the microbiome are the most significant environmental determinants of T1D. Future research should explore these triggers further through randomized controlled trials and prospective studies to aid in the development of public health prevention strategies.
The rising incidence of type 1 diabetes (T1D) cannot be ascribed to genetics alone, and causative environmental triggers and drivers must also be contributing. The prospective TEDDY study has provided the greatest contributions in modern time, by addressing misconceptions and refining the search strategy for the future. This review outlines the evidence to date to support the pathways from association to causality, across all stages of T1D (seroconversion to beta cell failure). We focus on infections and vaccinations; infant growth and childhood obesity; the gut microbiome and the lifestyle factors which cultivate it. Of these, the environmental determinants which have the most supporting evidence are enterovirus infection, rapid weight gain in early life, and the microbiome. We provide an infographic illustrating the key environmental determinants in T1D and their likelihood of effect. The next steps are to investigate these environmental triggers, ideally though gold-standard randomised controlled trials and further prospective studies, to help explore public health prevention strategies.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据