4.7 Article

LADA and CARDS: A Prospective Study of Clinical Outcome in Established Adult-Onset Autoimmune Diabetes

期刊

DIABETES CARE
卷 37, 期 6, 页码 1643-1649

出版社

AMER DIABETES ASSOC
DOI: 10.2337/dc13-2383

关键词

-

资金

  1. Diabetes UK
  2. National Health Service Research and Development Forum (England)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

OBJECTIVE Diabetes-associated autoantibodies can be detected in adult-onset diabetes, even when initially non insulin requiring, i.e., with latent autoimmune diabetes. We aimed to identify adult-onset autoimmune diabetes in patients with established type 2 diabetes participating in the Collaborative Atorvastatin Diabetes Study (CARDS) to characterize their phenotype and clinical outcome. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS We prospectively studied 2,425 European patients with presumed type 2 diabetes (mean age 62 years, diabetes duration 7.9 years) for outcomes at 3.9 years after randomization to either atorvastatin or placebo. Subjects were screened for autoantibodies to GAD (GADA), insulinoma-associated antigen-2 (IA-2A), and zinc-transporter 8 (ZnT8A). RESULTS A total of 173 patients (7.1%) had GADA, of whom 11 (0.5%) and 5(0.2%) were also positive for IA-2A and ZnT8A, respectively. At baseline, 44% of GADA-positive patients were not on insulin. Fewer autoantibody-positive than autoantibody-negative patients had metabolic syndrome (64 vs. 80%), and more were on insulin (56 vs. 17%) (P < 0.0001 for each) without lower HbA(1c), (69 mmol/mol [8.5%] vs. 62 mmol/mol [7.8%]). The frequency of microvascular and macrovascular events was similar in both cohorts, independent of atorvastatin. CONCLUSIONS Adult-onset autoimmune diabetes was prevalent, even in patients with established diabetes presumed to have type 2 diabetes. After 11.8 years' diabetes duration, nearly half the patients with autoimmune diabetes were not on insulin treatment and almost two-thirds had metabolic syndrome. The type of diabetes, whether autoimmune diabetes or type 2 diabetes, did not impact the risk of microvascular disease.

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

4.7
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