Islet Autoantibody Type-Specific Titer Thresholds Improve Stratification of Risk of Progression to Type 1 Diabetes in Children

Consensus guidance for monitoring individuals with islet autoantibody-positive pre-stage 3 type 1 diabetes

Given the proven benefits of screening to reduce diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) likelihood at the time of stage 3 type 1 diabetes diagnosis, and emerging availability of therapy to delay disease progression, type 1 diabetes screening programmes are being increasingly emphasised. Once broadly implemented, screening initiatives will identify significant numbers of islet autoantibody-positive (IAb+) children and adults who are at risk of (confirmed single IAb+) or living with (multiple IAb+) early-stage (stage 1 and stage 2) type 1 diabetes. These individuals will need monitoring for disease progression; much of this care will happen in non-specialised settings. To inform this monitoring, JDRF in conjunction with international experts and societies developed consensus guidance. Broad advice from this guidance includes the following: (1) partnerships should be fostered between endocrinologists and primary-care providers to care for people who are IAb+; (2) when people who are IAb+ are initially identified there is a need for confirmation using a second sample; (3) single IAb+ individuals are at lower risk of progression than multiple IAb+ individuals; (4) individuals with early-stage type 1 diabetes should have periodic medical monitoring, including regular assessments of glucose levels, regular education about symptoms of diabetes and DKA, and psychosocial support; (5) interested people with stage 2 type 1 diabetes should be offered trial participation or approved therapies; and (6) all health professionals involved in monitoring and care of individuals with type 1 diabetes have a responsibility to provide education. The guidance also emphasises significant unmet needs for further research on early-stage type 1 diabetes to increase the rigour of future recommendations and inform clinical care.

Consensus Guidance for Monitoring Individuals With Islet Autoantibody-Positive Pre-Stage 3 Type 1 Diabetes

Given the proven benefits of screening to reduce diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) likelihood at the time of stage 3 type 1 diabetes diagnosis, and emerging availability of therapy to delay disease progression, type 1 diabetes screening programs are being increasingly emphasized. Once broadly implemented, screening initiatives will identify significant numbers of islet autoantibody-positive (IAb+) children and adults who are at risk for (confirmed single IAb+) or living with (multiple IAb+) early-stage (stage 1 and stage 2) type 1 diabetes. These individuals will need monitoring for disease progression; much of this care will happen in nonspecialized settings. To inform this monitoring, JDRF, in conjunction with international experts and societies, developed consensus guidance. Broad advice from this guidance includes the following: 1) partnerships should be fostered between endocrinologists and primary care providers to care for people who are IAb+; 2) when people who are IAb+ are initially identified, there is a need for confirmation using a second sample; 3) single IAb+ individuals are at lower risk of progression than multiple IAb+ individuals; 4) individuals with early-stage type 1 diabetes should have periodic medical monitoring, including regular assessments of glucose levels, regular education about symptoms of diabetes and DKA, and psychosocial support; 5) interested people with stage 2 type 1 diabetes should be offered trial participation or approved therapies; and 6) all health professionals involved in monitoring and care of individuals with type 1 diabetes have a responsibility to provide education. The guidance also emphasizes significant unmet needs for further research on early-stage type 1 diabetes to increase the rigor of future recommendations and inform clinical care.

Childhood screening for type 1 diabetes comparing automated multiplex Antibody Detection by Agglutination-PCR (ADAP) with single plex islet autoantibody radiobinding assays

BACKGROUND

Two or more autoantibodies against either insulin (IAA), glutamic acid decarboxylase (GADA), islet antigen-2 (IA-2A) or zinc transporter 8 (ZnT8A) denote stage 1 (normoglycemia) or stage 2 (dysglycemia) type 1 diabetes prior to stage 3 type 1 diabetes. Automated multiplex Antibody Detection by Agglutination-PCR (ADAP) assays in two laboratories were compared to single plex radiobinding assays (RBA) to define threshold levels for diagnostic specificity and sensitivity.

METHODS

IAA, GADA, IA-2A and ZnT8A were analysed in 1504 (54% females) population based controls (PBC), 456 (55% females) doctor's office controls (DOC) and 535 (41% females) blood donor controls (BDC) as well as in 2300 (48% females) patients newly diagnosed (1-10 years of age) with stage 3 type 1 diabetes. The thresholds for autoantibody positivity were computed in 100 10-fold cross-validations to separate patients from controls either by maximizing the χ2-statistics (chisq) or using the 98th percentile of specificity (Spec98). Mean and 95% CI for threshold, sensitivity and specificity are presented.

FINDINGS

The ADAP ROC curves of the four autoantibodies showed comparable AUC in the two ADAP laboratories and were higher than RBA. Detection of two or more autoantibodies using chisq showed 0.97 (0.95, 0.99) sensitivity and 0.94 (0.91, 0.97) specificity in ADAP compared to 0.90 (0.88, 0.95) sensitivity and 0.97 (0.94, 0.98) specificity in RBA. Using Spec98, ADAP showed 0.92 (0.89, 0.95) sensitivity and 0.99 (0.98, 1.00) specificity compared to 0.89 (0.77, 0.86) sensitivity and 1.00 (0.99, 1.00) specificity in the RBA. The diagnostic sensitivity and specificity were higher in PBC compared to DOC and BDC.

INTERPRETATION

ADAP was comparable in two laboratories, both comparable to or better than RBA, to define threshold levels for two or more autoantibodies to stage type 1 diabetes.

FUNDING

Supported by The Leona M. and Harry B. Helmsley Charitable Trust (grant number 2009-04078), the Swedish Foundation for Strategic Research (Dnr IRC15-0067) and the Swedish Research Council, Strategic Research Area (Dnr 2009-1039). AL was supported by the DiaUnion collaborative study, co-financed by EU Interreg ÖKS, Capital Region of Denmark, Region Skåne and the Novo Nordisk Foundation.

Islet autoantibodies as precision diagnostic tools to characterize heterogeneity in type 1 diabetes: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Islet autoantibodies form the foundation for type 1 diabetes (T1D) diagnosis and staging, but heterogeneity exists in T1D development and presentation. We hypothesized that autoantibodies can identify heterogeneity before, at, and after T1D diagnosis, and in response to disease-modifying therapies.

METHODS

We systematically reviewed PubMed and EMBASE databases (6/14/2022) assessing 10 years of original research examining relationships between autoantibodies and heterogeneity before, at, after diagnosis, and in response to disease-modifying therapies in individuals at-risk or within 1 year of T1D diagnosis. A critical appraisal checklist tool for cohort studies was modified and used for risk of bias assessment.

RESULTS

Here we show that 152 studies that met extraction criteria most commonly characterized heterogeneity before diagnosis (91/152). Autoantibody type/target was most frequently examined, followed by autoantibody number. Recurring themes included correlations of autoantibody number, type, and titers with progression, differing phenotypes based on order of autoantibody seroconversion, and interactions with age and genetics. Only 44% specifically described autoantibody assay standardization program participation.

CONCLUSIONS

Current evidence most strongly supports the application of autoantibody features to more precisely define T1D before diagnosis. Our findings support continued use of pre-clinical staging paradigms based on autoantibody number and suggest that additional autoantibody features, particularly in relation to age and genetic risk, could offer more precise stratification. To improve reproducibility and applicability of autoantibody-based precision medicine in T1D, we propose a methods checklist for islet autoantibody-based manuscripts which includes use of precision medicine MeSH terms and participation in autoantibody standardization workshops.

Understanding Islet Autoantibodies in Prediction of Type 1 Diabetes

As screening studies and preventive interventions for type 1 diabetes (T1D) advance rapidly, the utility of islet autoantibodies (IAbs) in T1D prediction comes with challenges for early and accurate disease progression prediction. Refining features of IAbs can provide more accurate risk assessment. The advances in islet autoantibodies assay techniques help to screen out islet autoantibodies with high efficiency and high disease specificity. Exploring new islet autoantibodies to neoepitopes/neoantigens remains a hot research field for improving prediction and disease pathogenesis. We will review the recent research progresses of islet autoantibodies to better understand the utility of islet autoantibodies in prediction of T1D.

Refining the Definition of Stage 1 Type 1 Diabetes: An Ontology-Driven Analysis of the Heterogeneity of Multiple Islet Autoimmunity

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the risk of progression to stage 3 type 1 diabetes based on varying definitions of multiple islet autoantibody positivity (mIA).

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

Type 1 Diabetes Intelligence (T1DI) is a combined prospective data set of children from Finland, Germany, Sweden, and the U.S. who have an increased genetic risk for type 1 diabetes. Analysis included 16,709 infants-toddlers enrolled by age 2.5 years and comparison between groups using Kaplan-Meier survival analysis.

RESULTS

Of 865 (5%) children with mIA, 537 (62%) progressed to type 1 diabetes. The 15-year cumulative incidence of diabetes varied from the most stringent definition (mIA/Persistent/2: two or more islet autoantibodies positive at the same visit with two or more antibodies persistent at next visit; 88% [95% CI 85-92%]) to the least stringent (mIA/Any: positivity for two islet autoantibodies without co-occurring positivity or persistence; 18% [5-40%]). Progression in mIA/Persistent/2 was significantly higher than all other groups (P < 0.0001). Intermediate stringency definitions showed intermediate risk and were significantly different than mIA/Any (P < 0.05); however, differences waned over the 2-year follow-up among those who did not subsequently reach higher stringency. Among mIA/Persistent/2 individuals with three autoantibodies, loss of one autoantibody by the 2-year follow-up was associated with accelerated progression. Age was significantly associated with time from seroconversion to mIA/Persistent/2 status and mIA to stage 3 type 1 diabetes.

CONCLUSIONS

The 15-year risk of progression to type 1 diabetes risk varies markedly from 18 to 88% based on the stringency of mIA definition. While initial categorization identifies highest-risk individuals, short-term follow-up over 2 years may help stratify evolving risk, especially for those with less stringent definitions of mIA.

Stratifying risk for onset of type 1 diabetes using islet autoantibody trajectory clustering

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS

Islet autoantibodies can be detected prior to the onset of type 1 diabetes and are important tools for aetiologic studies, prevention trials and disease screening. Current risk stratification models rely on the positivity status of islet autoantibodies alone, but additional autoantibody characteristics may be important for understanding disease onset. This work aimed to determine if a data-driven model incorporating characteristics of islet autoantibody development, including timing, type and titre, could stratify risk for type 1 diabetes onset.

METHODS

Data on autoantibodies against GAD (GADA), tyrosine phosphatase islet antigen-2 (IA-2A) and insulin (IAA) were obtained for 1,415 children enrolled in The Environmental Determinants of Diabetes in the Young study with at least one positive autoantibody measurement from years 1 to 12 of life. Unsupervised machine learning algorithms were trained to identify clusters of autoantibody development based on islet autoantibody timing, type and titre. Risk for type 1 diabetes across each identified cluster was evaluated using time-to-event analysis.

RESULTS

We identified 2-4 clusters in each year cohort that differed by autoantibody timing, titre and type. During the first 3 years of life, risk for type 1 diabetes onset was driven by membership in clusters with high titres of all three autoantibodies (1-year risk: 20.87-56.25%, 5-year risk: 67.73-69.19%). Type 1 diabetes risk transitioned to type-specific titres during ages 4 to 8, as clusters with high titres of IA-2A (1-year risk: 20.88-28.93%, 5-year risk: 62.73-78.78%) showed faster progression to diabetes compared with high titres of GADA (1-year risk: 4.38-6.11%, 5-year risk: 25.06-31.44%). The importance of high GADA titres decreased during ages 9 to 12, with clusters containing high titres of IA-2A alone (1-year risk: 14.82-30.93%) or both GADA and IA-2A (1-year risk: 8.27-25.00%) demonstrating increased risk.

CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION

This unsupervised machine learning approach provides a novel tool for stratifying risk for type 1 diabetes onset using multiple autoantibody characteristics. These findings suggest that age-dependent changes in IA-2A titres modulate risk for type 1 diabetes onset across 12 years of life. Overall, this work supports incorporation of islet autoantibody timing, type and titre in risk stratification models for aetiologic studies, prevention trials and disease screening.

Quantifying the utility of islet autoantibody levels in the prediction of type 1 diabetes in children

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS

The aim of this study was to explore the utility of islet autoantibody (IAb) levels for the prediction of type 1 diabetes in autoantibody-positive children.

METHODS

Prospective cohort studies in Finland, Germany, Sweden and the USA followed 24,662 children at increased genetic or familial risk of developing islet autoimmunity and diabetes. For the 1403 who developed IAbs (523 of whom developed diabetes), levels of autoantibodies against insulin (IAA), glutamic acid decarboxylase (GADA) and insulinoma-associated antigen-2 (IA-2A) were harmonised for analysis. Diabetes prediction models using multivariate logistic regression with inverse probability censored weighting (IPCW) were trained using 10-fold cross-validation. Discriminative power for disease was estimated using the IPCW concordance index (C index) with 95% CI estimated via bootstrap.

RESULTS

A baseline model with covariates for data source, sex, diabetes family history, HLA risk group and age at seroconversion with a 10-year follow-up period yielded a C index of 0.61 (95% CI 0.58, 0.63). The performance improved after adding the IAb positivity status for IAA, GADA and IA-2A at seroconversion: C index 0.72 (95% CI 0.71, 0.74). Using the IAb levels instead of positivity indicators resulted in even better performance: C index 0.76 (95% CI 0.74, 0.77). The predictive power was maintained when using the IAb levels alone: C index 0.76 (95% CI 0.75, 0.76). The prediction was better for shorter follow-up periods, with a C index of 0.82 (95% CI 0.81, 0.83) at 2 years, and remained reasonable for longer follow-up periods, with a C index of 0.76 (95% CI 0.75, 0.76) at 11 years. Inclusion of the results of a third IAb test added to the predictive power, and a suitable interval between seroconversion and the third test was approximately 1.5 years, with a C index of 0.78 (95% CI 0.77, 0.78) at 10 years follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION

Consideration of quantitative patterns of IAb levels improved the predictive power for type 1 diabetes in IAb-positive children beyond qualitative IAb positivity status.

Progression likelihood score identifies substages of presymptomatic type 1 diabetes in childhood public health screening

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS

The aim of this study was to develop strategies that identify children from the general population who have late-stage presymptomatic type 1 diabetes and may, therefore, benefit from immune intervention.

METHODS

We tested children from Bavaria, Germany, aged 1.75-10 years, enrolled in the Fr1da public health screening programme for islet autoantibodies (n=154,462). OGTT and HbA_1c were assessed in children with multiple islet autoantibodies for diagnosis of presymptomatic stage 1 (normoglycaemia) or stage 2 (dysglycaemia) type 1 diabetes. Cox proportional hazards and penalised logistic regression of autoantibody, genetic, metabolic and demographic information were used to develop a progression likelihood score to identify children with stage 1 type 1 diabetes who progressed to stage 3 (clinical) type 1 diabetes within 2 years.

RESULTS

Of 447 children with multiple islet autoantibodies, 364 (81.4%) were staged. Undiagnosed stage 3 type 1 diabetes, presymptomatic stage 2, and stage 1 type 1 diabetes were detected in 41 (0.027% of screened children), 30 (0.019%) and 293 (0.19%) children, respectively. The 2 year risk for progression to stage 3 type 1 diabetes was 48% (95% CI 34, 58) in children with stage 2 type 1 diabetes (annualised risk, 28%). HbA_1c, islet antigen-2 autoantibody positivity and titre, and the 90 min OGTT value were predictors of progression in children with stage 1 type 1 diabetes. The derived progression likelihood score identified substages corresponding to ≤90th centile (stage 1a, n=258) and >90th centile (stage 1b, n=29; 0.019%) of stage 1 children with a 4.1% (95% CI 1.4, 6.7) and 46% (95% CI 21, 63) 2 year risk of progressing to stage 3 type 1 diabetes, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION

Public health screening for islet autoantibodies found 0.027% of children to have undiagnosed clinical type 1 diabetes and 0.038% to have undiagnosed presymptomatic stage 2 or stage 1b type 1 diabetes, with 50% risk to develop clinical type 1 diabetes within 2 years.

Islet Autoantibody Levels Differentiate Progression Trajectories in Individuals With Presymptomatic Type 1 Diabetes

In our previous data-driven analysis of evolving patterns of islet autoantibodies (IAb) against insulin (IAA), GAD (GADA), and islet antigen 2 (IA-2A), we discovered three trajectories, characterized according to multiple IAb (TR1), IAA (TR2), or GADA (TR3) as the first appearing autoantibodies. Here we examined the evolution of IAb levels within these trajectories in 2,145 IAb-positive participants followed from early life and compared those who progressed to type 1 diabetes (n = 643) with those remaining undiagnosed (n = 1,502). With use of thresholds determined by 5-year diabetes risk, four levels were defined for each IAb and overlaid onto each visit. In diagnosed participants, high IAA levels were seen in TR1 and TR2 at ages <3 years, whereas IAA remained at lower levels in the undiagnosed. Proportions of dwell times (total duration of follow-up at a given level) at the four IAb levels differed between the diagnosed and undiagnosed for GADA and IA-2A in all three trajectories (P < 0.001), but for IAA dwell times differed only within TR2 (P < 0.05). Overall, undiagnosed participants more frequently had low IAb levels and later appearance of IAb than diagnosed participants. In conclusion, while it has long been appreciated that the number of autoantibodies is an important predictor of type 1 diabetes, consideration of autoantibody levels within the three autoimmune trajectories improved differentiation of IAb-positive children who progressed to type 1 diabetes from those who did not.