The Rare and Atypical Diabetes Network (RADIANT) Study: Design and Early Results

Neonatal and Syndromic Forms of Diabetes

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Neonatal and syndromic diabetes are rare but important conditions. These conditions often result in severe insulin deficiency or insulin resistance. In this review, we aim to discuss the clinical characteristics and genetics of neonatal and syndromic forms of diabetes.

RECENT FINDINGS

Beyond the development of diabetes mellitus, many other organ systems are affected. Understanding the pathophysiology of these conditions have improved our collective understanding of the genetics and developmental biology related to glucose metabolism and beyond. This review will provide new information for researchers and provide a helpful resource for clinicians when evaluating a patient for neonatal and syndromic forms of diabetes.

A Research Roadmap to Address the Heterogeneity of Diabetes and Advance Precision Medicine

The current classification of diabetes had its genesis over 85 years ago, when individuals with diabetes were first subclassified into insulin sensitive and insulin insensitive states based on the response to an oral glucose tolerance test. About 35 years later, the contemporary classifications of type 1 and type 2 diabetes were coined. Today's evidence, however, suggests that multiple etiologic and pathogenic processes lead to both type 1 and type 2 diabetes, reflecting significant heterogeneity in factors associated with initiation, progression, and clinical presentation of each disorder of glucose homeostasis. Further, the current classification fails to recognize what is currently defined as "atypical" diabetes. Heterogeneity of diabetes continues through the life-course of an individual, with modification of prognosis risk (eg, diabetic complications) altered by genetics, life experience, comorbidities, and therapy. Understanding the sources of heterogeneity in diabetes will likely improve diagnosis, prevention, treatment, and prediction of complications in both the medical and public health settings. Such knowledge will help inform progress in the emerging era of precision diabetes medicine. This article presents NIDDK's Heterogeneity of Diabetes Initiative and a corresponding roadmap for future research in type 2 diabetes heterogeneity.

Identification of atypical pediatric diabetes mellitus cases using electronic medical records

INTRODUCTION

There are no established methods to identify children with atypical diabetes for further study. We aimed to develop strategies to systematically ascertain cases of atypical pediatric diabetes using electronic medical records (EMR).

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

We tested two strategies in a large pediatric hospital in the USA. Strategy 1: we designed a questionnaire to rule out typical diabetes and applied it to the EMR of 100 youth with diabetes. Strategy 2: we built three electronic queries to generate reports of three atypical pediatric diabetes phenotypes: unknown type, type 2 diabetes (T2D) diagnosed <10 years old and autoantibody-negative type 1 diabetes (AbNegT1D).

RESULTS

Strategy 1 identified six cases (6%) of atypical diabetes (mean diagnosis age=11±2.6 years, 16.6% men, 33% non-Hispanic white (NHW) and 66.6% Hispanic). Strategy 2: unknown diabetes type: n=68 (1%) out of 6676 patients with diabetes; mean diagnosis age=12.6±3.3 years, 32.8% men, 23.8% NHW, 47.6% Hispanic, 25.4% African American (AA), 3.2% other. T2D <10 years old: n=64 (6.6%) out of 1142 patients with T2D; mean diagnosis age=8.6±1.6 years, 20.3% men, 4.7% NHW, 65.6% Hispanic, 28.1% AA, 1.6% other. AbNegT1D: n=38 (5.6%) out of 680 patients with new onset T1D; mean diagnosis age=11.3±3.8 years; 57.9% men, 50% NHW, 19.4% Hispanic, 22.3% AA, 8.3% other.

CONCLUSIONS

In sum, we identified 1%-6.6% of atypical diabetes cases in a pediatric diabetes population with high racial and ethnic diversity using systematic review of the EMR. Better identification of these cases using unbiased approaches may advance precision diabetes.

Maturity-onset diabetes of the young (MODY) - in search of ideal diagnostic criteria and precise treatment

Maturity-onset diabetes of the young (MODY) is a spectrum of clinically heterogenous forms of monogenic diabetes mellitus characterized by autosomal dominant inheritance, onset at a young age, and absence of pancreatic islets autoimmunity. This rare form of hyperglycemia, with clinical features overlapping with type 1 and type 2 diabetes mellitus, has 14 subtypes with differences in prevalence and complications occurrence which tailor therapeutic approach. MODY phenotypes differ based on the gene involved, gene penetrance and expressivity. While MODY 2 rarely leads to diabetic complications and is easily managed with lifestyle interventions alone, more severe subtypes, such as MODY 1, 3, and 6, require an individualized treatment approach to maintain a patient's quality of life and prevention of complications. This review summarizes current evidence on the presentation, diagnosis, and management of MODY, an example of a genetic cause of hyperglycemia that calls for a precision medicine approach.

Atypical Diabetes: What Have We Learned and What Does the Future Hold?

As our understanding of the pathophysiology of diabetes evolves, we increasingly recognize that many patients may have a form of diabetes that does not neatly fit with a diagnosis of either type 1 or type 2 diabetes. The discovery and description of these forms of "atypical diabetes" have led to major contributions to our collective understanding of the basic biology that drives insulin secretion, insulin resistance, and islet autoimmunity. These discoveries now pave the way to a better classification of diabetes based on distinct endotypes. In this review, we highlight the key biological and clinical insights that can be gained from studying known forms of atypical diabetes. Additionally, we provide a framework for identification of patients with atypical diabetes based on their clinical, metabolic, and molecular features. Helpful clinical and genetic resources for evaluating patients suspected of having atypical diabetes are provided. Therefore, appreciating the various endotypes associated with atypical diabetes will enhance diagnostic accuracy and facilitate targeted treatment decisions.

High Prevalence of A-β+ Ketosis-Prone Diabetes in Children with Type 2 Diabetes and Diabetic Ketoacidosis at Diagnosis: Evidence from the Rare and Atypical Diabetes Network (RADIANT)

Background

A-β+ ketosis-prone diabetes (KPD) in adults is characterized by presentation with diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA), negative islet autoantibodies, and preserved β-cell function in persons with a phenotype of obesity-associated type 2 diabetes (T2D). The prevalence of KPD has not been evaluated in children. We investigated children with DKA at "T2D" onset and determined the prevalence and characteristics of pediatric A-β+ KPD within this cohort.

Methods

We reviewed the records of 716 children with T2D at a large academic hospital and compared clinical characteristics of those with and without DKA at onset. In the latter group, we identified patients with A-β+ KPD using criteria of the Rare and Atypical Diabetes Network (RADIANT) and defined its prevalence and characteristics.

Results

Mean age at diagnosis was 13.7 ± 2.4 years: 63% female; 59% Hispanic, 29% African American, 9% non-Hispanic White, and 3% other. Fifty-six (7.8%) presented with DKA at diagnosis and lacked islet autoantibodies. Children presenting with DKA were older and had lower C-peptide and higher glucose concentrations than those without DKA. Twenty-five children with DKA (45%) met RADIANT A-β+ KPD criteria. They were predominantly male (64%), African American or Hispanic (96%), with substantial C-peptide (1.3 ± 0.7 ng/mL) at presentation with DKA and excellent long-term glycemic control (HbA1c 6.6% ± 1.9% at follow-up (median 1.3 years postdiagnosis)).

Conclusions

In children with a clinical phenotype of T2D and DKA at diagnosis, approximately half meet criteria for A-β+ KPD. They manifest the key characteristics of obesity, preserved β-cell function, male predominance, and potential to discontinue insulin therapy, similar to adults with A-β+ KPD.

Investigator and participant expectations for returning non-genetic results: insights from the Rare and Atypical Diabetes Network (RADIANT) study

Objectives/Goals

The Rare and Atypical DIAbetes NeTwork (RADIANT) aims to discover the underlying pathoetiology of atypical diabetes by conducting both genotyping and non-genetic deep phenotyping. While the return of genetic test results in research settings has been investigated, the return of non-genetic results (RoR-NG) has received less attention. We explore the RoR-NG with RADIANT investigators and participants.

Methods/Study Population

We conducted one-on-one interviews with 10 adult RADIANT participants and 10 RADIANT investigators. Participants also completed two health literacy screening tools and a survey on perspectives regarding return of results (RoR). Investigators completed one survey on experience and confidence in explaining clinical tests utilized in the RADIANT study and another survey on perspectives regarding RoR.

Results

Most participants were non-Hispanic White. All participants had high scores on health literacy screens. Both RADIANT participants and investigators expressed strong support for RoR-NG. RADIANT participants and investigators acknowledged the different roles and responsibilities between research and clinical care for interpreting and acting on non-genetic results. However, the lines between clinical care and research in returning and acting on results were often blurred by both participants and investigators.

Discussion/Significance

Our study provides important insight into how both investigators and participants simultaneously distinguish and blur clinical and research roles and responsibilities when discussing non-genetic research results and the return of these results. Further study should engage individuals from diverse racial and ethnic backgrounds and with varying levels of health literacy to understand how best to support all participants when returning research results.