Abstract
Objective Islet autoantibodies at diagnosis are not well studied in older-adult onset (>30years) type 1 diabetes due to difficulties of accurate diagnosis. We used a type 1 diabetes genetic risk score (T1DGRS) to identify type 1 diabetes aiming to evaluate the prevalence and pattern of autoantibodies in older-adult onset type 1 diabetes.
Methods We used a 30 variant T1DGRS in 1866 white-European individuals to genetically confirm a clinical diagnosis of new onset type 1 diabetes. We then assessed the prevalence and pattern of GADA, IA2A and ZnT8A within genetically consistent type 1 diabetes across three age groups (<18years (n=702), 18-30years (n=524) and >30years (n=588)).
Findings In autoantibody positive cases T1DGRS was consistent with 100% type 1 diabetes in each age group. Conversely in autoantibody negative cases, T1DGRS was consistent with 93%(56/60) of <18years, 55%(37/67) of 18-30years and just 23%(34/151) of >30years having type 1 diabetes. Restricting analysis to genetically consistent type 1 diabetes showed similar proportions of positive autoantibodies across age groups (92% <18years, 92% 18-30years, 93% >30years)[p=0.87]. GADA was the most common autoantibody in older-adult onset type 1 diabetes, identifying 95% of autoantibody positive cases versus 72% in those <18years.
Interpretation Older adult-onset type 1 diabetes has identical rates but different patterns of positive autoantibodies to childhood onset. In clinically suspected type 1 diabetes in older-adults, absence of autoantibodies strongly suggests non-autoimmune diabetes. Our findings suggest the need to change guidelines from measuring islet autoantibodies where there is diagnostic uncertainty to measuring at least GADA in all suspected adult type 1 diabetes cases.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Clinical Trial
Ethics for the ADDRESS2 study was granted by the South Central - Berkshire NHS Research Ethics Committee on the 03/10/2010, ref: 10/H0505/85. Ethics for monogenetic testing in the ADDRESS2 cohort was granted by the East of England - Essex Research Ethics Committee on the 14/7/2016, ref 16/EE/0306
Funding Statement
NJT is funded by a Wellcome Trust funded GW4 PhD. M.N.W. is supported by the Wellcome Trust Institutional Support Fund (WT097835MF). KAP is a Wellcome Trust fellow (219606/Z/19/Z) and the genetic risk score analysis in ADDRESS-2 was funded by Diabetes wellness Research foundation pump priming grant. ADDRESS-2 is co-funded by Diabetes UK (grant numbers 09-0003919, 15-005234 & 19/0006119) and the Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation (grant numbers 9-2010-407 & 3-SRA-2015-35-A-N), supported by the NIHR Clinical Research Network and hosted by Imperial College London. S.M. is currently supported by a Future Leaders Mentorship award from the European Federation for the Study of Diabetes. NO is supported by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Biomedical Research Centre based at Imperial College London. DJ is funded by the NIHR CRN. The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR, or the Department of Health
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
Ethics for the ADDRESS2 study was granted by the South Central - Berkshire NHS Research Ethics Committee on the 03/10/2010, ref: 10/H0505/85. Ethics for monogenetic testing in the ADDRESS2 cohort was granted by the East of England - Essex Research Ethics Committee on the 14/7/2016, ref 16/EE/0306"
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
ADDRESS 2 data access is available via a management committee
