Cited by 284Diabetes and associated disordersDiabetes Management and ResearchClinical Laboratory Practices and Quality Control

Diabetes Antibody Standardization Program: evaluation of assays for autoantibodies to glutamic acid decarboxylase and islet antigen-2

Open access
Törn, C., Mueller, P. W., Schlosser, M., Bonifacio, E., Bingley, P. J., Participating Laboratories·2008·Diabetologia

Abstract

Aims/hypothesis Islet autoantibodies are important in diabetes classification and risk assessment, and as endpoints in observational studies. The Diabetes Autoantibody Standardization Program (DASP) aims to improve and standardise measurement of autoantibodies associated with type 1 diabetes. We report results for glutamic acid decarboxylase autoantibodies (GADA) and islet antigen-2 autoantibodies (IA-2A) from three DASP workshops (2002--2005). Methods Up to 60 laboratories in 18 countries participated in each workshop. Participants received coded serum aliquots from 50 patients with newly diagnosed type 1 diabetes (median age 18 years, range 9-35 years) and 100 blood donor controls. Results were analysed using receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curves with sensitivity adjusted to 95% specificity in workshop controls. Results GADA assays performed well in all three workshops (median area under the ROC curve [AUC] 0.94; interquartile range 0.91-0.95) and performance was similar to DASP 2000. Performance of IA-2A assays improved over the workshop programme. Median AUC was 0.81 (interquartile range 0.79-0.83) in DASP 2002, 0.82 (interquartile range 0.78-0.84) in 2003, and 0.85 (interquartile range 0.82-0.87) in 2005 (p < 0.0001). Performance of GADA ELISA improved between 2002 and 2005, and, in DASP 2005, achieved higher median AUC and adjusted sensitivity than RIA. IA-2A ELISA improved and, in DASP 2005, achieved AUCs equivalent to in-house RIA. Assays using IA-2ic or full length IA-2 clones were more sensitive than those using IA-2bdc, with higher AUC (p = 0.004). Conclusions/interpretation GADA and IA-2A assays perform well in discriminating health and disease. The workshop format highlights systematic differences related to assay method and allows full evaluation of novel methods. The programme of autoantibody workshops in type 1 diabetes provides a model for other autoimmune diseases.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s00125-008-0967-2

Cites

19 of 19 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Törn, C., Mueller, P. W., Schlosser, M., Bonifacio, E., Bingley, P. J., & Laboratories, P.
Affiliations
  • Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (US)
  • Universität Greifswald (DE)
  • Center for Regenerative Therapies Dresden (DE)
  • Southmead Hospital (GB)
Corresponding author
Bingley, P. J.
Venue
Diabetologia
Published
2008-03-29
Volume
51
Issue
5
Pages
846-852
ISSN
  • 0012-186X (ISSN-L)
  • 1432-0428
OpenAlex
W2098742390
Cited by
284
References
19
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 17 · 2018: 13 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 20 · 2015: 16 · 2014: 19 · 2013: 23 · 2012: 27
FWCI
11.43
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Diabetologia (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Bristol Research (University of Bristol) (publishedVersion)
  • Nova Science Publishers (Nova Science Publishers, Inc.) (submittedVersion)
  • Lund University Publications (Lund University) (submittedVersion)
  • VUBIR (Vrije Universiteit Brussel) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (PL105-33)
  • Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (106-554, PL 105-33, 107-360, 106-310)
  • U.S. Public Health Service (106-554, PL105-33, 106-310, 107-360)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Diabetes and associated disorders
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Clinical Laboratory Practices and Quality Control
Keywords
type 1 diabetes, islet autoantibodies, glutamic acid decarboxylase antibodies, assay standardization, sensitivity and specificity, newly diagnosed type 1 diabetes
MeSH terms
Autoantibodies, Diabetes Mellitus, Glutamate Decarboxylase, Humans, ROC Curve, Sensitivity and Specificity, Receptor-Like Protein Tyrosine Phosphatases, Class 8

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review