Cited by 30Diabetes Treatment and ManagementDiabetes Management and ResearchPharmacogenetics and Drug Metabolism

A roadmap to achieve pharmacological precision medicine in diabetes

Open access
Florez, Jose C., Pearson, Ewan R.·2022·Diabetologia

Abstract

Current pharmacological treatment of diabetes is largely algorithmic. Other than for cardiovascular disease or renal disease, where sodium–glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors and/or glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists are indicated, the choice of treatment is based upon overall risks of harm or side effect and cost, and not on probable benefit. Here we argue that a more precise approach to treatment choice is necessary to maximise benefit and minimise harm from existing diabetes therapies. We propose a roadmap to achieve precision medicine as standard of care, to discuss current progress in relation to monogenic diabetes and type 2 diabetes, and to determine what additional work is required. The first step is to identify robust and reliable genetic predictors of response, recognising that genotype is static over time and provides the skeleton upon which modifiers such as clinical phenotype and metabolic biomarkers can be overlaid. The second step is to identify these metabolic biomarkers (e.g. beta cell function, insulin sensitivity, BMI, liver fat, metabolite profile), which capture the metabolic state at the point of prescribing and may have a large impact on drug response. Third, we need to show that predictions that utilise these genetic and metabolic biomarkers improve therapeutic outcomes for patients, and fourth, that this is cost-effective. Finally, these biomarkers and prediction models need to be embedded in clinical care systems to enable effective and equitable clinical implementation. Whilst this roadmap is largely complete for monogenic diabetes, we still have considerable work to do to implement this for type 2 diabetes. Increasing collaborations, including with industry, and access to clinical trial data should enable progress to implementation of precision treatment in type 2 diabetes in the near future. Graphical abstract

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/s00125-022-05732-3

Cites

4 of 4 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?

  • This precision-medicine approach ensures that patients receive the most effective therapy, minimizing the risk of adverse effects and improving overall outcomes.

    “This precision-medicine approach ensures that patients receive the most effective therapy, minimizing the risk of adverse effects and improving overall outcomes (55).”

    From Generative artificial intelligence in predictive analysis of diabetes and its complications: a narrative review (2025) · cites this paper as [55]

    In “Caveats: reality vs the ideal” (page not provided), the authors propose that selecting the best drug for an individual will lead to better outcomes. But “What is needed? > Evidence that such prediction leads to better clinical outcomes” says improved outcomes still need to be demonstrated. The claim overstates this proposed approach as one that already ensures the most effective therapy and improved outcomes; the cited body passages also do not establish that it minimizes adverse effects. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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

Research works printed but not linked: 28

  1. [2]Fang M Wang D Coresh J Selvin E Trends in diabetes treatment and control in U.S. adults, 1999-2018 N Engl J Med 2021 384 23 2219 2228 10.1056/NEJMsa2032271 34107181 PMC8385648 · DOI · Paper page
  2. [3]Kahn SE Haffner SM Heise MA Glycemic durability of rosiglitazone, metformin, or glyburide monotherapy N Engl J Med 2006 355 23 2427 2443 10.1056/NEJMoa066224 17145742 · DOI · Paper page
  3. [4]Zeitler P Hirst K Pyle L A clinical trial to maintain glycemic control in youth with type 2 diabetes N Engl J Med 2012 366 24 2247 2256 10.1056/NEJMoa1109333 22540912 PMC3478667 · DOI
  4. [6]Ahlqvist E Storm P Karajamaki A Novel subgroups of adult-onset diabetes and their association with outcomes: a data-driven cluster analysis of six variables Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol 2018 6 5 361 369 10.1016/s2213-8587(18)30051-2 29503172 · DOI · Paper page
  5. [8]Dennis JM Shields BM Henley WE Jones AG Hattersley AT Disease progression and treatment response in data-driven subgroups of type 2 diabetes compared with models based on simple clinical features: an analysis using clinical trial data Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol 2019 7 6 442 451 10.1016/s2213-8587(19)30087-7 31047901 PMC6520497 · DOI
  6. [9]Slieker RC Donnelly LA Fitipaldi H Replication and cross-validation of type 2 diabetes subtypes based on clinical variables: an IMI-RHAPSODY study Diabetologia 2021 64 9 1982 1989 10.1007/s00125-021-05490-8 34110439 PMC8382625 · DOI
  7. [10]Mahajan A Wessel J Willems SM Refining the accuracy of validated target identification through coding variant fine-mapping in type 2 diabetes Nat Genet 2018 50 4 559 571 10.1038/s41588-018-0084-1 29632382 PMC5898373 · DOI · Paper page
  8. [11]McCarthy MI Painting a new picture of personalised medicine for diabetes Diabetologia 2017 60 793 799 10.1007/s00125-017-4210-x 28175964 PMC6518376 · DOI
  9. [13]Pearson ER Flechtner I Njolstad PR Switching from insulin to oral sulfonylureas in patients with diabetes due to Kir6.2 mutations N Engl J Med 2006 355 5 467 477 10.1056/NEJMoa061759 16885550 · DOI · Paper page
  10. [14]Pearson ER Starkey BJ Powell RJ Gribble FM Clark PM Hattersley AT Genetic cause of hyperglycaemia and response to treatment in diabetes Lancet 2003 362 9392 1275 1281 10.1016/S0140-6736(03)14571-0 14575972 · DOI · Paper page
  11. [15]Pearson ER Liddell WG Shepherd M Corrall RJ Hattersley AT Sensitivity to sulphonylureas in patients with hepatocyte nuclear factor-1a gene mutations: evidence for pharmacogenetics in diabetes Diabet Med 2000 17 7 543 545 10.1046/j.1464-5491.2000.00305.x 10972586 · DOI · Paper page
  12. [16]Steele AM Shields BM Wensley KJ Colclough K Ellard S Hattersley AT Prevalence of vascular complications among patients with glucokinase mutations and prolonged, mild hyperglycemia JAMA 2014 311 3 279 286 10.1001/jama.2013.283980 24430320 · DOI
  13. [17]Zhou K Bellenguez C Spencer CC Common variants near ATM are associated with glycemic response to metformin in type 2 diabetes Nat Genet 2011 43 2 117 120 10.1038/ng.735 21186350 PMC3030919 · DOI
  14. [18]Zhou K Yee SW Seiser EL Variation in the glucose transporter gene SLC2A2 is associated with glycemic response to metformin Nat Genet 2016 48 9 1055 1059 10.1038/ng.3632 27500523 PMC5007158 · DOI
  15. [19]Dawed AY Yee SW Zhou K Genome-wide meta-analysis identifies genetic variants associated with glycemic response to sulfonylureas Diabetes Care 2021 44 2673 2682 10.2337/dc21-1152 34607834 PMC8669535 · DOI
  16. [20]Zhou K Donnelly L Yang J Heritability of variation in glycaemic response to metformin: a genome-wide complex trait analysis Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol 2014 2 6 481 487 10.1016/s2213-8587(14)70050-6 24731673 PMC4038749 · DOI
  17. [21]McCarthy MI Genomic medicine at the heart of diabetes management Diabetologia 2015 58 8 1725 1729 10.1007/s00125-015-3588-6 25860651 · DOI
  18. [22]Slieker RC Donnelly LA Fitipaldi H Distinct molecular signatures of clinical clusters in people with type 2 diabetes: an IMIRHAPSODY study Diabetes 2021 70 2683 2693 10.2337/db20-1281 34376475 PMC8564413 · DOI
  19. [23]Walford GA Ma Y Clish C Florez JC Wang TJ Gerszten RE Metabolite profiles of diabetes incidence and intervention response in the Diabetes Prevention Program Diabetes 2016 65 1424 1433 10.2337/db15-1063 26861782 PMC4839205 · DOI
  20. [24]Chen ZZ Liu J Morningstar J Metabolite profiles of incident diabetes and heterogeneity of treatment effect in the Diabetes Prevention Program Diabetes 2019 68 12 2337 2349 10.2337/db19-0236 31582408 PMC6868469 · DOI
  21. [25]Dawed AY Zhou K van Leeuwen N Variation in the plasma membrane monoamine transporter (PMAT) (encoded by SLC29A4) and organic cation transporter 1 (OCT1) (encoded by SLC22A1) and gastrointestinal intolerance to metformin in type 2 diabetes: An IMI DIRECT study Diabetes Care 2019 42 6 1027 1033 10.2337/dc18-2182 30885951 · DOI
  22. [26]Flannick J Mercader JM Fuchsberger C Exome sequencing of 20,791 cases of type 2 diabetes and 24,440 controls Nature 2019 570 7759 71 76 10.1038/s41586-019-1231-2 31118516 PMC6699738 · DOI · Paper page
  23. [27]Greeley SA John PM Winn AN The cost-effectiveness of personalized genetic medicine: the case of genetic testing in neonatal diabetes Diabetes Care 2011 34 3 622 627 10.2337/dc10-1616 21273495 PMC3041194 · DOI
  24. [28]Naylor RN John PM Winn AN Cost-effectiveness of MODY genetic testing: translating genomic advances into practical health applications Diabetes Care 2014 37 1 202 209 10.2337/dc13-0410 24026547 PMC3867988 · DOI
  25. [29]Peters JL Anderson R Shields B Strategies to identify individuals with monogenic diabetes: results of an economic evaluation BMJ Open 2020 10 3 e034716 10.1136/bmjopen-2019-034716 32193268 PMC7150598 · DOI
  26. [30]Herman WH Edelstein SL Ratner RE Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of diabetes prevention among adherent participants Am J Manag Care 2013 19 3 194 202 23544761 PMC3985133
  27. [31]Dennis JM Henley WE Weedon MN Sex and BMI alter the benefits and risks of sulfonylureas and thiazolidinediones in type 2 diabetes: a framework for evaluating stratification using routine clinical and individual trial data Diabetes Care 2018 41 9 1844 1853 10.2337/dc18-0344 30072404 PMC6591127 · DOI
  28. [32]Dennis JM Shields BM Hill AV Precision medicine in type 2 diabetes: clinical markers of insulin resistance are associated with altered short- and long-term glycemic response to DPP-4 inhibitor therapy Diabetes Care 2018 41 4 705 712 10.2337/dc17-1827 29386249 PMC6591121 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Florez, J. C., & Pearson, E. R.
Affiliations
University of Dundee (GB)
Corresponding author
Pearson, Ewan R.
Venue
Diabetologia
Published
2022-06-24
Volume
65
Issue
11
Pages
1830-1838
ISSN
  • 0012-186X (ISSN-L)
  • 1432-0428
OpenAlex
W4283376467
Cited by
30
References
4
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 4
FWCI
0.89
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Diabetologia (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Discovery Research Portal (University of Dundee) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • Center for Scientific Review (R01 GM117163, UM1 DK126185, R01 DK123019, U54 DK11)
  • Wellcome New Investigator grant (102820/Z/13/Z)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Treatment and Management
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Research
  • Life Sciences › Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics › Pharmacology › Pharmacogenetics and Drug Metabolism
Keywords
monogenic diabetes, type 2 diabetes, metabolic biomarkers, beta-cell function, insulin sensitivity, liver fat, metabolite profiles, cost-effectiveness, clinical implementation, prediction model
MeSH terms
Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 Receptor, Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2, Glucose, Humans, Hypoglycemic Agents, Sodium, Biomarkers, Precision Medicine

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