Cited by 86Diabetes and associated disordersDiabetes Management and ResearchPancreatic function and diabetes

A new approach for diagnosing type 1 diabetes in autoantibody-positive individuals based on prediction and natural history

Open access
Sosenko, Jay M., Skyler, Jay S., DiMeglio, Linda A., Beam, Craig A., Krischer, Jeffrey P., Greenbaum, Carla J., Boulware, David, Rafkin, Lisa E. +5 more·2015·Diabetes Care

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: We assessed whether type 1 diabetes (T1D) can be diagnosed earlier using a new approach based on prediction and natural history in autoantibody-positive individuals. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Diabetes Prevention Trial–Type 1 (DPT-1) and TrialNet Natural History Study (TNNHS) participants were studied. A metabolic index, the T1D Diagnostic Index60 (Index60), was developed from 2-h oral glucose tolerance tests (OGTTs) using the log fasting C-peptide, 60-min C-peptide, and 60-min glucose. OGTTs with Index60 ≥2.00 and 2-h glucose <200 mg/dL (Ind60+Only) were compared with Index60 <2.00 and 2-h glucose ≥200 mg/dL (2hglu+Only) OGTTs as criteria for T1D. Individuals were assessed for C-peptide loss from the first Ind60+Only OGTT to diagnosis. RESULTS: Areas under receiver operating characteristic curves were significantly higher for Index60 than for the 2-h glucose (P < 0.001 for both DPT-1 and the TNNHS). As a diagnostic criterion, sensitivity was higher for Ind60+Only than for 2hglu+Only (0.44 vs. 0.15 in DPT-1; 0.26 vs. 0.17 in the TNNHS) OGTTs. Specificity was somewhat higher for 2hglu+Only OGTTs in DPT-1 (0.97 vs. 0.91) but equivalent in the TNNHS (0.98 for both). Positive and negative predictive values were higher for Ind60+Only OGTTs in both studies. Postchallenge C-peptide levels declined significantly at each OGTT time point from the first Ind60+Only OGTT to the time of standard diagnosis (range −22 to −34% in DPT-1 and −14 to −27% in the TNNHS). C-peptide and glucose patterns differed markedly between Ind60+Only and 2hglu+Only OGTTs. CONCLUSIONS: An approach based on prediction and natural history appears to have utility for diagnosing T1D.

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 · 10.2337/dc14-1813

Cites

17 of 17 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?

  • Autoantibody markers plus clinical presentation can help distinguish type 1 from type 2 diabetes in children and adults.

    “The presence or absence of autoimmune markers (autoantibodies to glutamic acid decarboxylase [GAD65], pancreatic islet b cells [tyrosine phosphatase IA-2], and IA-2b zinc transporter [ZnT8], and/or insulin) in addition to the clinical presentation may help establish the correct diagnosis to distinguish between T1D and T2D in children or adults.22–27”

    From American Association of Clinical Endocrinology Clinical Practice Guideline: Developing a Diabetes Mellitus Comprehensive Care Plan-2022 Update. (2022) · cites this paper as [26]

    The Subjects section identifies the participants as autoantibody-positive relatives of people with T1D, and the Conclusions discuss diagnosing T1D earlier in that group. The paper does not establish that combining autoantibody markers with clinical presentation distinguishes T1D from T2D in children and adults; its Conclusions explicitly limit the findings to autoantibody-positive relatives. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Sosenko, J. M., Skyler, J. S., DiMeglio, L. A., Beam, C. A., Krischer, J. P., Greenbaum, C. J., Boulware, D., Rafkin, L. E., Matheson, D., Herold, K. C., Mahon, J., Palmer, J. P., & Groups, T. T. 1. D. T. A. D. P. T. 1. S.
Affiliations
  • University of Miami (US)
  • Indiana University Indianapolis (US)
  • Western Michigan University (US)
  • University of South Florida (US)
  • Benaroya Research Institute (US)
  • Yale University (US)
  • Western University (CA)
  • University of Washington (US)
Corresponding author
  • Sosenko, Jay M.
  • the Type 1 Diabetes TrialNet and Diabetes Prevention Trial–Type 1 Study Groups
Venue
Diabetes Care
Published
2014-12-17
Volume
38
Issue
2
Pages
271-276
ISSN
  • 0149-5992 (ISSN-L)
  • 1935-5548
OpenAlex
W2078167380
Cited by
86
References
17
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 3
FWCI
2.84
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Diabetes Care (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (U01DK085461, U01DK085476, U01DK085499, U01DK061010, U01DK061058, UC4DK106993, U01DK061042, UC4DK117009, UC4DK097835, P30DK063720, P30DK017047)
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 › Surgery › Pancreatic function and diabetes
Keywords
oral glucose tolerance test, C-peptide, early diagnosis, diagnostic criteria, sensitivity and specificity
MeSH terms
Adult, Autoantibodies, Biological Assay, Blood Glucose, C-Peptide, Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1, Epidemiologic Methods, Fasting, Female, Glucose Tolerance Test, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, ROC Curve, Early Diagnosis

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