Diabetologia · 2025
Continuous glucose monitor metrics from five studies identify participants at risk for type 1 diabetes development.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Calhoun Peter, Spanbauer Charles, Steck Andrea K, Frohnert Brigitte I, Herman Mark A, Keymeulen Bart, Veijola Riitta, Toppari Jorma, Desouter Aster, Gorus Frans, Atkinson Mark, Wilson Darrell M, Pietropaolo Susan, Beck Roy W
Аннотация
AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: We aimed to assess whether continuous glucose monitor (CGM) metrics can accurately predict stage 3 type 1 diabetes diagnosis in those with islet autoantibodies (AAb).
METHODS: Baseline CGM data were collected from participants with ≥1 positive AAb type from five studies: ASK (n=79), BDR (n=22), DAISY (n=18), DIPP (n=8) and TrialNet Pathway to Prevention (n=91). Median follow-up time was 2.6 years (quartiles: 1.5 to 3.6 years). A participant characteristics-only model, a CGM metrics-only model and a full model combining characteristics and CGM metrics were compared.
RESULTS: The full model achieved a numerically higher performance predictor estimate (C statistic=0.74; 95% CI 0.66, 0.81) for predicting stage 3 type 1 diabetes diagnosis compared with the characteristics-only model (C statistic=0.69; 95% CI 0.60, 0.77) and the CGM-only model (C statistic=0.68; 95% CI 0.61, 0.75). Greater percentage of time >7.8 mmol/l (p<0.001), HbA1c (p=0.02), having a first-degree relative with type 1 diabetes (p=0.02) and testing positive for IA-2 AAb (p<0.001) were associated with greater risk of type 1 diabetes diagnosis. Additionally, being male (p=0.06) and having a negative GAD AAb (p=0.09) were selected but not found to be significant. Participants classified as having low (n=79), medium (n=98) or high (n=41) risk of stage 3 type 1 diabetes diagnosis using the full model had a probability of developing symptomatic disease by 2 years of 5%, 13% and 48%, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: CGM metrics can help predict disease progression and classify an individual's risk of type 1 diabetes diagnosis in conjunction with other factors. CGM can also be used to better assess the risk of type 1 diabetes progression and define eligibility for potential prevention trials.
METHODS: Baseline CGM data were collected from participants with ≥1 positive AAb type from five studies: ASK (n=79), BDR (n=22), DAISY (n=18), DIPP (n=8) and TrialNet Pathway to Prevention (n=91). Median follow-up time was 2.6 years (quartiles: 1.5 to 3.6 years). A participant characteristics-only model, a CGM metrics-only model and a full model combining characteristics and CGM metrics were compared.
RESULTS: The full model achieved a numerically higher performance predictor estimate (C statistic=0.74; 95% CI 0.66, 0.81) for predicting stage 3 type 1 diabetes diagnosis compared with the characteristics-only model (C statistic=0.69; 95% CI 0.60, 0.77) and the CGM-only model (C statistic=0.68; 95% CI 0.61, 0.75). Greater percentage of time >7.8 mmol/l (p<0.001), HbA1c (p=0.02), having a first-degree relative with type 1 diabetes (p=0.02) and testing positive for IA-2 AAb (p<0.001) were associated with greater risk of type 1 diabetes diagnosis. Additionally, being male (p=0.06) and having a negative GAD AAb (p=0.09) were selected but not found to be significant. Participants classified as having low (n=79), medium (n=98) or high (n=41) risk of stage 3 type 1 diabetes diagnosis using the full model had a probability of developing symptomatic disease by 2 years of 5%, 13% and 48%, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: CGM metrics can help predict disease progression and classify an individual's risk of type 1 diabetes diagnosis in conjunction with other factors. CGM can also be used to better assess the risk of type 1 diabetes progression and define eligibility for potential prevention trials.