AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: We aimed to evaluate how an aetiology-based classification, as recommended in the ADA and WHO guidelines for classification of diabetes mellitus, matches clinical judgement in the Diabetes Incidence Study in Sweden (DISS), a study covering incident cases of diabetic patients aged 15 to 34 years. METHODS: During a 1-year period (1998), blood samples were taken at diagnosis and 4 months (median) thereafter. Patients were classified according to clinical judgement by the reporting physicians and assessments of islet antibodies (ICA, GADA, and IA-2A) and plasma C-peptide. RESULTS: In 1998, 422 patients were registered in DISS. Among the 313 patients participating in the follow-up, most with clinical Type 1 diabetes (185/218, 85%, 95% CI 79-89%) were islet antibody positive (ab+) at diagnosis. In addition, 14 out of 58 (24%, 14-37%) with clinical Type 2 diabetes and 21 out of 37 (57%, 40-73%) with unclassifiable diabetes were antibody positive at diagnosis. Further to this, 4 out of 33 (12%, 3-28%) were antibody negative with clinical Type 1 diabetes and 4 out of 44 (9%, 3-22%) with Type 2 had converted to antibody positive at follow-up. Among those who were constantly antibody negative, 10 out of 29 (34%, 18-54%) with clinical Type 1 and 1 out of 16 (6%, 0-30%) with unclassifiable diabetes had fasting plasma C-peptide concentrations below the normal range (<0.25 nmol/l) at follow-up. CONCLUSION/ INTERPRETATION: Most young adults with clinical Type 1 diabetes (199/218, 91%) had objective Type 1 (ab+ at diagnosis/follow-up and/or low fasting plasma C-peptide concentrations at follow-up), as did one third (18/58, 31%) with clinical Type 2 diabetes and more than half (22/37, 59%) with unclassifiable diabetes. About 10% of those who were antibody negative converted to antibody positive. Our study underlines that a classification considering aetiology is superior to clinical judgement.
AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: We aimed to evaluate how an aetiology-based classification, as recommended in the ADA and WHO guidelines for classification of diabetes mellitus, matches clinical judgement in the Diabetes Incidence Study in Sweden (DISS), a study covering incident cases of diabeticpatients aged 15 to 34 years. METHODS: During a 1-year period (1998), blood samples were taken at diagnosis and 4 months (median) thereafter. Patients were classified according to clinical judgement by the reporting physicians and assessments of islet antibodies (ICA, GADA, and IA-2A) and plasma C-peptide. RESULTS: In 1998, 422 patients were registered in DISS. Among the 313 patients participating in the follow-up, most with clinical Type 1 diabetes (185/218, 85%, 95% CI 79-89%) were islet antibody positive (ab+) at diagnosis. In addition, 14 out of 58 (24%, 14-37%) with clinical Type 2 diabetes and 21 out of 37 (57%, 40-73%) with unclassifiable diabetes were antibody positive at diagnosis. Further to this, 4 out of 33 (12%, 3-28%) were antibody negative with clinical Type 1 diabetes and 4 out of 44 (9%, 3-22%) with Type 2 had converted to antibody positive at follow-up. Among those who were constantly antibody negative, 10 out of 29 (34%, 18-54%) with clinical Type 1 and 1 out of 16 (6%, 0-30%) with unclassifiable diabetes had fasting plasma C-peptide concentrations below the normal range (<0.25 nmol/l) at follow-up. CONCLUSION/ INTERPRETATION: Most young adults with clinical Type 1 diabetes (199/218, 91%) had objective Type 1 (ab+ at diagnosis/follow-up and/or low fasting plasma C-peptide concentrations at follow-up), as did one third (18/58, 31%) with clinical Type 2 diabetes and more than half (22/37, 59%) with unclassifiable diabetes. About 10% of those who were antibody negative converted to antibody positive. Our study underlines that a classification considering aetiology is superior to clinical judgement.
Authors: D B Schranz; L Bekris; M Landin-Olsson; C Törn; A Niläng; A Toll; J Sjöström; H Grönlund; A Lernmark Journal: Horm Metab Res Date: 2000-04 Impact factor: 2.936
Authors: M Pietropaolo; D J Becker; R E LaPorte; J S Dorman; S Riboni; W A Rudert; S Mazumdar; M Trucco Journal: Diabetologia Date: 2002-01 Impact factor: 10.122
Authors: M Landin-Olsson; H J Arnqvist; G Blohmé; B Littorin; F Lithner; L Nyström; B Scherstén; G Sundkvist; L Wibell; J Ostman; A Lernmark Journal: Autoimmunity Date: 1999 Impact factor: 2.815
Authors: T Kimpimäki; P Kulmala; K Savola; P Vähäsalo; H Reijonen; J Ilonen; H K Akerblom; M Knip Journal: J Clin Endocrinol Metab Date: 2000-03 Impact factor: 5.958
Authors: N Lammi; O Taskinen; E Moltchanova; I-L Notkola; J G Eriksson; J Tuomilehto; M Karvonen Journal: Diabetologia Date: 2007-05-11 Impact factor: 10.122
Authors: E Bakhtadze; H Borg; G Stenström; P Fernlund; H J Arnqvist; A Ekbom-Schnell; J Bolinder; J W Eriksson; S Gudbjörnsdottir; L Nyström; L C Groop; G Sundkvist Journal: Diabetologia Date: 2006-05-31 Impact factor: 10.122
Authors: K Steen Carlsson; M Landin-Olsson; L Nyström; H J Arnqvist; J Bolinder; J Ostman; S Gudbjörnsdóttir Journal: Diabetologia Date: 2009-12-18 Impact factor: 10.122
Authors: I Waernbaum; G Blohmé; J Ostman; G Sundkvist; J W Eriksson; H J Arnqvist; J Bolinder; L Nyström Journal: Diabetologia Date: 2006-01-31 Impact factor: 10.122
Authors: B Littorin; P Blom; A Schölin; H J Arnqvist; G Blohmé; J Bolinder; A Ekbom-Schnell; J W Eriksson; S Gudbjörnsdottir; L Nyström; J Ostman; G Sundkvist Journal: Diabetologia Date: 2006-10-27 Impact factor: 10.122
Authors: E Bakhtadze; C Cervin; E Lindholm; H Borg; P Nilsson; H J Arnqvist; J Bolinder; J W Eriksson; S Gudbjörnsdottir; L Nyström; C-D Agardh; M Landin-Olsson; G Sundkvist; L C Groop Journal: Diabetologia Date: 2008-10-07 Impact factor: 10.122