AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: To compare the predictive characteristics of autoantibodies to GAD (GADA) and islet antigen 2 (IA-2A) for type 1 diabetes between siblings of affected children and children from the general population. METHODS: Seven-hundred and fifty-five siblings and 3,475 population-derived children were screened for GADA and IA-2A and observed for type 1 diabetes for 15 years. Sensitivity and cumulative disease risks from GADA, IA-2A and double positivity were compared between the cohorts. RESULTS: Fifty-six siblings (7.4%) tested positive for GADA, 39 (5.2%) for IA-2A and 29 (3.8%) for both autoantibodies. Thirty-four population derived participants (1.0%) had GADA, 22 (0.6%) had IA-2A and 7 (0.2%) had double positivity. Fifty-one siblings (6.8%) and 15 participants in the population cohort (0.4%) progressed to type 1 diabetes. The predictive sensitivity of GADA was 68% (95% CI 53-81%) among siblings and 50% (95% CI 23-77%) in the general population, while the corresponding values were 58 (95% CI 43-72%) and 43% (95% CI 18-71%) for IA-2A. Double-autoantibody positivity had a sensitivity of 48% (95% CI 34-63%) among siblings and 36% (95% CI 13-65%) in the population cohort. Cumulative disease risks from GADA, IA-2A and double positivity were, respectively, 61% (95% CI 48-74%), 74% (95% CI 61-88%) and 83% (95% CI 69-97%) among siblings compared with those of 24% (95% CI 9-38%), 32% (95% CI 12-51%) and 86% (95% CI 60-100%) in the general population. CONCLUSIONS/ INTERPRETATION: There were no significant differences in the disease-predictive sensitivity of GADA and IA-2A positivity or their combination between siblings and the population cohort, whereas, for each antibody, positivity was associated with a higher cumulative disease risk among siblings. Double-antibody positivity conferred similar cumulative disease risk both among siblings and in the general population.
AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: To compare the predictive characteristics of autoantibodies to GAD (GADA) and islet antigen 2 (IA-2A) for type 1 diabetes between siblings of affected children and children from the general population. METHODS: Seven-hundred and fifty-five siblings and 3,475 population-derived children were screened for GADA and IA-2A and observed for type 1 diabetes for 15 years. Sensitivity and cumulative disease risks from GADA, IA-2A and double positivity were compared between the cohorts. RESULTS: Fifty-six siblings (7.4%) tested positive for GADA, 39 (5.2%) for IA-2A and 29 (3.8%) for both autoantibodies. Thirty-four population derived participants (1.0%) had GADA, 22 (0.6%) had IA-2A and 7 (0.2%) had double positivity. Fifty-one siblings (6.8%) and 15 participants in the population cohort (0.4%) progressed to type 1 diabetes. The predictive sensitivity of GADA was 68% (95% CI 53-81%) among siblings and 50% (95% CI 23-77%) in the general population, while the corresponding values were 58 (95% CI 43-72%) and 43% (95% CI 18-71%) for IA-2A. Double-autoantibody positivity had a sensitivity of 48% (95% CI 34-63%) among siblings and 36% (95% CI 13-65%) in the population cohort. Cumulative disease risks from GADA, IA-2A and double positivity were, respectively, 61% (95% CI 48-74%), 74% (95% CI 61-88%) and 83% (95% CI 69-97%) among siblings compared with those of 24% (95% CI 9-38%), 32% (95% CI 12-51%) and 86% (95% CI 60-100%) in the general population. CONCLUSIONS/ INTERPRETATION: There were no significant differences in the disease-predictive sensitivity of GADA and IA-2A positivity or their combination between siblings and the population cohort, whereas, for each antibody, positivity was associated with a higher cumulative disease risk among siblings. Double-antibody positivity conferred similar cumulative disease risk both among siblings and in the general population.
Authors: Massimo Pietropaolo; Shui Yu; Ingrid M Libman; Susan L Pietropaolo; Karen Riley; Ronald E LaPorte; Allan L Drash; Sati Mazumdar; Massimo Trucco; Dorothy J Becker Journal: Pediatr Diabetes Date: 2005-12 Impact factor: 4.866
Authors: P Kulmala; K Savola; J S Petersen; P Vähäsalo; J Karjalainen; T Löppönen; T Dyrberg; H K Akerblom; M Knip Journal: J Clin Invest Date: 1998-01-15 Impact factor: 14.808
Authors: James M LaGasse; Michael S Brantley; Nicola J Leech; Rachel E Rowe; Stephanie Monks; Jerry P Palmer; Gerald T Nepom; David K McCulloch; William A Hagopian Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2002-03 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: R Veijola; H Reijonen; P Vähäsalo; E Sabbah; P Kulmala; J Ilonen; H K Akerblom; M Knip Journal: J Clin Invest Date: 1996-12-01 Impact factor: 14.808
Authors: J Tuomilehto; E Virtala; M Karvonen; R Lounamaa; J Pitkäniemi; A Reunanen; E Tuomilehto-Wolf; L Toivanen Journal: Int J Epidemiol Date: 1995-10 Impact factor: 7.196
Authors: C Tiberti; L Yu; F Lucantoni; F Panimolle; I Spagnuolo; A Lenzi; G S Eisenbarth; F Dotta Journal: Clin Exp Immunol Date: 2011-12 Impact factor: 4.330
Authors: Mikael Knip; Sari Korhonen; Petri Kulmala; Riitta Veijola; Antti Reunanen; Olli T Raitakari; Jorma Viikari; Hans K Akerblom Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2010-06 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: C Wasserfall; E Montgomery; L Yu; A Michels; R Gianani; A Pugliese; C Nierras; J S Kaddis; D A Schatz; E Bonifacio; M A Atkinson Journal: Clin Exp Immunol Date: 2016-05-04 Impact factor: 4.330
Authors: F K Gorus; E V Balti; I Vermeulen; S Demeester; A Van Dalem; O Costa; H Dorchy; S Tenoutasse; T Mouraux; C De Block; P Gillard; K Decochez; J M Wenzlau; J C Hutton; D G Pipeleers; I Weets Journal: Clin Exp Immunol Date: 2013-01 Impact factor: 4.330
Authors: Qibin Zhang; Thomas L Fillmore; Athena A Schepmoes; Therese R W Clauss; Marina A Gritsenko; Patricia W Mueller; Marian Rewers; Mark A Atkinson; Richard D Smith; Thomas O Metz Journal: J Exp Med Date: 2012-12-31 Impact factor: 14.307
Authors: Andrea K Steck; Kelly Johnson; Katherine J Barriga; Dongmei Miao; Liping Yu; John C Hutton; George S Eisenbarth; Marian J Rewers Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2011-05-11 Impact factor: 19.112