| Literature DB >> 27818684 |
Steffen U Thorsen1, Christian B Pipper2, Henrik B Mortensen3, Flemming Pociot3, Jesper Johannesen3, Jannet Svensson3.
Abstract
Aims. A new perspective on autoantibodies as pivotal players in the pathogenesis of type 1 diabetes (T1D) has recently emerged. Our key objective was to examine whether increased levels of autoantibodies against the β-cell autoantigens glutamic acid decarboxylase (isoform 65) (GADA) and insulinoma associated antigen-2A (IA-2A) mirrored the 3.4% annual increase in incidence of T1D. Methods. From the Danish Childhood Diabetes Register, we randomly selected 500 patients and 500 siblings for GADA and IA-2A analysis (1997 through 2005). Blood samples were taken within three months after onset. A robust log-normal regression model was used. Nine hundred children and adolescents had complete records and were included in the analysis. Cochran-Armitage test for trend was used to evaluate changes in prevalence of autoantibody positivity by period. Results. No significant changes in levels of GADA and IA-2A were found over our 9-year study period. No trends in autoantibody positivity-in either patients or siblings-were found. Levels of GADA and IA-2A were significantly associated with HLA risk groups and GADA with age. Conclusion. The prevalence of positivity and the levels of GADA and IA-2A have not changed between 1997 and 2005 in newly diagnosed patients with T1D and their siblings without T1D.Entities:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27818684 PMCID: PMC5081463 DOI: 10.1155/2016/8350158
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Endocrinol ISSN: 1687-8337 Impact factor: 3.257
Descriptive characteristics of the study population.
| Variables | Entire study period | Period 1 | Period 2 | Period 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (1997–2005) | (1997–1999) | (2000–2002) | (2003–2005) | |||||
| Patient | Sibling | Patient | Sibling | Patient | Sibling | Patient | Sibling | |
| ( | ( | ( | ( | ( | ( | ( | ( | |
|
| ||||||||
| GADA | ||||||||
| Median/Q1–Q3, U/mL | 114/22–500 | 4/3–6 | 129/22–464 | 5/3–6 | 85/29–500 | 5/4–6 | 130/19–500 | 4/3–5 |
| IA-2A | ||||||||
| Median/Q1–Q3, U/mL | 188/0–250 | 0/0-0 | 145/0–250 | 0/0-0 | 191/0–250 | 0/0-0 | 229/0–250 | 0/0-0 |
|
| ||||||||
| GADA pos. (>31 U/mL), | 344/71.4 | 27/5.7 | 107/71.8 | 17/7.8 | 73/73.0 | 2/4.0 | 164/70.4 | 8/3.8 |
| IA-2A pos. (>5 U/mL), | 322/66.8 | 10/2.1 | 93/62.4 | 6/2.8 | 67/67.0 | 3/6.0 | 162/69.5 | 1/0.5 |
| GADA & IA-2A pos., | 244/50.6 | 8/1.7 | 71/47.7 | 6/2.8 | 52/52.0 | 1/2.0 | 121/51.9 | 1/0.5 |
|
| ||||||||
| Gender | ||||||||
| Female, | 227/47.1 | 212/44.4 | 74/49.7 | 99/45.6 | 46/46.0 | 18/36.0 | 107/45.9 | 95/45.2 |
| Age at blood sampling | ||||||||
| Median/Q1–Q3, years | 10.4/7.4–12.5 | 10.3/7.8–12.8 | 10.8/7.2–12.7 | 10.6/7.9–12.9 | 9.9/7.1–12.8 | 9.8/7.6–12.2 | 10.3/7.5–12.4 | 10.2/7.6–12.8 |
| Season when blood was sampled, | ||||||||
| Winter | 121/25.1 | 124/26.0 | 38/25.5 | 62/28.6 | 31/31.0 | 17/34.0 | 52/22.3 | 46/21.4 |
| Spring | 123/25.5 | 123/25.8 | 38/25.5 | 54/24.9 | 25/25.0 | 12/24.0 | 60/25.8 | 57/27.1 |
| Summer | 109/22.6 | 133/27.9 | 30/20.1 | 57/26.3 | 24/24.0 | 12/24.0 | 55/23.6 | 64/30.5 |
| Autumn | 129/26.8 | 97/20.3 | 43/28.9 | 46/20.3 | 20/20.0 | 9.18.0 | 66/28.3 | 44/21.0 |
|
| ||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| ||||||||
|
| ||||||||
| Higha, | 312/70.1 | 228/50.1 | 84/63.2 | 112/53.0 | 69/72.6 | 20/41.7 | 159/73.3 | 96/49.0 |
| Moderateb, | 66/14.8 | 43/9.5 | 30/22.6 | 19/9.0 | 11/11.6 | 7/14.6 | 25/11.5 | 17/8.7 |
| Low/protectivec, | 67/15.1 | 184/40.4 | 19/14.3 | 80/37.9 | 15/15.8 | 21/43.8 | 33/15.2 | 83/42.4 |
HLA-DQB1 genotypes are collapsed into risk categories, which are seen below.
aHLA-DQB1 allele_1/allele_2: 03 : 02/99 : 99, 03 : 02/02, 06 : 04/03 : 02.
bHLA-DQB1 allele_1/allele_2: 03 : 01/02, 06 : 03/03 : 02, 02/99 : 99, 06 : 04/02, 06 : 04/99 : 99, 03 : 01/03 : 02. 06 : 04/03 : 04.
cHLA-DQB1 allele_1/allele_2: 06 : 02/03 : 02, 06 : 02/02, 06 : 03/99 : 99, 03 : 01/99 : 99, 06 : 02/03 : 01, 06 : 03/03 : 01, 06 : 04/03 : 01, 06 : 03/02, 03 : 04/99 : 99, 03 : 04/02, 06 : 02/03 : 04, 99 : 99/99 : 99.
99 : 99 = remaining alleles.
Estimated relative differences in autoantibody levels according to the covariates in the adjusted model.
| Outcome | Variable | Level | RC (95% CI) |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| GADA | Status | Patient |
|
|
| Sibling | 1 | |||
| Gender | Females | 1.12 (0.91; 1.38) | 0.29 | |
| Male | 1 | |||
| Age | 10+ yrs |
|
| |
| 5–10 yrs |
|
| ||
| 0–5 yrs | 1 | |||
| Period | 2003–2005 | 0.87 (0.70; 1.09) | 0.23 | |
| 2000–2002 | 1.04 (0.76; 1.42) | 0.82 | ||
| 1997–1999 | 1 | |||
| Season | Spring | 1.12 (0.85; 1.48) | 0.41 | |
| Summer | 0.91 (0.69; 1.21) | 0.53 | ||
| Autumn | 0.89 (0.66; 1.22) | 0.47 | ||
| Winter | 1 | |||
| HLA risk | Low |
|
| |
| Moderate | 1.39 (0.96; 2.01) | 0.083 | ||
| High | 1 | |||
|
| ||||
| IA-2A | Status | Patient | 2.20 |
|
| Sibling | 1 | |||
| Gender | Females | 0.24 (0.06; 1.07) | 0.06 | |
| Male | 1 | |||
| Age | 10+ yrs | 3.43 (0.24; 48.11) | 0.36 | |
| 5–10 yrs | 6.39 (0.42; 97.17) | 0.18 | ||
| 0–5 yrs | 1 | |||
| Period | 2003–2005 | 0.68 (0.13; 3.56) | 0.97 | |
| 2000–2002 | 1.05 (0.10; 10.72) | 0.65 | ||
| 1997–1999 | 1 | |||
| Season | Spring | 0.69 (0.09; 5.55) | 0.73 | |
| Summer | 2.38 (0.26; 21.39) | 0.44 | ||
| Autumn | 0.34 (0.04; 2.93) | 0.33 | ||
| Winter | 1 | |||
| HLA risk | Lowa |
|
| |
| Moderateb |
|
| ||
| Highc | 1 | |||
Bold letters indicate significance at a 5% level.
HLA-DQB1 genotypes are collapsed into risk categories, which are seen below.
aHLA-DQB1 allele_1/allele_2: 06 : 02/03 : 02, 06 : 02/02, 06 : 03/99 : 99, 03 : 01/99 : 99, 06 : 02/03 : 01, 06 : 03/03 : 01, 06 : 04/03 : 01, 06 : 03/02, 03 : 04/99 : 99, 03 : 04/02, 06 : 02/03 : 04, 99 : 99/99 : 99.
bHLA-DQB1 allele_1/allele_2: 03 : 01/02, 06 : 03/03 : 02, 02/99 : 99, 06 : 04/02, 06 : 04/99 : 99, 03 : 01/03 : 02. 06 : 04/03 : 04.
cHLA-DQB1 allele_1/allele_2: 03 : 02/99 : 99, 03 : 02/02, 06 : 04/03 : 02.
99 : 99 = remaining alleles.
Figure 1Combined box and scatter plots for GADA and IA-2A levels by period and stratification by patient status. Schematic box plots are only used in the patient stratum, due to no visual graphical gain when used in the sibling stratum, due to low levels of the two autoantibodies.