OBJECTIVE
Recent joint American Diabetes Association and European Association for the Study of Diabetes guidelines recommend routine islet autoantibody testing in all adults newly diagnosed with type 1 diabetes. We aimed to assess the impact of routine islet autoantibody testing in this population.
RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS
We prospectively assessed the relationship between islet autoantibody status (GADA, IA-2A, and ZNT8A), clinical and genetic characteristics, and progression (annual change in urine C-peptide–to–creatinine ratio [UCPCR]) in 722 adults (≥18 years old at diagnosis) with clinically diagnosed type 1 diabetes and diabetes duration <12 months. We also evaluated changes in treatment and glycemia over 2 years after informing participants and their clinicians of autoantibody results.
RESULTS
Of 722 participants diagnosed with type 1 diabetes, 24.8% (179) were autoantibody negative. This group had genetic and C-peptide characteristics suggestive of a high prevalence of nonautoimmune diabetes: lower mean type 1 diabetes genetic risk score (islet autoantibody negative vs. positive: 10.85 vs. 13.09 [P < 0.001] [type 2 diabetes 10.12]) and lower annual change in C-peptide (UCPCR), −24% vs. −43% (P < 0.001).
After median 24 months of follow-up, treatment change occurred in 36.6% (60 of 164) of autoantibody-negative participants: 22.6% (37 of 164) discontinued insulin, with HbA1c similar to that of participants continuing insulin (57.5 vs. 60.8 mmol/mol [7.4 vs. 7.7%], P = 0.4), and 14.0% (23 of 164) added adjuvant agents to insulin.
CONCLUSIONS
In adult-onset clinically diagnosed type 1 diabetes, negative islet autoantibodies should prompt careful consideration of other diabetes subtypes. When routinely measured, negative antibodies are associated with successful insulin cessation. These findings support recent recommendations for routine islet autoantibody assessment in adult-onset type 1 diabetes.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.