Is mumps virus an etiologic factor in juvenile diabetes mellitus?

Sultz, Harry A.; Hart, Benjamin A.; Zielezny, Maria; Schlesinger, Edward R.

doi:10.1016/s0022-3476(75)80206-x

Cited by 107 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…They found that in children who had two autoantibodies by age two, 50% developed diabetes by age five, a median onset of approximately 36 months after detection of autoantibodies [7]. Further support for causation is derived from the fact that the temporal delay of 24-48 *Address correspondence to this author at the Classen Immunotherapies Inc., 6517 Montrose Avenue, Baltimore, MD 21212, USA; Tel: (410) 377-8526; E-mail: Classen@vaccines.net months between immunization and the rise in the rates of diabetes is consistent with earlier papers showing a two-tofour year delay between mumps infections and increases in type 1 diabetes [8][9][10][11]. A temporal delay of 24-48 months between vaccination and the rise in rates of type 1 diabetes also has been detected with the DTP and other vaccines [2].…”

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 76%

Risk of Vaccine Induced Diabetes in Children with a Family History of Type 1 Diabetes

Classen¹

2008

TOPEDJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cohort data from Denmark in all children born from January 1, 1990 to December 31, 2000 was analyzed to assess the association between immunization and type 1 diabetes in all Danish children and in a subgroup where children had a sibling with type 1 diabetes. Pediatric vaccines were associated with a statistically significant increased risk of type 1 diabetes in 12 of 21 endpoints in the general population. The rate ratios in children who received at least one dose of a specific vaccine were also elevated in the subgroup and were statistically the same as in the general population. Three doses of the hemophilus vaccine were associated with a rate ratio of 1.23 (1.02<

show abstract

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 76%

Risk of Vaccine Induced Diabetes in Children with a Family History of Type 1 Diabetes

Classen¹

2008

TOPEDJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, infectious diseases also behave in this way, often showing very marked periodicity [47]. One study [48] has linked cyclical variation in diabetes in-cidence to cyclical variation in reported infections with the mumps virus, although other studies have not reported this [49]. Several other registries have published temporal incidence curves showing multiple peaks in incidence [1,13,18,42,43,46], although this is not a universal feature [1].…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The epidemiology of diabetes mellitus in the United Kingdom: The Yorkshire regional childhood diabetes register

et al. 1993

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary. A register of the incidence of Type 1 (insulin-dependent) diabetes mellitus in the Yorkshire region of the United Kingdom has been completed. A total of 1,490 subjects aged between 0 and 16 years were identified from 1978 to 1990, giving an incidence of 13.7 per 100,000 (ages 0-14) or 13.6 per 100,000 (ages 0-16), comparable to other recent studies in the United Kingdom. An age-period-cohort analysis shows evidence for a modest drift effect of 1.75 % per year (95% confidence interval 0.28 to 3.25%). There is a marked epidemic pattern with peaks at 4-year intervals. The age-incidence curve is similar to that reported elsewhere, having peaks in early childhood and puberty. Girls have an earlier pubertal peak than boys. There is substantial seasonal variation in incidence confined to those over 5 years of age. Ascertainment is believed to be very complete, and is estimated to be 97.6% (95% confidence interval 97.2% to 98.1%).Key words: Type 1 (insulin-dependent) diabetes mellitus, epidemiology, aetiology, disease registry, childhood, ascertainment estimates.Type 1 (insulin-dependent) diabetes mellitus is an increasingly common disorder in many European populations [1,2]. Neither the causes of the condition, nor the causes of the increased incidence are known. Although a genetic predisposition is clearly of great importance, direct epidemiological evidence from case-control studies [3,4] and indirect epidemiological evidence from migrant studies [5,6] indicate that environmental agents are also very important.The descriptive epidemiology of Type i diabetes is an important source of information for the framing of aetiological hypotheses. Several prominent features require explanation. There is great geographical variation in incidence, with as much as a 40-fold variation between countries; Finland and Sardinia have the highest incidence rates (over 30 per 100,000 per year); Japan, Africa and Korea have the lowest (0.3 to 2.5 per 100,000 per year) [7][8][9][10][11][12][13]. The age incidence curve typically shows a peak in early adolescence, and may have a secondary peak earlier in childhood. There is marked seasonality of onset in many (though not all) studies [12,[14][15][16][17], although this may relate more to infections precipitating a metabolic decompensation in prediabetic persons, than to any aetiological agent [8]. The incidence in a population may change rapidly during short periods of time, whether in the indigenous population [18], or in migrant populations [5].A necessary first step in any series of investigations of the aetiology of Type 1 diabetes is to establish a good, well-validated register. This was the aim of the Yorkshire project.

show abstract

“…In 1976 there were an esti mated 5800 graduates of NP programs. Most of the available information about NPs is provided by a longitudinal study contracted for by the Divi sion of Nursing, US Public Health Service (31)(32)(33). These studies each surveyed by questionnaire the universe of NP programs and their current student body at three periods: 1974,1977, and 1980.…”

Section: Maturation and Current Statusmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…By 1979 the estimated number of graduates had grown to 16,000 . a figure used by the GMENAC in their projections of fu ture production (20) (31,32). Three-quarters of those employed functioned as nurse practitioners providing primary care or engaged in teaching, consulting, etc.…”

Section: Maturation and Current Statusmentioning

confidence: 99%