2004
DOI: 10.1111/j.1444-0903.2004.00482.x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Low prevalence of autoimmune diabetes markers in a mixed ethnic population of Singaporean diabetics

Abstract: Presence of both antibodies in our mixed ethnic group of type 1 diabetes patients was much lower than in Caucasians. Significant numbers of patients were seronegative for antibodies. Influences due to ethnicity and adiposity would require further investigations.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

2
9
0

Year Published

2005
2005
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 15 publications
(11 citation statements)
references
References 34 publications
2
9
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In Caucasian population, the prevalence of islet cell-associated antibodies in recently diagnosed subjects with T1DM ranged from 80% to 97% (Diabetes Prevention Trial -Type 1 Diabetes Study Group, 2002;Landin-Olsson et al, 1992;Notkins & Lernmark, 2001). The prevalence in our study was comparable to that of Asians (Lee, Ng, Thai, Lui, & Loke, 2001;Todd, Ng, Lui, & Thai, 2004;Zimmet et al, 1993) where it was reported at 5-40% and Africans (Hawa et al, 2005;Lutale et al, 2007;Oli et al, 1981;Panz et al, 2000) which ranged 7-44%, including what was reported in Ethiopia in the 1980s and in 2011 (Gill et al, 2011;Peters et al, 1986). We think that part of the reason why the antibody positivity in our T1DM patients was relatively lower is the fact that most of our T1DM patients were not newly diagnosed as indicated by the mean duration of diabetes.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 46%
“…In Caucasian population, the prevalence of islet cell-associated antibodies in recently diagnosed subjects with T1DM ranged from 80% to 97% (Diabetes Prevention Trial -Type 1 Diabetes Study Group, 2002;Landin-Olsson et al, 1992;Notkins & Lernmark, 2001). The prevalence in our study was comparable to that of Asians (Lee, Ng, Thai, Lui, & Loke, 2001;Todd, Ng, Lui, & Thai, 2004;Zimmet et al, 1993) where it was reported at 5-40% and Africans (Hawa et al, 2005;Lutale et al, 2007;Oli et al, 1981;Panz et al, 2000) which ranged 7-44%, including what was reported in Ethiopia in the 1980s and in 2011 (Gill et al, 2011;Peters et al, 1986). We think that part of the reason why the antibody positivity in our T1DM patients was relatively lower is the fact that most of our T1DM patients were not newly diagnosed as indicated by the mean duration of diabetes.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 46%
“…Markers of autoimmunity to islet cells may not be helpful as studies in Asians found that less than half have evidence of auto-antibodies against islet antigens at diagnosis [4], which is usually positive in 90% in Caucasian patients at time of diagnosis [15]. Commonly used clinical measurements such as BMI and other inflammatory biomarkers did not differentiate types of diabetes in AA which are different from studies involving Caucasian and other minority populations that show BMI and CRP are reliable predictors of type 2 diabetes [16].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Uniquely, positivity of auto-antibodies to islet cell antigens is only found in a minority of the newly diagnosed Asians with type 1 diabetes [4], limiting the clinical utility of antibody testing for differentiating diabetic type. Furthermore, specific HLA DR and DQ genotype typically associated with type 1 diabetes is not common in this population [5].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Previous studies in Indian populations with Type 2 diabetes have reported large differences in the prevalence of islet antibodies, ranging from 4.5 to 55% , but these studies were conducted in small numbers of participants and, in some instances, in specialized subgroups . More recently, in a study including a large cohort of patients with Type 2 diabetes of South‐Asian (Punjabi) origin residing in the UK, islet antibodies were noted to be uncommon (GAD antibody frequency 1.6%) .…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%