posted on 2025-07-22, 17:22authored byErin L. Templeman, Lauric Ferrat, Nick Thomas, Cate Speake, Diane .K. Wherrett, Jennifer Sherr, John M Wentworth, Maria J. Redondo, Hemang M. Parik, Jamie L. Felton, Carmella Evans-Molina, Jay Sosenko, Lu You, Richard A. Oram, Emily K. Sims
<p dir="ltr">Objective</p><p dir="ltr">Adults represent over half of incident type 1 diabetes, yet research on disease progression predominantly focuses on at-risk children. We aimed to compare autoantibody screening outcomes and type 1 diabetes progression in adults versus children.</p><p dir="ltr">Research Design and Methods</p><p dir="ltr">We studied 135,914 children (<18 years) and 99,795 adult relatives of individuals with type 1 diabetes screened in the TrialNet Pathway to Prevention study. In autoantibody positive participants, we compared progression rates, associations with risk factors, and performance of metabolic risk scores.</p><p dir="ltr">Results</p><p dir="ltr">Adults were more likely than children to screen positive for a single autoantibody (4.0% vs 2.6%) but less likely for multiple autoantibodies (0.83% vs 2.8%; p<0.001). Progression to stage 3 disease was lower in adults with single autoantibody positivity or stage 1 type 1 diabetes vs. children (5-year risks: single autoantibody, adults 8.2% vs children 22%; p<0.001; stage 1, adults 17% vs children 47%; p<0.001). However, adults with stage 2 type 1 diabetes at initial staging OGTT showed comparable 5-year progression risks to children (78% for both groups). A higher proportion of adults progressing to clinical diabetes were single autoantibody positive (40% v 15%, p<0.0001), these individuals were commonly single GAD positive, and had lower type 1 but higher type 2 genetic risk scores compared to multiple autoantibody-positive adults. HbA1c and established risk indices more effectively identified progressors in adults compared to children.</p><p dir="ltr">Conclusion</p><p dir="ltr">Autoantibody-positive adult relatives exhibit distinct autoantibody trajectories and progression risks compared to children, suggesting the need for tailored monitoring and intervention strategies.</p><p> </p><p><br></p>
Funding
The Type 1 Diabetes TrialNet Study Group is a clinical trials network currently funded by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) through the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, and The Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, through the cooperative agreements U01 DK061010, U01 DK061034, U01 DK061042, U01 DK061058, U01 DK085461, U01 DK085465, U01 DK085466, U01 DK085476, U01 DK085499, U01 DK085509, U01 DK103180, U01 DK103153, U01 DK103266, U01 DK103282, U01 DK106984, U01 DK106994, U01 DK107013, U01 DK107014, U01 DK106993, UC4 DK117009, and Breakthrough T1D (formerly JDRF). The content of this article are solely the responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official views of the NIH or Breakthrough T1D.
EKS receives support from NIH grants R01DK121929, R01DK133881 and U01DK127382-012. MJR and RAO have received support from NIH R01 DK121843-01. EKS is also supported by the Helmsley Charitable Trust, the Showalter Scholar Program, as well as the Doris Duke Charitable Foundation (grant 2021258) through the COVID-19 Fund to Retain Clinical Scientists collaborative grant program and supported by the John Templeton Foundation (grant 62288). RAO is supported by a Diabetes UK Harry Keen Fellowship (16/0005529) and RAO and LF by a JDRF strategic research agreement (3-SRA-2019-827-S-B). ELT is a PhD student funded by Randox Ltd.
ELT and RAO were supported by the National Institute for Health and Care Research Exeter Biomedical Research Centre. The views expressed are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NIHR or the Department of Health and Social Care.