Abstract
Aims Correct classification of type 1 (T1D) and type 2 diabetes (T2D) is challenging due to overlapping clinical features and the increasingly early onset of T2D, particularly in South Asians. We used polygenic risk scores (PRSs) in a British Bangladeshi and Pakistani population with diabetes to estimate the proportion and misclassification rate of T1D in insulin-treated individuals with ambiguous features.
Methods Using linked health records from the Genes & Health cohort (n=38,344) we defined four groups: 31 T1D cases, 1,842 T2D cases, and after excluding these, 839 insulin-treated individuals with ambiguous features and 5,174 controls. Combining these with 307 confirmed T1D cases and 307 controls from India, we calculated ancestry-corrected PRSs for T1D and T2D, with which we estimated the proportion of T1D cases within the ambiguous group and evaluated misclassification.
Results We estimated that the prevalence of T1D was ∼6% within the ambiguous group, or ∼4.5% within the subset who had T2D codes in their health records. We saw no significant association between the T1D or T2D PRS and BMI at diagnosis, time to insulin, or the presence of T1D or T2D diagnostic codes amongst the T2D or ambiguous cases, suggesting that these clinical features are not particularly helpful at aiding diagnosis in ambiguous cases.
Conclusions We estimate that about one in twenty of British Pakistanis and Bangladeshis with diabetes who are treated with insulin and have ambiguous clinical features have been classified incorrectly in their health records, and in fact have T1D. This emphasises that robust identification of T1D cases and appropriate clinical care may require routine measurement of diabetes autoantibodies and C-peptide.
What is already known about this subject?
- Correct classification of type 1 (T1D) and type 2 diabetes (T2D) is challenging due to overlapping clinical features and the increasingly early onset of T2D, particularly in people of South Asian descent.
- Polygenic risk scores (PRSs) are useful tools to aid the classification of people with diabetes.
What is the key question?
- What proportion of insulin-treated diabetic individuals with ambiguous clinical features have been clinically misclassified and in fact have T1D, amongst a cohort of British Pakistani and Bangladeshi adults?
What are the new findings?
- Based on analyses of polygenic risk scores, the prevalence of T1D was found to be ∼6% within patients who were insulin-treated but with ambiguous features, and ∼4.5% were estimated to have been misclassified.
- Clinical features such as BMI at diagnosis, time to insulin, or presence of T1D/T2D codes were not significantly associated with T1D or T2D PRS.
How might this impact on clinical practice in the foreseeable future?
- These findings emphasise the importance of routine collection of diabetes autoantibodies and C-peptide measurements to identify T1D cases robustly, especially in countries where diabetes cases are diagnosed in primary care without input from diabetologists.
Competing Interest Statement
SF and HCM have received salary contributions via the Genes & Health Industry Consortium of AstraZeneca PLC, Bristol-Myers Squibb Company, GlaxoSmithKline Research and Development Limited, Maze Therapeutics Inc, Merck Sharp & Dohme LLC, Novo Nordisk A/S, Pfizer Inc, Takeda Development Centre Americas Inc. ML has received speakers fees from Medtronic and Insulet. Others have no conflict of interest to declare.
Funding Statement
For the Genes & Health cohort Genes & Health is/has recently been core-funded by Wellcome (WT102627, WT210561), the Medical Research Council (UK) (M009017, MR/X009777/1), Higher Education Funding Council for England Catalyst, Barts Charity (845/1796), Health Data Research UK (for London substantive site), and research delivery support from the NHS National Institute for Health Research Clinical Research Network (North Thames). Genes & Health is/has recently been funded by Alnylam Pharmaceuticals, Genomics PLC; and a Life Sciences Industry Consortium of AstraZeneca PLC, Bristol-Myers Squibb Company, GlaxoSmithKline Research and Development Limited, Maze Therapeutics Inc, Merck Sharp & Dohme LLC, Novo Nordisk A/S, Pfizer Inc, Takeda Development Centre Americas Inc. GP was supported via the National Institute for Health Research funded Specialist Foundation Programme SH is supported by a PhD Fellowship from the Wellcome Trust Health Advances for Underrepresented Populations and Diseases PhD programme at Queen Mary University of London. This research was funded in whole, or in part, by the Wellcome Trust Grant 220540/Z/20/A, 'Wellcome Sanger Institute Quinquennial Review 2021-2026'. For the purpose of Open Access, the authors have applied a CC BY public copyright licence to any Author Accepted Manuscript version arising from this submission. For the Indian Cohort The Indian cohort of T1D patients and non-diabetic controls has been supported from multiple funding sources. The recruitment and early phenotyping including antibodies estimation has been supported by a Diabetes UK grant (15/0005297). High throughput genotyping has been supported by funds from Council for Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR), Ministry of Science and Technology, Govt. of India, New Delhi. GRC is thankful to the Science and Engineering Research Board, Department of Science and Technology, Ministry of Science and Technology, Govt. of India, New Delhi for the JC Bose Fellowship. AS is supported through a Fellowship from CSIR for his PhD.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
G&H was approved by the London South East NRES Committee of the Health Research Authority (14/LO/1240). Collection and use of the Indian data was approved by the Institutional Ethics Committee of the KEM Hospital Research Centre, Pune, India (KEMHRC ID No1737 and KEMHRC ID No PhD19)
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
Data Availability
The Genes & Health data are available upon application to the Genes & Health Executive Committee, as outlined here https://www.genesandhealth.org/research/scientists-using-genes-health-scientific-research. Access will be granted within a trusted research environment, as required by the ethical approvals. Request for access to the Indian cohort should be sent to Giriraj R Chandak, MD at chandakgrc{at}ccmb.res.in.
https://www.genesandhealth.org/research/scientists-using-genes-health-scientific-research
Data availability
The Genes & Health data are available upon application as described here https://www.genesandhealth.org/research/scientists-using-genes-health-scientific-research. Access will be granted within a custom-built trusted research environment. Request for access to the Indian cohort should be sent to Giriraj R Chandak at chandakgrc{at}ccmb.res.in and Chittaranjan Yajnik csyajnik{at}gmail.com.
