Type 1 diabetes genetic risk score discriminates between monogenic and Type 1 diabetes in children diagnosed at the age of <5 years in the Iranian population. Issue 12 (25th July 2019)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Yaghootkar, H.; Abbasi, F.; Ghaemi, N.; Rabbani, A.; Wakeling, M. N.; Eshraghi, P.; Enayati, S.; Vakili, S.; Heidari, S.; Patel, K.; Sayarifard, F.; Borhan‐Dayani, S.; McDonald, T. J.; Ellard, S.; Hattersley, A. T.; Amoli, M. M.; Vakili, R.; Colclough, K.
• Is Part Of: Diabetic medicine. Volume 36:Issue 12(2019)
• Page Start: 1694
• Page End: 1702
• Publication Date: 2019-07-25
• Subjects: Diabetes -- Periodicals; 616.462
• DOI: 10.1111/dme.14071
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0742-3071

Abstract

Abstract: Aim: To examine the extent to which discriminatory testing using antibodies and Type 1 diabetes genetic risk score, validated in European populations, is applicable in a non‐European population. Methods: We recruited 127 unrelated children with diabetes diagnosed between 9 months and 5 years from two centres in Iran. All children underwent targeted next‐generation sequencing of 35 monogenic diabetes genes. We measured three islet autoantibodies (islet antigen 2, glutamic acid decarboxylase and zinc transporter 8) and generated a Type 1 diabetes genetic risk score in all children. Results: We identified six children with monogenic diabetes, including four novel mutations: homozygous mutations in WFS1 ( n =3), SLC19A2 and SLC29A3, and a heterozygous mutation in GCK . All clinical features were similar in children with monogenic diabetes ( n =6) and in the rest of the cohort ( n =121). The Type 1 diabetes genetic risk score discriminated children with monogenic from Type 1 diabetes [area under the receiver‐operating characteristic curve 0.90 (95% CI 0.83–0.97)]. All children with monogenic diabetes were autoantibody‐negative. In children with no mutation, 59 were positive to glutamic acid decarboxylase, 39 to islet antigen 2 and 31 to zinc transporter 8. Measuring zinc transporter 8 increased the number of autoantibody‐positive individuals by eight. Conclusions: The present study provides the first evidence that Type 1 diabetes genetic risk score can be used to distinguish monogenic from Type 1 diabetes in an Iranian population with a large number of consanguineous unions. This test can be used to identify children with a higher probability of having monogenic diabetes who could then undergo genetic testing. Identification of these individuals would reduce the cost of treatment and improve the management of their clinical course. What&#39;s new?: Studies in white European populations have recently shown that a genetic risk score for Type 1 diabetes has a high ability to discriminate between Type 1 diabetes and monogenic diabetes. The diagnostic utility of this genetic risk score in non‐European populations is unknown. This study provides the first evidence that the Type 1 diabetes genetic risk score discriminates children with monogenic diabetes from those with Type 1 diabetes in the Iranian population with a large number of consanguineous unions. The Type 1 diabetes genetic risk score can be used to improve the selection of non‐European children for monogenic diabetes testing, resulting in the correct diagnosis, improving their clinical management and providing families with recurrence risk information.