Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20522170›Full record

ArticlePediatric diabetes2011

A comparison of the baseline metabolic profiles between Diabetes Prevention Trial-Type 1 and TrialNet Natural History Study participants.

Jay M Sosenko, Jeffrey Mahon, Lisa Rafkin, John M Lachin, Heidi Krause-Steinrauf, Jeffrey P Krischer, David Cuthbertson, Jerry P Palmer, Clinton Thompson, Carla J Greenbaum and 2 more

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Pediatric diabetes, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 38% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Observational
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.

Jay M SosenkoDivision of Endocrinology, University of Miami, Miami, FL, USA. jsosenko@med.miami.edu
Jeffrey Mahon
Lisa Rafkin
John M Lachin
Heidi Krause-Steinrauf
Jeffrey P Krischer
David Cuthbertson
Jerry P Palmer
Clinton Thompson
Carla J Greenbaum
Jay S Skyler
Diabetes Prevention Trial-Type 1 and TrialNet Study Groups
George Washington University · USUniversity of Miami · USUniversity of South Florida · USUniversity of Washington · USVirginia Mason Medical Center · USWestern University · CA

Funding

Data Coordinating Center for Type 1 Diabetes TrialNet (UC4)USF: TrialNet UC4-3UC4DK117009 · NIDDK · UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH FLORIDA · PI KRISCHER, JEFFREY P · 2017 to 2019
$49.6M
Northwest Clinical Center for Type 1 Diabetes - TrialNetU01DK061034 · NIDDK · BENAROYA RESEARCH INST AT VIRGINIA MASON · PI GREENBAUM, CARLA J · 2001 to 2018
$10.3M
Type 1 Diabetes TrialNet: Support FacilitiesU01DK061041 · NIDDK · UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI SCHOOL OF MEDICINE · PI SKYLER, JAY S · 2001 to 2007
$6.1M
NIDDK NIH HHS U01 DK061034NIDDK NIH HHS U01 DK061041NIDDK NIH HHS UC4 DK117009
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveWe assessed whether differing autoantibody screening criteria for type 1 diabetes (T1D) prevention trials result in different baseline metabolic profiles of those who screen positive.

methodsDiabetes Prevention Trial-Type 1 (DPT-1) participants were screened for islet cell autoantibodies, whereas TrialNet Natural History Study (TNNHS) participants were screened for biochemical autoantibodies. In both studies, those determined to be autoantibody positive underwent baseline oral glucose tolerance tests (OGTTs) in which glucose and C-peptide were measured.

resultsThe percentage of those with an OGTT in the diabetic range was higher among the DPT-1 participants (10.0% of 956 vs. 6.4% of 645, p < 0.01). In a logistic regression analysis with adjustments for age and gender, the difference persisted (p < 0.01). Among those in the non-diabetic range (n = 860 for DPT-1 and n = 604 for the TNNHS), glucose levels were similar at all time points, except for higher fasting glucose levels in the TNNHS participants (p < 0.001). There was a higher percentage of impaired fasting glucose (IFG) in the TNNHS participants (10.9 vs. 6.7%, p < 0.01); however, with adjustments for age and gender, there was no longer a significant difference. There was no significant difference in the percentages with impaired glucose tolerance. C-peptide levels were much lower in the DPT-1 cohort at all OGTT time points (p < 0.001 for all). DISCUSSION: Differing criteria for autoantibody screening can result in marked differences in the baseline metabolic profiles of prospective participants of T1D prevention trials.

Indexed as

MetabolomeAdolescentAdultAutoantibodiesBasal MetabolismBiomarkersChildChild, PreschoolClinical Trials as TopicCohort StudiesDiabetes Mellitus, Type 1FemaleHumansInfantMaleMass ScreeningAutoantibodiesBiomarkersislet cell antibody

Identifiers

PMID20522170
PMCPMC2955175
OpenAlexW2011107387

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.