Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37889320›Full record

ArticleDiabetologia2024

Multi-omic prediction of incident type 2 diabetes.

Julia Carrasco-Zanini, Maik Pietzner, Eleanor Wheeler, Nicola D Kerrison, Claudia Langenberg, Nicholas J Wareham

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Diabetologia, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
4.6field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

23 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 30 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. 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

6 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Julia Carrasco-ZaniniMRC Epidemiology Unit, School of Clinical Medicine, University of Cambridge, Institute of Metabolic Science, Cambridge, UK.
Maik PietznerMRC Epidemiology Unit, School of Clinical Medicine, University of Cambridge, Institute of Metabolic Science, Cambridge, UK.
Eleanor WheelerMRC Epidemiology Unit, School of Clinical Medicine, University of Cambridge, Institute of Metabolic Science, Cambridge, UK.
Nicola D KerrisonMRC Epidemiology Unit, School of Clinical Medicine, University of Cambridge, Institute of Metabolic Science, Cambridge, UK.
Claudia LangenbergMRC Epidemiology Unit, School of Clinical Medicine, University of Cambridge, Institute of Metabolic Science, Cambridge, UK. claudia.langenberg@qmul.ac.uk.
Nicholas J WarehamMRC Epidemiology Unit, School of Clinical Medicine, University of Cambridge, Institute of Metabolic Science, Cambridge, UK. Nick.Wareham@mrc-epid.cam.ac.uk.
MRC Epidemiology Unit · GBUniversity of Cambridge · GBBerlin Institute of Health at Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin · DEQueen Mary University of London · GB

Funding

Cancer Research UK C864/A14136Medical Research Council MC-UU_12015/1Medical Research Council MC_UU_12015/1Medical Research Council MR/N003284/1Wellcome TrustWellcome Trust 220044/Z/19/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aims/hypothesisThe identification of people who are at high risk of developing type 2 diabetes is a key part of population-level prevention strategies. Previous studies have evaluated the predictive utility of omics measurements, such as metabolites, proteins or polygenic scores, but have considered these separately. The improvement that combined omics biomarkers can provide over and above current clinical standard models is unclear. The aim of this study was to test the predictive performance of genome, proteome, metabolome and clinical biomarkers when added to established clinical prediction models for type 2 diabetes.

methodsWe developed sparse interpretable prediction models in a prospective, nested type 2 diabetes case-cohort study (N=1105, incident type 2 diabetes cases=375) with 10,792 person-years of follow-up, selecting from 5759 features across the genome, proteome, metabolome and clinical biomarkers using least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) regression. We compared the predictive performance of omics-derived predictors with a clinical model including the variables from the Cambridge Diabetes Risk Score and HbA

resultsAmong single omics prediction models that did not include clinical risk factors, the top ten proteins alone achieved the highest performance (concordance index [C index]=0.82 [95% CI 0.75, 0.88]), suggesting the proteome as the most informative single omic layer in the absence of clinical information. However, the largest improvement in prediction of type 2 diabetes incidence over and above the clinical model was achieved by the top ten features across several omic layers (C index=0.87 [95% CI 0.82, 0.92], Δ C index=0.05, p=0.045). This improvement by the top ten omic features was also evident in individuals with HbA CONCLUSIONS/

interpretationOmic approaches provided marginal improvements in prediction of incident type 2 diabetes. However, while a polygenic risk score does improve prediction in people with an HbA

Indexed as

Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2Prediabetic StateBiomarkersCohort StudiesHumansMultiomicsProspective StudiesProteomeRisk FactorsBiomarkersProteomeBiomarkersGenomicsMetabolomicsPrediction modelsProteomicsType 2 diabetes

Identifiers

PMID37889320
PMCPMC10709231
OpenAlexW4387966225

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.