ArticleActa diabetologica2025
Improving detection of monogenic diabetes through reanalysis of GCK variants of uncertain significance.
Article in Acta diabetologica, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Australian and New Zealand joint society consensus statement on genetic testing for monogenic diabetes in adults.The Medical journal of Australia · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsTo assess the utility of reanalysing GCK variants of uncertain significance (VUS) as an intervention to improve the detection of monogenic diabetes.
methodsWe examined GCK VUS in a local cohort of individuals with suspected monogenic diabetes and re-curated each variant against the recent ClinGen GCK-specific variant classification guidelines.
resultsVariant reanalysis achieved a new 'likely pathogenic' classification (i.e., positive results) in 4/8 identified VUS. The single most common newly applied criterion indicating variant pathogenicity was a confirmed phenotype of GCK-hyperglycaemia. RNA sequencing and segregation studies were performed in two cases but not additive to reclassification.
conclusionsThis is the first VUS reclassification study in monogenic diabetes using gene-specific guidelines. Within the limits of this small study, we observed a high rate (50%) of VUS upgrades to a positive result, thereby confirming the utility of VUS reanalysis- particularly with biochemical phenotyping- in increasing the detection of monogenic diabetes. We recommend HbA1c, fasting blood glucose and either pancreatic autoantibody negativity or a small oral glucose tolerance test increment as a feasible minimum dataset to inform variant classification at the individual patient level, noting the ongoing work of the ClinGen Monogenic Diabetes Expert Panel in systematically reviewing GCK variants at the international level.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.