Atypical diabetes cases that are islet autoantibody-negative (IAb-) often pose diagnostic and therapeutic challenges. The study summarized here evaluated whether genetic risk quantified by polygenic scores (PS) for type 1 diabetes (T1D PS) and type 2 diabetes (T2D PS) can improve classification of such atypical cases and relate to physiologic glycemic measures and treatment patterns.
The analyses were performed in 309 IAb- individuals who underwent genome sequencing as part of the Rare and Atypical Diabetes Network (RADIANT). Ancestry-matched controls were drawn from UK Biobank for comparison of PS distributions. The source reports that both T1D and T2D PS were significantly higher in the RADIANT participants than in these control participants.
The study implemented previously developed type 1 diabetes PS (T1D PS) and type 2 diabetes PS (T2D PS) in the RADIANT genomes. The authors applied a previously established optimal threshold for T1D PS (denoted GRS2) to stratify participants; the reported cutoff value used was >12.88. Additional implementation specifics (for example, exact variant sets, weighting, or ancestry adjustments) were not detailed in the abstract portion of the source.
Participants underwent oral glucose tolerance testing (OGTT) with serial C-peptide measurements. Regression analyses demonstrated that both T1D PS and T2D PS were associated with C-peptide measures during OGTT but in opposing directions: a higher T1D PS was associated with lower C-peptide levels, while a higher T2D PS associated with higher C-peptide levels. These opposite associations align with expected physiologic differences in insulin secretory capacity related to genetic risk for T1D versus T2D.
When participants were stratified by the published T1D PS threshold (GRS2 > 12.88), those above the threshold had substantially higher odds of being insulin deficient on OGTT and of using both basal and bolus insulin therapy. The source reports this increase in odds as approximately 13-fold. This finding suggests that T1D PS may identify a subgroup of atypical, IAb- individuals who have physiologic insulin deficiency and who are more likely to be treated with intensive insulin regimens.
The abstract indicates that regression analyses were used to assess associations between polygenic scores, clinical characteristics, and glycemic measures. It reports significance for higher PS in cases versus controls and for PS associations with OGTT C-peptide measurements. The abstract does not provide further detail on model covariates, adjustment for population structure, effect sizes beyond the reported odds ratio, or correction for multiple testing; those methodological details were not reported in the abstract available in the source.
The source material provided for this summary is the article abstract, which is truncated at the end. As a result, several details are not available in the provided text, including full methods (for PS construction and QC), complete statistical results and confidence intervals, participant clinical characteristics beyond the IAb- designation, and any sensitivity or subgroup analyses. The abstract also notes that the work is a preprint and has not been peer reviewed.
Within the limits of the abstract, the study supports the concept that polygenic scores for T1D and T2D can help stratify genetic risk among individuals with atypical, islet autoantibody-negative diabetes. The opposing associations of T1D PS and T2D PS with C-peptide during OGTT are physiologically plausible and the association of high T1D PS with insulin deficiency and with current basal-and-bolus insulin therapy suggests potential clinical utility for PS in guiding classification and treatment decisions for ambiguous cases. However, because the supplied source text is an abstract and is truncated, clinicians should consult the full manuscript (and subsequent peer review) for complete methods, effect magnitudes, and validation before using PS in practice.