Jacques Murray Leech, Aparajita Sriram, Kevin Colclough, Andrew T. Hattersley, Jayne A. L. Houghton, Thomas W. Laver, Kashyap A. Patel
{"title":"Clinical Utility of a Type 1 Diabetes Genetic Risk Score Measured as Part of MODY Genetic Testing","authors":"Jacques Murray Leech, Aparajita Sriram, Kevin Colclough, Andrew T. Hattersley, Jayne A. L. Houghton, Thomas W. Laver, Kashyap A. Patel","doi":"10.2337/dc26-1081","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"OBJECTIVE To evaluate the clinical utility of incorporating a type 1 diabetes genetic risk score (T1DGRS) into monogenic diabetes gene panel testing for individuals referred for suspected maturity-onset diabetes of the young (MODY) from routine clinical practice. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS We studied 1,129 individuals treated with insulin referred for MODY genetic testing. All underwent gene panel testing that included 10 variants to calculate T1DGRS. We compared T1DGRS distributions with reference populations to estimate the T1D prevalence within referred individuals. We defined age-specific T1DGRS thresholds to identify probable T1D (positive predictive value ≥80%) and applied them in individuals genetically unsolved MODY to assess its utility as a pregenetic testing triage tool. RESULTS T1DGRS in MODY referral individuals was intermediate between reference populations with and without T1D, consistent with an estimated 20% (95% CI 14.9–25.2%) T1D in this real-world setting. After genetic testing, no excess T1DGRS was observed in individuals with genetically solved MODY, whereas those with unsolved MODY showed enrichment consistent with 26.0% T1D, with highest values in children (76.2%) and lowest in adults (16.8%). Age-specific T1DGRS thresholds identified 16.1% (95% CI 13.8–18.5%) of genetically unsolved MODY as probable T1D. As a pretesting tool, T1DGRS showed limited discrimination overall (area under the curve [AUC] 0.60) but performed well in children aged <10 years (AUC 0.83), where >50% of tests could be avoided without missing MODY. CONCLUSIONS Incorporating a T1DGRS into routine MODY gene panel testing is feasible and clinically valuable. This approach broadens genomic diagnostics beyond monogenic disease by identifying T1D in individuals with genetically unsolved MODY. Pregenetic testing utility is age dependent and may reduce unnecessary testing in pediatric patients.","PeriodicalId":11140,"journal":{"name":"Diabetes Care","volume":"2 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":22.6000,"publicationDate":"2026-08-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Diabetes Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2337/dc26-1081","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To evaluate the clinical utility of incorporating a type 1 diabetes genetic risk score (T1DGRS) into monogenic diabetes gene panel testing for individuals referred for suspected maturity-onset diabetes of the young (MODY) from routine clinical practice. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS We studied 1,129 individuals treated with insulin referred for MODY genetic testing. All underwent gene panel testing that included 10 variants to calculate T1DGRS. We compared T1DGRS distributions with reference populations to estimate the T1D prevalence within referred individuals. We defined age-specific T1DGRS thresholds to identify probable T1D (positive predictive value ≥80%) and applied them in individuals genetically unsolved MODY to assess its utility as a pregenetic testing triage tool. RESULTS T1DGRS in MODY referral individuals was intermediate between reference populations with and without T1D, consistent with an estimated 20% (95% CI 14.9–25.2%) T1D in this real-world setting. After genetic testing, no excess T1DGRS was observed in individuals with genetically solved MODY, whereas those with unsolved MODY showed enrichment consistent with 26.0% T1D, with highest values in children (76.2%) and lowest in adults (16.8%). Age-specific T1DGRS thresholds identified 16.1% (95% CI 13.8–18.5%) of genetically unsolved MODY as probable T1D. As a pretesting tool, T1DGRS showed limited discrimination overall (area under the curve [AUC] 0.60) but performed well in children aged <10 years (AUC 0.83), where >50% of tests could be avoided without missing MODY. CONCLUSIONS Incorporating a T1DGRS into routine MODY gene panel testing is feasible and clinically valuable. This approach broadens genomic diagnostics beyond monogenic disease by identifying T1D in individuals with genetically unsolved MODY. Pregenetic testing utility is age dependent and may reduce unnecessary testing in pediatric patients.
目的评估将1型糖尿病遗传风险评分(T1DGRS)纳入单基因糖尿病基因面板检测中,对常规临床实践中疑似青年成熟型糖尿病(MODY)患者的临床应用价值。研究设计和方法我们研究了1129名接受胰岛素治疗的人进行MODY基因检测。所有人都进行了包括10个变异在内的基因面板测试,以计算T1DGRS。我们将T1DGRS分布与参考人群进行比较,以估计参考个体中的T1D患病率。我们定义了年龄特异性T1DGRS阈值,以识别可能的T1D(阳性预测值≥80%),并将其应用于遗传未解决的MODY个体,以评估其作为遗传前检测分诊工具的效用。结果MODY转诊个体的T1DGRS介于有和没有T1D的参考人群之间,与现实世界中估计的20% (95% CI 14.9-25.2%) T1D一致。经基因检测,MODY基因解决个体未发现T1DGRS过量,而MODY基因解决个体T1DGRS富集率为26.0%,其中儿童最高(76.2%),成人最低(16.8%)。年龄特异性T1DGRS阈值确定16.1% (95% CI 13.8-18.5%)的遗传未解MODY可能为T1D。作为一种前测工具,T1DGRS总体上显示出有限的歧视(曲线下面积[AUC] 0.60),但在年龄为11岁的儿童中表现良好。10年(AUC 0.83),其中&;gt;50%的检测可以避免而不遗漏MODY。结论将T1DGRS纳入常规MODY基因面板检测是可行的,具有临床价值。这种方法通过识别基因未解决的MODY患者的T1D,拓宽了单基因疾病之外的基因组诊断。遗传前检测的效用是年龄依赖性的,可以减少儿科患者不必要的检测。
期刊介绍:
The journal's overarching mission can be captured by the simple word "Care," reflecting its commitment to enhancing patient well-being. Diabetes Care aims to support better patient care by addressing the comprehensive needs of healthcare professionals dedicated to managing diabetes.
Diabetes Care serves as a valuable resource for healthcare practitioners, aiming to advance knowledge, foster research, and improve diabetes management. The journal publishes original research across various categories, including Clinical Care, Education, Nutrition, Psychosocial Research, Epidemiology, Health Services Research, Emerging Treatments and Technologies, Pathophysiology, Complications, and Cardiovascular and Metabolic Risk. Additionally, Diabetes Care features ADA statements, consensus reports, review articles, letters to the editor, and health/medical news, appealing to a diverse audience of physicians, researchers, psychologists, educators, and other healthcare professionals.