Institute for Clinical Diabetology, German Diabetes Center, Leibniz Center for Diabetes Research at Heinrich Heine University, Düsseldorf, Germany; German Center for Diabetes Research, Munich, Germany.
Institute for Biometrics and Epidemiology, German Diabetes Center, Leibniz Center for Diabetes Research at Heinrich Heine University, Düsseldorf, Germany; German Center for Diabetes Research, Munich, Germany.
Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2019 Sep;7(9):684-694. doi: 10.1016/S2213-8587(19)30187-1. Epub 2019 Jul 22.
Cluster analyses have proposed different diabetes phenotypes using age, BMI, glycaemia, homoeostasis model estimates, and islet autoantibodies. We tested whether comprehensive phenotyping validates and further characterises these clusters at diagnosis and whether relevant diabetes-related complications differ among these clusters, during 5-years of follow-up.
Patients with newly diagnosed type 1 or type 2 diabetes in the German Diabetes Study underwent comprehensive phenotyping and assessment of laboratory variables. Insulin sensitivity was assessed using hyperinsulinaemic-euglycaemic clamps, hepatocellular lipid content using magnetic resonance spectroscopy, hepatic fibrosis using non-invasive scores, and peripheral and autonomic neuropathy using functional and clinical criteria. Patients were reassessed after 5 years. The German Diabetes Study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01055093, and is ongoing.
1105 patients were classified at baseline into five clusters, with 386 (35%) assigned to mild age-related diabetes (MARD), 323 (29%) to mild obesity-related diabetes (MOD), 247 (22%) to severe autoimmune diabetes (SAID), 121 (11%) to severe insulin-resistant diabetes (SIRD), and 28 (3%) to severe insulin-deficient diabetes (SIDD). At 5-year follow-up, 367 patients were reassessed, 128 (35%) with MARD, 106 (29%) with MOD, 88 (24%) with SAID, 35 (10%) with SIRD, and ten (3%) with SIDD. Whole-body insulin sensitivity was lowest in patients with SIRD at baseline (mean 4·3 mg/kg per min [SD 2·0]) compared with those with SAID (8·4 mg/kg per min [3·2]; p<0·0001), MARD (7·5 mg/kg per min [2·5]; p<0·0001), MOD (6·6 mg/kg per min [2·6]; p=0·0011), and SIDD (5·5 mg/kg per min [2·4]; p=0·0035). The fasting adipose-tissue insulin resistance index at baseline was highest in patients with SIRD (median 15·6 [IQR 9·3-20·9]) and MOD (11·6 [7·4-17·9]) compared with those with MARD (6·0 [3·9-10·3]; both p<0·0001) and SAID (6·0 [3·0-9·5]; both p<0·0001). In patients with newly diagnosed diabetes, hepatocellular lipid content was highest at baseline in patients assigned to the SIRD cluster (median 19% [IQR 11-22]) compared with all other clusters (7% [2-15] for MOD, p=0·00052; 5% [2-11] for MARD, p<0·0001; 2% [0-13] for SIDD, p=0·0083; and 1% [0-3] for SAID, p<0·0001), even after adjustments for baseline medication. Accordingly, hepatic fibrosis at 5-year follow-up was more prevalent in patients with SIRD (n=7 [26%]) than in patients with SAID (n=5 [7%], p=0·0011), MARD (n=12 [12%], p=0·012), MOD (n=13 [15%], p=0·050), and SIDD (n=0 [0%], p value not available). Confirmed diabetic sensorimotor polyneuropathy was more prevalent at baseline in patients with SIDD (n=9 [36%]) compared with patients with SAID (n=10 [5%], p<0·0001), MARD (n=39 [15%], p=0·00066), MOD (n=26 [11%], p<0·0001), and SIRD (n=10 [17%], p<0·0001).
Cluster analysis can characterise cohorts with different degrees of whole-body and adipose-tissue insulin resistance. Specific diabetes clusters show different prevalence of diabetes complications at early stages of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease and diabetic neuropathy. These findings could help improve targeted prevention and treatment and enable precision medicine for diabetes and its comorbidities.
German Diabetes Center, German Federal Ministry of Health, Ministry of Culture and Science of the state of North Rhine-Westphalia, German Federal Ministry of Education and Research, German Diabetes Association, German Center for Diabetes Research, Research Network SFB 1116 of the German Research Foundation, and Schmutzler Stiftung.
聚类分析使用年龄、BMI、血糖、稳态模型评估和胰岛自身抗体提出了不同的糖尿病表型。我们检验了在诊断时综合表型是否可以验证和进一步描述这些聚类,以及在 5 年的随访中,这些聚类之间是否存在不同的相关糖尿病并发症。
德国糖尿病研究中的新诊断的 1 型或 2 型糖尿病患者接受了全面的表型分析和实验室变量评估。使用高胰岛素-正葡萄糖钳夹评估胰岛素敏感性,使用磁共振波谱测量肝细胞脂质含量,使用非侵入性评分评估肝纤维化,使用功能和临床标准评估周围和自主神经病变。患者在 5 年后再次接受评估。德国糖尿病研究在 ClinicalTrials.gov 上注册,编号为 NCT01055093,正在进行中。
1105 名患者在基线时分为 5 个聚类,386 名(35%)患者被归类为轻度年龄相关性糖尿病(MARD),323 名(29%)为轻度肥胖相关性糖尿病(MOD),247 名(22%)为严重自身免疫性糖尿病(SAID),121 名(11%)为严重胰岛素抵抗性糖尿病(SIRD),28 名(3%)为严重胰岛素缺乏性糖尿病(SIDD)。在 5 年的随访中,367 名患者接受了重新评估,其中 128 名(35%)为 MARD,106 名(29%)为 MOD,88 名(24%)为 SAID,35 名(10%)为 SIRD,10 名(3%)为 SIDD。在基线时,SIRD 患者的全身胰岛素敏感性最低(平均 4.3mg/kg/min [SD 2.0]),与 SAID(8.4mg/kg/min [3.2];p<0.0001)、MARD(7.5mg/kg/min [2.5];p<0.0001)、MOD(6.6mg/kg/min [2.6];p=0.0011)和 SIDD(5.5mg/kg/min [2.4];p=0.0035)患者相比。基线时 SIRD 患者的空腹脂肪组织胰岛素抵抗指数最高(中位数 15.6 [IQR 9.3-20.9])和 MOD(11.6 [7.4-17.9])与 MARD(6.0 [3.9-10.3];均 p<0.0001)和 SAID(6.0 [3.0-9.5];均 p<0.0001)患者相比。在新诊断的糖尿病患者中,基线时 SIRD 患者的肝细胞脂质含量最高(中位数 19% [IQR 11-22])与所有其他聚类相比(MOD 为 7% [2-15],p=0.00052;MARD 为 5% [2-11],p<0.0001;SIDD 为 2% [0-13],p=0.0083;SAID 为 1% [0-3],p<0.0001),即使在调整基线药物治疗后也是如此。因此,SIRD 患者的肝纤维化在 5 年随访时更为常见(n=7 [26%]),与 SAID(n=5 [7%],p=0.011)、MARD(n=12 [12%],p=0.012)、MOD(n=13 [15%],p=0.050)和 SIDD(n=0 [0%],p 值不可用)患者相比。基线时 SIDD 患者确诊的糖尿病感觉运动性多发性神经病更为常见(n=9 [36%]),与 SAID(n=10 [5%],p<0.0001)、MARD(n=39 [15%],p=0.00066)、MOD(n=26 [11%],p<0.0001)和 SIRD(n=10 [17%],p<0.0001)患者相比。
聚类分析可以描述具有不同程度全身和脂肪组织胰岛素抵抗的队列。特定的糖尿病聚类在非酒精性脂肪性肝病和糖尿病性周围神经病变的早期阶段显示出不同的糖尿病并发症发生率。这些发现可以帮助改善有针对性的预防和治疗,并为糖尿病及其合并症实现精准医学。
德国糖尿病中心、德国联邦卫生部、北莱茵-威斯特法伦州文化部、德国联邦教育与研究部、德国糖尿病协会、德国糖尿病研究联合会、德国研究基金会的 SFB 1116 以及 Schmutzler 基金会。