Islet cell antibodies and fasting C-peptide predict insulin requirement at diagnosis of diabetes mellitus

110Citations
Citations of this article
46Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

The differential diagnosis between Type 1 (insulin-dependent) and Type 2 (non-insulin-dependent) diabetes is complicated since no specific markers are available for either disease. In this study, 244 consecutive patients were diagnosed with diabetes mellitus during two years in Malmö (230000 inhabitants), corresponding to an incidence rate of 53·100000-1·year-1. Age, body mass index, HbA1c, C-peptide, and levels of islet cell antibodies were determined at the clinical onset, and related to the classification at diagnosis and at follow-up (n=233) after a median time of 31 (range 1-49) months. After diagnosis, 42 of 244 (17%) were started on insulin while 202 of 244 (83%) were not. Islet cell antibodies were present in 25 of 42 (60%), and in 18 of 183 (10%), respectively. In the non-insulin treated group, patients with islet cell antibodies had lower body mass index (p<0.001), higher HbA1c (p<0.004), and lower C-peptide (p<0.001) than patients without. At follow-up, 11 of 18 (61%) islet cell positive patients were changed to insulin treatment, as were six other patients. Insulin was discontinued in five initially insulin-treated but islet cell antibody negative patients. The sensitivity, specificity and predictive value for insulin treatment at follow-up were for islet cell antibody positivity; 72%, 96% and 84%, respectively, and for low C-peptide value; 60%, 96%, and 80%, respectively. Islet cell antibodies and low C-peptide at diagnosis of diabetes mellitus are concluded to be useful markers to predict insulin dependence. © 1990 Springer-Verlag.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Landin-Olsson, M., Nilsson, K. O., Lernmark, Å., & Sundkvist, G. (1990). Islet cell antibodies and fasting C-peptide predict insulin requirement at diagnosis of diabetes mellitus. Diabetologia, 33(9), 561–568. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00404145

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free