Patterns of Metabolic Progression to Type 1 Diabetes in the Diabetes Prevention Trial–Type 1
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: There is little information regarding the pattern of metabolic deterioration before the onset of type 1 diabetes. The goal of this study was to utilize data from the Diabetes Prevention Trial-Type 1 (DPT-1) to obtain a picture of the metabolic progression to type 1 diabetes over a period of approximately 2.5 years before its diagnosis. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Fifty-four DPT-1 participants (22 in the parenteral trial and 32 in the oral trial) were studied. All had oral glucose tolerance tests (OGTTs) at 6-month intervals from approximately 30 to 6 months before diagnosis. The vast majority also had OGTTs at diagnosis. Changes in OGTT glucose and C-peptide indexes from 30 to 6 months before diagnosis were examined by calculating slopes of the indexes for each individual over that time period. Changes from 6 months before diagnosis to diagnosis were examined by paired comparisons of the OGTT metabolic indexes between the time points. RESULTS: Glucose levels increased gradually from 30 to 6 months before diagnosis in both the parenteral and oral groups (P < 0.001 for all indexes). Area under the curve (AUC) C-peptide (P < 0.05) and AUC C-peptide-to-AUC glucose ratio (P < 0.001) values decreased in the oral group; peak C-peptide-to-2-h glucose ratio values decreased in both groups (P < 0.001). In participants who also had OGTTs at diagnosis, AUC C-peptide (parenteral group, P < 0.05) and peak C-peptide (oral group, P < 0.05) values decreased from the last 6 months before diagnosis; stimulated C-peptide-to-glucose ratio values decreased in both groups (P < 0.001). Conversely, fasting C-peptide levels increased in both groups (oral group, P < 0.01). Fasting C-peptide-to-fasting glucose ratio values remained constant throughout the 30-month follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: These data indicate that over a period of at least 2 years, glucose tolerance gradually deteriorates as stimulated C-peptide levels slowly decline in a substantial number of individuals who develop type 1 diabetes. However, fasting C-peptide levels are maintained, even at diagnosis.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".