Significance of combined screening for GADA, ICA, and IAA in new-onset type 2 diabetes mellitus in adults for early diagnosis of latent autoimmune diabetes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose To investigate the detection rate of latent autoimmune diabetes in adults (LADA) among newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) patients and analyze their clinical characteristics, with the aim of guiding treatment and improving prognosis. Methods Glutamic acid decarboxylase autoantibody (GADA), islet cell autoantibody (ICA), insulin autoantibody (IAA), blood pressure, height, weight, and BMI, as well as lipid profiles, fasting plasma glucose, insulin, C-peptide, HbA1c, thyroid-stimulating hormone (TSH), thyroglobulin antibody (TGAb), and thyroid peroxidase antibody (TPOAb) levels were measured in 352 newly diagnosed T2DM patients with disease duration of less than 1 year and non-ketotic onset. The incidence of LADA was calculated, and clinical characteristics of these patients were compared with those of T2DM patients without autoantibodies. Results The detection rate of LADA was 7.10%. Among the 25 LADA patients, 22 had GADA, 5 had ICA, 2 had IAA, and 2 were positive for all three antibodies. The percentages of GADA, ICA, and IAA among LADA patients were 88.00%, 20.00%, and 8.00%, respectively. Compared with the autoantibody-negative group, LADA patients had lower BMIs and total cholesterol, lower insulin and C-peptide levels, higher neutrophil counts, and increased abnormal TSH levels and TPOAb positivity ( P < 0.05). LADA patients exhibited reduced CD4+ T cell expression levels, which were lower than those in patients without autoantibodies, while LADA patients’ CD8+ T cell levels were within the normal range and slightly higher than those in patients without autoantibodies, reflecting a lower CD4+/CD8+ ratio in LADA patients. Conclusion A proportion of newly diagnosed T2DM patients have LADA. Early screening for GADA, ICA, and IAA should be performed in newly diagnosed T2DM patients with low BMI and poor islet function. LADA patients may have higher expression of inflammatory immune factors, lower total cholesterol, and a lower CD4+/CD8+ ratio. The decline in [Formula: see text]-cell function in LADA patients may be associated with decreased CD4+ T cell expression.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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".