Dataset Information

A Systematic Review of Biomarkers and Risk of Incident Type 2 Diabetes: An Overview of Epidemiological, Prediction and Aetiological Research Literature.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Blood-based or urinary biomarkers may play a role in quantifying the future risk of type 2 diabetes (T2D) and in understanding possible aetiological pathways to disease. However, no systematic review has been conducted that has identified and provided an overview of available biomarkers for incident T2D. We aimed to systematically review the associations of biomarkers with risk of developing T2D and to highlight evidence gaps in the existing literature regarding the predictive and aetiological value of these biomarkers and to direct future research in this field.

Methods and findings

We systematically searched PubMed MEDLINE (January 2000 until March 2015) and Embase (until January 2016) databases for observational studies of biomarkers and incident T2D according to the 2009 PRISMA guidelines. We also searched availability of meta-analyses, Mendelian randomisation and prediction research for the identified biomarkers. We reviewed 3910 titles (705 abstracts) and 164 full papers and included 139 papers from 69 cohort studies that described the prospective relationships between 167 blood-based or urinary biomarkers and incident T2D. Only 35 biomarkers were reported in large scale studies with more than 1000 T2D cases, and thus the evidence for association was inconclusive for the majority of biomarkers. Fourteen biomarkers have been investigated using Mendelian randomisation approaches. Only for one biomarker was there strong observational evidence of association and evidence from genetic association studies that was compatible with an underlying causal association. In additional search for T2D prediction, we found only half of biomarkers were examined with formal evidence of predictive value for a minority of these biomarkers. Most biomarkers did not enhance the strength of prediction, but the strongest evidence for prediction was for biomarkers that quantify measures of glycaemia.

Conclusions

This study presents an extensive review of the current state of the literature to inform the strategy for future interrogation of existing and newly described biomarkers for T2D. Many biomarkers have been reported to be associated with the risk of developing T2D. The evidence of their value in adding to understanding of causal pathways to disease is very limited so far. The utility of most biomarkers remains largely unknown in clinical prediction. Future research should focus on providing good genetic instruments across consortia for possible biomarkers in Mendelian randomisation, prioritising biomarkers for measurement in large-scale cohort studies and examining predictive utility of biomarkers for a given context.

SUBMITTER: Abbasi A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5082867 | biostudies-literature | 2016

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

A Systematic Review of Biomarkers and Risk of Incident Type 2 Diabetes: An Overview of Epidemiological, Prediction and Aetiological Research Literature.

Abbasi Ali A Sahlqvist Anna-Stina AS Lotta Luca L Brosnan Julia M JM Vollenweider Peter P Giabbanelli Philippe P Nunez Derek J DJ Waterworth Dawn D Scott Robert A RA Langenberg Claudia C Wareham Nicholas J NJ

PloS one 20161027 10

<h4>Background</h4>Blood-based or urinary biomarkers may play a role in quantifying the future risk of type 2 diabetes (T2D) and in understanding possible aetiological pathways to disease. However, no systematic review has been conducted that has identified and provided an overview of available biomarkers for incident T2D. We aimed to systematically review the associations of biomarkers with risk of developing T2D and to highlight evidence gaps in the existing literature regarding the predictive ...[more]

PMID: 27788146

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundGermany has become an important immigration country and health services need to adopt to meet the needs of an increasingly multicultural population. For public health planning, it is essential to understand the aetiology of health problems among migrant populations. The main objective was to systematically identify, evaluate and synthesise population-based studies that investigated exposure-outcome relationships among migrant groups in Germany.MethodsIn November 2019, we searched PubMed and LIVIVO, and updated this search in November 2020, to identify peer-reviewed publications that fulfilled our eligibility criteria: English or German language; study on disease aetiology among major migrant groups in Germany, according to the latest microcensus; publication date from inception to 01 November 2020 and observational or experimental study designs. For quality appraisal, we used the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme checklists. Outcomes under investigation were categorised according to the WHO major disease groups, and their associations with risk factors were synthesised as a heat map.ResultsOut of 2407 articles retrieved, we included 68 publications with a total number of 864 518 participants. These publications reported on cross-sectional data (n=56), cohort studies (n=11) and one intervention study. The population groups most frequently studied were from the Middle East (n=28), Turkey (n=24), sub-Saharan Africa (n=24), Eastern Europe (n=15) and the former Soviet Union (n=11). The outcomes under study were population group specific. There were consistent associations of demographic and socioeconomic factors with ill health among migrants in Germany.DiscussionIn this systematic review, we observed low risk of bias in two-thirds of the studies. There is an increasing body of evidence for aetiological research on migrants' health in Germany. Still, the directions of associations between a wide range of risk factors and major disease groups seem only partially understood.Prospero registration numberCRD42018085074.

Project description:BackgroundPeople with intermediate hyperglycemia (IH), including impaired fasting glucose and/or impaired glucose tolerance, are at higher risk of developing type 2 diabetes (T2D) than those with normoglycemia. We aimed to evaluate the performance of published T2D risk prediction models in Chinese people with IH to inform them about the choice of primary diabetes prevention measures.MethodsA systematic literature search was conducted to identify Asian-derived T2D risk prediction models, which were eligible if they were built on a prospective cohort of Asian adults without diabetes at baseline and utilized routinely-available variables to predict future risk of T2D. These Asian-derived and five prespecified non-Asian derived T2D risk prediction models were divided into BASIC (clinical variables only) and EXTENDED (plus laboratory variables) versions, with validation performed on them in three prospective Chinese IH cohorts: ACE (n = 3241), Luzhou (n = 1333), and TCLSIH (n = 1702). Model performance was assessed in terms of discrimination (C-statistic) and calibration (Hosmer-Lemeshow test).ResultsForty-four Asian and five non-Asian studies comprising 21 BASIC and 46 EXTENDED T2D risk prediction models for validation were identified. The majority were at high (n = 43, 87.8%) or unclear (n = 3, 6.1%) risk of bias, while only three studies (6.1%) were scored at low risk of bias. BASIC models showed poor-to-moderate discrimination with C-statistics 0.52-0.60, 0.50-0.59, and 0.50-0.64 in the ACE, Luzhou, and TCLSIH cohorts respectively. EXTENDED models showed poor-to-acceptable discrimination with C-statistics 0.54-0.73, 0.52-0.67, and 0.59-0.78 respectively. Fifteen BASIC and 40 EXTENDED models showed poor calibration (P < 0.05), overpredicting or underestimating the observed diabetes risk. Most recalibrated models showed improved calibration but modestly-to-severely overestimated diabetes risk in the three cohorts. The NAVIGATOR model showed the best discrimination in the three cohorts but had poor calibration (P < 0.05).ConclusionsIn Chinese people with IH, previously published BASIC models to predict T2D did not exhibit good discrimination or calibration. Several EXTENDED models performed better, but a robust Chinese T2D risk prediction tool in people with IH remains a major unmet need.

Project description:Aims/hypothesisThe identification of people who are at high risk of developing type 2 diabetes is a key part of population-level prevention strategies. Previous studies have evaluated the predictive utility of omics measurements, such as metabolites, proteins or polygenic scores, but have considered these separately. The improvement that combined omics biomarkers can provide over and above current clinical standard models is unclear. The aim of this study was to test the predictive performance of genome, proteome, metabolome and clinical biomarkers when added to established clinical prediction models for type 2 diabetes.MethodsWe developed sparse interpretable prediction models in a prospective, nested type 2 diabetes case-cohort study (N=1105, incident type 2 diabetes cases=375) with 10,792 person-years of follow-up, selecting from 5759 features across the genome, proteome, metabolome and clinical biomarkers using least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) regression. We compared the predictive performance of omics-derived predictors with a clinical model including the variables from the Cambridge Diabetes Risk Score and HbA1c.ResultsAmong single omics prediction models that did not include clinical risk factors, the top ten proteins alone achieved the highest performance (concordance index [C index]=0.82 [95% CI 0.75, 0.88]), suggesting the proteome as the most informative single omic layer in the absence of clinical information. However, the largest improvement in prediction of type 2 diabetes incidence over and above the clinical model was achieved by the top ten features across several omic layers (C index=0.87 [95% CI 0.82, 0.92], Δ C index=0.05, p=0.045). This improvement by the top ten omic features was also evident in individuals with HbA1c <42 mmol/mol (6.0%), the threshold for prediabetes (C index=0.84 [95% CI 0.77, 0.90], Δ C index=0.07, p=0.03), the group in whom prediction would be most useful since they are not targeted for preventative interventions by current clinical guidelines. In this subgroup, the type 2 diabetes polygenic risk score was the major contributor to the improvement in prediction, and achieved a comparable improvement in performance when added onto the clinical model alone (C index=0.83 [95% CI 0.75, 0.90], Δ C index=0.06, p=0.002). However, compared with those with prediabetes, individuals at high polygenic risk in this group had only around half the absolute risk for type 2 diabetes over a 20 year period.Conclusions/interpretationOmic approaches provided marginal improvements in prediction of incident type 2 diabetes. However, while a polygenic risk score does improve prediction in people with an HbA1c in the normoglycaemic range, the group in whom prediction would be most useful, even individuals with a high polygenic burden in that subgroup had a low absolute type 2 diabetes risk. This suggests a limited feasibility of implementing targeted population-based genetic screening for preventative interventions.

Project description:Rationale & objectiveBiomarkers of kidney disease progression have been identified in individuals with diabetes and underlying chronic kidney disease (CKD). Whether or not these markers are associated with the development of CKD in a general population without diabetes or CKD is not well established.Study designProspective observational cohort.Setting & participantsIn the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities) study, 948 participants were studied.ExposuresThe baseline plasma biomarkers of kidney injury molecule-1 (KIM-1), monocyte chemoattractant protein-1 (MCP-1), soluble urokinase plasminogen activator receptor (suPAR), tumor necrosis factor receptor 1 (TNFR-1), tumor necrosis factor receptor 2 (TNFR-2), and human cartilage glycoprotein-39 (YKL-40) measured in 1996-1998.OutcomeIncident CKD after 15 years of follow-up defined as ≥40% estimated glomerular filtration rate decline to <60 mL/min/1.73 m2 or dialysis dependence through United States Renal Data System linkage.Analytical approachLogistic regression and C statistics.ResultsThere were 523 cases of incident CKD. Compared with a random sample of 425 controls, there were greater odds of incident CKD per 2-fold higher concentration of KIM-1 (OR, 1.49; 95% CI, 1.25-1.78), suPAR (OR, 2.57; 95% CI, 1.74-3.84), TNFR-1 (OR, 2.20; 95% CI, 1.58-3.09), TNFR-2 (OR, 2.03; 95% CI, 1.37-3.04). After adjustment for all biomarkers, KIM-1 (OR, 1.42; 95% CI, 1.19-1.71), and suPAR (OR, 1.86; 95% CI, 1.18-2.92) remained associated with incident CKD. Compared with traditional risk factors, the addition of all 6 biomarkers improved the C statistic from 0.695-0.731 (P < 0.01) and using the observed risk of 12% for incident CKD, the predicted risk gradient changed from 5%-40% (for the 1st-5th quintile) to 4%-44%.LimitationsBiomarkers and creatinine were measured at one time point.ConclusionsHigher levels of KIM-1, suPAR, TNFR-1, and TNFR-2 were associated with higher odds of incident CKD among individuals without diabetes.Plain-language summaryFor people with diabetes or kidney disease, several biomarkers have been shown to be associated with worsening kidney disease. Whether these biomarkers have prognostic significance in people without diabetes or kidney disease is less studied. Using the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities study, we followed individuals without diabetes or kidney disease for an average of 15 years after biomarker measurement to see if these biomarkers were associated with the development of kidney disease. We found that elevated levels of KIM-1, suPAR, TNFR-1, and TNFR-2 were associated with the development of kidney disease. These biomarkers may help identify individuals who would benefit from interventions to prevent the development of kidney disease.

Project description:BackgroundWaist circumference is becoming recognized as a useful predictor of health risks in clinical research. However, clinical datasets tend to lack this measurement and self-reported values tend to be inaccurate. Predicting waist circumference from standard physical features could be a viable method for generating this information when it is missing or mitigating the impact of inaccurate self-reports. This study determined the degree to which the XGBoost advanced machine learning algorithm could build models that predict waist circumference from height, weight, calculated Body Mass Index, age, race/ethnicity and sex, whether they perform better than current models based on linear regression, and the relative importance of each feature in this prediction.MethodsWe trained tree-based models (via XGBoost gradient boosting) and linear models (via regression) to predict waist circumference from height, weight, Body Mass Index, age, race/ethnicity and sex (n = 60,740 participants). We created 10 iterations of each model, each using 90% of the dataset for training and the remaining 10% for testing performance (this group was different for each iteration). We calculated model performance and feature importance as an average across 10 iterations. We then externally validated the ensembled version of the top model.ResultsThe XGBoost model predicted waist circumference with a mean bias ± standard deviation of 0.0 ± 0.04 cm and a root mean squared error of 4.7 ± 0.05 cm, with performance varying slightly by sex and race/ethnicity. The XGBoost model showed varying degrees of improvement over linear regression models. The top 3 predictors were Body Mass Index, weight and race (Asian). External validation found that on average this model overestimated waist circumference by 4.65 cm in the United Kingdom population (mainly due to overprediction in females) and underestimated waist circumference by 1.7 cm in the Chinese population. The respective root mean squared errors were 7.7 cm and 7.1 cm.ConclusionsXGBoost-based models accurately predict waist circumference from standard physical features. Waist circumference prediction using this approach would be valuable for epidemiological research and beyond.

Project description:BackgroundThe prevalence of diabetes is increasing in all industrialized countries and its prevention has become a public health priority. However, the predictors of diabetes risk are insufficiently understood. We evaluated, whether 31 novel biomarkers could help to predict the risk of incident diabetes.Methods and findingsThe biomarkers were evaluated primarily in the FINRISK97 cohort (n = 7,827; 417 cases of clinically incident diabetes during the follow-up). The findings were replicated in the Health 2000 cohort (n = 4,977; 179 cases of clinically incident diabetes during the follow-up). We used Cox proportional hazards models to calculate the relative risk of diabetes, after adjusting for the classic risk factors, separately for each biomarker. Next, we assessed the discriminatory ability of single biomarkers using receiver operating characteristic curves and C-statistics, integrated discrimination improvement (IDI) and net reclassification improvement (NRI). Finally, we derived a biomarker score in the FINRISK97 cohort and validated it in the Health 2000 cohort. A score consisting of adiponectin, apolipoprotein B, C-reactive protein and ferritin almost doubled the relative risk of diabetes in the validation cohort (HR per one standard deviation increase 1.88, p = 2.8 e-5). It also improved discrimination of the model (IDI = 0.0149, p<0.0001) and reclassification of diabetes risk (NRI = 11.8%, p = 0.006). Gender-specific analyses suggested that the best score differed between men and women. Among men, the best results were obtained with the score of four biomarkers: adiponectin, apolipoprotein B, ferritin and interleukin-1 receptor antagonist, which gave an NRI of 25.4% (p<0.0001). Among women, the best score included adiponectin, apolipoprotein B, C-reactive protein and insulin. It gave an NRI of 13.6% (p = 0.041).ConclusionsWe identified novel biomarkers that were associated with the risk of clinically incident diabetes over and above the classic risk factors. This gives new insights into the pathogenesis of diabetes and may help with targeting prevention and treatment.

Dataset Information

A Systematic Review of Biomarkers and Risk of Incident Type 2 Diabetes: An Overview of Epidemiological, Prediction and Aetiological Research Literature.

Background

Methods and findings

Conclusions

Publications

A Systematic Review of Biomarkers and Risk of Incident Type 2 Diabetes: An Overview of Epidemiological, Prediction and Aetiological Research Literature.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets