Multicenter Evaluation of Diagnostic Circulating Biomarkers to Detect Sight-Threatening Diabetic Retinopathy

IMPORTANCE It is a global challenge to provide regular retinal screening for all people with diabetes to detect sight-threatening diabetic retinopathy (STDR). OBJECTIVE To determine if circulating biomarkers could be used to prioritize people with type 2 diabetes for retinal screening to detect STDR. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS This cross-sectional study collected data from October 22, 2018, to December 31,2021. All laboratory staff were masked to the clinical diagnosis, assigned a study cohort, and provided with the database containing the clinical data. This was a multicenter study conducted in parallel in 3 outpatient ophthalmology clinics in the UK and 2 centers in India. Adults 40 years and older were categorized into 4 groups: (1) no history of diabetes, (2) type 2 diabetes of at least 5 years' duration with no evidence of DR, (3) nonproliferative DR with diabetic macular edema (DME), or (4) proliferative DR. STDR comprised groups 3 and 4. EXPOSURES Thirteen previously verified biomarkers were measured using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Severity of DR and presence of DME were diagnosed using fundus photographs and optical coherence tomography. Weighted logistic regression and receiver operating characteristic curve analysis (ROC) were performed to identify biomarkers that discriminate STDR from no DR beyond the standard clinical parameters of age, disease duration, ethnicity (in the UK) and hemoglobin A(1c). RESULTS A total of 538 participants (mean [SD] age, 60.8 [9.8] years; 319 men [59.3%]) were recruited into the study. A total of 264 participants (49.1%) were from India (group 1, 54 [20.5%]; group 2, 53 [20.1%]; group 3, 52 [19.7%]; group 4, 105 [39.8%]), and 274 participants (50.9%) were from the UK (group 1, 50 [18.2%]; group 2, 70 [25.5%]; group 3, 55 [20.1%]; group 4, 99 [36.1%]). ROC analysis (no DR vs STDR) showed that in addition to age, disease duration, ethnicity (in the UK) and hemoglobin A(1c), inclusion of cystatin C had near-acceptable discrimination power in both countries (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve [AUC], 0.779; 95% CI, 0.700-0.857 in 215 patients in the UK with complete data; AUC, 0.696; 95% CI, 0.602-0.791 in 208 patients in India with complete data). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Results of this cross-sectional study suggest that serum cystatin C had good discrimination power in the UK and India. Circulating cystatin-C levels may be considered as a test to identify those who require prioritization for retinal screening for STDR.