Bivalent GAD autoantibody ELISA improves clinical utility and risk prediction for adult autoimmune diabetes

Aim/IntroductionTo investigate the differences in the clinical significance and glutamic acid decarboxylase autoantibody (GADA) affinity between RIA (RIA-GADA) and ELISA (ELISA-GADA) in patients with type 1 diabetes. MethodsA total of 415 patients with type 1 diabetes were enrolled, including 199 acute-onset type 1 diabetes, 168 slowly progressive type 1 diabetes (SPIDDM), and 48 fulminant type 1 diabetes. GADA affinity was measured by a competitive binding experiment using unlabeled recombinant human GAD65 protein, and the diagnostic performance of both assays and the relationship between GADA affinity and the decline of fasting C-peptide (F-CPR) were examined. ResultsWhile the ELISA-GADA displayed a higher sensitivity than the RIA method in diagnosing type 1 diabetes in acute-onset patients, about 40% of SPIDDM patients with low-titer RIA-GADA were determined as negative by the ELISA method. Patients with type 1 diabetes with RIA-GADA alone had an older age of onset, less diabetic ketoacidosis, a higher BMI, and a higher F-CPR compared with patients positive for both RIA-GADA and ELISA-GADA. Additionally, 36% of RIA-GADA-positive patients had low-affinity GADA (<10(10) L/mol), which was significantly higher than in the ELISA-GADA-positive patients (4%, P < 0.0001). Furthermore, over a 3 year monitoring period, F-CPR levels decreased in ELISA-GADA-positive SPIDDM, whereas it was maintained in patients with RIA-GADA alone, regardless of GADA affinity. ConclusionsThese results suggest that bivalent ELISA for GADA is superior to the RIA method in diagnosing type 1 diabetes. Moreover, the diagnostic superiority of the ELISA-GADA made possible the concurrent identification of SPIDDM patients at high-risk of early progression, and allowed for more accurate clinical diagnosis and management.