Introduction
Personalized medicine is an emerging concept for treating diseases, which involves determining specific information about a particular patient and then prescribing a treatment that is specific for that patient.1 Personalized medicine represents an approach for defining disease subtypes and defining biomarkers that can identify patients who are most likely to benefit from a specific treatment and other patients who are unlikely to respond or likely to experience side events.
Not every patient with diabetes with the same age, duration of disease, body mass index, and Hemoglobin A1c will respond the same way to a given treatment. Some patients respond to a treatment whereas others do not. The reason may be a genetic propensity to respond or not respond to a drug. The physician must assess every patient and then attempt to guess which treatment will work best. If the physician could be armed with specific personalized information about that patient, including information about their genetic makeup, then treatments could be tailored for each individual patient. This approach would then lead to better outcomes without wasting time on ineffective therapy. Outcome statistics, which indicate that a certain percentage of patients will respond to a specific treatment, are not always meaningful for a given individual. For some diseases and treatments if one treatment is used, then 100% will respond and if another treatment is used then 0% will respond and for other patients a different treatment might be 100% effective. The problem is that physicians do not know which treatment is likely to be effective in any given patient, so the treatment that works most often for the greatest number of patients is usually selected first, even though this treatment will not be effective for some patients.
Definition of Personalized Medicine for Diabetes
The definition of personalized medicine for diabetes (PMFD) is the use of information about the genetic makeup of a person with diabetes to tailor strategies for preventing, detecting, treating, or monitoring their diabetes. The practice of PMFD involves four processes. First is the identification of genes and biomarkers for diabetes as well as for obesity, which is the greatest risk factor for type 2 diabetes. Second, after these predictors of diabetes are identified, is allocation of resources to prevent or detect the diabetes and/or obesity phenotype in high-risk individuals, whose risk is based on their genotype. Third is selection of individualized therapies for affected individuals. The selection process involves deciding which drug to prescribe, what dose of drug to use, and which diet to prescribe. The selection process also accounts for which drug is least likely to cause side effects or toxicity. Fourth is measurement of circulating biomarkers of diabetes to monitor the response to prevention or therapy.
Risk Identification
Few patients with type 2 diabetes have yet been found to have highly penetrant mutations of a single gene causing diabetes. The vast majority of type 2 patients have polygenetic forms of this disease in which each gene locus contributes only a small amount of risk.2 Some of these loci identified to date include transcription factor 7-like 2, calpain 10, peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor γ, and potassium inwardly rectifying channel, subfamily J, member 11 (KCNJ11).3 An example of how a gene can affect the response to a type 2 diabetes drug is the association of the common E23K variant in KCNJ11 with an increased risk for secondary failure to sulfonylurea in type 2 diabetes patients.4 Another such example involves organic cation transporter 1 (OCT1), which is the major point of entry for metformin into hepatocytes and enterocytes. Individuals with OCT1 polymorphisms have a reduced response to metformin.5 The pace of gene identification is now increasing because of new genotyping technologies. More accurate genotyping portends an increasingly important role for a personalized medicine approach to diabetes in the future.
The context of the genetic information used for applying personalized medicine must be considered. Multiple factors affect the response to a particular drug. The patient's genes are not the only determinant of success. Other factors that can confound the effects of a personalized approach specific to a genotype include other genes in addition to the one(s) being measured, environmental effects that can overwhelm the effects of a drug, diet, competing comorbidities, and interactions with other drugs. Type 2 diabetes is often caused by a combination of multigene susceptibility, environmental factors, and diet. In this disease, the effect of a therapy based on the activity of a single gene may be overwhelmed by many other confounding factors. If a single gene is a strong predictor of response to therapy for a disease, then the personalized medicine approach can still be effective.
Benefits of PMFD
The potential benefit of a personalized medicine approach to diabetes is the possibility of earlier interventions to prevent or treat the disease by using screening genetic tests. Patients who are at high risk for a chronic disease such as diabetes usually experience a prolonged asymptomatic period before the onset of the disease. Patients who are identified by genetic testing to be at high risk for diabetes can be directed to preventative measures, such as lifestyle modifications or medications, in order to delay or prevent the disease.6 Genetic tests and biomarkers can be utilized for predicting the diagnosis and for monitoring the course of diabetes. Greater efficiency in drug development is possible if genetically7 or nutritionally8 determined drug targets are identified in subpopulations of patients with diabetes. Genetically determined polymorphisms of receptors, transporters, and metabolizing enzymes contribute to variable responses to drugs. Personalized medicine allows for personalized drug prescribing with less trial and error and less time wasted with an inadequate response or with side effects.9 The result of such a personalized medicine approach would be a better outcome for the disease being treated, such as diabetes or obesity.
Research Initiatives
Five main types of research initiatives are currently being pursued in the area of personalized medicine. First, pharmacogenetics is the science that seeks to explain how people respond in different ways to the same drug treatment. This approach tests candidate genes for drug–patient interactions and promotes drugs that have a favorable effect on any gene that is responsible for some or all of the disease phenotype.10 Second, pharmacogenomics is an approach that tests not genes but rather gene expression over time.11 A person's DNA content (which comprises genes) does not change over time, but the RNA content (which reflects how much the gene is being utilized) does change over time. The measurement of gene products over time adds great complexity to the process for identifying genes that are integral to the disease state. Ultimately the relationships that are elucidated by pharmacogenomics (including the use of cell systems or even living organisms) are more robust than those from pharmacogenetics alone. Third, nutrigenomics is the approach that utilizes identifying genetically mediated responses to foods and then adjusting the diet to take advantage of these responses.12,13 Fourth, biomarkers can be used to predict, diagnose, or monitor diseases. For example, autoantibodies can be measured to predict type 1 diabetes14 and adipokines15,16 can be measured to predict type 2 diabetes. Finally, systems biology17,18 is an approach that measures interactions between the components of biological systems and how these interactions give rise to the function and behavior of that system. Systems biology analyzes complex data from multiple sources by utilizing such tools as transcriptomics (which assesses gene expression measurements), proteomics (which completely identifies proteins and protein expression patterns of a cell or tissue), metabolomics (which identifies and measures all the small molecule metabolites within a cell or tissue), and glycomics (which identifies all carbohydrates in a cell or tissue).
Personalized medicine for diabetes will be applied to the prevention, diagnosis, treatment, and monitoring of diabetes. Genetic information will lead to advances in each of these clinical approaches to this disease. Examples of specific emerging inputs and responses related to PMFD are presented in Table 1. Blood glucose and Hemoglobin A1c levels are not included.
Table 1.
Applications of Personalized Medicine for Diabetes
PREVENTION | ||
Input | Response | |
Genetic studies identifying people at high risk for type 1 diabetes19 | Immune therapy for preventing onset of type 1 diabetes23 | |
Genetic studies identifying people at high risk for type 2 diabetes20 | Vaccine to prevent type 124 | |
Genetic studies identifying people at high risk for diabetic nephropathy21 | Drug therapy to prevent nephropathy25 | |
Genetic studies identifying people at high risk of obesity22 | Lifestyle modification to prevent type 2 diabetes26 | |
Drug therapy to prevent type 2 diabetes—multicenter trials sponsored by industry27 | ||
DIAGNOSIS | ||
Input | Response | |
Neuropathy and NH2-terminal fragment of the brain natriuretic peptide28 | Early diagnosis of diabetic neuropathy—tight control of DM29 | |
TREATMENT | ||
Input | Response | |
Genetic studies demonstrating subgroups within type 130 | Type 1: Early initiation of early treatment to avoid complications, such as intensive insulin therapy,42 immune therapy,43 or gene therapy44 | |
Abnormal insulin molecule31 | Type 2: Early initiation of thiazolidinediones45 or insulin46 to preserve islet function37 | |
Abnormal release (LADA)32 | LADA: Early initiation of insulin to maintain euglycemia in patients with this diagnosis47 | |
Clinical classification of new-onset, ketosis-prone patients into subgroups33 | Ketosis-prone diabetes therapy depends on classification48 | |
Classification of autoimmune diabetes into late-onset type and type 1 diabetes34 | MODY—sulfonylurea therapy and focus on specific vascular risks49 | |
Genetic studies demonstrating subgroups within type 235 | Neonatal diabetes: switch from insulin to sulfonylureas50 | |
Mechanisms of the cause of type 2 must be understood and presented36 | Dietary therapy of type 2 diabetes51 | |
Genetic variations in response to common diabetes drugs, e.g., metformin28 and sulfonylureas38 | Exercise therapy of type 2 diabetes52 | |
Distinction of MODY from type 2 DM390 | ||
Genetic studies of neonatal diabetes40 | ||
Nutrigenomic studies of food impact41 | ||
MONITORING | ||
Input | Response | |
Type 1: Biomarkers of autoimmunity—autoantibodies53 and antigens,54 cytokine levels,55 and inflammatory serum markers56 | Type 1: Immune intervention70 Technology: continuous glucose monitoring,71 insulin pump therapy,72 and artificial pancreas73 | |
Type 2: Lipids,57 C-reactive protein:58 cytokines,59 retinol-binding protein,60 and other inflammatory markers,61 | Type 2: Anti-inflammatory therapy with thiazoldinediones or statins74 Treatments of elevated levels of C-reactive protein75 | |
New markers of glycemia in addition to glucose and hemoglobin A1c | ||
Glycemic variability62 | ||
Advanced glycated end products63 | ||
1,5-Anhydroglucitol64 | ||
Glycated Albumin65 | ||
Exhaled methyl nitrate66 | ||
Physiologic hypoglycemia detection67 | ||
Smart Shirt68 and Smart Glove for detecting diabetic autonomic neuropathy69 |
Abbreviations: DM, diabetes mellitus; LADA, latent autoimmune diabetes; MODY, maturity onset diabetes of the young.
Barriers to PMFD
For personalized medicine to become established it will be necessary for people's genotypes to be analyzed completely, which is not currently possible on a large scale because of the great expense. The cost of performing such an analysis is coming down and it is expected that this type of test will soon be available for as little as $100076 within the next decade. The public's appetite for such genetic testing will be affected by the outcome of public policy debates on social and political barriers, including: (1) training sufficient medical genetics specialists to apply the results of genetic testing; (2) constructing an infrastructure to incorporate medical ethics into clinical trials using personalized genetic information; (3) creating guarantees of privacy for genetic records; (4) developing a regulatory oversight infrastructure to protect the public from abuses of genetic information; and (5) achieving the political will for insurance coverage and reimbursement to be available for personalized medicine because some treatments may increase in cost when the number of patients using them in a trial-and error approach is decreased greatly by switching to a personalized medicine approach.77
Stakeholders who will be affected by increased application of personalized medicine to diabetes include researchers, physicians, diabetes educators, geneticists, policy makers, patient advocates, clinical laboratories, pharmaceutical companies, diagnostics companies, information technology managers, payers, and government regulators.78,79 Members of these groups will all have to work together to regulate personalized medicine for diabetes. These stakeholders will determine the degree of accuracy necessary for reporting the results of genome testing and the process for selecting which patients will be eligible for treatments based on such information. Both of these factors in the logistics of running personalized medicine programs are currently regulated only lightly.
Genome Databases
The realization of new drugs for personalized diabetes therapy could be accelerated by the establishment of a Genome Commons.80 Such a publicly accessible electronic database of human genetic variation and its effects, incorporating both human and nonhuman experimental data, would be culled from locus-specific databases, diagnostic laboratories, and the scientific literature. This database would be a repository of common human inheritance and a tool for interpreting human genomes. This online repository with analytical software could be used as a tool for classifying genetic variations as to their clinical significance and as a reference tool for generating reports by clinical laboratories performing large-scale genome sequencing studies. This resource would be funded publicly to prevent private monopoly pricing for diagnostic information or private patenting of genes. A comprehensive knowledge base that incorporates information about pharmacogenomics for diabetes and other diseases is the Pharmacogenetics Research Network and Knowledge Base (Figure 1) maintained by Stanford University81 at http://www.pharmgkb.org/do/serve?objId=PA153627758&objCls=Pathway.
Figure 1.
Data elements modeled in the Pharmacogenetics Research Network and Knowledge Base, adapted from Klein and colleagues.81
Conclusions
Personalized medicine for diabetes will provide great benefits. Widespread adoption of this approach will occur only when the identification of risk factors through genotype or through biomarkers is accompanied by effective therapy. Personalized medicine will be utilized to treat cases of diabetes with specific approaches that will be effective for a given patient but not necessarily effective for another patient with similar height, weight, and glucose levels. Personalized medicine will also be used to prevent diabetes before the disease appears. Personalized medicine care for diabetes will become an increasingly important part of the fight against diabetes.
Abbreviations
- KCNJ11
potassium inwardly rectifying channel, subfamily J, member 11
- OCT1
organic cation transporter 1
- PMFD
personalized medicine for diabetes
References
- 1.Woodcock J. The prospects for “personalized medicine” in drug development and drug therapy. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2007;81:164–169. doi: 10.1038/sj.clpt.6100063. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.O'Rahilly S, Barroso I, Wareham NJ. Genetic factors in type 2 diabetes: the end of the beginning? Science. 2005;307:370–373. doi: 10.1126/science.1104346. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.Reitman ML, Schadt EE. Pharmacogenetics of metformin response: a step in the path toward personalized medicine. J Clin Invest. 2007;117:1226–1229. doi: 10.1172/JCI32133. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Sesti G, Laratta E, Cardellini M, Andreozzi F, Del Guerra S, Irace C, Gnasso A, Grupillo M, Lauro R, Hribal ML, Perticone F, Marchetti P. The E23K variant of KCNJ11 encoding the pancreatic beta-cell adenosine 5'-triphosphate-sensitive potassium channel subunit Kir6.2 is associated with an increased risk of secondary failure to sulfonylurea in patients with type 2 diabetes. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2006;91:2334–2339. doi: 10.1210/jc.2005-2323. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.Shu Y, Sheardown SA, Brown C, Owen RP, Zhang S, Castro RA, Ianculescu AG, Yue L, Lo JC, Burchard EG, Brett CM, Giacomini KM. Effect of genetic variation in the organic cation transporter 1 (OCT1) on metformin action. J Clin Invest. 2007;117:1422–1431. doi: 10.1172/JCI30558. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.Collins CD, Purohit S, Podolsky RH, Zhao HS, Schatz D, Eckenrode SE, Yang P, Hopkins D, Muir A, Hoffman M, McIndoe RA, Rewers M, She JX. The application of genomic and proteomic technologies in predictive, preventive and personalized medicine. Vascul Pharmacol. 2006;45:258–267. doi: 10.1016/j.vph.2006.08.003. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.Hoffman EP. Skipping toward personalized molecular medicine. N Engl J Med. 2007;357:2719–2722. doi: 10.1056/NEJMe0707795. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Yamagishi S, Ueda S, Okuda S. Food-derived advanced glycation end products (AGEs): a novel therapeutic target for various disorders. Curr Pharm Des. 2007;13:2832–2836. doi: 10.2174/138161207781757051. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Ruaño G, Goethe JW, Caley C, Woolley S, Holford TR, Kocherla M, Windemuth A, de Leon J. Physiogenomic comparison of weight profiles of olanzapine- and risperidone-treated patients. Mol Psychiatry. 2007;12:474–482. doi: 10.1038/sj.mp.4001944. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.Klein TE, Chang JT, Cho MK, Easton KL, Fergerson R, Hewett M, Lin Z, Liu Y, Liu S, Oliver DE, Rubin DL, Shafa F, Stuart JM, Altman RB. Integrating genotype and phenotype information: an overview of the PharmGKB project. Pharmacogenetics Research Network and Knowledge Base. Pharmacogenomics J. 2001;1:167–170. doi: 10.1038/sj.tpj.6500035. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11.Bozkurt O, de Boer A, Grobbee DE, Heerdink ER, Burger H, Klungel OH. Pharmacogenetics of glucose-lowering drug treatment: a systematic review. Mol Diagn Ther. 2007;11:291–302. doi: 10.1007/BF03256250. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12.El-Sohemy A. Nutrigenetics. Forum Nutr. 2007;60:25–30. doi: 10.1159/000107064. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13.Kaput J, Dawson K. Complexity of type 2 diabetes mellitus data sets emerging from nutrigenomic research: a case for dimensionality reduction? Mutat Res. 2007;622:19–32. doi: 10.1016/j.mrfmmm.2007.02.033. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14.In't Veld P, Lievens D, De Grijse J, Ling Z, Van der Auwera B, Pipeleers-Marichal M, Gorus F, Pipeleers D. Screening for insulitis in adult autoantibody-positive organ donors. Diabetes. 2007;56:2400–2404. doi: 10.2337/db07-0416. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15.Mojiminiyi OA, Abdella NA. Associations of resistin with inflammation and insulin resistance in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Scand J Clin Lab Invest. 2007;67:215–225. doi: 10.1080/00365510601032532. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16.Shaibi GQ, Cruz ML, Weigensberg MJ, Toledo-Corral CM, Lane CJ, Kelly LA, Davis JN, Koebnick C, Ventura EE, Roberts CK, Goran MI. Adiponectin independently predicts metabolic syndrome in overweight Latino youth. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2007;92:1809–1813. doi: 10.1210/jc.2006-2294. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17.Teixeira RE, Malin S. The next generation of artificial pancreas control algorithms. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2008;2:105–112. doi: 10.1177/193229680800200115. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18.Petrasek D. Systems biology: the case for a systems science approach to diabetes. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2008;2:131–134. doi: 10.1177/193229680800200119. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19.Eising S, Svensson J, Skogstrand K, Nilsson A, Lynch K, Andersen PS, Lernmark A, Hougaard DM, Pociot F, Norgaard-Pedersen B, Nerup J. Type 1 diabetes risk analysis on dried blood spot samples from population-based newborns: design and feasibility of an unseected case-control study. Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol. 2007;21:507–517. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-3016.2007.00846.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20.Hattersley AT. Prime suspect: the TCF7L2 gene and type 2 diabetes risk. J Clin Invest. 2007;117:2077–2079. doi: 10.1172/JCI33077. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21.Savage DA, Bain SC, McKnight AJ, Maxwell AP. Gene discovery in diabetic nephropathy. Curr Diab Rep. 2007;7:139–145. doi: 10.1007/s11892-007-0023-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22.Fox CS, Heard-Costa N, Cupples LA, Dupuis J, Vasan RS, Atwood LD. Genome-wide association to body mass index and waist circumference: the Framingham Heart Study 100K project. BMC Med Genet. 2007;8(Suppl 1):S18. doi: 10.1186/1471-2350-8-S1-S18. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23.Staevaq-Vieira T, Peakman M, von Herrath M. Translational mini-review series on type 1 diabetes: Immune-based therapeutic approaches for type 1 diabetes. Clin Exp Immunol. 2007;148:17–31. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2249.2007.03328.x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 24.Harrison LC. The prospect of vaccination to prevent type 1 diabetes. Hum Vaccin. 2005:1143–1150. doi: 10.4161/hv.1.4.1923. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 25.Jermendy G, Ruggenenti P. Preventing microalbuminuria in patients with type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Metab Res Rev. 2007;23:100–110. doi: 10.1002/dmrr.693. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26.Kilpeläinen TO, Lakka TA, Laaksonen DE, Laukkanen O, Lindström J, Eriksson JG, Valle TT, Hämäläinen H, Aunola S, Ilanne-Parikka P, Keinänen-Kiukaanniemi S, Tuomilehto J, Uusitupa M, Laakso M. Finnish Diabetes Prevention Study Group. Physical activity modifies the effect of SNPs in the SLC2A2 (GLUT2) and ABCC8 (SURI) genes on the risk of developing type 2 diabetes. Physiol Genomics. 2007;31:264–272. doi: 10.1152/physiolgenomics.00036.2007. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 27.Chiasson JL. Prevention of Type 2 diabetes: fact or fiction? Expert Opin Pharmacother. 2007;8:3147–3158. doi: 10.1517/14656566.8.18.3147. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 28.Jurado J, Ybarra J, Ferrandiz M, Comerma L, Pou JM. Amino-terminal brain natriuretic peptide is related to the presence of diabetic polyneuropathy independently of cardiovascular disease. Diabetes Care. 2007;30:e86. doi: 10.2337/dc07-0890. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 29.Sima AA. Pathological mechanisms involved in diabetic neuropathy: can we slow the process? Curr Opin Investig Drugs. 2006;7:324–337. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 30.Barrett TG. Differential diagnosis of type 1 diabetes: which genetic syndromes need to be considered? Pediatr Diabetes. 2007;8(Suppl 6):15–23. doi: 10.1111/j.1399-5448.2007.00278.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 31.Molven A, Ringdal M, Nordbø AM, Raeder H, Støv J, Lipkind GM, Steiner DF, Philipson LH, Bergmann I, Aarskog D, Undlien DE, Joner G, Søvik O. the Norwegian Childhood Diabetes Study Group, Bell GI, Njølstad PR. Mutations in the insulin gene can cause MODY and autoantibody-negative type 1 diabetes. Diabetes. 2008. Jan 11, [DOI] [PubMed]
- 32.Fielding AM, Brophy S, Davies H, Williams R. Latent autoimmune diabetes in adults: increased awareness will aid diagnosis. Ann Clin Biochem. 2007;44(Pt 4):321–323. doi: 10.1258/000456307780945679. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 33.Fernández C, Giménez M, Díaz G, Conget I. Accuracy and predictive value of classification schemes for ketosis-prone diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2007;30(9):e96. doi: 10.2337/dc07-0400. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 34.Cerna M, Kolostova K, Novota P, Romzova M, Cejkova P, Pinterova D, Pruhova S, Treslova L, Andel M. Autoimmune diabetes mellitus with adult onset and type 1 diabetes mellitus in children have different genetic predispositions. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2007;1110:140–150. doi: 10.1196/annals.1423.016. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 35.Frayling TM. Genome-wide association studies provide new insights into type 2 diabetes aetiology. Nat Rev Genet. 2007;8:657–662. doi: 10.1038/nrg2178. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 36.Petersen KF, Shulman GI. Etiology of insulin resistance. Am J Med. 2006;119(5) Suppl 1:S10–S16. doi: 10.1016/j.amjmed.2006.01.009. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 37.Reitman ML, Schadt EE. Pharmacogenetics of metformin response: a step in the path toward personalized medicine. J Clin Invest. 2007;117(5):1226–1229. doi: 10.1172/JCI32133. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 38.Hattersley AT, Pearson ER. Minireview: pharmacogenetics and beyond: the interaction of therapeutic response, beta-cell physiology, and genetics in diabetes. Endocrinology. 2006;147:2657–2663. doi: 10.1210/en.2006-0152. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 39.Holmkvist J, Almgren P, Lyssenko V, Lindgren CM, Eriksson KF, Isomaa B, Tuomi T, Nilsson P, Groop L. Common variants in MODY genes and future risk of type 2 diabetes. Diabetes. 2008. Mar 10, [DOI] [PubMed]
- 40.Rutter GA. Generating new candidate genes for neonatal diabetes: functional and genetic studies of insulin secretion in type 2 diabetes. Endocr Dev. 2007;12:75–85. doi: 10.1159/000109607. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 41.Kaput J, Dawson K. Complexity of type 2 diabetes mellitus data sets emerging from nutrigenomic research: a case for dimensionality reduction? Mutat Res. 2007;622(1-2):19–32. doi: 10.1016/j.mrfmmm.2007.02.033. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 42.Genuth S. Insights from the diabetes control and complications trial/epidemiology of diabetes interventions and complications study on the use of intensive glycemic treatment to reduce the risk of complications of type 1 diabetes. Endocr Pract. 2006;12(Suppl 1):34–41. doi: 10.4158/EP.12.S1.34. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 43.Bresson D, von Herrath M. Moving towards efficient therapies in type 1 diabetes: to combine or not to combine? Autoimmun Rev. 2007;6(5):315–322. doi: 10.1016/j.autrev.2006.09.013. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 44.Zaia JA. The status of gene vectors for the treatment of diabetes. Cell Biochem Biophys. 2007;48:183–190. doi: 10.1007/s12013-007-0023-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 45.Leiter LA. Can thiazolidinediones delay disease progression in type 2 diabetes? Curr Med Res Opin. 2006;22:1193–1201. doi: 10.1185/030079906X112507. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 46.Gerstein HC, Rosenstock J. Insulin therapy in people who have dysglycemia and type 2 diabetes mellitus: can it offer both cardiovascular protection and beta-cell preservation? Endocrinol Metab Clin North Am. 2005;34:137–154. doi: 10.1016/j.ecl.2004.11.002. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 47.Brophy S, Brunt H, Davies H, Mannan S, Williams R. Interventions for latent autoimmune diabetes (LADA) in adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2007;18:CD006165. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD006165.pub2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 48.Balasubramanyam A, Garza G, Rodriguez L, Hampe CS, Gaur L. Lernmark A, Maldonado MR. Accuracy and predictive value of classification schemes for ketosis-prone diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2006;29(12):2575–2579. doi: 10.2337/dc06-0749. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 49.Timsit J, Bellanné-Chantelot C, Dubois-Laforgue D, Velho G. Diagnosis and management of maturity-onset diabetes of the young. Treat Endocrinol. 2005;4:9–18. doi: 10.2165/00024677-200504010-00002. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 50.Polak M, Cavé H. Neonatal diabetes mellitus: a disease linked to multiple mechanisms. Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2007;2:12. doi: 10.1186/1750-1172-2-12. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 51.Nield L, Moore HJ, Hooper L, Cruickshank JK, Vyas A, Whittaker V, Summerbell CD. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2007. Jul 18, Dietary advice for treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus in adults; p. CD004097. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 52.Praet SF, van Loon LJ. Optimizing the therapeutic benefits of exercise in Type 2 diabetes. J Appl Physiol. 2007;103:1113–1120. doi: 10.1152/japplphysiol.00566.2007. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 53.Isermann B, Ritzel R, Zorn M, Schioling T, Nawroth PP. Autoantibodies in diabetes mellitus: current utility and perspectives. Exp Clin Endocrinol Diabetes. 2007;115:483–490. doi: 10.1055/s-2007-981452. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 54.Hinke SA. Finding GAD: early detection of beta-cell injury. Endocrinology. 2007;148:4568–4571. doi: 10.1210/en.2007-0861. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 55.Vrabelova Z, Kolouskova S, Böhmova K, Faresjö MK, Sumnik Z, Pechova M, Kverka M, Chudoba D, Zacharovova K, Stadlerova G, Pithova P, Hladikova M, Stechova K. Protein microarray analysis as a tool for monitoring cellular autoreactivity in type 1 diabetes patients and their relatives. Pediatr Diabetes. 2007;8:252–260. doi: 10.1111/j.1399-5448.2007.00308.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 56.Wang X, Jia S, Geoffrey R, Alemzadeh R, Ghosh S, Hessner MJ. Identification of a molecular signature in human type 1 diabetes mellitus using serum and functional genomics. J Immunol. 2008;180:1929–1937. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.180.3.1929. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 57.Gadi R, Samaha FF. Dyslipemia in type 2 diabetes mellitus. Curr Diab Rep. 2007;7:228–234. doi: 10.1007/s11892-007-0036-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 58.Mikhailidis DP, Press M. The importance of treating multiple cardiometabolic risk factors in patients with Type 2 diabetes. Expert Opin Pharmacother. 2007;8:3009–3020. doi: 10.1517/14656566.8.17.3009. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 59.Alexandraki K, Piperi C, Kalofoutis C, Singh J, Alaveras A, Kalofoutis A. Inflammatory process in type 2 diabetes: the role of cytokines. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2006;1084:89–117. doi: 10.1196/annals.1372.039. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 60.Wolf G. Serum retinol-binding protea link between obesity, insulin resistance, and type 2 diabetes. Nutr Rev. 2007;65:251–256. doi: 10.1111/j.1753-4887.2007.tb00302.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 61.Signorelli SS, Massarino MC, Spandidos DA, Malaponte G. Proinflammatory circulating molecules in peripheral arterial disease. Int J Mol Med. 2007;20:279–286. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 62.Monnier L, Mas E, Ginet C, Michel F, Villon L, Cristol JP, Colette C. Activation of oxidative stress by acute glucose fluctuations compared with sustained chronic hyperglycemia in patients with type 2 diabetes. JAMA. 2006;295:1681–1687. doi: 10.1001/jama.295.14.1681. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 63.Gerrits EG, Lutgers HL, Kleefstra N, Graaff R, Groenier KH, Smit AJ, Gans RO, Bilo HJ. Skin autofluorescence: a tool to identify type 2 diabetic patients at risk for developing microvascular complications. Diabetes Care. 2008;31(3):517–521. doi: 10.2337/dc07-1755. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 64.Dungan KM. 1,5-anhydroglucitol (GlycoMark) as a marker of short-term glycemic control and glycemic excursions. Expert Rev Mol Diagn. 2008;8:9–19. doi: 10.1586/14737159.8.1.9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 65.Takahashi S, Uchino H, Shimizu T, Kanazawa A, Tamura Y, Sakai K, Watada H, Hirose T, Kawamori R, Tanaka Y. Comparison of glycated albumin (GA) and glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) in type 2 diabetic patients: usefulness of GA for evaluation of short-term changes in glycemic control. Endocr J. 2007;54(1):139–144. doi: 10.1507/endocrj.k06-103. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 66.Novak BJ, Blake DR, Meinardi S, Rowland FS, Pontello A, Cooper DM, Galassetti PR. Exhaled methyl nitrate as a noninvasive marker of hyperglycemia in type 1 diabetes. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2007;104:15613–15618. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0706533104. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 67.Nguyen HT, Ghevondian N, Nguyen ST, Jones TW. Detection of hypoglycemic episodes in children with type 1 diabetes using an optimal Bayesian neural network algorithm. Conf Proc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc. 2007;1:3140–3143. doi: 10.1109/IEMBS.2007.4352995. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 68.Pandian PS, Mohanavelu K, Safeer KP, Kotresh TM, Shakunthala DT, Gopal P, Padaki VC. Smart Vest: Wearable multi-parameter remote physiological monitoring system. Med Eng Phys. 2007. Sep 12, [DOI] [PubMed]
- 69.Axisa F, Gehin C, Delhomme G, Collet C, Robin O, Dittmar A. Wrist ambulatory monitoring system and smart glove for real time emotional, sensorial and physiological analysis. Conf Proc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc. 2004;3:2161–2164. doi: 10.1109/IEMBS.2004.1403632. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 70.Ludvigsson J. Immune intervention at diagnosis–should we treat children to preserve beta-cell function? Pediatr Diabetes. 2007;8(Suppl 6):34–39. doi: 10.1111/j.1399-5448.2007.00299.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 71.Klonoff DC. Continuous glucose monitoring: roadmap for 21st century diabetes therapy. Diabetes Care. 2005;28:1231–1239. doi: 10.2337/diacare.28.5.1231. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 72.White RD. Insulin pump therapy (continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion) Prim Care. :845–871. doi: 10.1016/j.pop.2007.07.005. 200734. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 73.Klonoff D. The artificial pancreas: how sweet engineering will solve bitter problems. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2007;1:72–81. doi: 10.1177/193229680700100112. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 74.Bastard JP, Maachi M, Lagathu C, Kim MJ, Caron M, Vidal H, Capeau J, Feve B. Recent advances in the relationship between obesity, inflammation, and insulin resistance. Eur Cytokine Netw. 2006;17:4–12. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 75.Mikhailidis DP, Press M. The importance of treating multiple cardiometabolic risk factors in patients with Type 2 diabetes. Expert Opin Pharmacother. 2007;8:3009–3020. doi: 10.1517/14656566.8.17.3009. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 76.Hutchison CA., 3rd DNA sequencing: bench to bedside and beyond. Nucleic Acids Res. 2007;35:6227–6237. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkm688. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 77.Bottinger EP. Foundations, promises and uncertainties of personalized medicine. Mt Sinai J Med. 2007;74:15–21. doi: 10.1002/msj.20005. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 78.Solomon LM, Sieczkiewicz GJ. Impact of the US Patent System on the promise of personalized medicine. Gend Med. 2007;4:187–192. doi: 10.1016/s1550-8579(07)80039-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 79.Fox JL. Despite glacial progress, US government signals support for personalized medicine. Nat Biotechnol. 2007;25:489–490. doi: 10.1038/nbt0507-489. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 80.Brenner SE. Common sense for our genomes. Nature. 2007;449:783–784. doi: 10.1038/449783a. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 81.Klein TE, Chang JT, Cho MK, Easton KL, Fergerson R, Hewett M, Lin Z, Liu Y, Liu S, Oliver DE, Rubin DL, Shafa F, Stuart JM, Altman RB. Integrating genotype and phenotype information: an overview of the PharmGKB project. Pharmacogenetics Research Network and Knowledge Base. Pharmacogenomics J. 2001;1:167–170. doi: 10.1038/sj.tpj.6500035. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]