Search

A global network of researchers was formed to investigate the role of human genetics in SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 severity; this paper reports 13 genome-wide significant loci and potentially actionable mechanisms in response to infection.

A systematic review of evidence, across the key pillars of prevention, diagnosis, treatment and prognosis, outlines milestones that need to be met to enable the broad clinical implementation of precision medicine in diabetes care.

Naylor et al. systematically review the efficacy of treatments for beta-cell monogenic diabetes. Limited evidence from the mostly non-randomized, small studies supports no treatment in glucokinase-related hyperglycemia and sulfonylureas for HNF1A-diabetes; further evidence is needed on the optimum treatments in these and other monogenic subtypes.

Young, McInnes, Massey et al. systematically review published studies evaluating features associated with heterogenous treatment effects for SGLT2-inhibitor and GLP1-receptor agonist therapies in people with type 2 diabetes. They find limited current evidence on treatment effect heterogeneity, for glycaemic, cardiovascular and renal outcomes.

Ahmad, Lim, Morieri, Tam et al perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of biomarkers, genetic markers, and risk scores for prediction of cardiovascular outcomes in Type 2 diabetes. A few prognostic markers are identified that provide incremental predictive utility beyond established cardiovascular risk factors.

Misra, Wagner et al. systematically review if strategies to subclassify type 2 diabetes (T2D) are associated with high quality evidence and patient outcomes. Cluster-based stratification yields T2D subtypes that associate with outcomes, suggesting subclassification could have future clinical use.

Felton et al. conduct a systematic review to determine the utility of islet autoantibodies as biomarkers of type 1 diabetes heterogeneity. They find that islet autoantibodies are most likely to be useful for patient stratification prior to clinical diagnosis.

Bodhini et al. systematically review the evidence on sociodemographic, clinical, behavioral, and molecular factors that modify the effect of interventions for type 2 diabetes prevention. The certainty of evidence that such factors modify the effectiveness of lifestyle and behavioral interventions is low to very low.

Takele et al. conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of the effects of intervention characteristics on preventing gestational diabetes. Group or healthcare facility-based physical activity interventions are found to be more effective in preventing gestational diabetes than community-based interventions.

Semnani-Azad et al. review the evidence on prognostic factors that predict cardiovascular disease and type 2 diabetes for women, and cardiometabolic profile in offspring subsequent to gestational diabetes. The evidence was of low quality, but some maternal characteristics were predictive of unfavourable outcomes in women and their offspring.

Lim et al. perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to identify participant characteristics associated with response to gestational diabetes prevention. Characteristics such as BMI, polycystic ovary syndrome and being in the preconception phase could determine responses to certain preventive interventions.

Jacobsen, Sherr et al. evaluate the utility of novel technologies in the treatment of type 1 diabetes. Their systematic review finds technologies such as continuous glucose monitoring, insulin pumps, and decision support tools improve important measures (e.g., HbA1c, time in range, quality of life) allowing precision-directed uptake of technology.

Francis et al. perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate studies comparing perinatal outcomes among individuals with gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM). Their review and post hoc analysis find that maternal preconception weight and non-glucose-dependent biochemical markers could be a precision diagnostic approach to reducing variability in clinical outcomes following treatment.

Felton et al. conducted a systematic review to evaluate studies testing disease-modifying therapies and features linked to treatment response for type 1 diabetes prevention. While the quality of prevention and intervention trials is found to be high, precision analyses on factors associated with treatment response are of poorer quality.

Semple et al. review the literature to assess the effects of pharmacologic or surgical interventions in monogenic insulin resistance when stratified by genotype. The evidence guiding genotype-specific treatment of monogenic insulin resistance is of low to very low quality, but suggestive of benefits of metreleptin, thiazolidinediones, and rhIGF-1.

Benham, Gingras, McLennan, Most, Yamamoto, Aiken et al. conduct two systematic reviews and meta-analyses to evaluate whether a precision-based medicine approach can be adopted to improve the clinical management of gestational diabetes (GDM). They find some precision markers that may improve the treatment course of GDM but further research is needed.

Murphy, Kevin, Pollin et al. perform a systematic review of the evidence on the criteria used to select individuals with diabetes for genetic testing and of the evidence for the optimal methods for variant detection in genes involved in monogenic diabetes. Based on the findings the authors make recommendations and highlight challenges for the field.

The pandemic has badly affected the most diverse career stage in UK Earth sciences: early career researchers. Disrupted careers must be rescued with contingency plans, remote networks, a focus on mental health and mentor support if we are to retain diversity and talent.