ArticleActa diabetologica2025
Proximity extension assay inflammatory profiling cannot distinguish the presence of residual C-peptide in patients with long-standing type 1 diabetes.
Article in Acta diabetologica, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- The inflammatory path toward type 1 diabetes begins during pregnancy.Nature communications · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveMany patients with long-standing type 1 diabetes (T1D) have remaining low levels of C-peptide, i.e. and indirect sign of remaining functional beta-cells. This study focused on identifying differences in immunological and inflammatory biomarkers in patients with longstanding T1D and remaining C-peptide. RESEARCH DESIGN AND
methodsAdult patients (n = 120) with long-standing T1D (≥ 10 years) and healthy controls (HC) (n = 50) were recruited at Uppsala University Hospital. Residual beta-cell function was determined with an ultrasensitive C-peptide ELISA under fasting conditions. T1D patients were divided into two groups (C-peptide positive vs. C-peptide negative). Using the OLINK Explore Inflammation proximity extension assay (PEA), 368 circulating immunological and inflammatory biomarkers were analyzed in plasma.
resultsThe three groups could not be distinguished by principal component analysis and when correcting for multiple testing we found no differences in circulating biomarkers. However, based on uncorrected p-values there were six biomarkers that were different when comparing all T1D patients with HC and eight markers that were different when comparing C-peptide positive vs. negative T1D patients.
conclusionA wide inflammatory assay analysis cannot distinguish patients with longstanding T1D and remaining C-peptide from patients with a complete loss of C-peptide nor from HC.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.