ArticleBiomarker research2026
Stratifying high-risk prediabetes clusters using blood-based epigenetic markers.
Article in Biomarker research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPreviously, we identified six prediabetes clusters, three at moderate and three at high-risk for type 2 diabetes and/or complications. While this novel classification could enable earlier and improved disease prevention, it relies on intensive clinical phenotyping. Here, we developed a machine learning workflow to identify blood-based epigenetic markers to distinguish between prediabetes clusters.
methodsDNA methylation was profiled in blood cells of different cohorts including individuals that belong to clusters 2 (low-risk), 3, 5, and 6 (each high-risk) and data was subjected to a machine learning workflow.
resultsIn a discovery cohort (n = 187), we identified 1,557 CpG sites as predictors for clusters 2, 3, 5, and 6. These CpGs were sufficient to distinguish between individuals belonging to the high-risk clusters 3, 5 and 6 in an independent replication cohort (n = 146) with an accuracy of 92%. Between 300 and 339 CpG sites were specific for each cluster and the corresponding genes linked to TGF-β receptor and calcium signaling (cluster 3), MAPK cascade and ECM organization (cluster 5), and Wnt/SMAD signaling (cluster 6), mirroring the metabolic deterioration observed in each cluster.
conclusionsWithout the need for complex clinical measurements, the identified blood-based epigenetic signatures may improve the detection of individuals at high-risk of developing diabetes and complications and point to the potential molecular mechanism responsible for the heterogeneity in prediabetes. These markers highlight the potential of the blood epigenome as an effective proxy for predicting future complications and make extensive clinical assessments obsolete, enabling the identification of clusters in larger populations.
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.