PubMed HealthSearch

PubMed · 42078411

Multi-omic signatures of genetic mechanisms inform on type 2 diabetes biology and patient heterogeneity.

Abstract

Type 2 diabetes (T2D) is a heterogeneous disease shaped by genetic pathways related to insulin resistance and β-cell dysfunction, but how this heterogeneity is reflected molecularly remains unclear. We integrated partitioned polygenic scores (pPS) with proteomic and metabolomic profiling to define molecular signatures of T2D and their clinical relevance. We analyzed UK Biobank participants with genomic, proteomic, and metabolomic data. In a disease-free training subset, we used LASSO regression to identify multi-omic signatures associated with each pPS by jointly modeling proteins and metabolites. In an independent testing set, we constructed multi-omic scores and examined their associations with clinical traits and diabetes-related outcomes. Mediation analyses were used to investigate putative causal pathways. Key findings were evaluated in the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (MESA). We identified distinct multi-omic signatures that capture the molecular architecture of T2D genetic risk across physiological subtypes. Compared with genetic scores alone, multi-omic pPS showed larger effect sizes and better disease discrimination. These scores recapitulated subtype-specific physiology and were associated with T2D risk. The Beta-Cell 2 multi-omic score showed marked stratification for insulin use, which was replicated in MESA, where it also predicted future insulin use. Mediation analyses implicated lipoprotein remodeling and fatty acid metabolism in the Lipodystrophy 1 cluster, accounting for 30-45% of the total effect of pPS on T2D risk. Integrating process-specific genetic risk with circulating multi-omic profiles reveals biologically distinct endotypes of T2D and supports a framework for improved patient stratification and risk assessment.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Magdalena Sevilla-González, Alan Magno Martínez-Muñoz, Paul A Hanson, Sarah Hsu, Xingyang Wang, Kirk Smith, Zsu-Zsu Chen, Lukasz Szczerbinski, Varinderpal Kaur, Kent D Taylor, Alexis C Wood, Michael Y Mi, Hui Li, Clemens Wittenbecher, Robert E Gerszten, Stephen S Rich, Jerome I Rotter, Jun Li, Josep M Mercader, Alisa K Manning, Ravi V Shah, Miriam S Udler. 2026-04-25. Multi-omic signatures of genetic mechanisms inform on type 2 diabetes biology and patient heterogeneity.. https://doi.org/10.64898/2026.04.17.26351136

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Effectiveness of high-dose versus standard-dose influenza vaccines against hospitalisation according to frailty risk: a prespecified analysis of the randomised trial DANFLU-2.

BACKGROUND: Frailty is a major risk factor for influenza-related complications and can influence vaccine effectiveness. We aimed to assess the relative vaccine effectiveness (rVE) of high-dose (HD-IIV) versus standard-dose inactivated influenza vaccine (SD-IIV) in older adults aged 65 years or older according to frailty risk. METHODS: This study was a prespecified analysis of DANFLU-2, an open-label, individually randomised trial, conducted in Denmark during three consecutive influenza seasons (2022-23, 2023-24, and 2024-25). Adults aged 65 years or older were randomised (1:1) to the HD-IIV or SD-IIV group. The primary endpoint was hospitalisation for influenza or pneumonia. Frailty was defined according to the validated Hospital Frailty Risk Score (HFRS) based on ICD-10 codes within 10 years before randomisation. Participants were stratified into three HFRS categories, namely low (<5 points), intermediate (5-15 points), and high (>15 points) frailty risk. The rVE of HD-IIV versus SD-IIV against the primary endpoint was assessed across prespecified HFRS categories and treating HFRS as a continuous variable. Pearson's chi-square test was used to compare safety events across frailty risk groups and randomisation groups. FINDINGS: Among 332&#x2009;438 randomised participants (mean age 73&#xb7;7 years [SD 5&#xb7;8]; 161&#x2009;538 [48&#xb7;6%] were female), 276&#x2009;173 (83&#xb7;1%) had low frailty risk, 52&#x2009;395 (15&#xb7;8%) had intermediate frailty risk, and 3861 (1&#xb7;2%) had high frailty risk. The primary endpoint of hospitalisation for influenza or pneumonia occurred in 1424 (0&#xb7;5%) of 276&#x2009;173 participants with low frailty risk, 761 (1&#xb7;5%) of 52&#x2009;395 with intermediate frailty risk, and 163 (4&#xb7;2%) of 3861 with high frailty risk (relative risk [RR] for intermediate vs low frailty risk 2&#xb7;8 [95% CI 2&#xb7;6-3&#xb7;1]; RR for high vs low frailty risk 8&#xb7;2 [7&#xb7;0-9&#xb7;6]). HFRS as a continuous variable significantly modified the effect of HD-IIV versus SD-IIV against the primary endpoint with higher rVE estimates with increasing HFRS (pinteraction=0&#xb7;020). The rVE was 0&#xb7;2% (95% CI -10&#xb7;8 to 10&#xb7;2) among those with low frailty risk, 13&#xb7;1% (-0&#xb7;4 to 24&#xb7;8) among those with intermediate frailty risk, and 19&#xb7;9% (-10&#xb7;3 to 42&#xb7;1) among those with high frailty risk. No significant interaction was observed when HFRS was assessed according to the prespecified categorical frailty groups (pinteraction=0&#xb7;17). The proportion of participants with at least one serious adverse event increased across frailty risk groups (13&#x2009;366 [4&#xb7;8%] of 275&#x2009;795 for low frailty risk, 5475 [10&#xb7;5%] of 52&#x2009;315 for intermediate frailty risk, and 777 [20&#xb7;2%] of 3850 for high frailty risk; p<0&#xb7;0001), with similar proportions of serious adverse events in the HD-IIV and SD-IIV groups for each frailty risk group. INTERPRETATION: Among adults aged 65 years or older in Denmark, frailty risk might modify the effects of HD-IIV versus SD-IIV against hospitalisation for influenza or pneumonia, with higher rVE estimates with increasing frailty risk. These findings might support considering high-dose influenza vaccines for frail older adults. However, effect modification was not evident when frailty was assessed using prespecified categorical subgroups, and subgroup-specific estimates were imprecise, with 95% CIs crossing the null. These results should be considered exploratory, warranting further investigation. FUNDING: The DANFLU-2 trial was funded by Sanofi.

Journal Article