Search

Insulin autoantibodies (IAA), a marker for insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus (IDDM), have been reported in other diseases such as thyroid disease and after treatment with sulfhydryl containing medications. Reported prevalences of IAA in non-diabetics vary widely, probably due in part to methodological differences between laboratories. In addition, certain sera may have a high non-specific binding to insulin. We compared a radioimmunoassay (RIA) for IAA which included non-specific binding with an RIA that incorporated a competitive displacement with cold insulin to remove non-specific binding. Using the RIA which measured specific plus non-specific binding, IAA positivity was found in 22/92 (23.9%) of sera from thyroid disease patients, 16/124 (12.9%) of random masked sera from a hospital laboratory, 27/335 (8.1%) of first degree relatives of IDDM patients, 63/178 (35.4%) of subjects with newly diagnosed IDDM, and 0/92 (0%) of normal controls. Insulin antibodies (IA) were found in 80/99 (80.8%) of insulin-treated diabetic subjects. In contrast, using the displacement assay which allowed measurement of specific binding, the frequency of IAA positivity was lower for subjects with thyroid disease (7/92 (7.6%)), random hospital sera (12/124 (9.8%)), and for first degree relatives of IDDM patients (8/335 (2.4%)), while higher for subjects with newly diagnosed IDDM (71/178 (39.9%)). Subjects with insulin-treated diabetes (78/99 (78.8%)) and normal subjects (1/92 (1.1%)) showed little change. Strikingly, three of the eight (37.5%) relatives of IDDM patients that were positive in the RIA measuring specific binding were detected only because cold displacement was utilized. We conclude: (1) subjects with thyroid disease and first degree relatives of IDDM patients frequently have high non-specific binding for IAA in an RIA not employing a cold displacement step, (2) in some newly diagnosed IDDM patients and first degree relatives of IDDM patients, IAA may be missed by an assay not optimized to measure specific binding, and (3) displacement with cold insulin increases both the specificity and sensitivity of RIAs measuring insulin autoantibodies.

Insulin autoantibodies (IAAs) are currently the subject of intensive investigation as potential markers for autoimmune insulitis. However, the results of different reports vary widely. In an attempt to elucidate the reasons for the discrepant reports and to initiate standardization procedures, the International Diabetes Workshop (IDW) undertook two studies in which 22 centers worldwide measured IAA in coded samples. The variance in binding signal from the 49 sera in study 1 was considerable, even when results were standardized, but was largely systematic and attributable to basic differences in assay type (liquid phase versus solid phase) and to differences in the ligand used (human vs. nonhuman insulin). In study 2, 5 sera were prepared and presented blindly to compare dilution curves, insulin-species specificity, interference from irrelevant serum proteins, precision, and dose-dependent displaceability. Many assays, both liquid and solid phase, were influenced by marked and unpredictable nonspecific binding, revealed by loss of parallelism between dilution curves in pooled normal serum and buffer, by variable binding signals with different normal sera, and by difficulty in distinguishing human insulin-specific from cross-reactive IAA sera. It was concluded from the experience of both studies that variance could probably be reduced by using a standard curve with derived common units, a single species of ligand, and methodology to minimize the effect of nonspecific binding. Variation related to assay type was probably due to liquid- versus solid-phase systems being differentially more sensitive to certain aspects of antigen-antibody binding; this issue will be addressed in future serum exchanges and workshops.