Association Between Real-Time Continuous Glucose Monitor Use and Diabetes-Related Medical Costs for Patients with Type 2 Diabetes

Reduction in Diabetes-Related Hospitalizations and Medical Costs After Dexcom G6 Continuous Glucose Monitor Initiation in People with Type 2 Diabetes Using Intensive Insulin Therapy

INTRODUCTION

Some people with type 2 diabetes (T2D) require intensive insulin therapy to manage their diabetes. This can increase the risk of diabetes-related hospitalizations. We hypothesize that initiation of real-time continuous glucose monitoring (RT-CGM), which continuously measures a user's glucose values and provides threshold- and trend-based alerts, will reduce diabetes-related emergency department (ED) and inpatient hospitalizations and concomitant costs.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of US healthcare claims data using Optum's de-identified Clinformatics® Data Mart database was performed. The cohort consisted of commercially insured, CGM-naïve individuals with T2D who initiated Dexcom G6 RT-CGM system between August 1, 2018, and March 31, 2021. Twelve months of continuous health plan enrollment before and after RT-CGM initiation was required to capture baseline and follow-up rates of diabetes-related hospitalizations and associated healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) costs. Analyses were performed for claims with a diabetes-related diagnosis code in either (1) any position or (2) first or second position on the claim.

RESULTS

A total of 790 individuals met the inclusion criteria. The average age was 52.8 (10.5) [mean (SD)], 53.3% were male, and 76.3% were white. For claims with a diabetes-related diagnosis code in any position, the number of individuals with ≥ 1 ED visit decreased by 30.0% (p = 0.01) and with ≥ 1 inpatient visit decreased by 41.5% (p < 0.0001). The number of diabetes-related visits and average number of visits per person similarly decreased by at least 31.4%. Larger relative decreases were observed for claims with a diabetes-related diagnosis code in the first or second position on the claim. Total diabetes-related costs expressed as per-person-per-month (PPPM) decreased by $341 PPPM for any position and $330 PPPM for first or second position.

CONCLUSION

Initiation of Dexcom G6 among people with T2D using intensive insulin therapy was associated with a significant reduction in diabetes-related ED and inpatient visits and related HCRU costs. Expanded use of RT-CGM could augment these benefits and result in further cost reductions.

Initiating GLP-1 Therapy in Combination with FreeStyle Libre Provides Greater Benefit Compared with GLP-1 Therapy Alone

Background and Aim: Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RA) therapy provides glycemic benefits to individuals with type 2 diabetes (T2D). However, the effects of GLP-1 RA therapy in combination with FreeStyle Libre systems (FSL) are unknown. This study aimed to compare changes in hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) between people acquiring GLP-1 with FSL (GLP-1+FSL) versus GLP-1 without FSL (GLP-1). Methods: This real-world study used Optum's de-identified Market Clarity Data, a linked electronic health records (EHR)-claims database, and included adults with T2D and HbA1c ≥8% who acquired their first GLP-1 RA medication between 2018 and 2022. GLP-1+FSL subjects acquired their first FSL within ±30 days of their first GLP-1 acquisition. Cohorts were matched 1:5 on baseline insulin therapy, age, sex, baseline HbA1c, and GLP-1 type. Paired changes in HbA1c were compared between unmatched and matched groups at 6 months. Results: The study included 24,724 adults in the unmatched cohort (GLP-1+FSL, n = 478; GLP-1, n = 24,246). The matched cohort included 478 GLP-1+FSL users and 2,390 GLP-1 users: mean age 53.5 ± 11.8 and 53.5 ± 11.3 years, HbA1c 10.25 ± 1.68% and 10.22 ± 1.69%, respectively. HbA1c reduction was greater in the GLP-1+FSL group compared with the GLP-1 group in the unmatched cohort (-2.43% vs. -1.73%, difference 0.70%, P < 0.001, respectively) and in the matched cohort (-2.43% vs. -2.06%, difference 0.37%, P < 0.001). GLP-1+FSL vs. GLP-1 treatment was associated with greater HbA1c reduction in the intensive insulin (-2.32% vs. -1.50%), nonintensive insulin (-2.50% vs. -1.74%), and noninsulin group (-2.46% vs. -1.78%), as well as in patients using semaglutide (-2.73% vs. -1.92%) and dulaglutide (-2.45% vs. -1.71%) GLP-1 RA, all P < 0.001. Conclusions: Adults with suboptimally controlled T2D, initiating GLP-1 RA with FreeStyle Libre, had greater improvement in HbA1c compared with those treated with GLP-1 RA only. These results suggest an additional glycemic benefit of FSL when used with a GLP-1 RA in T2D treatment.

Coverage for Continuous Glucose Monitoring for Individuals with Type 2 Diabetes Treated with Nonintensive Therapies: An Evidence-Based Approach to Policymaking

Numerous studies have demonstrated the clinical benefits of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) in individuals with type 1 diabetes (T1D) and type 2 diabetes (T2D) who are treated with intensive insulin regimens. Based on this evidence, CGM is now a standard of care for individuals within these diabetes populations and widely covered by commercial and public insurers. Moreover, recent clinical guidelines from the American Diabetes Association and American Association of Clinical Endocrinology now endorse CGM use in individuals treated with nonintensive insulin regimens. However, despite increasing evidence supporting CGM use for individuals treated with less-intensive insulin therapy or noninsulin medications, insurance coverage is limited or nonexistent. This narrative review reports key findings from recent randomized, observational, and retrospective studies investigating use of CGM in T2D individuals treated with basal insulin only and/or noninsulin therapies and presents an evidence-based rationale for expanding access to CGM within this population.

Economic Evaluations of mHealth Interventions for the Management of Type 2 Diabetes: A Scoping Review

BACKGROUND

There is plenty of evidence supporting the clinical benefits of mHealth interventions for type 2 diabetes, but despite often being promoted as cost-effective or cost-saving, there is still limited research to support such claims. The objective of this review was to summarize and critically analyze the current body of economic evaluation (EE) studies for mHealth interventions for type 2 diabetes.

METHODS

Using a comprehensive search strategy, five databases were searched for full and partial EE studies for mHealth interventions for type 2 diabetes from January 2007 to March 2022. "mHealth" was defined as any intervention that used a mobile device with cellular technology to collect and/or provide data or information for the management of type 2 diabetes. The CHEERS 2022 checklist was used to appraise the reporting of the full EEs.

RESULTS

Twelve studies were included in the review; nine full and three partial evaluations. Text messages smartphone applications were the most common mHealth features. The majority of interventions also included a Bluetooth-connected medical device, eg, glucose or blood pressure monitors. All studies reported their intervention to be cost-effective or cost-saving, however, most studies' reporting were of moderate quality with a median CHEERS score of 59%.

CONCLUSION

The current literature indicates that mHealth interventions for type 2 diabetes can be cost-saving or cost-effective, however, the quality of the reporting can be substantially improved. Heterogeneity makes it difficult to compare study outcomes, and the failure to report on key items leaves insufficient information for decision-makers to consider.

Glycemic Outcomes and Feature Set Engagement Among Real-Time Continuous Glucose Monitoring Users With Type 1 or Non-Insulin-Treated Type 2 Diabetes: Retrospective Analysis of Real-World Data

BACKGROUND

The benefits of real-time continuous glucose monitoring (RT-CGM) are well established for patients with type 1 diabetes (T1D) and patients with insulin-treated type 2 diabetes (T2D). However, the usage and effectiveness of RT-CGM in the context of non-insulin-treated T2D has not been well studied.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to assess glycemic metrics and rates of RT-CGM feature utilization in users with T1D and non-insulin-treated T2D.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed data from 33,685 US-based users of an RT-CGM system (Dexcom G6; Dexcom, Inc) who self-identified as having either T1D (n=26,706) or T2D and not using insulin (n=6979). Data included glucose concentrations, alarm settings, feature usage, and event logs.

RESULTS

The T1D cohort had lower proportions of glucose values in the 70 mg/dl to 180 mg/dl range than the T2D cohort (52.1% vs 70.8%, respectively), with more values indicating hypoglycemia or hyperglycemia and higher glycemic variability. Discretionary alarms were enabled by a large majority in both cohorts. The data sharing feature was used by 38.7% (10,327/26,706) of those with T1D and 10.4% (727/6979) of those with T2D, and the mean number of followers was higher in the T1D cohort. Large proportions of patients with T1D or T2D enabled and customized their glucose alerts. Retrospective analysis features were used by the majority in both cohorts (T1D: 15,783/26,706, 59.1%; T2D: 3751/6979, 53.8%).

CONCLUSIONS

Similar to patients with T1D, patients with non-insulin-treated T2D used RT-CGM system features, suggesting beneficial, routine engagement with data by patients and others involved in their care. Motivated patients with diabetes could benefit from RT-CGM coverage.

Continuous Glucose Monitoring: An Opportunity for Population-Based Diabetes Management

The increasing prevalence of prediabetes and diabetes in the United States poses a serious threat to the health of the population. Closely associated with obesity, hypertension, dyslipidemia, and cardiovascular disease, a diagnosis of diabetes or prediabetes carries with it life-altering demands. Critically important among these is the requirement for frequent glucose level checks-typically performed with blood obtained from a fingerstick. Innovative real-time continuous glucose monitoring (rtCGM) technology makes it possible for patients and their clinicians to receive continuous glucose level measurements around the clock without finger sticks. Accruing evidence shows that rtCGM is an effective tool for patients and their clinicians in managing diabetes (ie, maintaining glucose levels within the recommended target range) and in understanding how lifestyle behaviors directly influence glucose levels. In recent years, a number of large payer organizations (eg, private health insurers, employers) have incorporated rtCGM in their diabetes management programs as a means of addressing the dual challenge of achieving/maintaining control of glucose levels and preventing or delaying the onset of complications. Programmatic integrated approaches have been used successfully and cost-effectively for managing other chronic conditions. Incorporating rtCGM in similar integrated approaches in diabetes management may be of value in improving quality outcomes and reducing costs on a population level. The evidence supports broader adoption and continued study to evaluate models that incorporate the use of rtCGM.