Reduced acute diabetes events after FreeStyle Libre® system initiation in people 65 years or older with type 2 diabetes on intensive insulin therapy in France

Ageing well with diabetes: the role of technology

Over the past two decades there has been a substantial rise in the adoption of diabetes therapeutic technology among children, adolescents and younger adults with type 1 diabetes, and its use is now also advocated for older individuals. Older people with diabetes are more prone to experience hypoglycaemia because of numerous predisposing factors and are at higher risk of hypoglycaemic events requiring third-party assistance as well as other adverse sequelae. Hypoglycaemia may also have long-term consequences, including cognitive impairment, frailty and disability. Diabetes in older people is often characterised by marked glucose variability related to age-associated changes such as variable appetite and levels of physical activity, comorbidities and polypharmacotherapy. Preventing hypoglycaemia and mitigating glucose excursions may have considerable positive impacts on physical and cognitive function and general well-being and may even prevent or improve frailty. Technology for older people includes continuous glucose monitoring systems, insulin pumps, automated insulin delivery systems and smart insulin pens. Clinical trials and real-world studies have shown that older people with diabetes benefit from technology in terms of glucose management, reductions in hypoglycaemic events, emergency department attendance and hospital admissions, and improvement in quality of life. However, ageing may bring physical impairments and other challenges that hinder the use of technology. Healthcare professionals should identify older adults with diabetes who may benefit from therapeutic technology and then adopt an individualised approach to education and follow-up for individuals and their caregivers. Future research should explore the impact of diabetes technology on outcomes relevant to older people with diabetes.

Perspective of Continuous Glucose Monitoring-Based Interventions at the Various Stages of Type 2 Diabetes

Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) is now advocated for the clinical management of individuals with type 1 diabetes (T1D). However, this glucose monitoring strategy is not routinely used in type 2 diabetes (T2D), given the large population, significant cost implications and relatively limited supporting evidence. T2D is a more heterogenous condition compared with T1D with various glucose lowering therapies that do not necessarily require CGM to ensure within target glucose levels. While all individuals with T2D may benefit from CGM at certain time points, the whole T2D population does not necessarily require this technology continuously, which should be prioritized based on patient benefit and cost effectiveness. In this pragmatic opinion piece, we describe the rationale and evidence for CGM use in different subgroups of individuals with T2d, divided according to the stage of the condition, glycemic therapies, presence of diabetes complications, or associated co-morbidities. We discuss a total of 16 T2D subgroups and provide a clinical view on CGM use in each, based on current evidence while also highlighting areas of knowledge gaps. This work provides health care professionals with a simple guide to CGM use in different T2D groups and gives suggestion for future studies to justify expansion of this technology.

Continuous glucose monitoring for the routine care of type 2 diabetes mellitus

Although continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) devices are now considered the standard of care for people with type 1 diabetes mellitus, the uptake among people with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) has been slower and is focused on those receiving intensive insulin therapy. However, increasing evidence now supports the inclusion of CGM in the routine care of people with T2DM who are on basal insulin-only regimens or are managed with other medications. Expanding CGM to these groups could minimize hypoglycaemia while allowing efficient adaptation and escalation of therapies. Increasing evidence from randomized controlled trials and observational studies indicates that CGM is of clinical value in people with T2DM on non-intensive treatment regimens. If further studies confirm this finding, CGM could soon become a part of routine care for T2DM. In this Perspective we explore the potential benefits of widening the application of CGM in T2DM, along with the challenges that must be overcome for the evidence-based benefits of this technology to be delivered for all people with T2DM.

Accuracy of FreeStyle Libre flash glucose monitoring in patients with type 2 diabetes who migrated from highlands to plains

BACKGROUND

The FreeStyle Libre flash glucose monitoring (FGM) system entered the Chinese market in 2017 to complement the self-monitoring of blood glucose. Due to its increased usage in clinics, the number of studies investigating its accuracy has increased. However, its accuracy has not been investigated in highland popu-lations in China.

AIM

To evaluate measurements recorded using the FreeStyle Libre FGM system compared with capillary blood glucose measured using the enzyme electrode method in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) who had migrated within 3 mo from highlands to plains.

METHODS

Overall, 68 patients with T2D, selected from those who had recently migrated from highlands to plains (within 3 mo), were hospitalized at the Department of Endocrinology from August to October 2017 and underwent continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) with the FreeStyle Libre FGM system for 14 d. Throughout the study period, fingertip capillary blood glucose was measured daily using the enzyme electrode method (Super GL, China), and blood glucose levels were read from the scanning probe during fasting and 2 h after all three meals. Moreover, the time interval between reading the data from the scanning probe and collecting fingertip capillary blood was controlled to < 5 min. The accuracy of the FGM system was evaluated according to the CGM guidelines. Subsequently, the factors influencing the mean absolute relative difference (MARD) of this system were analyzed by a multiple linear regression method.

RESULTS

Pearson's correlation analysis showed that the fingertip and scanned glucose levels were positively correlated (R = 0.86, P = 0.00). The aggregated MARD of scanned glucose was 14.28 ± 13.40%. Parker's error analysis showed that 99.30% of the data pairs were located in areas A and B. According to the probe wear time of the FreeStyle Libre FGM system, MARD1 d and MARD2-14 d were 16.55% and 14.35%, respectively (t = 1.23, P = 0.22). Multiple stepwise regression analysis showed that MARD did not correlate with blood glucose when the largest amplitude of glycemic excursion (LAGE) was < 5.80 mmol/L but negatively correlated with blood glucose when the LAGE was ≥ 5.80 mmol/L.

CONCLUSION

The FreeStyle Libre FGM system has good accuracy in patients with T2D who had recently migrated from highlands to plains. This system might be ideal for avoiding the effects of high hematocrit on blood glucose monitoring in populations that recently migrated to plains. MARD is mainly influenced by glucose levels and fluctuations, and the accuracy of the system is higher when the blood glucose fluctuation is small. In case of higher blood glucose level fluctuations, deviation in the scanned glucose levels is the highest at extremely low blood glucose levels.

An estimate of the need for continuous glucose monitoring in type 2 diabetes with intensive insulin treatment in secondary healthcare

AIM

To estimate the proportion of persons with type 2 diabetes (T2DM) receiving intensive insulin treatment in the secondary healthcare who could be candidates for continuous glucose monitoring (CGM), based on different HbA1c criteria. For comparison, the results are also presented as proportion of persons with type 1 diabetes (T1DM) in the same region.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In the Central Denmark Region, we identified all persons with T1DM (n = 6179) and T2DM (n = 4315) who had a minimum of one contact to a diabetes outpatient clinic from September 2021 to September 2022. Insulin regimen and HbA1c measured after a minimum of 2 months with a stable insulin regimen were retrieved from the healthcare administrative electronic platform used in the region.

RESULTS

The numbers of persons with T1DM and T2DM with HbA1c meeting the criteria were 5145 and 3090, respectively. The fraction of T2DM with basal-bolus insulin was 35.3%, and the fraction with basal-bolus insulin and HbA1c >53 (7%) mmol/mol or >58 (7.5%) mmol/mol was 20.5% and 16.6%, respectively. These proportions correspond to 19.4%, 14.4% and 11.7% of the persons with T1DM in the same geographical area.

CONCLUSION

The proportion of persons with T2DM in secondary healthcare undergoing intensive insulin treatment who could be candidates for CGM corresponded to only a minor fraction of persons with T1DM in the same region, irrespective of any HbA1c criteria applied.

Clinical features of type 1 diabetes in older adults and the impact of intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitoring: An Association of British Clinical Diabetologists (ABCD) study

AIMS

To evaluate the clinical features and impact of flash glucose monitoring in older adults with type 1 diabetes (T1D) across age groups defined as young-old, middle-old, and old-old.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Clinicians were invited to submit anonymized intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitoring (isCGM) user data to a secure web-based tool within the National Health Service secure network. We collected baseline data before isCGM initiation, such as demographics, glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) values from the previous 12 months, Gold scores and Diabetes Distress Scale (DDS2) scores. For analysis, people with diabetes were classified as young-old (65-75 years), middle-old (>75-85 years) and old-old (>85 years). We compared baseline clinical characteristics across the age categories using a t test. All the analyses were performed in R 4.1.2.

RESULTS

The study involved 1171 people with diabetes in the young-old group, 374 in the middle-old group, and 47 in the old-old group. There were no significant differences in baseline HbA1c and DDS2 scores among the young-old, middle-old, and old-old age groups. However, Gold score increased with age (3.20 [±1.91] in the young-old vs. 3.46 [±1.94] in the middle-old vs. 4.05 [±2.28] in the old-old group; p < 0.0001). This study showed reduced uptake of insulin pumps (p = 0.005) and structured education (Dose Adjustment For Normal Eating [DAFNE] course; p = 0.007) in the middle-old and old-old populations compared to the young-old population with T1D. With median isCGM use of 7 months, there was a significant improvement in HbA1c in the young-old (p < 0.001) and old-old groups, but not in the middle-old group. Diabetes-related distress score (measured by the DDS2) improved in all three age groups (p < 0.001) and Gold score improved (p < 0.001) in the young-old and old-old populations but not in the middle-old population. There was also a significant improvement in resource utilization across the three age categories following the use of is CGM.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrated significant differences in hypoglycaemia awareness and insulin pump use across the older age groups of adults with T1D. The implementation of isCGM demonstrated significant improvements in HbA1c, diabetes-related distress, hypoglycaemia unawareness, and resource utilization in older adults with T1D.

Association Between Adherence, A1C Improvement, and Type of Continuous Glucose Monitoring System in People with Type 1 Diabetes or Type 2 Diabetes Treated with Intensive Insulin Therapy

INTRODUCTION

Use of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) systems by people with diabetes is associated with improved glycemic outcomes, including lower glycated hemoglobin (A1C). Less is known about adherence to CGM systems, whether glycemic outcomes are impacted by levels of adherence, or whether adherence rates differ between types of CGM systems-intermittently scanned CGM (isCGM) or real-time CGM (rtCGM).

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of de-identified US administrative health claims and linked laboratory data was conducted using the Merative™ MarketScan® Research Database. The cohort included CGM-naïve people with type 1 diabetes (T1D) or type 2 diabetes treated with intensive insulin therapy (T2D-IIT) who initiated rtCGM or isCGM between August 1, 2019 and March 31, 2021 (defined as the index date). Adherence was calculated over a 12-month period using the proportion of days covered (PDC) with PDC ≥ 0.8 defined as adherent. A1C values were obtained within 6 months of the index date.

RESULTS

A total of 7669 individuals were identified. Subgroups included T1D using isCGM (n = 1578), T1D using rtCGM (n = 1244), T2D-IIT using isCGM (n = 3567), and T2D-IIT using rtCGM (n = 1280). After 12 months, PDC was 0.71 (0.30)-0.72 (0.31) (mean(SD)) for T1D and T2D-IIT rtCGM users and 0.55 (0.34)-0.56 (0.34) for T1D and T2D-IIT isCGM users. The proportion of adherent users (PDC ≥ 0.8) was 56.8-59.7% for rtCGM users and 36.3-37.6% for isCGM users. Overall, regardless of diabetes type, the odds of adherence were over two times higher for rtCGM users compared to isCGM users. For those with available A1C information (T1D n = 213; T2D-IIT n = 346), independent of CGM type, adherence to CGM was associated with a greater reduction in A1C and more people reaching A1C targets of < 7.0% or < 8.0%.

CONCLUSION

For people with T1D or T2D-IIT, higher adherence to CGM is associated with greater reductions in A1C, and higher adherence rates were observed with rtCGM systems than with isCGM systems.

Expanding the Role of Continuous Glucose Monitoring in Modern Diabetes Care Beyond Type 1 Disease

Application of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) has moved diabetes care from a reactive to a proactive process, in which a person with diabetes can prevent episodes of hypoglycemia or hyperglycemia, rather than taking action only once low and high glucose are detected. Consequently, CGM devices are now seen as the standard of care for people with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM). Evidence now supports the use of CGM in people with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) on any treatment regimen, not just for those on insulin therapy. Expanding the application of CGM to include all people with T1DM or T2DM can support effective intensification of therapies to reduce glucose exposure and lower the risk of complications and hospital admissions, which are associated with high healthcare costs. All of this can be achieved while minimizing the risk of hypoglycemia and improving quality of life for people with diabetes. Wider application of CGM can also bring considerable benefits for women with diabetes during pregnancy and their children, as well as providing support for acute care of hospital inpatients who experience the adverse effects of hyperglycemia following admission and surgical procedures, as a consequence of treatment-related insulin resistance or reduced insulin secretion. By tailoring the application of CGM for daily or intermittent use, depending on the patient profile and their needs, one can ensure the cost-effectiveness of CGM in each setting. In this article we discuss the evidence-based benefits of expanding the use of CGM technology to include all people with diabetes, along with a diverse population of people with non-diabetic glycemic dysregulation.