Further Evidence of Severe Allergic Contact Dermatitis From Isobornyl Acrylate While Using a Continuous Glucose Monitoring System

Early feasibility study with an implantable near-infrared spectroscopy sensor for glucose, ketones, lactate and ethanol

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the safety and performance of an implantable near-infrared (NIR) spectroscopy sensor for multi-metabolite monitoring of glucose, ketones, lactate, and ethanol.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

This is an early feasibility study (GLOW, NCT04782934) including 7 participants (4 with type 1 diabetes (T1D), 3 healthy volunteers) in whom the YANG NIR spectroscopy sensor (Indigo) was implanted for 28 days. Metabolic challenges were used to vary glucose levels (40-400 mg/dL, 2.2-22.2 mmol/L) and/or induce increases in ketones (ketone drink, up to 3.5 mM), lactate (exercise bike, up to 13 mM) and ethanol (4-8 alcoholic beverages, 40-80g). NIR spectra for glucose, ketones, lactate, and ethanol levels analyzed with partial least squares regression were compared with blood values for glucose (Biosen EKF), ketones and lactate (GlucoMen LX Plus), and breath ethanol levels (ACE II Breathalyzer). The effect of potential confounders on glucose measurements (paracetamol, aspartame, acetylsalicylic acid, ibuprofen, sorbitol, caffeine, fructose, vitamin C) was investigated in T1D participants.

RESULTS

The implanted YANG sensor was safe and well tolerated and did not cause any infectious or wound healing complications. Six out 7 sensors remained fully operational over the entire study period. Glucose measurements were sufficiently accurate (overall mean absolute (relative) difference MARD of 7.4%, MAD 8.8 mg/dl) without significant impact of confounders. MAD values were 0.12 mM for ketones, 0.16 mM for lactate, and 0.18 mM for ethanol.

CONCLUSIONS

The first implantable multi-biomarker sensor was shown to be well tolerated and produce accurate measurements of glucose, ketones, lactate, and ethanol.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinical trial identifier: NCT04782934.

7. Diabetes Technology: Standards of Care in Diabetes-2024

The American Diabetes Association (ADA) "Standards of Care in Diabetes" includes the ADA's current clinical practice recommendations and is intended to provide the components of diabetes care, general treatment goals and guidelines, and tools to evaluate quality of care. Members of the ADA Professional Practice Committee, an interprofessional expert committee, are responsible for updating the Standards of Care annually, or more frequently as warranted. For a detailed description of ADA standards, statements, and reports, as well as the evidence-grading system for ADA's clinical practice recommendations and a full list of Professional Practice Committee members, please refer to Introduction and Methodology. Readers who wish to comment on the Standards of Care are invited to do so at professional.diabetes.org/SOC.

Current state of the art and future directions for implantable sensors in medical technology: Clinical needs and engineering challenges

Implantable sensors have revolutionized the way we monitor biophysical and biochemical parameters by enabling real-time closed-loop intervention or therapy. These technologies align with the new era of healthcare known as healthcare 5.0, which encompasses smart disease control and detection, virtual care, intelligent health management, smart monitoring, and decision-making. This review explores the diverse biomedical applications of implantable temperature, mechanical, electrophysiological, optical, and electrochemical sensors. We delve into the engineering principles that serve as the foundation for their development. We also address the challenges faced by researchers and designers in bridging the gap between implantable sensor research and their clinical adoption by emphasizing the importance of careful consideration of clinical requirements and engineering challenges. We highlight the need for future research to explore issues such as long-term performance, biocompatibility, and power sources, as well as the potential for implantable sensors to transform healthcare across multiple disciplines. It is evident that implantable sensors have immense potential in the field of medical technology. However, the gap between research and clinical adoption remains wide, and there are still major obstacles to overcome before they can become a widely adopted part of medical practice.

Comparative assessment of blood glucose monitoring techniques: a review

Monitoring blood glucose levels is a vital indicator of diabetes mellitus management. The mainstream techniques of glucometers are invasive, painful, expensive, intermittent, and time-consuming. The ever-increasing number of global diabetic patients urges the development of alternative non-invasive glucose monitoring techniques. Recent advances in electrochemical biosensors, biomaterials, wearable sensors, biomedical signal processing, and microfabrication technologies have led to significant research and ideas in elevating the patient's life quality. This review provides up-to-date information about the available technologies and compares the advantages and limitations of invasive and non-invasive monitoring techniques. The scope of measuring glucose concentration in other bio-fluids such as interstitial fluid (ISF), tears, saliva, and sweat are also discussed. The high accuracy level of invasive methods in measuring blood glucose concentrations gives them superiority over other methods due to lower average absolute error between the detected glucose concentration and reference values. Whereas minimally invasive, and non-invasive techniques have the advantages of continuous and pain-free monitoring. Various blood glucose monitoring techniques have been evaluated based on their correlation to blood, patient-friendly, time efficiency, cost efficiency, and accuracy. Finally, this review also compares the currently available glucose monitoring devices in the market.

7. Diabetes Technology: Standards of Care in Diabetes-2023

The American Diabetes Association (ADA) "Standards of Care in Diabetes" includes the ADA's current clinical practice recommendations and is intended to provide the components of diabetes care, general treatment goals and guidelines, and tools to evaluate quality of care. Members of the ADA Professional Practice Committee, a multidisciplinary expert committee, are responsible for updating the Standards of Care annually, or more frequently as warranted. For a detailed description of ADA standards, statements, and reports, as well as the evidence-grading system for ADA's clinical practice recommendations and a full list of Professional Practice Committee members, please refer to Introduction and Methodology. Readers who wish to comment on the Standards of Care are invited to do so at professional.diabetes.org/SOC.

Automated insulin delivery: benefits, challenges, and recommendations. A Consensus Report of the Joint Diabetes Technology Working Group of the European Association for the Study of Diabetes and the American Diabetes Association

A technological solution for the management of diabetes in people who require intensive insulin therapy has been sought for decades. The last 10 years have seen substantial growth in devices that can be integrated into clinical care. Driven by the availability of reliable systems for continuous glucose monitoring, we have entered an era in which insulin delivery through insulin pumps can be modulated based on sensor glucose data. Over the past few years, regulatory approval of the first automated insulin delivery (AID) systems has been granted, and these systems have been adopted into clinical care. Additionally, a community of people living with type 1 diabetes has created its own systems using a do-it-yourself approach by using products commercialised for independent use. With several AID systems in development, some of which are anticipated to be granted regulatory approval in the near future, the joint Diabetes Technology Working Group of the European Association for the Study of Diabetes and the American Diabetes Association has created this consensus report. We provide a review of the current landscape of AID systems, with a particular focus on their safety. We conclude with a series of recommended targeted actions. This is the fourth in a series of reports issued by this working group. The working group was jointly commissioned by the executives of both organisations to write the first statement on insulin pumps, which was published in 2015. The original authoring group was comprised by three nominated members of the American Diabetes Association and three nominated members of the European Association for the Study of Diabetes. Additional authors have been added to the group to increase diversity and range of expertise. Each organisation has provided a similar internal review process for each manuscript prior to submission for editorial review by the two journals. Harmonisation of editorial and substantial modifications has occurred at both levels. The members of the group have selected the subject of each statement and submitted the selection to both organisations for confirmation.

Automated Insulin Delivery: Benefits, Challenges, and Recommendations. A Consensus Report of the Joint Diabetes Technology Working Group of the European Association for the Study of Diabetes and the American Diabetes Association

A technological solution for the management of diabetes in people who require intensive insulin therapy has been sought for decades. The last 10 years have seen substantial growth in devices that can be integrated into clinical care. Driven by the availability of reliable systems for continuous glucose monitoring, we have entered an era in which insulin delivery through insulin pumps can be modulated based on sensor glucose data. Over the past few years, regulatory approval of the first automated insulin delivery (AID) systems has been granted, and these systems have been adopted into clinical care. Additionally, a community of people living with type 1 diabetes has created its own systems using a do-it-yourself approach by using products commercialized for independent use. With several AID systems in development, some of which are anticipated to be granted regulatory approval in the near future, the joint Diabetes Technology Working Group of the European Association for the Study of Diabetes and the American Diabetes Association has created this consensus report. We provide a review of the current landscape of AID systems, with a particular focus on their safety. We conclude with a series of recommended targeted actions. This is the fourth in a series of reports issued by this working group. The working group was jointly commissioned by the executives of both organizations to write the first statement on insulin pumps, which was published in 2015. The original authoring group was comprised by three nominated members of the American Diabetes Association and three nominated members of the European Association for the Study of Diabetes. Additional authors have been added to the group to increase diversity and range of expertise. Each organization has provided a similar internal review process for each manuscript prior to submission for editorial review by the two journals. Harmonization of editorial and substantial modifications has occurred at both levels. The members of the group have selected the subject of each statement and submitted the selection to both organizations for confirmation.

Diabetes Technology Meeting 2021

Diabetes Technology Society hosted its annual Diabetes Technology Meeting on November 4 to November 6, 2021. This meeting brought together speakers to discuss various developments within the field of diabetes technology. Meeting topics included blood glucose monitoring, continuous glucose monitoring, novel sensors, direct-to-consumer telehealth, metrics for glycemia, software for diabetes, regulation of diabetes technology, diabetes data science, artificial pancreas, novel insulins, insulin delivery, skin trauma, metabesity, precision diabetes, diversity in diabetes technology, use of diabetes technology in pregnancy, and green diabetes. A live demonstration on a mobile app to monitor diabetic foot wounds was presented.

Contact dermatitis in children caused by diabetes devices

BACKGROUND

Insulin pump and glucose monitoring devices improve diabetes mellitus (DM) control and enhance patients' quality of life. However, a growing number of adverse cutaneous reactions related to the use of these devices has been reported.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the culprits of localized contact dermatitis in pediatric patients with diabetes caused by insulin pump and glucose monitoring devices.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of 15 pediatric patients patch tested as part of a clinical investigation for skin reactions associated with insulin pump and glucose monitoring devices RESULTS: Seven patients had positive patch test reactions to isobornyl acrylate (IBOA) and five had positive reactions to benzoyl peroxide (BP). Positive patch test reactions to materials from the glucose sensor and/or insulin pump were seen in 10 of the 15 patients. Three had positive reactions to adhesive remover wipe from Smith and Nephew Remove and four had reactions to EMLA plaster.

CONCLUSION

A high share of patients showed positive reactions to IBOA and/or their medical devices (insulin pumps or glucose devices). A third of patients showed positive reactions to benzoyl peroxide. The presence of additional unidentified allergens cannot be excluded, highlighting the importance of access to a full description of the chemical composition of the devices. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Contact allergy to the Dexcom G6 glucose monitoring system -role of 2,2'-methylenebis(6-tert-butyl-4-methylphenol) monoacrylate in the new adhesive

BACKGROUND

Skin reactions to the glucose monitoring systems Dexcom G5 and G6 have been rare. In 2019, the components of the adhesive were exchanged for better skin fixation. Since then, more and more patients experienced severe skin reactions. A few months ago, 2,2'-methylenebis(6-tert-butyl-4-methylphenol) monoacrylate (MBPA) was identified as a new component in the adhesive of the G6 model. Furthermore, it was suspected that isobornylacrylate (IBOA) was also a component of the exchanged adhesive.

OBJECTIVES

Our objective was to investigate if MBPA plays a major role in the increasing skin problems of patients without a history of IBOA-sensitization. Furthermore, our aim was to examine whether IBOA is contained in the newer model adhesive and may also contribute to allergic contact dermatitis (ACD).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Five patients with a newly occurred ACD caused by the glucose monitoring system Dexcom G6 were investigated. Patch testing including MBPA in 3 different concentrations, as well as IBOA were performed. Gas chromatography-mass spectrometry of the newer system Dexcom G6 was carried out.

RESULTS

All patients were shown to be sensitized to MBPA, while MBPA 0,5% showed the strongest reaction. On the other hand, IBOA was tested negative.

CONCLUSION

In our study group MBPA was observed to be the triggering allergen of the recently changed adhesive.

Allergic Contact Dermatitis, an Important Skin Reaction in Diabetes Device Users: A Systematic Review

ABSTRACT

Diabetes management has undergone many advances over the years, including the introduction of devices that allow patients to monitor blood glucose and administer insulin. Although these devices have improved patients' quality of life, they are associated with adverse reactions.A systematic literature search was performed up to May 2020 in PubMed, Cochrane, and Embase databases, with no temporal restrictions. Articles were screened by title, abstract, and full text as needed. A manual search among the references of the included articles was also performed.Two hundred sixty-five articles were identified, and 50 studies met inclusion criteria. Several cases of allergic contact dermatitis due to the use of insulin infusion systems and blood glucose monitoring have been reported. Acrylates, methacrylates, and colophonium, as well as, in particular, isobornyl acrylate, represent the main allergens responsible.Skin reactions, in particular allergic contact dermatitis, are a very common adverse event caused by insulin pumps and glucose sensors, which may lead to discontinue the usage of these devices with serious consequences for the patients. Collaboration between specialists, specifically between dermatologists and diabetologists, with patients and manufacturers is essential for the correct management of diabetes devices and potential related skin reactions.

Impact of trends in new and emerging contact allergens

Allergic contact dermatitis represents a T cell-mediated, delayed-type hypersensitivity response to exogenous agents. While allergic contact dermatitis is one of the most common causes of skin disease encountered by dermatologists, emerging trends within the field are in constant flux, as influenced by ever-changing industry practices and evolving consumer behaviors. Although certain allergens continue to predominate, new chemicals are frequently being introduced, thus shifting the pattern of allergen exposure and sensitization. This review examines the impact of trends in new and emerging contact allergens, with particular attention to clinical contexts in which these agents may be encountered. In addition, we offer a working knowledge of these allergens’ characteristics, sources, and relevance, while outlining recommendations to accurately evaluate, diagnose, and provide appropriate counseling for these diseases.

Technologies for Type 1 Diabetes and Contact Dermatitis: Therapeutic Tools and Clinical Outcomes in a Cohort of Pediatric Patients

The increasing use of technological devices for the management of diabetes is related to the prolonged exposure of patients' skin to chemical and mechanical agents and, consequently, to the increased risk of developing dermatological complications. Among these, contact dermatitis is the most insidious skin disorder. Despite the magnitude of the issue, no universally accepted recommendations on the management of this common complication are currently available. Our observational study aimed to describe all the solutions adopted by patients and their caregivers to treat and prevent the appearance of contact dermatitis and to describe the clinical impact of this cutaneous complication. Twenty-one pediatric patients (mean age 12.1 ± 3.7 years) with type 1 diabetes were recruited in the study. The most common treatment used to treat acute skin lesions was the application of topical corticosteroids, sometimes associated with topical antibiotics (9.5%). In order to prevent the further appearance of dermatitis, the most frequently adopted measure was the use of hydrocolloid and/or silicone-based adhesives, followed by the application of protective barrier films. One patient reported benefit from the off-label use of fluticasone propionate nasal spray. However, only 52.4% of the study participants achieved a definitive resolution of the skin issue, and 38.1% of patients were forced to discontinue insulin pump therapy and/or continuous glucose monitoring. No differences were observed in glycated hemoglobin values between the period before and after the onset of contact dermatitis. Our study confirms the severity of this dermatological complication that may hinder the spread of new technologies for the management of diabetes. Finally, our findings highlight the importance of establishing close collaboration both with pediatric allergy specialists to prescribe the most suitable treatment and with manufacturing companies to ensure that adhesives of technological devices are free of harmful well-known sensitizers.

7. Diabetes Technology: Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes-2022

The American Diabetes Association (ADA) "Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes" includes the ADA's current clinical practice recommendations and is intended to provide the components of diabetes care, general treatment goals and guidelines, and tools to evaluate quality of care. Members of the ADA Professional Practice Committee, a multidisciplinary expert committee (https://doi.org/10.2337/dc22-SPPC), are responsible for updating the Standards of Care annually, or more frequently as warranted. For a detailed description of ADA standards, statements, and reports, as well as the evidence-grading system for ADA's clinical practice recommendations, please refer to the Standards of Care Introduction (https://doi.org/10.2337/dc22-SINT). Readers who wish to comment on the Standards of Care are invited to do so at professional.diabetes.org/SOC.

Products for Monitoring Glucose Levels in the Human Body With Noninvasive Optical, Noninvasive Fluid Sampling, or Minimally Invasive Technologies

BACKGROUND

Conventional home blood glucose measurements require a sample of blood that is obtained by puncturing the skin at the fingertip. To avoid the pain associated with this procedure, there is high demand for medical products that allow glucose monitoring without blood sampling. In this review article, all such products are presented.

METHODS

In order to identify such products, four different sources were used: (1) PubMed, (2) Google Patents, (3) Diabetes Technology Meeting Startup Showcase participants, and (4) experts in the field of glucose monitoring. The information obtained were filtered by using two inclusion criteria: (1) regulatory clearance, and/or (2) significant coverage in Google News starting in the year 2016, unless the article indicated that the product had been discontinued. The identified bloodless monitoring products were classified into three categories: (1) noninvasive optical, (2) noninvasive fluid sampling, and (3) minimally invasive devices.

RESULTS

In total, 28 noninvasive optical, 6 noninvasive fluid sampling, and 31 minimally invasive glucose monitoring products were identified. Subsequently, these products were characterized according to their regulatory, technological, and consumer features. Products with regulatory clearance are described in greater detail according to their advantages and disadvantages, and with design images.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on favorable technological features, consumer features, and other advantages, several bloodless products are commercially available and promise to enhance diabetes management. Paths for future products are discussed with an emphasis on understanding existing barriers related to both technical and non-technical issues.

Skin Involvement in Paediatric Patients with Type 1 Diabetes

Skin involvement is an overlooked aspect in the management of paediatric patients with type 1 diabetes. A comprehensive search of published literature using the PubMed database was carried out using the following key terms: "children," "pediatric/paediatric patients," "skin," "skin disorders," "type 1 diabetes." Dermatological side effects are frequently observed among diabetic children and adolescents. Insulin-induced lipodystrophies and allergic contact dermatitis caused by insulin pumps or glycaemic sensors are the most common skin reactions in these patients. Furthermore, several diabetes-associated skin diseases such as necrobiosis lipoidica, granuloma annulare, vitiligo, and bullosis diabeticorum may already be present in paediatric patients. Paediatric diabetes specialists should pay attention to their patients' skin to recognize these disorders, identify the potential causes, and choose the most suitable treatment. Finally, the evaluation of skin concentrations of advanced glycation end-products using non-invasive diagnostic techniques may be used to assess the risk of chronic complications of diabetes as early as adolescence.

Modern diabetes devices for continuous blood sugar measuring: Limitations due to contact allergies

During the past years, diabetes diseases have increased significantly worldwide. However, new technologies such as continuous glucose measurement using a subcutaneous sensor are developing just as rapidly. A continuous improvement in insulin pump therapy is also contributing to an improved quality of life. A common feature of these modern devices for diabetes therapy is that they remain fixed in place on the skin for several days. In recent years, skin reactions, in particular pronounced contact dermatitis due to the devices and their adhesives have been increasingly reported. In particular, isobornyl acrylate, which used to be included in a glucose measurement sensor set, was identified as a main allergen. Development of contact allergy can result both in a necessity to quit the measuring system and in allergic cross-reactions to other systems.

High Frequency of Dermatological Complications in Children and Adolescents with Type 1 Diabetes: A Web-Based Survey

INTRODUCTION

Despite advances in the management of type 1 diabetes (T1D), there is an increasing incidence of skin reactions related to diabetes devices such as patch pumps and glucose sensors. Aim of the present study was to assess the prevalence of dermatological complications in pediatric patients with T1D using technological devices.

METHODS

Online survey regarding skin reactions related to the use of patch pumps and/or glucose sensors was administered to families of children and adolescents (0-17 years) with T1D. Data were collected on demographic characteristics, duration of diabetes, and clinical features of dermatological complications if present.

RESULTS

Our study population consisted of 139 patients (female 51.8%) aged 11.1 ± 3.3 years. More than half (51.1%) experienced skin reactions due to patch pumps or glucose sensors. Dermatological complications were mainly caused by continuous glucose monitoring (56.3% of total). Timing of appearance of dermatological reactions varied from a few days to several months after the introduction of the device. The application of hypoallergenic barrier bandages was the most frequently adopted measure to solve the issue.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study confirmed high frequency of dermatological complications among pediatric patients with type 1 diabetes. Well-designed studies are awaited to provide clear recommendations to minimize the burden of skin issues related to technological devices.

Severe allergic contact dermatitis to two different continuous glucose monitoring devices in a patient with glycogen storage disease type 9b

Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) systems are of great value for patients with disorders of impaired glucose homeostasis, including glycogen storage diseases. We report on an 8-year-old girl with glycogen storage disease type 9b who developed severe allergic contact dermatitis to two different continuous glucose monitoring systems, FreeStyle^® Libre and Dexcom^® G6. Our case highlights the impact of sensitization for pediatric patients, the urgent need for open labeling of components by pharmaceutical and device manufacturers, and the need for avoidance of skin sensitizers in medical devices.

Extraction With Sweat-Sebum Emulsion as a New Test Method for Leachables in Patch-Based Medical Devices, Illustrated by Assessment of Isobornylacrylate (IBOA) in Diabetes Products

BACKGROUND

The increasing offering of patch-based medical devices is accompanied by growing numbers of reported adverse skin reactions. Procedures for testing leachables according to ISO 10993 may not be optimal for lipophilic substances that can be mobilized on skin by sweat and sebum. We propose an improved extraction method for targeted analysis of leachables using low volumes of a sweat-sebum emulsion. The approach is illustrated by the analysis of isobornylacrylate (IBOA), a compound found in some devices and suspected for allergenic potential.

METHOD

Three patch-based products were tested: an implantable device for continuous glucose monitoring (CGM), an intermittently scanned CGM (isCGM) device, and a micro-insulin pump. Quantification of IBOA was performed by gas chromatography and allergenic potential of IBOA levels was assessed by the KeratinoSens cell assay. Different combinations were used for extraction solvent (isopropanol, 5% ethanol-water solution, and sweat-sebum emulsion), extraction volumes (complete immersion vs partial immersion in 2 mm of solvent), and extraction time (3, 5, and 14 days).

RESULTS

Isobornylacrylate was only found in the isCGM device. About 20 mg/L IBOA were eluted after 3 days in isopropanol but only about 1 mg/L in ethanol-water. Sweat-sebum emulsion dissolves IBOA better and gives a more stable solution than ethanol-water. Decomposition of IBOA solutions requires adjusted extraction timing or correction of results. In the sweat-sebum extract, IBOA levels were about 20 mg/L after 3 days and about 30 mg/L after 5 days, clearly above the threshold found in the KerationSens assay for keratinocyte activation (10 mg/L).

CONCLUSION

Extraction by low volumes of sweat-sebum emulsion can be a superior alternative for the targeted simulating-use assessment of leachables in patch-based medical devices.

Skin Reaction Report Form: Development and Design of a Standardized Report Form for Skin Reactions Due to Medical Devices for Diabetes Management

BACKGROUND

Skin reactions due to medical devices for diabetes management have become a common problem in diabetes technology. There is a varying degree in how detailed skin reactions are described in scientific literature and diabetes practice, and no uniform structured documentation is given. Whereas most articles only describe findings, some others already document final diagnoses, such as contact dermatitis. Furthermore, inconsistent wordings for comparable issues were used.

METHODS

A more detailed and standardized documentation, possibly facilitated by a generally accepted guideline for structured descriptions, of skin reactions could be helpful to enable better differentiations between the described skin reactions. Therefore, a report form to assess skin reactions due to medical devices in diabetes therapy was developed and will be presented in this article.

RESULTS

The one-page report form is divided into four categories and a separate instruction paper. Beside general information the form includes the location, size, severity and duration of skin appearances, the grading of itching, and suspected diagnoses.

CONCLUSION

A consistent use of the form in daily practice and clinical trials could facilitate a fast and standardized documentation and help to evaluate the occurrence and severity of different skin reactions due to medical devices in diabetes management.

Cutaneous Reactions to Continuous Glucose Monitoring and Continuous Subcutaneous Insulin Infusion Devices in Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus

BACKGROUND

Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) and continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) are the standard of care for type 1 diabetes in children. There is little reported on device-related skin complications and treatment options. This study documents cutaneous reactions to CGM and CSII devices in children and young adults with type 1 diabetes.

METHODS

One hundred and twenty-one subjects (3-25 years) with type 1 diabetes and CGM and/or CSII use were recruited over a three-month period from the Naomi Berrie Diabetes Center at Columbia University Irving Medical Center. A five-question survey was completed for each subject detailing demographic data, diabetes management, and device-related skin complications.

RESULTS

Sixty percent of subjects reported skin complications related to CGM and/or CSII use. Terms most frequently used to describe cutaneous reactions were "red," "itchy," "painful," and "rash." Subjects who used both CGM and CSII were more likely to report skin problems than those who used only CSII (odds ratio 2.9, [95% confidence interval: 1.2-6.7]; P = .015). There were no associations between skin complications and sex or race/ethnicity. Twenty-two percent of subjects with adverse skin event(s) discontinued use of a device due to their skin problem. Seven percent were evaluated by a dermatologist. Eighty-one percent used a range of products to treat their symptoms, with variable perceived clinical outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Skin complications related to CSII or CGM devices are commonly reported in pediatric patients with type 1 diabetes and may lead to interruption or discontinuation of device use. Future studies are needed to elucidate the causes of these reactions and determine the best methods for prevention.

Pediatric Allergic Contact Dermatitis

Allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) affects up to 20% of adults and children, although children are infrequently patch tested. Available data suggest that children and adults, with or without atopic dermatitis, have the same prevalence of ACD. Patch testing is the gold standard for evaluation of ACD. The Pediatric Baseline Series was recently published by expert consensus for use in pediatric patch testing, with additional allergens tested as guided by history. This article examines methods of patch testing and up-to-date data on pediatric ACD. The top allergens are reviewed, and avoidance strategies are discussed.

Position statement: The need for EU legislation to require disclosure and labelling of the composition of medical devices

BACKGROUND

In recent years, skin reactions secondary to the use of medical devices (MD), such as allergic contact dermatitis have increasingly been observed (e.g. to continuous blood sugar monitoring systems, insulin pumps, wound dressings, medical gloves, etc.): this is regarded as a developing epidemic. Lack of labelling of the composition of MD, as well as frequent lack of cooperation of manufacturers to disclose this relevant information, even when contacted by the clinician for the individual case of an established adverse reaction, significantly impede patient care.

OBJECTIVES

To advocate for full ingredient labelling in the implementation of EU regulation for MD.

METHODS

This position paper reviews the scientific literature, the current regulatory framework adopted for MD to date, and the likely impact, including some costs data in case of the absence of such labelling.

RESULTS

Efforts made by several scientific teams, who are trying to identify the culprit of such adverse effects, either via asking for cooperation from companies, or using costly chemical analyses of MD, can only partly, and with considerable delay, compensate for the absence of meaningful information on the composition of MD; hence, patient management is compromised. Indeed, without knowing the chemical substances present, physicians are unable to inform patients about which substances they should avoid, and which alternative MD may be suitable/tolerated.

CONCLUSION

There is an urgent need for full and accurate labelling of the chemical composition of MD in contact with the human body.

Flash Continuous Glucose Monitoring: A Practical Guide and Call to Action for Pharmacists

Despite advances in diabetes technology, the proportion of patients with type 2 diabetes achieving recommended glycemic goals remains suboptimal. There is a growing interest in flash continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) among patients, pharmacists and providers. Pharmacists are well positioned to collaborate with patients and providers in ambulatory care or community-based settings to allow a greater number of patients with diabetes to harness the benefits of flash CGM. The purpose of this narrative review is to provide pharmacists with a background on flash CGM technology, review the data supporting pharmacist-driven flash CGM services, and address common questions that arise in pharmacy practice surrounding flash CGM.

The Influence of Skin Thickness on Flash Glucose Monitoring System Accuracy in Dogs with Diabetes Mellitus

Simple Summary

A flash glucose monitoring system (FGMS) has been validated for use in dogs with diabetes mellitus and diabetic ketoacidosis. It continuously measures the glucose in the interstitial fluid through a small filament (5 mm long) inserted under the skin. Interstitial glucose concentrations are reportedly comparable to whole blood glucose concentrations. However, several factors can influence the performance of interstitial sensors, including the proportion of interstitial fluid in a tissue. The influence of skin thickness on flash glucose monitoring system accuracy has not been investigated in previous studies; therefore, the aim of this study was to evaluate whether FGMS accuracy is affected by skin thickness. On the basis of our results, skin thickness seems to affect FGMS measurements; the mean bias was significantly inversely correlated (p = 0.02; r = −0.6) with the mean skin thickness, and clinical accuracy according to ISO 15197:2013 criteria was observed only in dogs with skin thickness > 5 mm, with 99% of the results falling in zone A + B of the Parkes consensus error grid analysis. In dogs with thin skin (<5 mm), the clinical accuracy was low, and the results should be interpreted with caution.

Abstract

A flash glucose monitoring system (FGMS) has been validated for use in diabetic dogs. However, it is unknown whether skin thickness affects FGMS measurements. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether FGMS accuracy is affected by skin thickness. Fourteen client-owned diabetic dogs on insulin treatment were prospectively enrolled in the study. The dogs were divided into two groups according to their ultrasound-measured skin thickness: dogs with skin thickness < 5 mm (Group 1) and dogs with skin thickness > 5 mm (Group 2). On days 1, 7 and 14, glucose curves were obtained simultaneously using the FGMS and a validated portable blood glucose meter. Paired measurements were used to calculate the mean bias and to determine accuracy according to ISO 15197:2013 criteria. The mean bias was significantly inversely correlated (p = 0.02; r = −0.6) with the mean skin thickness. Clinical accuracy was observed only in Group 2, with 99% of the results in zone A + B of the Parkes consensus error grid analysis. In conclusion, skin thickness seems to affect FGMS measurements, and the device is accurate in dogs with thicker skin (>5 mm); in dogs with thin skin (<5 mm), the clinical accuracy is low, and the results should be interpreted with caution.

7. Diabetes Technology: Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes-2021

The American Diabetes Association (ADA) "Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes" includes the ADA's current clinical practice recommendations and is intended to provide the components of diabetes care, general treatment goals and guidelines, and tools to evaluate quality of care. Members of the ADA Professional Practice Committee, a multidisciplinary expert committee (https://doi.org/10.2337/dc21-SPPC), are responsible for updating the Standards of Care annually, or more frequently as warranted. For a detailed description of ADA standards, statements, and reports, as well as the evidence-grading system for ADA's clinical practice recommendations, please refer to the Standards of Care Introduction (https://doi.org/10.2337/dc21-SINT). Readers who wish to comment on the Standards of Care are invited to do so at professional.diabetes.org/SOC.

Wearable Woes: Allergens in Diabetic Devices

Novel diabetic devices are being developed to help manage diabetes and improve the quality of life of patients with diabetes. Both insulin pumps and glucose monitors are becoming increasingly convenient, long-lasting, and discrete for patients, but this often requires the use of strong external cutaneous adhesives and increased contact time with the skin. As a consequence, these devices have been associated with a variety of dermatologic reactions, namely, irritant and allergic contact dermatitis. Some of these reactions can be severe, precluding the use of these devices, which puts patients' long-term health at risk. Herein, we review the history of diabetic devices and reported cutaneous reactions to diabetic devices and commonly cited allergens.

Pediatric allergic contact dermatitis. Part I: Clinical features and common contact allergens in children

Allergic contact dermatitis (ACD), a delayed hypersensitivity skin reaction to environmental allergens, has a prevalence that is similar in children and adults. However, diagnostic testing for ACD in pediatric populations accounts for less than one tenth of all patch tests. The relative infrequency of pediatric patch testing may be attributed to the difficulty in testing in this population, which includes a smaller surface area for patch test placement and maintaining cooperation during patch testing, especially in younger children. Diagnosis can be difficult in children because the appearance of ACD can mimic other common pediatric skin conditions, particularly atopic dermatitis and irritant contact dermatitis. Comprehensive history taking, guided by patient presentation, age group, and location of dermatitis, helps build clinical suspicion. Such clinical suspicion is one of the major reasons behind patch testing, with additional indications being recalcitrant dermatitis and dermatitis with atypical distribution. US pediatric data have shown the top allergens to be metals, fragrances, topical antibiotics, preservatives, and emollients. These trends are important to recognize to guide management and accurate diagnosis, because ACD tends to persist if the allergen is not identified and can affect patients' quality of life.

The 'flash' adhesive study: a randomized crossover trial using an additional adhesive patch to prolong freestyle libre sensor life among youth with type 1 diabetes mellitus

AIMS

Although strategies to prevent premature sensor loss for flash glucose monitoring (FGM) systems may have substantial benefit, limited data are available. This study among youth with high-risk type 1 diabetes evaluated whether an additional adhesive patch over FGM sensors would reduce premature sensor loss frequency and not cause additional cutaneous adverse events (AEs).

METHODS

This is a six-month, open-label, randomized crossover trial. Participants were recruited at completion of prior 'Managing Diabetes in a Flash' randomized controlled trial and allocated to three months of Freestyle Libre FGM sensors with either standard adhesive (control) or additional adhesive patches (RockaDex, New Zealand) (intervention), before crossing over to the opposite study arm. Participants self-reported patch use or non-use, premature sensor loss and cutaneous AEs fortnightly via an electronic questionnaire.

RESULTS

Thirty-four participants were enrolled: mean age (± SD) 17.0 (± 2.2) years; mean HbA1c (± SD) 89 (± 16) mmol/mol (10.3% ± 1.4%). The response rate of questionnaires was 77% (314/408). Premature sensor loss was reported in 18% (58/314) of questionnaires: 20% (32/162) from intervention and 17% (26/152) from control (p = 0.56). Thirty-eight percent (118/314) of questionnaires were non-compliant to protocol allocation. However, per-protocol analysis showed similar findings. No significant difference in AEs was reported between compliant adhesive patch use and non-use (6% [5/78] and 3% [3/118], respectively, p = 0.27).

CONCLUSIONS

The adhesive patch investigated in this study does not appear to prevent premature FGM sensor loss. However, the low risk of AEs and low cost of an adhesive patch suggest an individualized approach to their use may still be warranted. Further research is needed to explore alternative strategies to prevent sensor loss.

Comparison between a flash glucose monitoring system and a portable blood glucose meter for monitoring dogs with diabetes mellitus

Background

Flash glucose monitoring system (FGMS; FreeStyle Libre) was recently validated for use in diabetic dogs (DD). It is not known if this system is clinically useful in monitoring DD.

Objective

To compare the clinical utility of FGMS against blood glucose curves (BGCs) obtained with a portable blood glucose meter (PBGM) in monitoring DD.

Animals

Twenty dogs with diabetes mellitus.

Methods

Prospective study. Dogs with diabetes mellitus on insulin treatment for at least 1 month were included. Comparisons of insulin dose recommendations based on the in‐hospital GCs acquired using FGMS and a PBGM, consecutive‐day interstitial GCs (IGCs) acquired at home using the FGMS, and consecutive‐day, home vs hospital IGCs acquired using the FGMS were made using concordance analysis.

Results

There was good concordance between insulin dose recommendations based on FGMS and PBGM generated GCs and IGCs obtained in the 2 different environments on 2 consecutive days, but almost absent concordance between IGCs obtained on 2 consecutive days at home. Glucose nadirs were detected in 34/43 (79%) of Ambulatory Glucose Profile (AGP) reports of the FGMS. In comparison, concordant glucose nadirs were identified in 14/34 (41%) BGCs using PBGM. The individual FGMS scans and PBGM identified 60% and 9% of low IG/hypoglycemic episodes, respectively.

Conclusions and Clinical Importance

Insulin dose adjustments based on BGCs can be suboptimal. The FGMS allows a more accurate identification of the glucose nadirs and hypoglycemic episodes compared to the use of a PBGM and assessment of day‐to‐day variations in glycemic control.

Concomitant positive patch test reactions in FreeStyle-allergic patients sensitized to isobornyl acrylate

BACKGROUND

Concomitant positive patch test reactions in patients sensitized to isobornyl acrylate (IBOA) have rarely been documented.

OBJECTIVES

To report concomitant sensitizations in patients with allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) from the glucose sensor FreeStyle Libre and sensitized to IBOA.

METHODS

In 2019, 26 patients with suspected ACD from FreeStyle Libre were patch tested to a baseline series and to a (meth) acrylate series containing IBOA and 2-phenoxyethyl acrylate (PEA) 0.1% pet. Diabetes devices and patch test preparations were analyzed with gas chromatography - mass spectrometry (GC-MS) for the presence of IBOA and PEA.

RESULTS

Of the 26 patients, 18 (69%) were sensitized to IBOA, and eight (44%) and 11 (61%) of these were co-sensitized to sesquiterpene lactones and fragrances, respectively. Ten patients (56%) were co-sensitized to PEA, which, contrary to IBOA, could not be detected in any device. The PEA test material was shown to be contaminated with IBOA.

CONCLUSIONS

Contact allergy to IBOA appears to be declining and IBOA-sensitized patients are most often co-sensitized to sesquiterpene lactones and fragrances. Vigilance is required when patch testing (acrylate) materials obtained from industry, as these might be contaminated and, hence, alter the results and their interpretation.

Contact dermatitis caused by glucose sensors, insulin pumps, and tapes: Results from a 5-year period

BACKGROUND

The number of patients with contact dermatitis from glucose sensors and insulin infusion sets is increasing. Patch testing is challenging because of a lack of information concerning the constituent materials of medical devices.

OBJECTIVES

To report on products and causes of allergic reactions to glucose sensors or insulin infusion sets over a 5-year period and suggest a short screening series.

METHODS

Analysis of patch test data from consecutive patients suspected of allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) to glucose sensors and/or insulin infusion sets from 2015-2019.

RESULTS

Patient numbers increased from 4 to 15 per year; 30/38 (78.9%) were children. In 29 (76.3%), a diagnosis of allergic/probable ACD was established, mostly due to the tapes of the device or allergens in these tapes (n = 23) followed by allergens in the device housing (n = 10). Isobornyl acrylate, abitol, and colophonium were the most common allergens. Information from manufacturers was often difficult to obtain and, if accessible, inadequate. For this reason, the diagnosis was delayed for more than 1.5 years in 12 (31%) patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The increasing number of patients, mostly children, with ACD from devices used in treatment of type 1 diabetes demonstrates the importance of this problem. Allergies can easily be overlooked, due to the lack of mandatory labeling of the constituent materials of the devices.

Usage of Hydrocolloid-Based Plasters in Patients Who Have Developed Allergic Contact Dermatitis to Isobornyl Acrylate While Using Continuous Glucose Monitoring Systems

BACKGROUND

Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) systems replace more and more capillary self-monitoring of blood glucose by patients with diabetes. However, at least a subset of patients experience adverse skin reactions such as severe allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) after prolonged usage of CGM systems. A major allergen isobornyl acrylate (IBOA) has been identified recently.

OBJECTIVES

After developing an ACD, patients have difficulties in continuing the usage of their CGM system (and also of, eg, certain patch pumps). Most of such patients look for possibilities to continue the usage of, eg, a CGM system that requires intermittent scanning (iscCGM, Freestyle Libre).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Eight patients with a known ACD were supplied with different hydrocolloid-based plasters (n = 5 with Hansaplast blister plaster, n = 2 with Cutimed Hydro B from BSN, and n = 1 with Stomahesive baseplate from Convatec). They attached these plasters to their skin underneath their iscCGM system.

RESULTS

All patients were able to continue the usage of this iscCGM system when using such plasters.

CONCLUSION

Patients with ACD benefit from the usage of such plasters; however, some limitations have to be acknowledged.

Contact Allergy-Emerging Allergens and Public Health Impact

Contact allergy (sensitisation) and allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) resulting from it have a considerable public health impact. For the present review, all pertinent articles were systematically searched via Medline and Web of Science™; additionally, all available issues of the journals "Contact Dermatitis" and "Dermatitis" were manually searched, covering the years 2018-2019, thereby extending and re-focusing a previous similar review. New allergens, or previously described allergens found in a new exposure context or of other current importance, are described in sections according to substance classes, e.g., metals, preservatives, fragrances. As a common finding in many investigations, a lack of information on product composition has been noted, for instance, regarding a newly described allergen in canvas shoes (dimethylthiocarbamylbenzothiazole sulfide) and, most notably, absence of co-operation from manufacturers of glucose-monitoring devices and insulin pumps, respectively. These latter devices have been shown to cause severe ACD in a considerable number of diabetic patients caused by the liberation of isobornyl acrylate and N,N'-dimethylacrylamide, respectively, as demonstrated by an international collaboration between dermatologists and chemists. Improved and complete ingredient labelling for all types of products, and not just cosmetics, must be put on the legislative agenda.

Prevalence and Prevention of Contact Dermatitis Caused by FreeStyle Libre: A Monocentric Experience

OBJECTIVE

Cutaneous adverse events (CAE) from FreeStyle Libre include allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) caused by the allergen isobornyl acrylate (IBOA). We aim to report CAE from this glucose sensor, ACD to IBOA in particular, and the outcome of using barrier films as a prevention.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

A monocentric, retrospective review of medical files from adult and pediatric patients with diabetes using Freestyle Libre, in the period between December 2016 and April 2019, was performed with a focus on CAE.

RESULTS

Fifty-seven of 1,036 patients with diabetes (5.5%) were referred to our dermatology department because of CAE from FreeStyle Libre. Thirty-nine of 1,036 (3.8%) had ACD due to IBOA. Only two patients, of whom one sensitized to IBOA, had a benefit from using barrier films.

CONCLUSIONS

CAE occurred in 5.5% of FreeStyle Libre users, and 3.8% suffered from ACD due to IBOA. Barrier films had limited value in the prevention.

Allergic Contact Dermatitis to Components of Wearable Adhesive Health Devices

Consumer use of wearable health devices has been rapidly increasing. Because of prolonged skin contact required, allergic contact dermatitis to components has been reported. Eczematous rash is the most common dermatologic adverse reaction to continuous glucose monitors, and rash from wearable activity trackers is commonly reported by consumers, suggesting that allergic contact dermatitis to wearable health devices may be vastly underreported. Acrylates, methacrylates, and colophonium are the most common allergens found on patch testing. Isobornyl acrylate has been identified as the primary allergen in many cases of allergic contact dermatitis to continuous glucose monitors. These chemicals are found in either the adhesives or the units themselves. Awareness of the presence of these chemicals in wearable devices may provide assistance for diagnostic patch testing in users who have dermatological reactions to the devices and hopefully guide dermatotoxicological evaluation guidance by government and industry.

Cutaneous Complications With Continuous or Flash Glucose Monitoring Use: Systematic Review of Trials and Observational Studies

BACKGROUND

Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM)/flash glucose monitoring (FGM) use in diabetes management is increasing. Cutaneous complications associated with these devices were reported. We conducted a systematic review to provide an overview of cutaneous complications with CGM/FGM use.

METHODS

We identified observational studies and intervention trials that report on cutaneous complications with CGM/FGM use up to January 14, 2019. Studies were identified through Medline, Embase, and PubMed, or with hand searching of the previous publications. Screening was duplicated and data extracted to consider four main themes: incidence rate and severity, participant perspectives of cutaneous complications, potential solutions, and future directions in diabetic technology relevant to reducing cutaneous complications.

RESULTS

A total of 54 eligible studies were identified. The overall event rate of cutaneous complications reported from 19 trials was one event per eight weeks of sensor wear-time of which 1.5% were considered severe. The most common cutaneous complications were wear-related erythema, itching, and induration. Although skin irritations were the most common cause of CGM/FGM discontinuation, most users experienced less pain or discomfort with CGM/FGM than capillary blood glucose testing. Future technological advances may reduce, but not eliminate cutaneous complications.

CONCLUSION

The incidence rate of reported cutaneous complications with CGM/FGM use from the available literature is low, with one event per eight weeks of sensor wear-time. Reported complication severity was also low, leading to low rates of CGM/FGM discontinuation. However, there appear to be discrepancies between reporting in trial and observational data. Greater constancy in reporting is necessary to understand the frequency of this issue.

7. Diabetes Technology: Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes-2020

The American Diabetes Association (ADA) "Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes" includes the ADA's current clinical practice recommendations and is intended to provide the components of diabetes care, general treatment goals and guidelines, and tools to evaluate quality of care. Members of the ADA Professional Practice Committee, a multidisciplinary expert committee (https://doi.org/10.2337/dc20-SPPC), are responsible for updating the Standards of Care annually, or more frequently as warranted. For a detailed description of ADA standards, statements, and reports, as well as the evidence-grading system for ADA's clinical practice recommendations, please refer to the Standards of Care Introduction (https://doi.org/10.2337/dc20-SINT). Readers who wish to comment on the Standards of Care are invited to do so at professional.diabetes.org/SOC.

Decisions in the Psychology of Glucose Monitoring

This commentary aims to discuss the parallels between nonadherence to continuous glucose level monitoring and nonadherence to medication in people with diabetes and to investigate specific reasons for the difficulties involved in glucose monitoring. To this end, examples are given from both continuous and discontinuous glucose monitoring (CGM and SMBG, respectively).

Evaluation of Isobornyl Acrylate Content in Medical Devices for Diabetes Treatment

Background: Along with increased usage of continuous glucose monitors, flash glucose monitors, and patch pumps by patients with diabetes, the frequency of skin reactions has also increased. Skin irritation and itching can be annoying to users. However, more serious contact allergies to one or more components of the adhesives or plastic material of the housing of the devices can become lifelong. Redness and itchiness are so strong that patients can no longer use a particular system. In August 2017, a major culprit allergen, isobornyl acrylate (IBOA), was identified for these more serious reactions. Objectives: Our objective was to evaluate IBOA content in different medical products. Methods: The plastic material used for the housing of the Freestyle Libre (n = 3), Dexcom G6 (n = 3), and Enlite (n = 4) was analyzed for IBOA content by gas chromatography-mass spectrometry. Adhesives of the different systems were also analyzed. Results: IBOA was found in the housings of Freestyle Libre and Enlite sensor, but not in the Dexcom G6. Conclusions: Patients with an IBOA allergy should consider switching to a medical product without IBOA. Furthermore, removal of IBOA from devices that contact the skin is encouraged.

Documentation of Skin-Related Issues Associated with Continuous Glucose Monitoring Use in the Scientific Literature

Background: The average wear time of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) systems steadily increased over the last years. Increased wear times are likely achieved by using adhesives with a longer adherence time, which may have a more pronounced effect on the skin than adhesives with shorter adherence time. Methods: In this project, a structured literature search was performed to assess how potential skin-related issues with CGM usage have been reported in scientific literature in the last 5 years. The literature search was performed with four search terms in the PubMed database. Results: In sum, 279 articles were analyzed. Skin-related issues were mentioned in 19.0% of articles (53 out of 279). With respect to articles mentioning skin-related issues, CGM performance or efficacy was the study's main topic of most of these studies, whereas the minority used CGM as "add-on" to assess other objectives. There was a varying degree in how detailed skin-related issues were described and no uniform structured documentation was given. While some articles only described findings, other articles already documented final diagnoses, such as contact dermatitis. Furthermore, inconsistent wordings for comparable issues were used. The most frequent issues were pain, itching, erythema, bleeding, bruising, and allergic reactions. Conclusion: To draw possible conclusions about the occurrence of skin-related issues during CGM use, more reports about skin-related issues in scientific literature are needed. A more detailed and uniformly structured documentation, possibly facilitated by a generally accepted guideline for structured descriptions, of skin-related issues could be helpful to enable clear differentiations between the described skin reactions.