Six Months of Hybrid Closed-Loop Versus Manual Insulin Delivery With Fingerprick Blood Glucose Monitoring in Adults With Type 1 Diabetes: A Randomized, Controlled Trial

The psychosocial outcomes of advanced hybrid closed-loop system in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes

The study was carried out to determine the psychosocial outcomes of advanced hybrid closed-loop (AHCL) systems in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes (T1D). Single-center and cohort study with a duration 6 months consisted of 60 children and adolescents with T1D. Standard clinical procedures, including both glycemic indicators, e.g., sensor-measured time within the 70-180 mg/dL range and glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) levels, and psychosocial metrics were used for data collection. The psychosocial metrics included the Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory (PedsQL) 3.0 Diabetes Module for both children (8-12 years) and parents; the Quality of Life for Youth scale for adolescents (13-18 years); the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ); the Hypoglycemia Fear Survey for Children (HFS-C); the Revised Child Anxiety and Depression Scale (R-CADS); and AHCLS-specific DTSEQ satisfaction and expectation survey. These metrics were evaluated at the baseline and after 6 months of AHCL use. Of the 60 children and adolescents with T1D for whom the AHCL system was utilized, 41 of them, 23 female and 18 male, completed the surveys. The mean age of the 41 children and adolescents was 12.5 ± 3.2 (min. 6.7, max. 18) years. The time spent within the target glycemic range, i.e., time-in-range (TIR), improved from 76.9 ± 9% at the baseline to 80.4 ± 5% after 6 months of AHCL system use (p = 0.03). Additionally, HbA1c levels reduced from 7.1% ± 0.7% at the baseline to 6.8% ± 0.8% after 6 months of AHCL system use (p = 0.03). The most notable decline in HbA1c was observed in participants with higher baseline HbA1c levels. All patients' HFS-C and AHCL system-specific DTSEQ satisfaction and expectation survey scores were within the normal range at the baseline and remained unchanged during the follow-up period. No significant difference was found in the R-CADS scores of children and adolescents between baseline and after 6 months of AHCL system use. However, there was a significant decrease in the R-CADS scores of the parents. Patients' PedsQL scores were high both at the baseline and after 6 months. The SDQ scores were high at baseline, and there was no significant improvement at the end of 6 months.  Conclusion: This is the first study to investigate in detail the psychosocial outcomes of AHCL system use in T1D patients and their parents. Although state-of-the-art technologies such as AHCL provide patients with more flexibility in their daily lives and information about glucose fluctuations, the AHCL resulted in a TIR above the recommended target range without a change in QOL, HFS-C, SDQ, and R-CADS scores. The scores obtained from the R-CADS conducted by the parents of the children indicated that the use of pumps caused a psychological improvement in the long term, with a significant decrease in the R-CADS scores of the children and adolescents with T1D. What is Known: • Previous studies focused on clinical outcomes of AHCL systems in pediatric T1D patients, showing glycemic control improvements. • Limited attention given to psychosocial outcomes of AHCL systems in children and adolescents with T1D. • Crucial psychosocial factors like quality of life, emotional well-being, and fear of hypoglycemia underexplored in AHCL system context. What is New: • First study to comprehensively examine psychosocial outcomes of AHCL systems in pediatric T1D patients. • Study's robust methodology sets new standard for diabetes technology research and its impact on qualiy of life.

Hybrid Closed Loop in Adults With Type 1 Diabetes and Severely Impaired Hypoglycemia Awareness

BACKGROUND

Benefits of hybrid closed-loop (HCL) systems in a high-risk group with type 1 diabetes and impaired awareness of hypoglycemia (IAH) have not been well-explored.

METHODS

Adults with Edmonton HYPO scores ≥1047 were randomized to 26-weeks HCL (MiniMed™ 670G) vs standard therapy (multiple daily injections or insulin pump) without continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) (control). Primary outcome was percentage CGM time-in-range (TIR; 70-180 mg/dL) at 23 to 26 weeks post-randomization. Major secondary endpoints included magnitude of change in counter-regulatory hormones and autonomic symptom responses to hypoglycemia at 26-weeks post-randomization. A post hoc analysis evaluated glycemia risk index (GRI) comparing HCL with control groups at 26 weeks post-randomization.

RESULTS

Nine participants (median [interquartile range (IQR)] age 51 [41, 59] years; 44% male; enrolment HYPO score 1183 [1058, 1308]; Clarke score 6 [6, 6]; n = 5 [HCL]; n = 4 [control]) completed the study. Time-in-range was higher using HCL vs control (70% [68, 74%] vs 48% [44, 50%], P = .014). Time <70 mg/dL did not differ (HCL 3.8% [2.7, 3.9] vs control 6.5% [4.3, 8.6], P = .14) although hypoglycemia episode duration was shorter (30 vs 50 minutes, P < .001) with HCL. Glycemia risk index was lower with HCL vs control (38.1 [30.0, 39.2] vs 70.8 [58.5, 72.4], P = .014). Following 6 months of HCL use, greater dopamine (24.0 [12.3, 27.6] vs -18.5 [-36.5, -4.8], P = .014), and growth hormone (6.3 [4.6, 16.8] vs 0.5 [-0.8, 3.0], P = .050) responses to hypoglycemia were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Six months of HCL use in high-risk adults with severe IAH increased glucose TIR and improved GRI without increased hypoglycemia, and partially restored counter-regulatory responses.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

ACTRN12617000520336.

Improved Satisfaction While Maintaining Safety and High Time in Range (TIR) With a Medtronic Investigational Enhanced Advanced Hybrid Closed-Loop (e-AHCL) System

OBJECTIVE

To determine feasibility and compare acceptance of an investigational Medtronic enhanced advanced hybrid closed-loop (e-AHCL) system in adults with type 1 diabetes with earlier iterations.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

This nonrandomized three-stage (12 weeks each) exploratory study compared e-AHCL (Bluetooth-enabled MiniMed 780G insulin pump with automatic data upload [780G] incorporating an updated algorithm; calibration-free all-in-one disposable sensor; 7-day infusion set) preceded by a run-in (non-Bluetooth 780G [670G V4.0 insulin pump] requiring manual data upload; Guardian Sensor 3 [GS3] requiring calibration; 3-day infusion set), stage 1 (780G; GS3; 3-day infusion set), and stage 2 (780G; calibration-free Guardian Sensor 4; 3-day infusion set). Treatment satisfaction was assessed by Diabetes Technology Questionnaire (DTQ)-current (primary outcome) and other validated treatment satisfaction tools with glucose outcomes by continuous glucose monitoring metrics.

RESULTS

Twenty-one of 22 (11 women) participants (baseline HbA1c 6.7%/50 mmol/mol) completed the study. DTQ-current scores favored e-AHCL (123.1 [17.8]) versus run-in (101.6 [24.2]) and versus stage 1 (110.6 [20.8]) (both P < 0.001) but did not differ from stage 2 (119.4 [16.0]; P = 0.271). Diabetes Medication System Rating Questionnaire short-form scores for "Convenience and Efficacy" favored e-AHCL over run-in and all stages. Percent time in range 70-180 mg/dL was greater with e-AHCL versus run-in and stage 2 (+2.9% and +3.6%, respectively; both P < 0.001). Percent times of <70 mg/dL for e-AHCL were significantly lower than run-in, stage 1, and stage 2 (-0.9%, -0.6%, and -0.5%, respectively; all P < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

e-AHCL was feasible. User satisfaction increased compared with earlier Medtronic HCL iterations without compromising glucose control.

Enhanced Interstitial Fluid Extraction and Rapid Analysis via Vacuum Tube-Integrated Microneedle Array Device

Advancing the development of point-of-care testing (POCT) sensors that utilize interstitial fluid (ISF) presents considerable obstacles in terms of rapid sampling and analysis. Herein, an innovative strategy is introduced that involves the use of a 3D-printed, hollow microneedle array patch (MAP), in tandem with a vacuum tube (VT) connected through a hose, to improve ISF extraction efficiency and facilitate expedited analysis. The employment of negative pressure by the VT allows the MAP device to effectively gather ≈18 µL of ISF from the dermis of a live rabbit ear within a concise period of 5 min. This methodology enables the immediate and minimally invasive measurement of glucose levels within the body, employing personal healthcare meters for quantification. The fusion of the VT and MAP technologies provides for their effortless integration into a comprehensive and mobile system for ISF analysis, accomplished by preloading the hose with custom sensing papers designed to detect specific analytes. Moreover, the design and functionality of this integrated VT-MAP system are intuitively user-friendly, eliminating the requirement for specialized medical expertise. This feature enhances its potential to make a significant impact on the field of decentralized personal healthcare.

Blood glucose monitoring devices for type 1 diabetes: a journey from the food and drug administration approval to market availability

Blood glucose monitoring constitutes a pivotal element in the clinical management of Type 1 diabetes (T1D), a globally escalating metabolic disorder. Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) devices have demonstrated efficacy in optimizing glycemic control, mitigating adverse health outcomes, and augmenting the overall quality of life for individuals afflicted with T1D. Recent progress in the field encompasses the refinement of electrochemical sensors, which enhances the effectiveness of blood glucose monitoring. This progress empowers patients to assume greater control over their health, alleviating the burdens associated with their condition, and contributing to the overall alleviation of the healthcare system. The introduction of novel medical devices, whether derived from existing prototypes or originating as innovative creations, necessitates adherence to a rigorous approval process regulated by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Diverse device classifications, stratified by their associated risks, dictate distinct approval pathways, each characterized by varying timelines. This review underscores recent advancements in blood glucose monitoring devices primarily based on electrochemical sensors and elucidates their regulatory journey towards FDA approval. The advent of innovative, non-invasive blood glucose monitoring devices holds promise for maintaining stringent glycemic control, thereby preventing T1D-associated comorbidities, and extending the life expectancy of affected individuals.

Evaluation of hybrid closed-loop insulin delivery system in type 1 diabetes in real-world clinical practice: One-year observational study

BACKGROUND

In 2016, the Food and Drug Administration approved the first hybrid closed-loop (HCL) insulin delivery system for adults with type 1 diabetes (T1D). There is limited information on the impact of using HCL systems on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in patients with T1D in real-world clinical practice. In this independent study, we evaluated glycemic parameters and PROs over one year of continuous use of Medtronic's 670G HCL in real-world clinical practice.

AIM

To assess the effects of hybrid closed loop system on glycemic control and quality of life in adults with T1D.

METHODS

We evaluated 71 patients with T1D (mean age: 45.5 ± 12.1 years; 59% females; body weight: 83.8 ± 18.7 kg, body mass index: 28.7 ± 5.6 kg/m2, A1C: 7.6% ± 0.8%) who were treated with HCL at Joslin Clinic from 2017 to 2019. We measured A1C and percent of glucose time-in-range (%TIR) at baseline and 12 months. We measured percent time in auto mode (%TiAM) for the last two weeks preceding the final visit and assessed PROs through several validated quality-of-life surveys related to general health and diabetes management.

RESULTS

At 12 mo, A1C decreased by 0.3% ± 0.1% (P = 0.001) and %TIR increased by 8.1% ± 2.5% (P = 0.002). The average %TiAM was only 64.3% ± 32.8% and was not associated with A1C, %TIR or PROs. PROs, provided at baseline and at the end of the study, showed that the physical functioning submodule of 36Item Short-Form Health Survey increased significantly by 22.9% (P < 0.001). Hypoglycemia fear survey/worry scale decreased significantly by 24.9% (P < 0.000); Problem Areas In Diabetes reduced significantly by -17.2% (P = 0.002). The emotional burden submodules of dietary diversity score reduced significantly by -44.7% (P = 0.001). Furthermore, analysis of Clarke questionnaire showed no increase in awareness of hypoglycemic episodes. WHO-5 showed no improvements in subject's wellbeing among participants after starting the 670G HCL system. Finally, analysis of Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index showed no difference in sleep quality, sleep latency, or duration of sleep from baseline to 12 mo.

CONCLUSION

The use of HCL in real-world clinical practice for one year was associated with significant improvements in A1C, %TIR, physical functioning, hypoglycemia fear, emotional distress, and emotional burden related to diabetes management. However, these changes were not associated with time in auto mode.

Advances in Automated Insulin Delivery with the Medtronic 780G: The Australian Experience

Aim: To assess the real-world performance of MiniMed™ 780G for Australians with type 1 diabetes (T1D) following advanced hybrid closed loop (AHCL) activation and to evaluate the effect of changing from MiniMed 670/770G to 780G. Methods: We analyzed deidentified Carelink™ continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) data from Australian users from January 2020 to December 2022, including the proportion attaining three major consensus targets: Glucose management indicator (GMI <7.0%), time in range (TIR 70-180 mg/dL >70%), and time below range (TBR 70 mg/dL <4%). Results: Comparing 670/770G users (n = 5676) for mean ± standard deviation 364 ± 244 days with 780G users (n = 3566) for 146 ± 145 days, the latter achieved a higher TIR (72.6% ± 10.6% vs. 67.3% ± 11.4%; P < 0.001), lower time above range (TAR) (25.5% ± 10.9% vs. 30.6% ± 11.7%; P < 0.001), and lower GMI (6.9% ± 0.4% vs. 7.2% ± 0.4%; P < 0.001) without compromising TBR (1.9% ± 1.8% vs. 2.0% ± 1.8%; P = 0.0015). Of 1051 670/770G users transitioning to 780G, TIR increased (70.0% ± 10.7% to 74.0% ± 10.2%; P < 0.001), TAR decreased (28.1% ± 10.9% to 24.0% ± 10.7%; P < 0.001), and TBR was unchanged. The percentage of users attaining all three CGM targets was higher in 780G users (50.1% vs. 29.5%; P < 0.001). CGM metrics were stable at 12 months post-transition. Conclusion: Real-world data from Australia shows that a higher proportion of MiniMed 780G users meet clinical targets for CGM consensus metrics compared to MiniMed 670/770G users and glucose control was sustained over 12 months.

The diabetes management experiences questionnaire: Psychometric validation among adults with type 1 diabetes

AIMS

To examine the psychometric properties of the Diabetes Management Experiences Questionnaire (DME-Q). Adapted from the validated Glucose Monitoring Experiences Questionnaire, the DME-Q captures satisfaction with diabetes management irrespective of treatment modalities.

METHODS

The DME-Q was completed by adults with type 1 diabetes as part of a randomized controlled trial comparing hybrid closed loop (HCL) to standard therapy. Most psychometric properties were examined with pre-randomization data (n = 149); responsiveness was examined using baseline and 26-week follow-up data (n = 120).

RESULTS

Pre-randomization, participants' mean age was 44 ± 12 years, 52% were women. HbA1c was 61 ± 11 mmol/mol (7.8 ± 1.0%), diabetes duration was 24 ± 12 years and 47% used an insulin pump prior to the trial. A forced three-factor analysis revealed three expected domains, that is, 'Convenience', 'Effectiveness' and 'Intrusiveness', and a forced one-factor solution was also satisfactory. Internal consistency reliability was strong for the three subscales (α range = 0.74-0.84) and 'Total satisfaction'( α  = 0.85). Convergent validity was demonstrated with moderate correlations between DME-Q 'Total satisfaction' and diabetes distress (PAID: rs  = -0.57) and treatment satisfaction (DTSQ; rs  = 0.58). Divergent validity was demonstrated with a weak correlation with prospective/retrospective memory (PRMQ: rs  = -0.16 and - 0.13 respectively). Responsiveness was demonstrated, as participants randomized to HCL had higher 'Effectiveness' and 'Total satisfaction' scores than those randomized to standard therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

The 22-item DME-Q is a brief, acceptable, reliable measure with satisfactory structural and construct validity, which is responsive to intervention. The DME-Q is likely to be useful for evaluation of new pharmaceutical agents and technologies in research and clinical settings.

The artificial pancreas: two alternative approaches to achieve a fully closed-loop system with optimal glucose control

INTRODUCTION

Diabetes mellitus type 1 is a chronic disease that implies mandatory external insulin delivery. The patients must monitor their blood glucose levels and administer appropriate insulin boluses to keep their blood glucose within the desired range. It requires a lot of time and endeavour, and many patients struggle with suboptimal glucose control despite all their efforts.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This narrative review combines existing knowledge with new discoveries from animal experiments.

DISCUSSION

In the last decade, artificial pancreas (AP) devices have been developed to improve glucose control and relieve patients of the constant burden of managing their disease. However, a feasible and fully automated AP is yet to be developed. The main challenges preventing the development of a true, subcutaneous (SC) AP system are the slow dynamics of SC glucose sensing and particularly the delay in effect on glucose levels after SC insulin infusions. We have previously published studies on using the intraperitoneal space for an AP; however, we further propose a novel and potentially disruptive way to utilize the vasodilative properties of glucagon in SC AP systems.

CONCLUSION

This narrative review presents two lesser-explored viable solutions for AP systems and discusses the potential for improvement toward a fully automated system: A) using the intraperitoneal approach for more rapid insulin absorption, and B) besides using glucagon to treat and prevent hypoglycemia, also administering micro-boluses of glucagon to increase the local SC blood flow, thereby accelerating SC insulin absorption and SC glucose sensor site dynamics.

Hybrid Closed-Loop Versus Manual Insulin Delivery in Adults With Type 1 Diabetes: A Post Hoc Analysis Using the Glycemia Risk Index

BACKGROUND

Glycemia risk index (GRI) is a novel composite metric assessing overall glycemic risk, accounting for both hypoglycemia and hyperglycemia and weighted toward extremes. Data assessing GRI as an outcome measure in closed-loop studies and its relation with conventional key continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) metrics are limited.

METHODS

A post hoc analysis was performed to evaluate the sensitivity of GRI in assessing glycemic quality in adults with type 1 diabetes randomized to 26 weeks hybrid closed-loop (HCL) or manual insulin delivery (control). The primary outcome was GRI comparing HCL with control. Comparisons were made with changes in other CGM metrics including time in range (TIR), time above range (TAR), time below range (TBR), and glycemic variability (standard deviation [SD] and coefficient of variation [CV]).

RESULTS

GRI with HCL (N = 61) compared with control (N = 59) was significantly lower (mean [SD] 33.5 [11.7] vs 56.1 [14.4], respectively; mean difference -22.8 [-27.2, -18.3], P = .001). The mean increase in TIR was +14.8 (11.0, 18.5)%. GRI negatively correlated with TIR for combined arms (r = -.954; P = .001), and positively with TAR >250 mg/dL (r = .901; P = .001), TBR < 54 mg/dL (r = .416; P = .001), and glycemic variability (SD [r = .916] and CV [r = .732]; P = .001 for both).

CONCLUSIONS

Twenty-six weeks of HCL improved GRI, in addition to other CGM metrics, compared with standard insulin therapy. The improvement in GRI was proportionally greater than the change in TIR, and GRI correlated with all CGM metrics. We suggest that GRI may be an appropriate primary outcome for closed-loop trials.

Effects of hybrid closed-loop system on glycemic control and psychological aspects in persons with type 1 diabetes treated with sensor-augmented pump: A prospective single-center observational study

AIMS/INTRODUCTION

This study evaluated the effects of the Medtronic MiniMed 770G hybrid closed-loop system on glycemic control and psychological aspects in persons with type 1 diabetes mellitus.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This 3-month prospective observational study included 22 participants with type 1 diabetes mellitus who used the Medtronic MiniMed 640G predictive low-glucose suspend system and were switched to the 770G system. Time in the range of 70-180 mg/dL and glycated hemoglobin levels were evaluated; satisfaction, emotional distress and quality of life were assessed using self-reported questionnaires, including the Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire Status, Problem Area in Diabetes and Diabetes Therapy-Related Quality of Life.

RESULTS

Time in the range of 70-180 mg/dL increased (63.5 ± 13.4 to 73.0 ± 10.9% [mean ± standard deviation], P = 0.0010), and time above the range of 181-250 mg/dL decreased (26.9 ± 8.9 to 19.6 ± 7.1%, P < 0.0005). Glycated hemoglobin levels decreased (7.7 ± 1.0 to 7.2 ± 0.8%, P = 0.0021). The percentage of participants with time below the range of 54-69 mg/dL <4% of readings increased from 91% to 100% (P < 0.0005). No significant changes were detected in the satisfaction, emotional distress and quality of life levels, but increased sensor calibration might be related to worsened emotional distress and quality of life.

CONCLUSIONS

The hybrid closed-loop system decreased hyperglycemia and minimized hypoglycemia, but did not improve psychological aspects compared with the predictive low-glucose suspend system, probably because sensor calibration was increased.

Automated insulin delivery among adults with type 1 diabetes for up to 2 years: a real-world, multicentre study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Automated insulin delivery (AID) improves glycaemia among people with type 1 diabetes in clinical trials and overseas real-world studies. Whether improvements are sustained beyond 12 months in the real world, and whether they occur in the Australian context, has not yet been established. We aimed to observe, up to 2 years, the effectiveness of initiating first-generation AID for type 1 diabetes management.

METHODS

Retrospective, real-world, observational study using medical records, conducted across five sites in Australia. Adults with type 1 diabetes, who had AID initiated between February 2019 and December 2021, were observed for 6-24 months after initiation (until June 2022). Outcomes examined included glucose metrics assessed by glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c ) and continuous glucose monitoring (CGM), safety and therapy continuation.

RESULTS

Ninety-four adults were studied (median age 39 years (interquartile range, IQR: 31-51); pre-initiation HbA1c 7.8% (7.2-8.6)). After AID initiation, HbA1c decreased by mean 0.5 percentage points (95% confidence interval (CI): -0.7 to -0.2) at 3 months (P < 0.001); CGM time in range 3.9-10.0 mmol/L increased by 11 percentage points (9-14) at 1 month (P < 0.001); these improvements were maintained up to 24 months (all P < 0.02). Median CGM time below 3.9 mmol/L was <1.5% pre- and post-AID initiation. The subgroup with pre-initiation HbA1c above 8.5% had the greatest HbA1c improvement (-1.4 percentage points (-1.8 to -1.1) at 3 months). Twelve individuals (13%) discontinued AID, predominantly citing difficulties with CGM. During the 150 person-years observed, four diabetes-related emergencies were documented: three severe hypoglycaemic events and one hyperglycaemic event without ketoacidosis.

CONCLUSIONS

Early glucose improvements were observed after real-world AID initiation, sustained up to 2 years, without excess adverse events. The greatest benefits were observed among individuals with highest glycaemia before initiation. Future-generation systems with increased user-friendliness may enhance therapy continuation.

(Hybrid) Closed-Loop Systems: From Announced to Unannounced Exercise

Physical activity and exercise have many beneficial effects on general and type 1 diabetes (T1D) specific health and are recommended for individuals with T1D. Despite these health benefits, many people with T1D still avoid exercise since glycemic management during physical activity poses substantial glycemic and psychological challenges - which hold particularly true for unannounced exercise when using an AID system. Automated insulin delivery (AID) systems have demonstrated their efficacy in improving overall glycemia and in managing announced exercise in numerous studies. They are proven to increase time in range (70-180 mg/dL) and can especially counteract nocturnal hypoglycemia, even when evening exercise was performed. AID-systems consist of a pump administering insulin as well as a CGM sensor (plus transmitter), both communicating with a control algorithm integrated into a device (insulin pump, mobile phone/smart watch). Nevertheless, without manual pre-exercise adaptions, these systems still face a significant challenge around physical activity. Automatically adapting to the rapidly changing insulin requirements during unannounced exercise and physical activity is still the Achilles' heel of current AID systems. There is an urgent need for improving current AID-systems to safely and automatically maintain glucose management without causing derailments - so that going forward, exercise announcements will not be necessary in the future. Therefore, this narrative literature review aimed to discuss technological strategies to how current AID-systems can be improved in the future and become more proficient in overcoming the hurdle of unannounced exercise. For this purpose, the current state-of-the-art therapy recommendations for AID and exercise as well as novel research approaches are presented along with potential future solutions - in order to rectify their deficiencies in the endeavor to achieve fully automated AID-systems even around unannounced exercise.

Relationship between CGM-derived nocturnal hypoglycemia and subjective sleep quality in people with type 1 diabetes

This pilot study explores the relationship between nocturnal hypoglycemia (NH) and subjective sleep quality in people with type 1 diabetes (T1D). Twenty-seven adults with T1D wore a Freestyle Libre Pro CGM and recorded subjective sleep quality daily, as assessed by a single Likert scale question. Frequency, duration, area under the curve (AUC) of NH (00:00-06:00) defined as sensor glucose below threshold (< 3.9 mmol/L; < 3 mmol/L) for ≥ 15 min, nocturnal mean glucose, Time in Range (3.9-10 mmol/L), and coefficient of variation were calculated. Twenty-seven adults, 18 (66.7%) women, with median (IQR) age of 27 (26, 32) years and HbA1c of 7.6 (7.1, 8.1) participated. Nights with NH < 3.9 mmol/L resulted in a lower (worse) sleep score than nights without NH [Mean (SD): 3.3 (1.2) vs 3.5 (1.0), p = 0.03). A higher frequency and longer duration but not AUC [adjusted OR (95% CI) 0.52 (0.38, 0.72), 0.961 (0.932, 0.991), 0.999 (0.998, 1.001) respectively)], of NH < 3.9 mmol/L, were associated with a lower sleep score. NH < 3.0 mmol/L metrics were not associated with sleep quality. Recurrent NH < 3.9 mmol/L, rather than prolonged NH < 3.0 mmol/L, seems associated with subjective sleep quality, implying that those with the highest burden of NH are likely unaware of it.

Guideline Development for Medical Device Technology: Issues for Consideration

Advances in the development of innovative medical devices and telehealth technologies create the potential to improve the quality and efficiency of diabetes care through collecting, aggregating, and interpreting relevant health data in ways that facilitate more informed decisions among all stakeholder groups. Although many medical societies publish guidelines for utilizing these technologies in clinical practice, we believe that the methodologies used for the selection and grading of the evidence should be revised. In this article, we discuss the strengths and limitations of the various types of research commonly used for evidence selection and grading and present recommendations for modifying the process to more effectively address the rapid pace of device and technology innovation and new product development.

Evaluating Factors Associated With Continuous Glucose Monitoring Utilization With the Type 1 Diabetes Exchange Registry

BACKGROUND

The 2022 American Diabetes Association (ADA) Standards of Care recommends considering use of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) for insulin-managed diabetes mellitus (DM), but equitable access remains challenging. This study evaluates socioeconomic and demographic metrics associated with CGM use.

METHODS

RStudio 2021.09.1+372 was utilized to perform uni- and bivariable analysis, as well as binomial logistic regression modeling for categorical CGM use (yes/no) on the most recent cross-section from the Type 1 Diabetes Exchange (T1DX) Registry 2016-2018 cohort (n = 22 418).

RESULTS

Compared with White Non-Hispanic participants, Black Non-Hispanic (OR = 0.45, CI = 0.36-0.57, P < 0.001) and American Indian/Alaskan Native individuals (OR = 0.33, CI = 0.14-0.70, P = 0.008) had lower odds of CGM use. Compared with private insurance, government insurance had reduced odds of CGM use (OR = 0.59, CI = 0.52-0.66, P < 0.001). Individuals earning $100,000 or more were twice as likely to use CGMs (OR = 2.06, CI = 1.75-2.45, P < 0.001) compared with those earning <$25,000 annually. Subgroup analysis based on income bracket demonstrated that government insured individuals earning <$25,000 annually were the least likely to use CGMs (OR = 0.44, CI = 0.32-0.61, P < 0.001), as compared with private insurance.

CONCLUSIONS

T1DX Registry data demonstrate that CGM use follows the inverse care law, with health technology utilization inversely related to disease burden. Federal policies promoting CGM use in Medicare and Medicaid populations can facilitate the ADA's recommendation for patients with insulin-managed diabetes mellitus.

Safety and performance of a hybrid closed-loop insulin delivery system with carbohydrate suggestion in adults with type 1 diabetes prone to hypoglycemia

AIMS

To evaluate the safety and performance of a hybrid closed-loop (HCL) system with automatic carbohydrate suggestion in adults with type 1 diabetes (T1D) prone to hypoglycemia.

METHODS

A 32-hour in-hospital pilot study, including a night period, 4 meals and 2 vigorous unannounced 45-minute aerobic sessions, was conducted in 11 adults with T1D prone to hypoglycemia. The primary outcome was the percentage of time in range 70-180 mg/dL (TIR). Main secondary outcomes were time below range < 70 mg/dL (TBR < 70) and < 54 (TBR < 54). Data are presented as median (10th-90th percentile ranges).

RESULTS

The participants, 6 (54.5%) men, were 24 (22-48) years old, and had 22 (9-32) years of T1D duration. All of them regularly used an insulin pump and a continuous glucose monitoring system. The median TIR was 78.7% (75.6-91.2): 92.7% (68.2-100.0) during exercise and recovery period, 79.3% (34.9-100.0) during postprandial period, and 95.4% (66.4-100.0) during overnight period. The TBR < 70 and TBR < 54 were 0.0% (0.0-6.6) and 0.0% (0.0-1.2), respectively. A total of 4 (3-9) 15-g carbohydrate suggestions were administered per person. No severe acute complications occurred during the study.

CONCLUSIONS

The HCL system with automatic carbohydrate suggestion performed well and was safe in this population during challenging conditions in a hospital setting.

Combining Glucose Monitoring and Insulin Infusion in an Integrated Device: A Narrative Review of Challenges and Proposed Solutions

The introduction of automated insulin delivery (AID) systems has enabled increasing numbers of individuals with type 1 diabetes (T1D) to improve their glycemic control largely. However, use of AID systems is limited due to their complexity and costs associated. The user must wear both a continuously monitoring glucose system and an insulin infusion pump. The glucose sensor and the insulin catheter must be inserted at two different body sites using different insertion devices. In addition, the user must pair and manage the different systems. These communicate with the AID software implemented on the pump or on a third device such as a dedicated display device or smart phone application. These components might be developed and commercialized by different manufacturers, which in turn can cause difficulties for patients seeking technical support. A possible solution to these challenges would be to integrate the glucose sensor and insulin catheter into a single device. This would allow the glucose sensor and insulin catheter to be inserted simultaneously, eliminating the need for pairing, and simplifying system management. In recent years, different technologies have been developed and evaluated in clinical investigations that combine the glucose sensor and the insulin catheter in one platform. The consistent finding of all these studies is that integration has no adverse effect on insulin infusion and glucose measurements provided that certain conditions are met. In this review, we discuss the perceived challenges of such an approach and discuss possible solutions that have been proposed.

Utility and precision evidence of technology in the treatment of type 1 diabetes: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

The greatest change in the treatment of people living with type 1 diabetes in the last decade has been the explosion of technology assisting in all aspects of diabetes therapy, from glucose monitoring to insulin delivery and decision making. As such, the aim of our systematic review was to assess the utility of these technologies as well as identify any precision medicine-directed findings to personalize care.

METHODS

Screening of 835 peer-reviewed articles was followed by systematic review of 70 of them (focusing on randomized trials and extension studies with ≥50 participants from the past 10 years).

RESULTS

We find that novel technologies, ranging from continuous glucose monitoring systems, insulin pumps and decision support tools to the most advanced hybrid closed loop systems, improve important measures like HbA1c, time in range, and glycemic variability, while reducing hypoglycemia risk. Several studies included person-reported outcomes, allowing assessment of the burden or benefit of the technology in the lives of those with type 1 diabetes, demonstrating positive results or, at a minimum, no increase in self-care burden compared with standard care. Important limitations of the trials to date are their small size, the scarcity of pre-planned or powered analyses in sub-populations such as children, racial/ethnic minorities, people with advanced complications, and variations in baseline glycemic levels. In addition, confounders including education with device initiation, concomitant behavioral modifications, and frequent contact with the healthcare team are rarely described in enough detail to assess their impact.

CONCLUSIONS

Our review highlights the potential of technology in the treatment of people living with type 1 diabetes and provides suggestions for optimization of outcomes and areas of further study for precision medicine-directed technology use in type 1 diabetes.

Safety Event Outcomes and Glycemic Control with a Hybrid Closed-Loop System Used by Chinese Adolescents and Adults with Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus

Background: While evidence supports glycemic control benefits for individuals with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) using hybrid closed-loop (HCL) systems, HCL automated insulin delivery therapy in China has not been assessed. This study evaluated safety events and effectiveness during HCL system use by Chinese adolescents and adults with T1DM. Methods: Sixty-two participants (n = 12 adolescents with a mean ± standard deviation [SD] of 15.5 ± 1.1 years and n = 50 adults [mean ± SD of 37.6 ± 11.1 years]) with T1DM and baseline A1C of 7.1% ± 1.0% underwent a run-in period (∼2 weeks) using open-loop Manual Mode (sensor-augmented pump) insulin delivery with the MiniMed™ 770G system with the Guardian™ Sensor (3) glucose sensor, followed by a study period (4 weeks) with HCL Auto Mode enabled. Analyses compared continuous glucose monitoring data and insulin delivered during the run-in versus study period (Wilcoxon signed-rank test or t-test). Safety events included rates of severe hypoglycemia and diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA). Results: Compared to baseline run-in, overall Auto Mode use increased time in range (TIR, 70-180 mg/dL) from 75.3% to 80.9% (P < 0.001) and reduced time below range (TBR, <70 mg/dL) from 4.7% to 2.2% (P < 0.001). Subgroup analysis demonstrated that participants (n = 29) with baseline A1C <7.0% had TBR that reduced from 5.6% to 2.0%, while participants (n = 21) with baseline A1C ≥7.5% had time above range (TAR, >180 mg/dL) that reduced from 31.6% to 20.8%. Auto Mode use also increased the percentage achieving combined recommendations for time at sensor glucose ranges (i.e., TIR of >70%, TBR of <4% and TAR of <25%) from 24.2% at baseline to 77.4% at study end. Total daily insulin dose reduced from 42.8 ± 19.8 to 40.7 ± 18.9 U (P = 0.013). There were no severe hypoglycemic, DKA, or serious adverse events. Conclusions: Chinese adolescents and adults, some of whom met target A1C at baseline, safely achieved significantly improved glycemia with 1 month of MiniMed 770G system use when compared to open-loop insulin delivery. ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT04663295.

Hybrid Closed-Loop Therapy in Adults With Type 1 Diabetes and Above-Target HbA1c: A Real-world Observational Study

OBJECTIVE

We explored longitudinal changes associated with switching to hybrid closed-loop (HCL) insulin delivery systems in adults with type 1 diabetes and elevated HbA1c levels despite the use of intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitoring (isCGM) and insulin pump therapy.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

We undertook a pragmatic, preplanned observational study of participants included in the National Health Service England closed-loop pilot. Adults using isCGM and insulin pump across 31 diabetes centers in England with an HbA1c ≥8.5% who were willing to commence HCL therapy were included. Outcomes included change in HbA1c, sensor glucometrics, diabetes distress score, Gold score (hypoglycemia awareness), acute event rates, and user opinion of HCL.

RESULTS

In total, 570 HCL users were included (median age 40 [IQR 29-50] years, 67% female, and 85% White). Mean baseline HbA1c was 9.4 ± 0.9% (78.9 ± 9.1 mmol/mol) with a median follow-up of 5.1 (IQR 3.9-6.6) months. Of 520 users continuing HCL at follow-up, mean adjusted HbA1c reduced by 1.7% (95% CI 1.5, 1.8; P < 0.0001) (18.1 mmol/mol [95% CI 16.6, 19.6]; P < 0.0001). Time in range (70-180 mg/dL) increased from 34.2 to 61.9% (P < 0.001). Individuals with HbA1c of ≤58 mmol/mol rose from 0 to 39.4% (P < 0.0001), and those achieving ≥70% glucose time in range and <4% time below range increased from 0.8 to 28.2% (P < 0.0001). Almost all participants rated HCL therapy as having a positive impact on quality of life (94.7% [540 of 570]).

CONCLUSIONS

Use of HCL is associated with improvements in HbA1c, time in range, hypoglycemia, and diabetes-related distress and quality of life in people with type 1 diabetes in the real world.

Glucose control and psychosocial outcomes with use of automated insulin delivery for 12 to 96 weeks in type 1 diabetes: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Glycaemic control of Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus (T1DM) remains a challenge due to hypoglycaemic episodes and the burden of insulin self-management. Advancements have been made with the development of automated insulin delivery (AID) devices, yet, previous reviews have only assessed the use of AID over days or weeks, and potential benefits with longer time of AID use in this population remain unclear.

METHODS

 We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials comparing AID (hybrid and fully closed-loop systems) to usual care (sensor augmented pumps, multiple daily insulin injections, continuous glucose monitoring and predictive low-glucose suspend) for adults and children with T1DM with a minimum duration of 3 months. We searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central, and Clinicaltrials.gov for studies published up until April 4, 2023. Main outcomes included time in range 70-180 mg/dL as the primary outcome, and change in HbA1c (%, mmol/mol), glucose variability, and psychosocial impact (diabetes distress, treatment satisfaction and fear of hypoglycaemia) as secondary outcomes. Adverse events included diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) and severe hypoglycaemia. Statistical analyses were conducted using mean differences and odds ratios. Sensitivity analyses were performed according to age, study duration and type of AID device. The protocol was registered in PROSPERO, CRD42022366710.

RESULTS

We identified 25 comparisons from 22 studies (six crossover and 16 parallel designs) including a total of 2376 participants (721 in adult studies, 621 in paediatric studies, and 1034 in combined studies) which were eligible for analysis. Use of AID devices ranged from 12 to 96 weeks. Patients using AID had 10.87% higher time in range [95% CI 9.38 to 12.37; p < 0.0001, I2 = 87%) and 0.37% (4.77 mmol/mol) lower HbA1c (95% CI - 0.49% (- 6.39 mmol/mol) to - 0.26 (- 3.14 mmol/mol); p < 0·0001, I2 = 77%]. AID systems decreased night hypoglycaemia, time in hypoglycaemia and hyperglycaemia and improved patient distress, with no increase in the risk of DKA or severe hypoglycaemia. No difference was found regarding treatment satisfaction or fear of hypoglycaemia. Among children, there was no difference in glucose variability or time spent in hypoglycaemia between the use of AID systems or usual care. In sensitivity analyses, results remained consistent with the overall analysis favouring AID.

CONCLUSION

The use of AID systems over 12 weeks, regardless of technical or clinical differences, improved glycaemic outcomes and diabetes distress without increasing the risk of adverse events in adults and children with T1DM.

High diabetes-specific distress among adults with type 1 diabetes and impaired awareness of hypoglycaemia despite widespread use of sensor technology

AIMS

Impaired awareness of hypoglycaemia (IAH) has been associated with increased diabetes distress and use of sensor technology can reduce diabetes distress. The aim of this study was to examine diabetes-specific distress (emotions, cognitions, behaviours) in relation to IAH status and use of glucose sensors in people with type 1 diabetes.

METHODS

Individuals with type 1 diabetes from an academic diabetes outpatient clinic completed the Clarke questionnaire (to assess hypoglycaemic awareness), Problem Areas in Diabetes (PAID-5), Hypoglycaemia Fear Survey-II (HFS-II), Attitudes to Awareness of Hypoglycaemia Survey (A2A), Nijmegen Clinical Screening Instrument Survey (NCSI) and Hyperglycaemia Avoidance Scale (HAS).

RESULTS

Of the 422 participants (51.9% male, diabetes duration 30 [16-40] years, HbA1c 60 ± 11 mmol/mol [7.6 ± 1.0%], 351 [88.2%] used a glucose sensor; 82 [19.4%]) had IAH. Compared to individuals with normal awareness, those with IAH more often had PAID-5 scores ≥8 (35.4% vs. 21.5%, p = 0.008) and higher scores on all HFS-II subscores (total [40.2 ± 21.5 vs. 27.9 ± 17.2, p < 0.001]), HFS-II behaviour (18.5 ± 10.0 vs. 15.1 ± 8.0, p = 0.005), HFS-II worry (21.8 ± 13.5 vs. 12.7 ± 10.9, p < 0.001), HAS worries (17.5 ± 7.3 vs. 14.3 ± 7.0, p < 0.001) and NCSI hypoglycaemia items. HAS behaviour, A2A and NCSI hyperglycaemia scores did not differ between individuals with or without IAH. Restricting the analyses to individuals using a glucose sensor did not materially change the results.

CONCLUSIONS

Diabetes-specific distress remains a major problem among individuals with type 1 diabetes, particularly those with IAH, despite the widespread use of (intermittently scanned) sensor technology. Further studies are needed to examine strategies to lower diabetes-specific distress in individuals with IAH.

Intelligent Insulin vs. Artificial Intelligence for Type 1 Diabetes: Will the Real Winner Please Stand Up?

Research in the treatment of type 1 diabetes has been addressed into two main areas: the development of "intelligent insulins" capable of auto-regulating their own levels according to glucose concentrations, or the exploitation of artificial intelligence (AI) and its learning capacity, to provide decision support systems to improve automated insulin therapy. This review aims to provide a synthetic overview of the current state of these two research areas, providing an outline of the latest development in the search for "intelligent insulins," and the results of new and promising advances in the use of artificial intelligence to regulate automated insulin infusion and glucose control. The future of insulin treatment in type 1 diabetes appears promising with AI, with research nearly reaching the possibility of finally having a "closed-loop" artificial pancreas.

The Artificial Pancreas and Type 1 Diabetes

Diabetes technologies represent a paradigm shift in type 1 diabetes care. Continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) pumps and continuous glucose monitors (CGM) improve glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) levels, enhance time in optimal glycemic range, limit severe hypoglycemia, and reduce diabetes distress. The artificial pancreas or closed-loop system connects these devices via a control algorithm programmed to maintain target glucose, partially relieving the person living with diabetes of this constant responsibility. Automating insulin delivery reduces the input required from those wearing the device, leading to better physiological and psychosocial outcomes. Hybrid closed-loop therapy systems, requiring user-initiated prandial insulin doses, are the most advanced closed-loop systems commercially available. Fully closed-loop systems, requiring no user-initiated insulin boluses, and dual hormone systems have been shown to be safe and efficacious in the research setting. Clinical adoption of closed-loop therapy remains in early stages despite recent technological advances. People living with diabetes, health care professionals, and regulatory agencies continue to navigate the complex path to equitable access. We review the available devices, evidence, clinical implications, and barriers regarding these innovatory technologies.

Time spent in hypoglycemia according to age and time-of-day: Observations during closed-loop insulin delivery

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to assess whether percentage of time spent in hypoglycemia during closed-loop insulin delivery differs by age-group and time-of-day.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed data from hybrid closed-loop studies involving young children (2-7 years), children and adolescents (8-18 years), adults (19-59 years), and older adults (≥60 years) with type 1 diabetes. Main outcome was time spent in hypoglycemia <3.9mmol/l. Eight weeks of data for 88 participants were analyzed.

RESULTS

Median time spent in hypoglycemia over the 24-hour period was highest in children and adolescents (4.4%; [IQR 2.4-5.0]) and very young children (4.0% [3.4-5.2]), followed by adults (2.7% [1.7-4.0]), and older adults (1.8% [1.2-2.2]); p<0.001 for difference between age-groups. Time spent in hypoglycemia during nighttime (midnight-05:59) was lower than during daytime (06:00-23:59) across all age-groups.

CONCLUSION

Time in hypoglycemia was highest in the pediatric age-group during closed-loop insulin delivery. Hypoglycemia burden was lowest overnight across all age-groups.

Diabetes technology including automated insulin delivery systems to manage hyperglycemia in a failing pancreatic graft: Case series of people with type 1 diabetes and a pancreas kidney or pancreas-only transplant

We share our experience of using continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) therapy and diabetes technology in six people (5 men) with type 1 diabetes (mean duration 36 years), who developed hyperglycemia post-simultaneous kidney/pancreas (n = 5) or pancreas only (n = 1) transplant. All were on immunosuppression and multiple daily injections of insulin prior to CSII. Four people were started on automated insulin delivery, and two people on CSII and intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitoring. With diabetes technology, the median time in range glucose improved from 37% (24-49%) to 56.6% (48-62%), and similarly, glycated hemoglobin fell from 72.7 mmol/mol (72-79 mmol/mol) to 64 mmol/mol (42-67 mmol/mol; P < 0.05 for both) with no concomitant increase in hypoglycemia. Use of diabetes technology improved glycemic parameters in people with type 1 diabetes with failing pancreatic graft function. Early use of such technology should be considered to improve diabetes control in this complex cohort.

Challenges of Glycemic Control in People With Diabetes and Advanced Kidney Disease and the Potential of Automated Insulin Delivery

Diabetes is the leading cause of chronic kidney disease (CKD) and end-stage kidney disease in the world. It is known that maintaining optimal glycemic control can slow the progression of CKD. However, the failing kidney impacts glucose and insulin metabolism and contributes to increased glucose variability. Conventional methods of insulin delivery are not well equipped to adapt to this increased glycemic lability. Automated insulin delivery (AID) has been established as an effective treatment in patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus, and there is emerging evidence for their use in type 2 diabetes mellitus. However, few studies have examined their role in diabetes with concurrent advanced CKD. We discuss the potential benefits and challenges of AID use in patients with diabetes and advanced CKD, including those on dialysis.

Offline reinforcement learning for safer blood glucose control in people with type 1 diabetes

The widespread adoption of effective hybrid closed loop systems would represent an important milestone of care for people living with type 1 diabetes (T1D). These devices typically utilise simple control algorithms to select the optimal insulin dose for maintaining blood glucose levels within a healthy range. Online reinforcement learning (RL) has been utilised as a method for further enhancing glucose control in these devices. Previous approaches have been shown to reduce patient risk and improve time spent in the target range when compared to classical control algorithms, but are prone to instability in the learning process, often resulting in the selection of unsafe actions. This work presents an evaluation of offline RL for developing effective dosing policies without the need for potentially dangerous patient interaction during training. This paper examines the utility of BCQ, CQL and TD3-BC in managing the blood glucose of the 30 virtual patients available within the FDA-approved UVA/Padova glucose dynamics simulator. When trained on less than a tenth of the total training samples required by online RL to achieve stable performance, this work shows that offline RL can significantly increase time in the healthy blood glucose range from 61.6±0.3% to 65.3±0.5% when compared to the strongest state-of-art baseline (p<0.001). This is achieved without any associated increase in low blood glucose events. Offline RL is also shown to be able to correct for common and challenging control scenarios such as incorrect bolus dosing, irregular meal timings and compression errors. The code for this work is available at: https://github.com/hemerson1/offline-glucose.

A Systematic Review of Commercial Hybrid Closed-Loop Automated Insulin Delivery Systems

INTRODUCTION

Several different forms of automated insulin delivery systems (AID systems) have recently been developed and are now licensed for type 1 diabetes (T1D). We undertook a systematic review of reported trials and real-world studies for commercial hybrid closed-loop (HCL) systems.

METHODS

Pivotal, phase III and real-world studies using commercial HCL systems that are currently approved for use in type 1 diabetes were reviewed with a devised protocol using the Medline database.

RESULTS

Fifty-nine studies were included in the systematic review (19 for 670G; 8 for 780G; 11 for Control-IQ; 14 for CamAPS FX; 4 for Diabeloop; and 3 for Omnipod 5). Twenty were real-world studies, and 39 were trials or sub-analyses. Twenty-three studies, including 17 additional studies, related to psychosocial outcomes and were analysed separately.

CONCLUSIONS

These studies highlighted that HCL systems improve time In range (TIR) and arouse minimal concerns around severe hypoglycaemia. HCL systems are an effective and safe option for improving diabetes care. Real-world comparisons between systems and their effects on psychological outcomes require further study.

CGM accuracy: Contrasting CE marking with the governmental controls of the USA (FDA) and Australia (TGA): A narrative review

The National Institute for Clinical Excellence updated guidance for continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) in 2022, recommending that CGM be available to all people living with type 1 diabetes. Manufacturers can trade in the UK with Conformité Européenne (CE) marking without an initial national assessment. The regulatory process for CGM CE marking, in contrast to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and Australian Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) process, is described. Manufacturers operating in the UK provided clinical accuracy studies submitted for CE marking. Critical appraisal of the studies shows several CGM devices have CE marking for wide-ranging indications beyond available data, unlike FDA and TGA approval. The FDA and TGA use tighter controls, requiring comprehensive product-specific clinical data evaluation. In 2018, the FDA published the integrated CGM (iCGM) criteria permitting interoperability. Applying the iCGM criteria to clinical data provided by manufacturers trading in the UK identified several study protocols that minimized glucose variability, thereby improving CGM accuracy on all metrics. These results do not translate into real-life performance. Furthermore, for many CGM devices available in the UK, accuracy reported in the hypoglycaemic range is below iCGM standards, or measurement is absent. We offer a framework to evaluate CGM accuracy studies critically. The review concludes that FDA- and TGA-approved indications match the available clinical data, whereas CE marking indications can have discrepancies. The UK can bolster regulation with UK Conformity Assessed marking from January 2025. However, balanced regulation is needed to ensure innovation and timely technological access are not hindered.

Lived experience of older adults with type 1 diabetes using closed-loop automated insulin delivery in a randomised trial

AIM

To explore the lived experience of older adults with type 1 diabetes using closed-loop automated insulin delivery, an area previously receiving minimal attention.

METHODS

Semi-structured interviews were conducted with adults aged 60 years or older with long-duration type 1 diabetes who participated in a randomised, open-label, two-stage crossover trial comparing first-generation closed-loop therapy (MiniMed 670G) versus sensor-augmented pump therapy. Interview recordings were transcribed, thematically analysed and assessed.

RESULTS

Twenty-one older adults participated in interviews after using closed-loop therapy. Twenty were functionally independent, without frailty or major cognitive impairment; one was dependent on caregiver assistance, including for diabetes management. Quality of life benefits were identified, including improved sleep and reduced diabetes-related psychological burden, in the context of experiencing improved glucose levels. Gaps between expectations and reality of closed-loop therapy were also experienced, encountering disappointment amongst some participants. The cost was perceived as a barrier to continued closed-loop access post-trial. Usability issues were identified, such as disruptive overnight alarms and sensor inaccuracy.

CONCLUSIONS

The lived experience of older adults without frailty or major cognitive impairment using first-generation closed-loop therapy was mainly positive and concordant with glycaemic benefits found in the trial. Older adults' lived experience using automated insulin delivery beyond trial environments requires exploration; moreover, the usability needs of older adults should be considered during future device development.

Switching to an advanced hybrid closed-loop system in real-world practice improves hypoglycemia awareness and metabolic control in adults with type 1 diabetes, particularly in those with impaired perception of hypoglycemia symptoms

AIMS

To evaluate the efficacy of an advance closed-loop (AHCL) system in restoring awareness of hypoglycemia in patients with type 1 diabetes (T1D).

METHODS

We conducted a prospective study including 46 subjects with T1D flash glucose monitoring (FGM) or continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) switching to a Minimed 780G® system. Patients were classified in three groups according to the therapy used before switching to Minimed® 780G: multiple dose insulin (MDI) therapy + FGM (n = 6), continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion + FGM (n = 21), and sensor-augmented pump with predictive low-glucose suspend (n = 19). FGM/CGM data were analyzed at baseline, after 2 and 6 months on AHCL. Clarke's score of hypoglycemia awareness was compared at baseline and 6 months recordings. We also compared the efficacy of the AHCL system in improving A_1c among patients with appropriate perception of symptoms of hypoglycemia compared to those presenting with impaired awareness of hypoglycemia (IAH).

RESULTS

Participants had a mean age of 37 ± 15 and a diabetes duration of 20 ± 10 years. At baseline, 12 patients (27%) showed IAH as defined by a Clarke's score ≥ 3. Patients with IAH were older and had lower estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) compared with those who did not have IAH; with no differences in baseline CGM metrics or A_1c. An overall decrease in A_1c was observed after 6 months on AHCL system (from 6.9 ± 0.5% to 6.7 ± 0.6%, P < 0.001), regardless of prior insulin therapy. The improvement in metabolic control was greater in patients with IAH, showing a reduction in A_1c from 6.9 ± 0.5 to 6.4 ± 0.4% vs 6.9 ± 0.5 to 6.8 ± 0.6% (P = 0.003), showing a parallel increase in total daily boluses of insulin and automatic bolus correction administered by the AHCL system. In patients with IAH Clarke's score decreased from 3.6 ± 0.8 at baseline to 1.9 ± 1.6 after 6 months (P < 0.001). After 6 months on AHCL system, only 3 patients (7%) presented with a Clarke's score ≥ 3, resulting in an absolute risk reduction of 20% (95% confidence interval: 7-32) of having IAH.

CONCLUSIONS

Switching from any type of insulin administration to AHCL system improves restoration of hypoglycemia awareness and metabolic control in patients with T1D, particularly in adults with impaired perception of hypoglycemia symptoms.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrial.gov ID NCT04900636.

Consensus Recommendations for the Use of Automated Insulin Delivery Technologies in Clinical Practice

The significant and growing global prevalence of diabetes continues to challenge people with diabetes (PwD), healthcare providers, and payers. While maintaining near-normal glucose levels has been shown to prevent or delay the progression of the long-term complications of diabetes, a significant proportion of PwD are not attaining their glycemic goals. During the past 6 years, we have seen tremendous advances in automated insulin delivery (AID) technologies. Numerous randomized controlled trials and real-world studies have shown that the use of AID systems is safe and effective in helping PwD achieve their long-term glycemic goals while reducing hypoglycemia risk. Thus, AID systems have recently become an integral part of diabetes management. However, recommendations for using AID systems in clinical settings have been lacking. Such guided recommendations are critical for AID success and acceptance. All clinicians working with PwD need to become familiar with the available systems in order to eliminate disparities in diabetes quality of care. This report provides much-needed guidance for clinicians who are interested in utilizing AIDs and presents a comprehensive listing of the evidence payers should consider when determining eligibility criteria for AID insurance coverage.

A systematic scoping review of just-in-time, adaptive interventions finds limited automation and incomplete reporting

OBJECTIVES

To describe the degree of automation in just-in-time, adaptive interventions (JITAIs) assessed in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in any medical specialty, and to assess the completeness of intervention reporting.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

Systematic scoping review-we searched PubMed, PsycINFO, and Web of Science, from 1 January 2019 to 2 March 2021, for reports of RCTs assessing JITAIs. We assessed whether study reports included the minimum information required to replicate the interventions based on JITAI frameworks. We described JITAIs according to their automation level using an established framework (partially, highly, or fully automated), and care workload distribution (requiring work from patients, health care professionals [HCPs], both, or neither).

RESULTS

We included 88 JITAIs (62%, n = 55 supported chronic illness management and 12%, n = 11 supported health behavior change). Overall, 77% (n = 68) of JITAIs were missing some information required to replicate the intervention (e.g., n = 38, 43% inadequately reported the algorithm used to select intervention components). Only fifteen (17%) JITAIs were fully automated and did not require additional work from HCPs nor patients. Of the remaining JITAIs, 36% required work from both patients and HCPs, and 47% required work from either patients or HCPs.

CONCLUSION

Most JITAIs are not fully automated and require work from the HCPs and patients.

An Assessment of Clinical Continuous Glucose Monitoring Targets for Older and High-Risk People Living with Type 1 Diabetes

Aim: To assess relationships between continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) time in range (TIR), 70-180 mg/dL, time below range (TBR), <70 mg/dL, time above range (TAR), >180 mg/dL, and glucose coefficient of variation (CV) in relation to currently recommended clinical CGM targets for older people, which recommend reduced TIR and TBR targets relative to the general type 1 diabetes population. Methods: We conducted a post hoc analysis using the JDRF Australia Adult Hybrid Closed Loop trial database examining correlations in 120 adults with type 1 diabetes of 3 weeks masked CGM (Guardian Sensor 3; Medtronic) metrics (n = 61 on multiple daily injections, 59 on non-CGM augmented pumps) using manual insulin dosing at baseline and at 26-weeks, with 50% randomized to automated insulin dosing (AID). Results: Correlations between baseline TIR and TAR were strong (r = -0.966; P < 0.0001), weak for TBR (r = 0.363; P < 0.0001), and glucose CV (r = 0.037; P = 0.687) while moderate between CV and TBR (r = 0.726; P < 0.0001). Associations were similar for participants aged >60 years (n = 15) versus younger subjects. Correlations of changes in (Δ) TIR with ΔTAR over 26 weeks were strong (r = -0.945; P < 0.001) and correlations for ΔTBR were weak (r = 0.025; P = 0.802). ΔCV did not significantly correlate with ΔTAR (r = -0.064; P = 0.526) but did with ΔTBR (r = 0.770; P = <0.001). Conclusions: Changes in TIR are not associated with changes in TBR. Thus, we recommend that for older AID users whilst TBR targets should be prioritized to reduce hypoglycemia-related risk, TBR should be addressed independently of TIR. Clinical Trial Registratrion number: (ACTRN12617000520336).

Improved Glycemia with Hybrid Closed-Loop Versus Continuous Subcutaneous Insulin Infusion Therapy: Results from a Randomized Controlled Trial

Objective: To evaluate safety and effectiveness of MiniMed™ 670G hybrid closed loop (HCL) in comparison with continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) therapy for 6 months in persons with type 1 diabetes (T1D). Methods: Adults (aged 18-80 years), adolescents, and children (aged 2-17 years) with T1D who were using CSII therapy were enrolled and randomized (1:1) to 6 months of HCL intervention (n = 151, mean age of 39.9 ± 19.8 years) or CSII without continuous glucose monitoring (n = 151, 35.7 ± 18.4 years). Primary effectiveness endpoints included change in A1C for Group 1 (baseline A1C >8.0%), from baseline to the end of study, and difference in the end of study percentage of time spent below 70 mg/dL (%TBR <70 mg/dL) for Group 2 (baseline A1C ≤8.0%), to show superiority of HCL intervention versus control. Secondary effectiveness endpoints were change in A1C and %TBR <70 mg/dL for Group 2 and Group 1, respectively, to show noninferiority of HCL intervention versus control. Primary safety endpoints were rates of severe hypoglycemia and diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA). Results: Change in A1C and difference in %TBR <70 mg/dL for the overall group were significantly improved, in favor of HCL intervention. In addition, a significant mean (95% confidence interval) change in A1C was observed for both Group 1 (-0.8% [-1.1% to -0.4%], P < 0.0001) and Group 2 (-0.3% [-0.5% to -0.1%], P < 0.0001), in favor of HCL intervention. The same was observed for difference in %TBR <70 mg/dL for Group 1 (-2.2% [-3.6% to -0.9%]) and Group 2 (-4.9% [-6.3% to -3.6%]) (P < 0.0001 for both). There was one DKA event during run-in and six severe hypoglycemic events: two during run-in and four during study (HCL: n = 0 and CSII: n = 4 [6.08 per 100 patient-years]). Conclusions: This RCT demonstrates that the MiniMed 670G HCL safely and significantly improved A1C and %TBR <70 mg/dL compared with CSII control in persons with T1D, irrespective of baseline A1C level.

Impact of glycaemic technologies on quality of life and related outcomes in adults with type 1 diabetes: A narrative review

AIMS

To explore the association between the use of glycaemic technologies and person-reported outcomes (PROs) in adults with type 1 diabetes (T1D).

METHODS

We included T1D and technology publications reporting on PROs since 2014. Only randomised controlled trials and cohort studies that used validated PRO measures (PROMs) were considered.

RESULTS

T1D studies reported on a broad range of validated PROMs, mainly as secondary outcome measures. Most studies examined continuous glucose monitoring (CGM), intermittently scanned CGM (isCGM), and the role of continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII), including sensor-augmented CSII and closed loop systems. Generally, studies demonstrated a positive impact of technology on hypoglycaemia-specific and diabetes-specific PROs, including reduced fear of hypoglycaemia and diabetes distress, and greater satisfaction with diabetes treatment. In contrast, generic PROMs (including measures of health/functional status, emotional well-being, depressive symptoms, and sleep quality) were less likely to demonstrate improvements associated with the use of glycaemic technologies. Several studies showed contradictory findings, which may relate to study design, population and length of follow-up. Differences in PRO findings were apparent between randomised controlled trials and cohort studies, which may be due to different populations studied and/or disparity between trial and real-world conditions.

CONCLUSIONS

PROs are usually assessed as secondary outcomes in glycaemic technology studies. Hypoglycaemia-specific and diabetes-specific, but not generic, PROs show the benefits of glycaemic technologies, and deserve a more central role in future studies as well as routine clinical care.

Increase Access, Reduce Disparities: Recommendations for Modifying Medicaid CGM Coverage Eligibility Criteria

Numerous studies have demonstrated the clinical value of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) in type 1 diabetes (T1D) and type 2 diabetes (T2D) populations. However, the eligibility criteria for CGM coverage required by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) ignore the conclusive evidence that supports CGM use in various diabetes populations that are currently deemed ineligible. In an earlier article, we discussed the limitations and inconsistencies of the agency's CGM eligibility criteria relative to current scientific evidence and proposed practice solutions to address this issue and improve the safety and care of Medicare beneficiaries with diabetes. Although Medicaid is administered through CMS, there is no consistent Medicaid policy for CGM coverage in the United States. This article presents a rationale for modifying and standardizing Medicaid CGM coverage eligibility across the United States.

Closed-loop insulin delivery: update on the state of the field and emerging technologies

INTRODUCTION

Over the last five years, closed-loop insulin delivery systems have transitioned from research-only to real-life use. A number of systems have been commercialized and are increasingly used in clinical practice. Given the rapidity of new developments in the field, understanding the capabilities and key similarities and differences of current systems can be challenging. This review aims to provide an update on the state of the field of closed-loop insulin delivery systems, including emerging technologies.

AREAS COVERED

We summarize key clinical safety and efficacy evidence of commercial and emerging insulin-only hybrid closed-loop systems for type 1 diabetes. A literature search was conducted and clinical trials using closed-loop systems during free-living conditions were identified to report on safety and efficacy data. We comment on emerging technologies and adjuncts for closed-loop systems, as well as non-technological priorities in closed-loop insulin delivery.

EXPERT OPINION

Commercial hybrid closed-loop insulin delivery systems are efficacious, consistently improving glycemic control when compared to standard therapy. Challenges remain in widespread adoption due to clinical inertia and the lack of resources to embrace technological developments by health care professionals.

A Multicenter Randomized Trial Evaluating Fast-Acting Insulin Aspart in the Bionic Pancreas in Adults with Type 1 Diabetes

Objective: To evaluate the insulin-only configuration of the iLet® bionic pancreas (BP) using fast-acting insulin aspart (Fiasp®) in adults with type 1 diabetes (T1D). Research Design and Methods: In this multicenter, randomized trial, 275 adults with T1D (18-83 years old, baseline HbA1c 5.3%-14.9%) were randomly assigned 2:2:1 to use the BP with fast-acting insulin aspart (BP-F group, N = 114), BP with aspart or lispro (BP-A/L group, N = 107), or a control group using their standard-care insulin delivery (SC group, N = 54) plus real-time continuous glucose monitoring (CGM). The primary outcome was HbA1c at 13 weeks. The BP-F versus SC comparison was considered primary and BP-F versus BP-A/L secondary. Results: Mean ± standard deviation (SD) HbA1c decreased from 7.8% ± 1.2% at baseline to 7.1% ± 0.6% at 13 weeks with BP-F versus 7.6% ± 1.2% to 7.5% ± 0.9% with SC (adjusted difference = -0.5%, 95% CI -0.7 to -0.3, P < 0.001). CGM-measured percent time <54 mg/dL over 13 weeks with BP-F was noninferior to SC (adjusted difference = 0.00%, 95% CI -0.07 to 0.05, P < 0.001 for noninferiority based on a prespecified noninferiority limit of 1%). Over 13 weeks, mean time in range 70-180 mg/dL (TIR) increased by 14% (3.4 h/day) and mean CGM glucose was reduced by 18 mg/dL with BP-F compared with SC (P < 0.001). Analyses of time >180 mg/dL, time >250 mg/dL, and the SD of CGM glucose all favored BP-F compared with SC (P < 0.001). Differences between BP-F and BP-A/L were minimal, with no difference in HbA1c at 13 weeks (adjusted difference = -0.0%, 95% CI -0.2 to 0.1, P = 0.67) or mean glucose (adjusted difference = -2.0 mg/dL, 95% CI -4.3 to 0.4, P = 0.10). Mean TIR was 2% greater with BP-F than BP-A/L (95% CI 1 to 4, P = 0.005), but the percentages of participants improving TIR by ≥5% were not significantly different (P = 0.49) and there were no significant differences comparing BP-F versus BP-A/L across nine patient-reported outcome surveys. The rate of severe hypoglycemia events did not differ among the three groups. Conclusions: In adults with T1D, HbA1c was improved with the BP using fast-acting insulin aspart compared with standard care without increasing CGM-measured hypoglycemia. However, the effect was no better than the reduction observed with the BP using aspart or lispro. Clinical Trial Registry: clinicaltrials.gov; NCT04200313.

Closed-Loop Insulin Delivery Effects on Glycemia During Sleep and Sleep Quality in Older Adults with Type 1 Diabetes: Results from the ORACL Trial

Sleep-related effects of closed-loop therapy among older adults with type 1 diabetes have not been well established. In the OldeR Adult Closed-Loop (ORACL) randomized, crossover trial of first-generation closed-loop therapy (MiniMed 670G), participants wore actigraphy and completed sleep diaries for 14-day periods at stage end. During objectively measured sleep (actigraphy) with closed-loop versus sensor-augmented pump therapy, glucose time-in-range 70-180 mg/dL (3.9-10.0 mmol/L) was greater (90.3% vs. 78.7%, respectively; difference 8.2 percentage points [95% confidence interval {CI} 1.5 to 13.0]; P = 0.008), and there were fewer sensor hypoglycemia episodes (18 vs. 43, respectively; incident rate ratio 0.40 [95% CI 0.20 to 0.55]; P = 0.007). Sleep quality recorded daily was worse with closed-loop therapy (P = 0.006); Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index did not differ. There were 30% more system alarms during monitored sleep with closed-loop therapy (P < 0.001). First-generation closed-loop therapy has important glycemic benefits during sleep for older adults, with deterioration in some sleep quality measures. Sleep quality warrants prioritization and investigation during advancement of closed-loop technology.

Cell delivery systems: Toward the next generation of cell therapies for type 1 diabetes

Immunoprotection and oxygen supply are vital in implementing a cell therapy for type 1 diabetes (T1D). Without these features, the transplanted islet cell clusters will be rejected by the host immune system, and necrosis will occur due to hypoxia. The use of anti-rejection drugs can help protect the transplanted cells from the immune system; yet, they also may have severe side effects. Cell delivery systems (CDS) have been developed for islet transplantation to avoid using immunosuppressants. CDS provide physical barriers to reduce the immune response and chemical coatings to reduce host fibrotic reaction. In some CDS, there is architecture to support vascularization, which enhances oxygen exchange. In this review, we discuss the current clinical and preclinical studies using CDS without immunosuppression as a cell therapy for T1D. We find that though CDS have been demonstrated for their ability to support immunoisolation of the grafted cells, their functionality has not been fully optimized. Current advanced methods in clinical trials demonstrate the systems are partly functional, physically complicated to implement or inefficient. However, modifications are being made to overcome these issues.