Impact of school-supervised ultra-long-acting basal insulin injections on ketosis in youth with T1D and elevated haemoglobin A1c: A pilot study.

BACKGROUND: In youth with type 1 diabetes (T1D), high haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) levels are associated with an increased risk for diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA). AIMS: This study examined whether daily school-supervised basal insulin injections were feasible and if they reduced the risk of morning ketosis in children and adolescents with high HbA1c levels. We hypothesized that supervised glargine and degludec would reduce the risk of ketosis and that the prolonged action of degludec would protect from ketosis after consecutive days of unsupervised injections. MATERIALS & METHODS: After a 2-4-week run-in, youth (10-18 years, HbA1c ≥ 8.5%) managing T1D with injections were randomized to school-supervised administration of degludec or glargine for 4 months. School nurses observed daily blood ß-hydroxybutyrate (BHB) and glucose checks. During COVID closures, the research team supervised procedures remotely. RESULTS: Data from 28 youth (age 14.3 ± 2.3 years, HbA1c 11.4 ± 1.9%, 64% F) were analysed. School-supervised injections of both basal insulins for 1-4 days progressively lowered the percent of participants with elevated BHB. The percent of participants with elevated BHB (≥0.6 mmol/L) after 2 days of unsupervised basal insulin doses at home was greater in the glargine than degludec group but had a high p-value (17.2% vs. 9.0%, p = 0.3). HbA1c was unchanged in both groups. DISCUSSION: In youth with T1D at high risk for DKA, daily supervised long-acting insulin administration decreased the probability of elevated ketone levels on subsequent school days, regardless of basal insulin type. A larger sample size may have demonstrated that the longer action profile of degludec would offer additional protection from ketosis during days of not attending school. CONCLUSION: Engaging school-based caregivers in management of youth with T1D on injected insulin may decrease clinically significant ketosis and minimize acute complications of diabetes.

Safety and Glycemic Outcomes With a Tubeless Automated Insulin Delivery System in Very Young Children With Type 1 Diabetes: A Single-Arm Multicenter Clinical Trial.

OBJECTIVE: Very young children with type 1 diabetes often struggle to achieve glycemic targets, putting them at risk for long-term complications and creating an immense management burden for caregivers. We conducted the first evaluation of the Omnipod 5 Automated Insulin Delivery System in this population. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: A total of 80 children aged 2.0-5.9 years used the investigational system in a single-arm study for 13 weeks following 14 days of baseline data collection with their usual therapy. RESULTS: There were no episodes of severe hypoglycemia or diabetic ketoacidosis. By study end, HbA1c decreased by 0.55% (6.0 mmol/mol) (P < 0.0001). Time with sensor glucose levels in target range 70-180 mg/dL increased by 10.9%, or 2.6 h/day (P < 0.0001), while time with levels <70 mg/dL declined by median 0.27% (P = 0.0204). CONCLUSIONS: Use of the automated insulin delivery system was safe, and participants experienced improved glycemic measures and reduced hypoglycemia during the study phase compared with baseline.

A Pilot Study of Youth With Type 1 Diabetes Initiating Use of a Hybrid Closed-Loop System While Receiving a Behavioral Economics Intervention.

OBJECTIVE: Many youth do not use the hybrid closed-loop system for type 1 diabetes effectively. This study evaluated the impact of financial incentives for diabetes-related tasks on use of the 670G hybrid closed-loop system and on glycemia. METHODS: At auto mode initiation and for 16 weeks thereafter, participants received a flat rate for wearing and calibrating the sensor ($1/day), administering at least 3 mealtime insulin boluses per day ($1/day), and uploading ($5/week). Weekly bonuses were given for maintaining at least 70% of the time in auto mode, which were increased for persistent auto mode use from $3/week to a maximum of $13/week. If a participant failed to maintain auto mode for a week, the rewards were reset to baseline. Data from 17 participants aged 15.9 years ± 2.5 years (baseline hemoglobin A1c [HbA1c] 8.6% ± 1.1%) were collected at 6, 12, and 16 weeks. The reinforcers were withdrawn at 16 weeks, with a follow-up assessment at 24 weeks. RESULTS: With reinforcers, the participants administered an average of at least 3 mealtime insulin boluses per day and wore the sensor over 70% of the time. However, auto mode use waned. HbA1c levels decreased by 0.5% after 6 weeks, and this improvement was maintained at 12 and 16 weeks (P < .05). Upon withdrawal of reinforcers, HbA1c levels increased back to baseline at 24 weeks. CONCLUSION: Compensation for diabetes-related tasks was associated with lower HbA1c levels, consistent administration of mealtime insulin boluses, and sustained sensor use. These results support the potential of financial rewards for improving outcomes in youth with type 1 diabetes.

Glucose management for rewards: A randomized trial to improve glucose monitoring and associated self-management behaviors in adolescents with type 1 diabetes.

BACKGROUND: This randomized, controlled trial evaluated a monetary-based reinforcement intervention for increasing self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) among youth with poorly controlled type 1 diabetes. METHODS: After a 2-week baseline, 60 participants were randomized to enhanced usual care (EUC) or Reinforcers. The Reinforcers group earned monetary rewards for SMBG and associated behaviors such as uploading glucose meters. Reinforcers were withdrawn at 24 weeks. A follow-up evaluation occurred at 36 weeks. RESULTS: Participants in the reinforcers group increased the proportion of days they completed ≥4 SMBG from 14.6% at baseline to 64.4%, 47.5%, and 37.8% at 6, 12, and 24 weeks, respectively. In contrast, EUC participants declined from 22.7% at baseline to 17.5%, 10.5%, and 11.1% (Ps < .01 vs EUC at all time points). Group differences were attenuated but remained significant after withdrawal of reinforcers. Effect sizes for SMBG were very large during reinforcement and large after withdrawal of reinforcers. In the reinforcers group, mean A1c dropped from 9.5% ± 1.2% at baseline to 9.0% ± 1.3% at week 6 and 9.0% ± 1.4% at week 12. For EUC, A1c was 9.2% ± 0.2% at baseline and ranged from 9.2% ± 1.5% to 9.6% ± 1.6% throughout the study (P < .05 vs EUC). Group differences in A1c were no longer significant at weeks 24 and 36. Effect sizes for A1c were small during reinforcement and also after withdrawal of reinforcement. CONCLUSIONS: Monetary-based reinforcement of adolescents with type 1 diabetes caused durable increases in SMBG. Modification of the reinforcement structure may be needed to sustain improved metabolic control in this challenging age group.

Metformin Improves Peripheral Insulin Sensitivity in Youth With Type 1 Diabetes.

CONTEXT: Type 1 diabetes in adolescence is characterized by insulin deficiency and insulin resistance (IR), both thought to increase cardiovascular disease risk. We previously demonstrated that adolescents with type 1 diabetes have adipose, hepatic, and muscle IR, and that metformin lowers daily insulin dose, suggesting improved IR. However, whether metformin improves IR in muscle, hepatic, or adipose tissues in type 1 diabetes was unknown. OBJECTIVE: Measure peripheral, hepatic, and adipose insulin sensitivity before and after metformin or placebo therapy in youth with obesity with type 1 diabetes. DESIGN: Double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial. SETTING: Multi-center at eight sites of the T1D Exchange Clinic Network. PARTICIPANTS: A subset of 12- to 19-year-olds with type 1 diabetes (inclusion criteria: body mass index ≥85th percentile, HbA1c 7.5% to 9.9%, insulin dosing ≥0.8 U/kg/d) from a larger trial (NCT02045290) were enrolled. INTERVENTION: Participants were randomized to 3 months of metformin (N = 19) or placebo (N = 18) and underwent a three-phase hyperinsulinemic euglycemic clamp with glucose and glycerol isotope tracers to assess tissue-specific IR before and after treatment. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Peripheral insulin sensitivity, endogenous glucose release, rate of lipolysis. RESULTS: Between-group differences in change in insulin sensitivity favored metformin regarding whole-body IR [change in glucose infusion rate 1.3 (0.1, 2.4) mg/kg/min, P = 0.03] and peripheral IR [change in metabolic clearance rate 0.923 (-0.002, 1.867) dL/kg/min, P = 0.05]. Metformin did not impact insulin suppression of endogenous glucose release (P = 0.12). Adipose IR was not assessable with traditional methods in this highly IR population. CONCLUSIONS: Metformin appears to improve whole-body and peripheral IR in youth who are overweight/obese with type 1 diabetes.

Pramlintide but Not Liraglutide Suppresses Meal-Stimulated Glucagon Responses in Type 1 Diabetes.

Context: Postprandial hyperglycemia remains a challenge in type 1 diabetes (T1D) due, in part, to dysregulated increases in plasma glucagon levels after meals. Objective: This study was undertaken to examine whether 3 to 4 weeks of therapy with pramlintide or liraglutide might help to blunt postprandial hyperglycemia in T1D by suppressing plasma glucagon responses to mixed-meal feedings. Design: Two parallel studies were conducted in which participants underwent mixed-meal tolerance tests (MMTTs) without premeal bolus insulin administration before and after 3 to 4 weeks of treatment with either pramlintide (8 participants aged 20 ± 3 years, hemoglobin A1c 6.9 ± 0.5%) or liraglutide (10 participants aged 22 ± 3 years, hemoglobin A1c 7.6 ± 0.9%). Results: Compared with pretreatment responses to the MMTT, treatment with pramlintide reduced the peak increment in glucagon from 32 ± 16 to 23 ± 12 pg/mL (P < 0.02). In addition, the incremental area under the plasma glucagon curve from 0 to 120 minutes dropped from 1988 ± 590 to 737 ± 577 pg/mL/min (P < 0.001), which was accompanied by a similar reduction in the meal-stimulated increase in the plasma glucose curve from 11,963 ± 1424 mg/dL/min pretreatment vs 2493 ± 1854 mg/dL/min after treatment (P < 0.01). In contrast, treatment with liraglutide had no effect on plasma glucagon and glucose responses during the MMTT. Conclusions: Adjunctive treatment with pramlintide may provide an effective means to blunt postmeal hyperglycemia in T1D by suppressing dysregulated plasma glucagon responses. In contrast, plasma glucose and glucagon responses were unchanged after 3 to 4 weeks of treatment with liraglutide.

Mitigating Reductions in Glucose During Exercise on Closed-Loop Insulin Delivery: The Ex-Snacks Study.

OBJECTIVE: To assess whether snacking could be used with closed-loop (CL) insulin delivery to avoid exercise-induced reductions in plasma glucose (PG), as well as elevations in PG at the end of exercise. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Twelve type 1 diabetes (T1D) subjects (age 13-36 years, duration 10.7 ± 8.4 years, A1c 7.4% ± 0.8% [57 ± 8.7 mmol/mol]) underwent two 105-min exercise studies while under CL control: CL alone and CL+snack. Exercise, commenced at 3 PM, consisted of four 15-min periods of brisk treadmill walking to 65%-70% HRmax (separated by three 5-min rest periods), followed by a 30-min recovery period. Fifteen to 30 g carbohydrate (Gatorade) was provided on snacking visits just before and midway through the exercise period. PG and insulin were measured every 15-20 min during the exercise studies. RESULTS: Baseline PG levels were similar for CL alone (164 ± 16 mg/dL) versus CL+snack (172 ± 11 mg/dL). During exercise, PG levels fell by 53 ± 10 mg/dL without snacking versus a modest 10 ± 13 mg/dL increase in PG with snacking (P = 0.0005); similar differences in the change in PG levels were observed at the end of recovery period. Hypoglycemia requiring rescue treatment (PG ≤60 mg/dL) during exercise occurred in three nonsnacking visits versus none with snacking. During the 75-min exercise period, insulin delivered was 1.8 ± 0.4 U for the CL+snack admission compared to 0.7 ± 0.1 U during CL alone (P = 0.002). CONCLUSION: These results support the use of a simple snacking strategy to avoid exercise-induced lowering of PG while on CL insulin delivery. Persistent insulin infusion during exercise with snacking also appears to be effective in limiting increases in PG at the end of exercise.

Mitigating Meal-Related Glycemic Excursions in an Insulin-Sparing Manner During Closed-Loop Insulin Delivery: The Beneficial Effects of Adjunctive Pramlintide and Liraglutide.

OBJECTIVE: Closed-loop (CL) insulin delivery effectively maintains glucose overnight but struggles when challenged with meals. Use of single-day, 30-µg/meal pramlintide lowers meal excursions during CL. We sought to further elucidate the potential benefits of adjunctive agents after 3-4 weeks of outpatient dose titration. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Two CL studies were conducted: one evaluating adjunctive pramlintide and the other liraglutide. Ten subjects (age 16-23 years; A1C 7.2 ± 0.6% [55 ± 6.6 mmol/mol]) completed two 24-h sessions: one on CL alone and one on CL plus 60-µg pramlintide (CL + P), after a 3-4-week outpatient dose escalation. Eleven subjects (age 18-27 years; A1C 7.5 ± 0.9% [58 ± 9.8 mmol/mol]) were studied before and after treatment with 1.8 mg liraglutide (CL + L) after a similar 3-4-week dose escalation period. Timing and content of meals during CL were identical within experiments; meals were not announced. RESULTS: Pramlintide delayed the time to peak plasma glucose (PG) excursion (CL 1.6 ± 0.5 h vs. CL + P 2.6 ± 0.9 h, P < 0.001) with concomitant blunting of peak postprandial increments in PG (P < 0.0001) and reductions in postmeal incremental PG area under the curve (AUC) (P = 0.0002). CL + L also led to reductions in PG excursions (P = 0.05) and incremental PG AUC (P = 0.004), with a 28% reduction in prandial insulin delivery. Outpatient liraglutide therapy led to a weight loss of 3.2 ± 1.8 kg, with a 26% reduction in total daily insulin dose. CONCLUSIONS: Adjunctive pramlintide and liraglutide treatment mitigated postprandial hyperglycemia during CL control; liraglutide demonstrated the additional benefit of weight loss in an insulin-sparing manner. Further investigations of these and other adjunctive agents in long-term outpatient CL studies are needed.

Testing for rewards: a pilot study to improve type 1 diabetes management in adolescents.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of monetary reinforcement to increase the frequency of self-monitoring blood glucose (SMBG). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Ten adolescents with poorly controlled diabetes enrolled in a 12-week program in which they earned monetary reinforcers based on SMBG frequency ($0.10 per test, with bonuses for ≥4 tests per day, and $251.40 maximum). RESULTS: SMBG increased from 1.8 ± 1.0 to 4.9 ± 1.0 tests per day (P < 0.001) with 90% completing four or more tests per day. Mean A1C fell from 9.3 ± 0.9% to 8.4 ± 1.5% (P = 0.05). Adolescents and parents reported high satisfaction with procedures. CONCLUSIONS: Reinforcing adolescents for SMBG may increase testing and improve A1C.

Safety of nighttime 2-hour suspension of Basal insulin in pump-treated type 1 diabetes even in the absence of low glucose.

OBJECTIVE: An integrated sensor-augmented pump system has been introduced that interrupts basal insulin infusion for 2 h if patients fail to respond to low-glucose alarms. It has been suggested that such interruptions of basal insulin due to falsely low glucose levels detected by sensor could lead to diabetic ketoacidosis. We hypothesized that random suspension of basal insulin for 2 h in the overnight period would not lead to clinically important increases in blood ß-hydroxybutyrate levels despite widely varying glucose values prior to the suspension. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Subjects measured blood glucose and blood ß-hydroxybutyrate levels using a meter each night at 9:00 p.m., then fasted until the next morning. On control nights, the usual basal rates were continued; on experimental nights, the basal insulin infusion was reprogrammed for a 2-h zero basal rate at random times after 11:30 p.m. RESULTS: In 17 type 1 diabetic subjects (mean age 24 ± 9 years, diabetes duration 14 ± 11 years, A1C level 7.3 ± 0.5% [56 mmol/mol]), blood glucose and blood ß-hydroxybutyrate levels were similar at 9:00 p.m. on suspend nights (144 ± 63 mg/dL and 0.09 ± 0.07 mmol/L) and nonsuspend nights (151 ± 65 mg/dL and 0.08 ± 0.06 mmol/L) (P = 0.39 and P = 0.47, respectively). Fasting morning blood glucose levels increased after suspend nights compared with nonsuspend nights (191 ± 68 vs. 141 ± 75 mg/dL, P < 0.0001), and the frequency of fasting hypoglycemia decreased the morning following suspend nights (P < 0.0001). Morning blood ß-hydroxybutyrate levels were slightly higher after suspension (0.13 ± 0.14 vs. 0.09 ± 0.11 mmol/L, P = 0.053), but the difference was not clinically important. CONCLUSIONS: Systems that suspend basal insulin for 2 h are safe and do not lead to clinically significant ketonemia even if the blood glucose level is elevated at the time of the suspension.

Faster in and faster out: accelerating insulin absorption and action by insulin infusion site warming.

OBJECTIVE: This study was undertaken to investigate the effect of an insulin infusion site warming device, the InsuPatch(40)(™) (IP(40)) (InsuLine Medical Ltd., Petach-Tikvah, Israel), on insulin aspart pharmacodynamics (PD) and pharmacokinetics (PK) in adolescents with type 1 diabetes. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Seventeen subjects with type 1 diabetes (age, 15±1 years; hemoglobin A1c, 7.5±0.2% [58±2.2 mmol/mol]) underwent two euglycemic clamps performed on separate mornings with and without IP(40) activation with warming temperature at 40°C. On both days, the basal infusion was suspended, and glucose levels were maintained between 90 and 100 mg/dL by a variable rate dextrose infusion for up to 5 h after a 0.2 U/kg bolus of insulin aspart. RESULTS: Time to peak insulin action and time to half-maximal action occurred earlier with a greater early glucodynamic effect (area under the curve [AUC] for glucose infusion rate from 0 to 30 min) with IP(40) than without the IP(40), whereas the AUC for the time-action profile and the peak action did not differ with and without infusion site warming. PK parameters were in agreement with PD parameters, namely, a significantly earlier time to reach the maximum increment in insulin concentrations and greater early bioavailability (AUC for the change in insulin concentration from 0 to 30 min) with the IP(40). The tail of the plasma insulin response curve was also shortened with infusion site warming, with the time to reach baseline insulin concentration occurring significantly earlier (P=0.04). CONCLUSIONS: Our data demonstrate that skin warming around the infusion site to 40°C with the IP(40) is an effective means to accelerate absorption and action of rapid-acting insulin. These improvements in time-action responses have the potential to enhance the performance of open- and closed-loop insulin delivery systems.

Acceleration of insulin pharmacodynamic profile by a novel insulin infusion site warming device.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Subcutaneously injected rapid-acting insulin analogs do not replicate physiologic insulin action due to delays in their onset and peak action resulting in postprandial glucose excursions. The InsuPatch (IP) is a novel insulin infusion site warming device developed to accelerate insulin action by increasing blood flow to the area of insulin absorption. Thirteen adolescents with type 1 diabetes (T1D, mean age 14 ± 4 yr) were enrolled in this study to investigate the effect of the IP on the pharmacodynamics and pharmacokinetics of a 0.2 unit/kg bolus dose of aspart insulin using the euglycemic clamp technique. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Each subject underwent two euglycemic clamp procedures on separate occasions: one with IP and one without IP activation in random order. RESULTS: When the insulin bolus was given with IP activation as compared to without IP activation, time to reach maximum insulin action (T(GIRmax)) and to reach 50% maximum action (T(50%GIRmax)) were 35 and 18 min earlier (125 ± 8 min vs. 90 ± 6 min, p = 0.002 and 58 ± 5 min. vs. 40 ± 3 min, p = 0.01, respectively), and the area under curve, AUC(GIR 0-90 min), reflecting early glucodynamic action, was significantly greater (p = 0.001). IP activation also accelerated the rise in plasma insulin levels after the bolus (p = 0.03) and resulted in a higher peak (p = 0.04) and greater overall increase (p = 0.02) in plasma insulin levels. CONCLUSIONS: Our results show that insulin infusion site warming with IP activation accelerates the time action profile of aspart insulin which may be of benefit to current open-loop and future closed-loop insulin delivery in patients with T1D.