Glycaemic outcomes in adults with type 2 diabetes over 34 weeks with the Omnipod® 5 automated insulin delivery system.

AIMS: The aim was to evaluate the effect of extended use of the Omnipod® 5 automated insulin delivery (AID) system in adults with type 2 diabetes and suboptimal glycaemic control. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Following an 8-week single-arm, multicentre, outpatient trial of AID in adults with type 2 diabetes and baseline ≥ 64 mmol/mol, participants were given the opportunity to continue use of the AID system in a 26-week (~6 month) extension phase. The primary safety endpoints were percentage of time with sensor glucose ≥ 250 mg/dL and < 54 mg/dL. Additional glycaemic measures, including percentage of time in range (TIR) (70-180 mg/dL) and HbA1c, were evaluated. The use of non-insulin anti-hyperglycaemic medications was permitted throughout the entire study. RESULTS: During the initial 8-week study, participants (N = 22) achieved a decrease in percentage of time ≥ 250 mg/dL from 27.4% ± 21.0% to 10.5% ± 8.8% (p < 0.0001), which further decreased to 9.7% ± 9.2% during the extension phase (p = 0.0002 vs. standard therapy). Percentage of time < 54 mg/dL remained low from standard therapy through extension (median [interquartile range] 0.00% [0.00%, 0.06%] vs. 0.02% [0.00%, 0.05%], p > 0.05). HbA1c decreased by 1.6% ± 1.2% (15.5 ± 13.1 mmol/mol, p < 0.0001) and TIR increased by 22.4% ± 19.2% (p < 0.0001) from standard therapy through extension with no significant change in body mass index and without an observed increase in total daily insulin requirements. CONCLUSIONS: These longer-term findings of Omnipod 5 AID system use demonstrate the potential value of AID in helping people with type 2 diabetes reach glycaemic targets.

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

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

Efficacy and safety of sotagliflozin in patients with type 2 diabetes and stage 3 chronic kidney disease.

AIM: To assess the efficacy and safety of sotagliflozin, a dual inhibitor of sodium-glucose co-transporters 1 and 2, in adults with type 2 diabetes (T2D) and stage 3 chronic kidney disease (CKD3). MATERIALS AND METHODS: This phase 3, randomized, placebo-controlled trial evaluated sotagliflozin 200 and 400 mg in 787 patients with T2D and an estimated glomerular filtration rate of 30-59 ml/min/1.73m2 . The primary objective was superiority of week 26 HbA1c reductions with sotagliflozin versus placebo. Secondary endpoints included changes in other glycaemic and renal endpoints overall and in CKD3 subgroups. RESULTS: At 26 weeks, the placebo-adjusted mean change in HbA1c (from a baseline of 8.3% ± 1.0%) was -0.1% (95% CI: -0.2% to 0.05%; P = .2095) and -0.2% (-0.4% to -0.09%; P = .0021) in the sotagliflozin 200 and 400 mg groups, respectively. Significant reductions in fasting plasma glucose and body weight, but not systolic blood pressure, were observed. Among patients with at least A2 albuminuria at week 26, the urine albumin-creatinine ratio (UACR) was reduced with both sotagliflozin doses relative to placebo. At week 52, UACR was reduced with sotagliflozin 200 mg in the CKD3B group. Adverse events (AEs), including serious AEs, were similar between the treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: After 26 weeks, HbA1c was significantly reduced with sotagliflozin 400 but not 200 mg compared with placebo in this CKD3 cohort. UACR in patients with at least A2 albuminuria was reduced with each of the two doses at 26 weeks, but changes were not sustained at week 52. The safety findings were consistent with previous reports (NCT03242252).

Equity in Medical Care for People Living With Diabetes.

Disparities and inequities exist for individuals with diabetes in marginalized communities of color, especially among people with low socioeconomic status. Although these barriers are apparent, only a few care models have been designed for and examined in racially and ethnically diverse individuals. This article reviews models that have been developed and examined in a variety of different populations and focuses on how to implement elements from these programs in clinical practice. Health equity-promoting ideas and approaches that can be applied throughout the life span (children to seniors) are also included. As diabetes health care providers, researchers, educators, policymakers, and advocates, we must now combine our efforts and focus on historically excluded populations to bridge the gap to essential diabetes care.

The management of type 1 diabetes in adults. A consensus report by the American Diabetes Association (ADA) and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes (EASD).

The American Diabetes Association (ADA) and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes (EASD) convened a writing group to develop a consensus statement on the management of type 1 diabetes in adults. The writing group has considered the rapid development of new treatments and technologies and addressed the following topics: diagnosis, aims of management, schedule of care, diabetes self-management education and support, glucose monitoring, insulin therapy, hypoglycaemia, behavioural considerations, psychosocial care, diabetic ketoacidosis, pancreas and islet transplantation, adjunctive therapies, special populations, inpatient management and future perspectives. Although we discuss the schedule for follow-up examinations and testing, we have not included the evaluation and treatment of the chronic microvascular and macrovascular complications of diabetes as these are well-reviewed and discussed elsewhere. The writing group was aware of both national and international guidance on type 1 diabetes and did not seek to replicate this but rather aimed to highlight the major areas that healthcare professionals should consider when managing adults with type 1 diabetes. Though evidence-based where possible, the recommendations in the report represent the consensus opinion of the authors. Graphical abstract.

Efficacy and safety of sotagliflozin in patients with type 2 diabetes and severe renal impairment.

AIMS: To assess the efficacy and safety of sotagliflozin, a dual inhibitor of sodium-glucose cotransporter-1 and -2, in adults with type 2 diabetes (T2D) and stage 4 chronic kidney disease (CKD4). MATERIALS AND METHODS: This 52-week, phase 3, randomized (1:1:1), placebo-controlled trial evaluated sotagliflozin 200 mg and sotagliflozin 400 mg once daily in 277 patients with T2D and estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) 15 to 30 mL/min/1.73 m2 . The primary endpoint was glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) reduction with sotagliflozin 400 mg versus placebo at 26 weeks. A hierarchical statistical testing approach was used. RESULTS: The baseline mean HbA1c was 65 ± 12 mmol/mol (8.1% ± 1.1%), systolic blood pressure (SBP) was 144 ± 15 mmHg, and eGFR was 24 ± 4 mL/min/1.73m2 . Placebo-adjusted changes with sotagliflozin 400 mg were -3 mmol/mol (-0.3%; 95% confidence interval -7 to 0.6 [-0.6 to 0.05]; P = 0.096) and -8 mmol/mol (-0.7%; -13 to -3 [-1.2 to -0.2]; P = 0.003) in HbA1c at Weeks 26 and 52, respectively, -1.5 kg (-3.0 to -0.1) in body weight at Week 26, -5.4 mmHg (-9.4 to -1.3) in SBP at Week 12, and -0.3 mL/min/1.73 m2 (-2.1 to 1.6; P = 0.776) in eGFR at Week 52. Over 52 weeks, 11.8%, 5.4% and 3.3% of patients receiving placebo and sotagliflozin 200 and 400 mg, respectively, required rescue therapy for hyperglycaemia. Adverse events (AEs) occurred in 82.8%, 86.2% and 81.1% of patients and serious cardiovascular AEs occurred in 12.9%, 3.2% and 4.4% of patients in the placebo and sotagliflozin 200 and 400 mg groups, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: After 26 weeks, HbA1c reductions with sotagliflozin were not statistically significant versus placebo in adults with T2D and CKD4. The 52-week safety profile was consistent with results of the SCORED outcomes trial (NCT03242018).

Patient-reported outcomes in adults with type 1 diabetes in global real-world clinical practice: The SAGE study.

AIMS: To conduct a secondary analysis of the SAGE study to evaluate the association between glycaemic control and patient-reported outcomes (PROs), in adults with type 1 diabetes (T1DM) across different age groups and regions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: SAGE was a multinational, cross-sectional, observational study in adults with T1DM. Data were collected at a single visit, analysed according to predefined age groups (26-44, 45-64, and ≥65 years), and reported across different regions. PRO questionnaires were applied to assess hypoglycaemia fear (Hypoglycemia Fear Survey-II), diabetes-related distress (Problem Areas In Diabetes questionnaire), insulin treatment satisfaction (Insulin Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire), and diabetes-specific quality of life (QoL; Audit of Diabetes-Dependent Quality of Life). Multivariable analysis was performed to evaluate the relationship between glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) target achievement (<7% and individualised targets) with PRO scores. RESULTS: The PRO scores showed relatively low levels of diabetes-related emotional distress and fear of hypoglycaemia, moderate to high treatment satisfaction, and low diabetes-related impact on QoL. Results were generally comparable across age groups with some regional variability. Achievement of the HbA1c <7% target was associated with less worry about hypoglycaemia, lower diabetes-related emotional distress, higher insulin treatment satisfaction, and higher QoL. Achievement of individualised HbA1c targets was associated with lower diabetes-related emotional distress and higher insulin treatment satisfaction. CONCLUSIONS: Better glycaemic control was most closely associated with low emotional distress due to diabetes and high patient-reported insulin treatment satisfaction.

Comparison of Protocols to Reduce Diabetic Ketoacidosis in Patients With Type 1 Diabetes Prescribed a Sodium-Glucose Cotransporter 2 Inhibitor.

OBJECTIVE | Sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors are approved for type 1 diabetes in Europe and Japan, with off-label use in type 1 diabetes in the United States. Although there were no consistent approaches to risk mitigation in clinical trials of these agents, protocols have been developed to try to reduce the risk of diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA). However, a validated risk mitigation strategy does not exist. We reviewed available DKA risk mitigation protocols to better understand the various strategies currently in use. METHODS | We conducted a search of the published medical literature and other medical information sources, including conference presentations, for protocols. We then categorized the information provided into guidance on patient selection, initiation of SGLT2 inhibitors, ketone monitoring, necessary patient action in the event of ketosis or DKA, and inpatient treatment of ketosis or DKA. RESULTS | Patient selection is generally similar among the protocols, although some require a minimum BMI and insulin dose. All protocols advocate routine measurement of ketones, although some insist on blood ketone tests. Although action steps for ketosis varies, all protocols advocate rapid patient intervention. The importance of evaluating ketones and acid-base balance even in the absence of hyperglycemia is emphasized by all protocols, as is the need to continue administering insulin until ketosis has resolved. CONCLUSION | DKA risk mitigation must be pursued systematically in individuals with type 1 diabetes, although the best strategy remains to be determined. Given the ongoing need for adjunctive therapies in type 1 diabetes and current use of SGLT2 inhibitors for this purpose, additional education and research are crucial, especially in the hospital environment, where DKA may not be diagnosed promptly and treated appropriately.

Effect of Continuous Glucose Monitoring on Glycemic Control in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes Treated With Basal Insulin: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) has been shown to be beneficial for adults with type 2 diabetes using intensive insulin therapy, but its use in type 2 diabetes treated with basal insulin without prandial insulin has not been well studied. Objective: To determine the effectiveness of CGM in adults with type 2 diabetes treated with basal insulin without prandial insulin in primary care practices. Design, Setting, and Participants: This randomized clinical trial was conducted at 15 centers in the US (enrollment from July 30, 2018, to October 30, 2019; follow-up completed July 7, 2020) and included adults with type 2 diabetes receiving their diabetes care from a primary care clinician and treated with 1 or 2 daily injections of long- or intermediate-acting basal insulin without prandial insulin, with or without noninsulin glucose-lowering medications. Interventions: Random assignment 2:1 to CGM (n = 116) or traditional blood glucose meter (BGM) monitoring (n = 59). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) level at 8 months. Key secondary outcomes were CGM-measured time in target glucose range of 70 to 180 mg/dL, time with glucose level at greater than 250 mg/dL, and mean glucose level at 8 months. Results: Among 175 randomized participants (mean [SD] age, 57 [9] years; 88 women [50%]; 92 racial/ethnic minority individuals [53%]; mean [SD] baseline HbA1c level, 9.1% [0.9%]), 165 (94%) completed the trial. Mean HbA1c level decreased from 9.1% at baseline to 8.0% at 8 months in the CGM group and from 9.0% to 8.4% in the BGM group (adjusted difference, -0.4% [95% CI, -0.8% to -0.1%]; P = .02). In the CGM group, compared with the BGM group, the mean percentage of CGM-measured time in the target glucose range of 70 to 180 mg/dL was 59% vs 43% (adjusted difference, 15% [95% CI, 8% to 23%]; P < .001), the mean percentage of time at greater than 250 mg/dL was 11% vs 27% (adjusted difference, -16% [95% CI, -21% to -11%]; P < .001), and the means of the mean glucose values were 179 mg/dL vs 206 mg/dL (adjusted difference, -26 mg/dL [95% CI, -41 to -12]; P < .001). Severe hypoglycemic events occurred in 1 participant (1%) in the CGM group and in 1 (2%) in the BGM group. Conclusions and Relevance: Among adults with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes treated with basal insulin without prandial insulin, continuous glucose monitoring, as compared with blood glucose meter monitoring, resulted in significantly lower HbA1c levels at 8 months. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03566693.

Diabetes digital app technology: benefits, challenges, and recommendations. A consensus report by the European Association for the Study of Diabetes (EASD) and the American Diabetes Association (ADA) Diabetes Technology Working Group.

Digital health technology, especially digital and health applications ('apps'), have been developing rapidly to help people manage their diabetes. Numerous health-related apps provided on smartphones and other wireless devices are available to support people with diabetes who need to adopt either lifestyle interventions or medication adjustments in response to glucose-monitoring data. However, regulations and guidelines have not caught up with the burgeoning field to standardise how mobile health apps are reviewed and monitored for patient safety and clinical validity. The available evidence on the safety and effectiveness of mobile health apps, especially for diabetes, remains limited. The European Association for the Study of Diabetes (EASD) and the American Diabetes Association (ADA) have therefore conducted a joint review of the current landscape of available diabetes digital health technology (only stand-alone diabetes apps, as opposed to those that are integral to a regulated medical device, such as insulin pumps, continuous glucose monitoring systems, and automated insulin delivery systems) and practices of regulatory authorities and organisations. We found that, across the USA and Europe, mobile apps intended to manage health and wellness are largely unregulated unless they meet the definition of medical devices for therapeutic and/or diagnostic purposes. International organisations, including the International Medical Device Regulators Forum and WHO, have made strides in classifying different types of digital health technology and integrating digital health technology into the field of medical devices. As the diabetes digital health field continues to develop and become more fully integrated into everyday life, we wish to ensure that it is based on the best evidence for safety and efficacy. As a result, we bring to light several issues that the diabetes community, including regulatory authorities, policymakers, professional organisations, researchers, people with diabetes and healthcare professionals, needs to address to ensure that diabetes health technology can meet its full potential. These issues range from inadequate evidence on app accuracy and clinical validity to lack of training provision, poor interoperability and standardisation, and insufficient data security. We conclude with a series of recommended actions to resolve some of these shortcomings.

Efficacy and safety of dual add-on therapy with dapagliflozin plus saxagliptin versus glimepiride in patients with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes on a stable dose of metformin: Results from a 52-week, randomized, active-controlled trial.

AIMS: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of dapagliflozin (DAPA) + saxagliptin (SAXA) compared with glimepiride (GLIM) in patients with type 2 diabetes who were inadequately controlled [glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) 7.5-10.5% (58-91 mmol/mol)] on metformin monotherapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This 52-week, multicentre, double-blind, active-controlled study (NCT02419612) randomized (1:1) patients on metformin to add-on DAPA 10 mg + SAXA 5 mg (n = 227) or GLIM 1-6 mg (titrated; n = 217). The primary efficacy endpoint was change in HbA1c from baseline to week 52. RESULTS: Baseline mean ± standard deviation of age, duration of diabetes and HbA1c were 56.1 ± 9.7 years, 7.8 ± 6.4 years and 8.5% ± 0.8% (69 ± 9.0 mmol/mol), respectively. Adjusted mean change from baseline in HbA1c was -1.35% (-14.8 mmol/mol) with DAPA + SAXA versus -0.98% (-10.7 mmol/mol) with GLIM (P <0.001). Changes from baseline in body weight and systolic blood pressure were -3.1 kg and -2.6 mmHg with DAPA + SAXA versus +1.0 kg (P <0.001) and +1.0 mmHg (P = 0.007) with GLIM. More patients achieved HbA1c <7.0% (53 mmol/mol) (44.3% vs. 34.3%; P = 0.044), and fewer patients required treatment intensification (1.3% vs. 8.8%; P = 0.002) with DAPA + SAXA than with GLIM. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with GLIM, concurrent addition of DAPA + SAXA significantly improved glycaemic control, body weight and other metabolic parameters in patients inadequately controlled on metformin. Trial: NCT02419612, ClinicalTrials.gov.

Baseline nocturnal glucose change: A predictor of the treatment effect of bolus intensification in insulin-treated type 2 diabetes.

This post hoc analysis of an 18-week randomized trial explored the utility of calculating baseline glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c), postprandial glucose (PPG) increments and nocturnal glucose change in predicting efficacy and safety outcomes in response to bolus insulin intensification in people with type 2 diabetes (T2D). Analyses were conducted on 236 participants with T2D receiving metformin: 116 received fast-acting insulin aspart (faster aspart) basal-bolus therapy and 120 received basal-only insulin. Participants were grouped according to baseline HbA1c, PPG increments and nocturnal glucose change variables; analyses were performed on the end-of-trial treatment differences between "high" and "low" baseline values. The change from baseline in end-of-trial mean HbA1c and mean PPG increments was in favour of faster aspart across all subgroups. Significantly greater treatment differences were observed in participants with high (vs. low) baseline nocturnal glucose change and PPG increments. For baseline HbA1c, significantly greater treatment differences were observed for change in end-of-trial PPG increments, but not end-of-trial HbA1c. In conclusion, both nocturnal glucose change and PPG increments may be more useful than HbA1c for identifying subgroups of people with T2D who would most benefit from bolus intensification.

Dose-dependent glycometabolic effects of sotagliflozin on type 1 diabetes over 12 weeks: The inTandem4 trial.

AIMS: To assess the dose-related effects of sotagliflozin, a novel dual inhibitor of sodium-glucose co-transporters-1 and -2, in type 1 diabetes (T1D). MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this 12-week, multicentre, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled dose-ranging trial, adults with T1D were randomized to once-daily placebo (n = 36) or sotagliflozin 75 mg (n = 35), 200 mg (n = 35) or 400 mg (n = 35). Insulin was maintained at baseline doses. The primary endpoint was least squares mean (LSM) change in glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) from baseline. Other endpoints included proportion of participants with ≥0.5% HbA1c reduction and assessments of 2-hour postprandial glucose (PPG), weight, and urinary glucose excretion (UGE). RESULTS: From a mean baseline of 8.0% ± 0.8% (full study population), placebo-adjusted LSM HbA1c decreased by 0.3% (P = .07), 0.5% (P < .001) and 0.4% (P = .006) with sotagliflozin 75 mg, 200 mg and 400 mg, respectively, at week 12. In the placebo and sotagliflozin 75 mg, 200 mg and 400 mg groups, 33.3%, 37.1%, 80.0% and 65.7% of participants achieved an HbA1c reduction ≥0.5%. Placebo-adjusted PPG decreased by 22.2 mg/dL (P = .28), 28.7 mg/dL (P = .16) and 50.2 mg/dL (P = .013), UGE increased by 41.8 g/d (P = .006), 57.7 g/d (P < .001) and 70.5 g/d (P < .001), and weight decreased by 1.3 kg (P = .038), 2.4 kg (P < .001) and 2.6 kg (P < .001) with sotagliflozin 75 mg, 200 mg and 400 mg, respectively. One case of severe hypoglycaemia occurred in each sotagliflozin group and one case of diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) occurred with sotagliflozin 400 mg. CONCLUSIONS: Combined with stable insulin doses, sotagliflozin 200 mg and 400 mg improved glycaemic control and weight in adults with T1D. Sotagliflozin 400 mg reduced PPG levels. UGE increased with all sotagliflozin doses. Rates of severe hypoglycaemia and DKA were low (NCT02459899).

Management of Preexisting Diabetes in Pregnancy: A Review.

Importance: The presence of preexisting type 1 or type 2 diabetes in pregnancy increases the risk of adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes, such as preeclampsia, cesarean delivery, preterm delivery, macrosomia, and congenital defects. Approximately 0.9% of the 4 million births in the United States annually are complicated by preexisting diabetes. Observations: Women with diabetes have increased risk for adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes, and similar risks are present with type 1 and type 2 diabetes. Both forms of diabetes require similar intensity of diabetes care. Preconception planning is very important to avoid unintended pregnancies and to minimize risk of congenital defects. Hemoglobin A1c goals are less than 6.5% at conception and less than 6.0% during pregnancy. It is also critical to screen for and manage comorbid illnesses, such as retinopathy and nephropathy. Medications known to be unsafe in pregnancy, such as angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and statins, should be discontinued. Women with obesity should be screened for obstructive sleep apnea, which is often undiagnosed and can result in poor outcomes. Blood pressure goals must be considered carefully because lower treatment thresholds may be required for women with nephropathy. During pregnancy, continuous glucose monitoring can improve glycemic control and neonatal outcomes in women with type 1 diabetes. Insulin is first-line therapy for all women with preexisting diabetes; injections and insulin pump therapy are both effective approaches. Rates of severe hypoglycemia are increased during pregnancy; therefore, glucagon should be available to the patient and close contacts should be trained in its use. Low-dose aspirin is recommended soon after 12 weeks' gestation to minimize the risk of preeclampsia. The importance of discussing long-acting reversible contraception before and after pregnancy, to allow for appropriate preconception planning, cannot be overstated. Conclusions and Relevance: Preexisting diabetes in pregnancy is complex and is associated with significant maternal and neonatal risk. Optimization of glycemic control, medication regimens, and careful attention to comorbid conditions can help mitigate these risks and ensure quality diabetes care before, during, and after pregnancy.

Dulaglutide treatment results in effective glycaemic control in latent autoimmune diabetes in adults (LADA): A post-hoc analysis of the AWARD-2, -4 and -5 Trials.

AIMS: Patients with a type-2-diabetes (T2D) phenotype positive for glutamic acid decarboxylase antibodies (GADA) represent the majority of cases of latent autoimmune diabetes of the adult (LADA). The GLP-1 receptor agonist dulaglutide, recently introduced for treatment of T2D, has yet to be evaluated in LADA patients. Our primary objective was to evaluate the effect of dulaglutide on glycaemic control (HbA1c) in GADA-positive LADA vs GADA-negative T2D patients. METHODS: A post-hoc analysis was performed using data from 3 randomized phase 3 trials (AWARD-2,-4,-5; patients with GADA assessment) which were part of the dulaglutide clinical development programme in T2D. LADA patients were identified by GADA ≥5 IU/mL (ELISA). Changes in HbA1c during 12 months of treatment with dulaglutide or comparator were analysed using mixed-effect model repeated measures. RESULTS: Of 2466 adults tested for GADA (dulaglutide, 1710; glargine, 298; sitagliptin, 294; placebo, 164), 2278 (92.4%) were GADA-negative and 188 (7.6%) were GADA-positive, including 58 GADA-high patients (> 200 IU/mL) and 130 GADA-low patients (≤200 and ≥5 IU/mL). Overall, baseline parameters were comparable between the groups. Dulaglutide resulted in comparable HbA1c reductions in GADA-negative (LS mean change [95%CI], -1.09% [-1.15, -1.03]) and GADA-positive patients (-0.94% [-1.15, -0.72]) at 12 months. HbA1c reductions were numerically, but not statistically, significantly larger in GADA-low patients (-1.02% [-1.26, -0.78]) vs GADA-high patients (-0.72% [-1.21,-0.24]) at 12 months. Similar outcomes were observed at 3 and 6 months. CONCLUSIONS: These data are the first to indicate that dulaglutide was effective in reducing HbA1c in LADA patients.

Improving the clinical value and utility of CGM systems: issues and recommendations : A joint statement of the European Association for the Study of Diabetes and the American Diabetes Association Diabetes Technology Working Group.

The first systems for continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) became available over 15 years ago. Many then believed CGM would revolutionise the use of intensive insulin therapy in diabetes; however, progress towards that vision has been gradual. Although increasing, the proportion of individuals using CGM rather than conventional systems for self-monitoring of blood glucose on a daily basis is still low in most parts of the world. Barriers to uptake include cost, measurement reliability (particularly with earlier-generation systems), human factors issues, lack of a standardised format for displaying results and uncertainty on how best to use CGM data to make therapeutic decisions. This scientific statement makes recommendations for systemic improvements in clinical use and regulatory (pre- and postmarketing) handling of CGM devices. The aim is to improve safety and efficacy in order to support the advancement of the technology in achieving its potential to improve quality of life and health outcomes for more people with diabetes.

Insulin pump risks and benefits: a clinical appraisal of pump safety standards, adverse event reporting and research needs. A joint statement of the European Association for the Study of Diabetes and the American Diabetes Association Diabetes Technology Working Group.

Insulin pump therapy, also known as continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII), is an important and evolving form of insulin delivery, which is mainly used for people with type 1 diabetes. However, even with modern insulin pumps, errors of insulin infusion can occur due to pump failure, insulin infusion set (IIS) blockage, infusion site problems, insulin stability issues, user error or a combination of these. Users are therefore exposed to significant and potentially fatal hazards: interruption of insulin infusion can result in hyperglycaemia and ketoacidosis; conversely, delivery of excessive insulin can cause severe hypoglycaemia. Nevertheless, the available evidence on the safety and efficacy of CSII remains limited. The European Association for the Study of Diabetes (EASD) and American Diabetes Association (ADA) have therefore joined forces to review the systems in place for evaluating the safety of pumps from a clinical perspective. We found that useful information held by the manufacturing companies is not currently shared in a sufficiently transparent manner. Public availability of adverse event (AE) reports on the US Food and Drug Administration's Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience (MAUDE) database is potentially a rich source of safety information but is insufficiently utilised due to the current configuration of the system; the comparable database in Europe (European Databank on Medical Devices, EUDAMED) is not publicly accessible. Many AEs appear to be attributable to human factors and/or user error, but the extent to which manufacturing companies are required by regulators to consider the interactions of users with the technical features of their products is limited. The clinical studies required by regulators prior to marketing are small and over-reliant on bench testing in relation to 'predicate' products. Once a pump is available on the market, insufficient data are made publicly available on its long-term use in a real-world setting; such data could provide vital information to help healthcare teams to educate and support users, and thereby prevent AEs. As well as requiring more from the manufacturing companies, we call for public funding of more research addressing clinically important questions in relation to pump therapy: both observational studies and clinical trials. At present there are significant differences in the regulatory systems between the USA and European Union at both pre- and post-marketing stages; improvements in the European system are more urgently required. This statement concludes with a series of recommended specific actions for 'meknovigilance' (i.e. a standardised safety approach to technology) which could be implemented to address the shortcomings we highlight.