Safety and Glycemic Outcomes During the MiniMedTM Advanced Hybrid Closed-Loop System Pivotal Trial in Children and Adolescents with Type 1 Diabetes.

Background: During MiniMed™ advanced hybrid closed-loop (AHCL) use by adolescents and adults in the pivotal trial, glycated hemoglobin (A1C) was significantly reduced, time spent in range (TIR) was significantly increased, and there were no episodes of severe hypoglycemia or diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA). The present study investigated the same primary safety and effectiveness endpoints during AHCL use by a younger cohort with type 1 diabetes (T1D). Methods: An intention-to-treat population (N = 160, aged 7-17 years) with T1D was enrolled in a single-arm study at 13 investigational centers. There was a run-in period (∼25 days) using HCL or sensor-augmented pump with/without predictive low-glucose management, followed by a 3-month study period with AHCL activated at two glucose targets (GTs; 100 and 120 mg/dL) for ∼45 days each. The mean ± standard deviation values of A1C, TIR, mean sensor glucose (SG), coefficient of variation (CV) of SG, time at SG ranges, and insulin delivered between run-in and study were analyzed (Wilcoxon signed-rank test or t-test). Results: Compared with baseline, AHCL use was associated with reduced A1C from 7.9 ± 0.9% (N = 160) to 7.4 ± 0.7% (N = 136) (P < 0.001) and overall TIR increased from the run-in 59.4 ± 11.8% to 70.3 ± 6.5% by end of study (P < 0.001), without change in CV, time spent below range (TBR) <70 mg/dL, or TBR <54 mg/dL. Relative to longer active insulin time (AIT) settings (N = 52), an AIT of 2 h (N = 19) with the 100 mg/dL GT increased mean TIR to 73.4%, reduced TBR <70 mg/dL from 3.5% to 2.2%, and reduced time spent above range (TAR) >180 mg/dL from 28.7% to 24.4%. During AHCL use, there was no severe hypoglycemia or DKA. Conclusions: In children and adolescents with T1D, MiniMed AHCL system use was safe, A1C was lower, and TIR was increased. The lowest GT and shortest AIT were associated with the highest TIR and lowest TBR and TAR, all of which met consensus-recommended glycemic targets. ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT03959423.

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.

Glycemic Outcomes During Early Use of the MiniMed™ 780G Advanced Hybrid Closed-Loop System with Guardian™ 4 Sensor.

Background: Safety and significant improvement in overall glycated hemoglobin (A1C) and percentage of time spent in (TIR), below (TBR), and above (TAR) glucose range were demonstrated in the pivotal trial of adolescents and adults using the MiniMed™ advanced hybrid closed-loop (AHCL) system with the adjunctive, calibration-required Guardian™ Sensor 3. The present study evaluated early outcomes of continued access study (CAS) participants who transitioned from the pivotal trial investigational system to the approved MiniMed™ 780G system with the non-adjunctive, calibration-free Guardian™ 4 Sensor (MM780G+G4S). Study data were presented alongside those of real-world MM780G+G4S users from Europe, the Middle East, and Africa. Methods: The CAS participants (N = 109, aged 7-17 years and N = 67, aged >17 years) used the MM780G+G4S for 3 months and data of real-world MM780G+G4S system users (N = 10,204 aged ≤15 years and N = 26,099 aged >15 years) were uploaded from September 22, 2021 to December 02, 2022. At least 10 days of real-world continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) data were required for analyses. Glycemic metrics, delivered insulin and system use/interactions underwent descriptive analyses. Results: Time in AHCL and CGM use were >90% for all groups. AHCL exits averaged 0.1/day and there were few blood glucose measurements (BGMs) (0.8/day-1.0/day). Adults in both cohorts met most consensus recommendations for glycemic targets. Pediatric groups met recommendations for %TIR and %TBR, although not those for mean glucose variability and %TAR, possibly due to low use of recommended glucose target (100 mg/dL) and active insulin time (2 h) settings (28.4% in the CAS cohort and 9.4% in the real-world cohort). The CAS pediatric and adult A1C were 7.2% ± 0.7% and 6.8% ± 0.7%, respectively, and there were no serious adverse events. Conclusions: Early clinical use of the MM780G+G4S was safe and involved minimal BGMs and AHCL exits. Consistent with real-world pediatric and adult use, outcomes were associated with achievement of recommended glycemic targets. Clinical Trial Registration number: NCT03959423.

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.

Evaluation of Extended Infusion Set Performance in Adults with Type 1 Diabetes: Infusion Set Survival Rate and Glycemic Outcomes from a Pivotal Trial.

Background: Standard insulin infusion sets (IISs) are to be replaced every 2 to 3 days to avoid complications and diabetic ketosis due to set failure. This pivotal trial evaluated the safety and performance of a new extended-wear infusion set (EIS) when used for 7 days by adults with type 1 diabetes (T1D). Methods: This single-arm, nonrandomized trial enrolled adults (18-80 years of age) with T1D, who used their own MiniMed™ 670G system with insulin lispro or insulin aspart and the EIS for up to 7 days, across 12 consecutive wears. Safety endpoints included incidence of serious adverse events (SAEs), serious adverse device effects (SADEs), unanticipated adverse device effects (UADEs), severe hypoglycemia (SevHypo), severe hyperglycemia (SevHyper), diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA), and skin infection. The EIS failure rate due to unexplained hyperglycemia (i.e., suspected occlusion), the overall EIS survival rate, glycemic control outcomes (i.e., A1C, mean sensor glucose and time spent in established glucose ranges), total daily insulin delivered, and satisfaction with the EIS were determined. Results: The intention to treat population (n = 259, 48% men, 45.0 ± 14.1 years) wore a total of 3041 EIS devices. No SADE, UADE, or DKA events was reported. Overall rates of SAEs, SevHypo, SevHyper, and skin infection were 3.8, 2.5, 104.1, and 20.1 events per 100 participant-years. The rate of EIS failure due to unexplained hyperglycemia at the end of day 7 was 0.1% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.03-0.51) and 0.4% (95% CI: 0.16-1.00) for insulin lispro and aspart use, respectively. Overall EIS survival rate at the end of day 7 was 77.8% (95% CI: 76.2-79.3), glycemic control did not change, and participants reported greater satisfaction with the EIS compared with standard IISs worn before the study (P < 0.001). Conclusions: This investigation demonstrates that the EIS, when worn for up to 7 days, was safe and rated with high satisfaction, without adversely affecting glycemic control in adults with T1D. Clinical Trial Registration number: NCT04113694 (https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04113694).

Glycemic outcomes of children 2-6 years of age with type 1 diabetes during the pediatric MiniMed™ 670G system trial.

BACKGROUND: Highly variable insulin sensitivity, susceptibility to hypoglycemia and inability to effectively communicate hypoglycemic symptoms pose significant challenges for young children with type 1 diabetes (T1D). Herein, outcomes during clinical MiniMed™ 670G system use were evaluated in children aged 2-6 years with T1D. METHODS: Participants (N = 46, aged 4.6 ± 1.4 years) at seven investigational centers used the MiniMed™ 670G system in Manual Mode during a two-week run-in period followed by Auto Mode during a three-month study phase. Safety events, mean A1C, sensor glucose (SG), and percentage of time spent in (TIR, 70-180 mg/dl), below (TBR, <70 mg/dl) and above (TAR, >180 mg/dl) range were assessed for the run-in and study phase and compared using a paired t-test or Wilcoxon signed-rank test. RESULTS: From run-in to end of study (median 87.1% time in auto mode), mean A1C and SG changed from 8.0 ± 0.9% to 7.5 ± 0.6% (p < 0.001) and from 173 ± 24 to 161 ± 16 mg/dl (p < 0.001), respectively. Overall TIR increased from 55.7 ± 13.4% to 63.8 ± 9.4% (p < 0.001), while TBR and TAR decreased from 3.3 ± 2.5% to 3.2 ± 1.6% (p = 0.996) and 41.0 ± 14.7% to 33.0 ± 9.9% (p < 0.001), respectively. Overnight TBR remained unchanged and TAR was further improved 12:00 am-6:00 am. Throughout the study phase, there were no episodes of severe hypoglycemia or diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) and no serious adverse device-related events. CONCLUSIONS: At-home MiniMed™ 670G Auto Mode use by young children safely improved glycemic outcomes compared to two-week open-loop Manual Mode use. The improvements are similar to those observed in older children, adolescents and adults with T1D using the same system for the same duration of time.

Safety and Glycemic Outcomes During the MiniMed™ Advanced Hybrid Closed-Loop System Pivotal Trial in Adolescents and Adults with Type 1 Diabetes.

Introduction: This trial assessed safety and effectiveness of an advanced hybrid closed-loop (AHCL) system with automated basal (Auto Basal) and automated bolus correction (Auto Correction) in adolescents and adults with type 1 diabetes (T1D). Materials and Methods: This multicenter single-arm study involved an intent-to-treat population of 157 individuals (39 adolescents aged 14-21 years and 118 adults aged ≥22-75 years) with T1D. Study participants used the MiniMed™ AHCL system during a baseline run-in period in which sensor-augmented pump +/- predictive low glucose management or Auto Basal was enabled for ∼14 days. Thereafter, Auto Basal and Auto Correction were enabled for a study phase (∼90 days), with glucose target set to 100 or 120 mg/dL for ∼45 days, followed by the other target for ∼45 days. Study endpoints included safety events and change in mean A1C, time in range (TIR, 70-180 mg/dL) and time below range (TBR, <70 mg/dL). Run-in and study phase values were compared using Wilcoxon signed-rank test or paired t-test. Results: Overall group time spent in closed loop averaged 94.9% ± 5.4% and involved only 1.2 ± 0.8 exits per week. Compared with run-in, AHCL reduced A1C from 7.5% ± 0.8% to 7.0% ± 0.5% (<0.001, Wilcoxon signed-rank test, n = 155), TIR increased from 68.8% ± 10.5% to 74.5% ± 6.9% (<0.001, Wilcoxon signed-rank test), and TBR reduced from 3.3% ± 2.9% to 2.3% ± 1.7% (<0.001, Wilcoxon signed-rank test). Similar benefits to glycemia were observed for each age group and were more pronounced for the nighttime (12 AM-6 AM). The 100 mg/dL target increased TIR to 75.4% (n = 155), which was further optimized at a lower active insulin time (AIT) setting (i.e., 2 h), without increasing TBR. There were no severe hypoglycemic or diabetic ketoacidosis events during the study phase. Conclusions: These findings show that the MiniMed AHCL system is safe and allows for achievement of recommended glycemic targets in adolescents and adults with T1D. Adjustments in target and AIT settings may further optimize glycemia and improve user experience. Clinical Trial Registration number: NCT03959423.

Safety Evaluation of the MiniMed 670G System in Children 7-13 Years of Age with Type 1 Diabetes.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the safety of in-home use of the MiniMed™ 670G system with SmartGuard™ technology in children with type 1 diabetes (T1D). METHODS: Participants (N = 105, ages 7-13 years, mean age 10.8 ± 1.8 years) were enrolled at nine centers (eight in the United States and one in Israel) and completed a 2-week baseline run-in phase in Manual Mode followed by a 3-month study phase with Auto Mode enabled. Sensor glucose (SG), glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c), percentage of SG values across glucose ranges, and SG variability, during the run-in and study phases were compared. Participants underwent frequent sample testing with i-STAT® venous reference measurement during a hotel period (6 days/5 nights) to evaluate the system's continuous glucose monitoring performance. RESULTS: Auto Mode was used a median of 81% of the time. From baseline to end of study, overall SG dropped by 6.9 ± 17.2 mg/dL (P < 0.001), HbA1c decreased from 7.9% ± 0.8% to 7.5% ± 0.6% (P < 0.001), percentage of time in target glucose range (70-180 mg/dL) increased from 56.2% ± 11.4% to 65.0% ± 7.7% (P < 0.001), and the SG coefficient of variation decreased from 39.6% ± 5.4% to 38.5% ± 3.8% (P = 0.009). The percentage of SG values within target glucose range was 68.2% ± 9.1% and that of i-STAT reference values was 65.6% ± 17.7%. The percentage of values within 20%/20 of the i-STAT reference was 85.2%. There were no episodes of severe hypoglycemia or diabetic ketoacidosis during the study phase. CONCLUSION: In-home use of MiniMed 670G system Auto Mode for 3 months by children with T1D, similar to MiniMed 670G system use by adolescents and adults with T1D, was safe and associated with reduced HbA1c levels and increased time in target glucose range, compared with baseline.

In-Clinic Evaluation of the MiniMed 670G System "Suspend Before Low" Feature in Children with Type 1 Diabetes.

BACKGROUND: The Medtronic predictive low-glucose management (PLGM) algorithm automatically stops insulin delivery when sensor glucose (SG) is predicted to reach or fall below a preset low-glucose value within the next 30 min, and resumes delivery after hypoglycemia recovery. The present study evaluated the PLGM algorithm performance of the MiniMed™ 670G system SmartGuard™ "suspend before low" feature in children aged 7-13 years with type 1 diabetes (T1D). METHOD: Participants (N = 105, mean ± standard deviation of 10.8 ± 1.8 years) underwent an overnight in-clinic evaluation of the "suspend before low" feature with a preset low limit of 65 mg/dL. After exercise, frequent sample testing (FST) was conducted every 5 min if values were <70 mg/dL; every 15 min if 70-80 mg/dL; and every 30 min if >80 mg/dL. First-day performance of the Guardian™ Sensor 3 glucose sensor and continuous glucose monitoring system was also evaluated. RESULTS: Activation of the "suspend before low" feature occurred in 79 of the 105 participants, 79.7% (63/79) did not result in SG falling below 65 mg/dL. Mean glucose at activation was 102 ± 19 mg/dL and the initial insulin suspension duration was 87.5 ± 32.7 min. Four hours after insulin resumption, mean reference glucose was 130 ± 42 mg/dL. Mean absolute relative difference between the FST reference glucose and SG values on the first day of sensor wear was 11.4%. For the 26 participants in whom the "suspend before low" feature did not activate, none involved a reference glucose value ≤65 mg/dL, suggesting that the PLGM algorithm performed as intended. CONCLUSION: In children aged 7-13 years with T1D, the "suspend before low" feature of the MiniMed 670G system demonstrated a hypoglycemia prevention rate of nearly 80% after exercise and did not involve rebound hyperglycemia. There were no events of severe hypoglycemia during the evaluation.

Accuracy of a Fourth-Generation Continuous Glucose Monitoring System in Children and Adolescents with Type 1 Diabetes.

BACKGROUND: This study evaluated the safety and performance of the Guardian™ continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) system in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes (T1D). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Subjects 2-18 years of age (mean ± standard deviation [SD] 13.1 ± 3.9 years) with T1D and duration of diagnosis ≥1 year were enrolled at 11 sites in the United States and wore two Guardian Sensor 3 sensors in the abdomen and/or buttock. Sensors were connected to a transmitter paired with either a Guardian Connect system (i.e., mobile device with software application allowing display of sensor glucose [SG] values) or a Guardian Link 3 transmitter used as a Glucose Sensor Recorder (GSR). There were 145 participants who underwent a 6-h in-clinic frequent sample testing (FST) on day 1 (n = 54), day 3 (n = 48), or day 7 (n = 43) postsensor insertion. During FST, SG values were compared with a Yellow Springs Instrument (YSI) plasma reference every 5-15 min (n = 124, 7-18 years of age; n = 2, 2-6 years of age), or to a self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) reference every 5-30 min (n = 19, 2-6 years of age). RESULTS: The overall mean absolute relative difference (ARD ± SD) between SG and reference values (YSI or SMBG) when calibrating approximately every 12 h, was 10.9% ± 10.7% (3102 paired points) for sensors communicating with the Guardian Connect system and 11.1% ± 10.6% (2624 paired points) for sensors connected to the GSR. The overall percentage of SG values within ±20% of reference values >80 mg/dL or within 20 mg/dL of reference values ≤80 mg/dL was 87.8% for the Guardian Connect system and 86.7% for the GSR, respectively. There was one device-related adverse event of contact dermatitis, but no serious device-related adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: The Guardian CGM system demonstrated good accuracy in children and adolescents. These findings support its use in sensor-integrated insulin pump platforms, as well as a standalone technology, for managing diabetes in pediatric populations.

IMPROVED HBA1C, TOTAL DAILY INSULIN DOSE, AND TREATMENT SATISFACTION WITH INSULIN PUMP THERAPY COMPARED TO MULTIPLE DAILY INSULIN INJECTIONS IN PATIENTS WITH TYPE 2 DIABETES IRRESPECTIVE OF BASELINE C-PEPTIDE LEVELS.

OBJECTIVE: Fasting C-peptide levels are used to differentiate type 1 from type 2 diabetes (T2D), thereby determining eligibility for coverage of continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) for patients with T2D. METHODS: A total of 168 patients (74 female/94 male, aged 55.5 ± 9.7 years) were randomized to CSII, and 163 patients (77 female/86 male, aged 56.4 ± 9.5 years) were randomized to multiple daily injections (MDI) of insulin and grouped by baseline C-peptide level: group A (≤183 pmol/L [≤0.55 ng/mL]); group B (>183 pmol/L [>0.55 ng/mL]). At 6 months, the MDI group crossed over to CSII. Within- and between-group comparisons were recorded at 6 and 12 months in the entire group and separately for those patients aged ≥65 years. RESULTS: CSII reduced hemoglobin A1c (A1c) equally in groups A ( P = .0006, P = .0022) and B ( P<.0001, P<.0001) at 6 and 12 months, respectively. There was an increase in weight in group A versus group B at 6 months but not 12 months ( P<.03). CSII therapy reduced total daily dose (TDD) of insulin and improved treatment satisfaction similarly in groups A and B. The results for patients aged ≥65 years displayed a similar trend as the entire group. CONCLUSION: A1c, TDD of insulin, and treatment satisfaction improved for T2D patients using CSII versus MDI therapy, irrespective of baseline C-peptide level. A subgroup of patients aged ≥65 years displayed a similar trend. These results support abandoning C-peptide as a criterion for reimbursing CSII therapy in patients with diabetes. ABBREVIATIONS: A1c = hemoglobin A1c; CMS = Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services; CSII = continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion; DTSQ = Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire; MDI = multiple daily injections; RCT = randomized controlled trials; T1D = type 1 diabetes; T2D = type 2 diabetes; TDD = total daily dose.

Complex Assessment of Metabolic Effectiveness of Insulin Pump Therapy in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Beyond HbA1c Reduction.

BACKGROUND: This prospective single-center study recruited insulin-resistant continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) therapy-naive patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) using insulin analog-based multiple daily injections (MDI) therapy and metformin. METHODS: A total of 23 individuals with T2D (70% male), aged a mean ± standard deviation 57.2 ± 8.03 years, with body mass index of 36.2 ± 7.02 kg/m2, diabetes duration of 13.3 ± 4.64 years, and HbA1c of 10.0% ± 1.05% were randomly assigned to a CSII arm or an MDI continuation arm to explore glucose control, weight loss, total daily insulin dose (TDD), and insulin resistance. Insulin dosing was optimized over a 2-month run-in period. RESULTS: At 6 months, patients assigned to the CSII arm achieved a significant mean HbA1c reduction of -0.9% (95% confidence interval [CI] = -1.6, -0.1), while reducing their TDD by -29.8 ± 28.41 U/day (33% of baseline [92.1 ± 20.35 U/day]) and achieving body mass (BM) reduction of -0.8 ± 5.61 kg (0.98% of baseline [104.8 ± 16.15 kg]). MDI patients demonstrated a nonsignificant HbA1c reduction of -0.3% (95% CI = -0.8, 0.1) with a TDD reduction of 5% from baseline (99.0 ± 25.25 U/day to 94.3 ± 21.25 U/day), and a BM reduction of -1.0 ± 2.03 kg (0.99% of baseline [108.9 ± 20.55 kg]). After 6 months, the MDI arm crossed over to CSII therapy. At 12 months, patients continuing CSII demonstrated an additional mean 0.7% HbA1c reduction with 54.6% achieving HbA1c<8%. The final TDD reduction was -9.7 U/day in comparison to baseline; BM increased by 1.1 ± 6.5 kg from baseline. The MDI patients that crossed to CSII showed an HbA1c reduction of -0.5% ± 1.04%, HbA1c response rate of 27.3%, a TDD reduction of -17.4 ± 21.06 U/day, and a BM reduction of -0.3 ± 3.39 kg. Diabetic ketoacidosis or severe hypoglycemia did not occur in either arm. CONCLUSION: CSII therapy safely and significantly improved metabolic control with less insulin usage, with no sustainable reduction of BM, blood pressure, and lipid profile, in insulin-resistant T2D patients. Treatment adherence and satisfaction in these patients were excellent.

The Effect of Prior Continuous Glucose Monitoring Use on Glycemic Outcomes in the Pivotal Trial of the MiniMed™ 670G Hybrid Closed-Loop System.

A 3-month pivotal trial using the MiniMed™ 670G hybrid closed-loop (HCL) system in adolescent and adult patients with type 1 diabetes (T1D), relative to a 2-week baseline run-in period, resulted in increased sensor glucose (SG) values in target range (71-180 mg/dL), reduced HbA1c levels, and no events of diabetic ketoacidosis or severe hypoglycemia ( Clinicaltrials.gov : NCT02463097). This brief report evaluated how prior continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) experience influenced glycemic outcomes, in the same pivotal trial. HbA1c levels and the percentage of SG values in low, high, and in-target ranges were analyzed from participants (n = 124) completing the Hybrid Closed-Loop Pivotal Trial in T1D. There were 78 individuals comprising the prior CGM group and 46 comprising the no prior CGM group. Compared to baseline, HbA1c was reduced from 7.4% ± 0.9% to 6.9% ± 0.7% for the prior CGM group and from 7.5% ± 0.9% to 6.8% ± 0.5% for the no prior CGM group. For those with prior CGM experience, the mean percentage of in-target SG values increased from 66.9% ± 12.5% to 72.6% ± 9.1%, and for those with no prior CGM experience it increased from 66.6% ± 11.7% to 71.5% ± 8.5%. Similar improvement in glucose values in the low and high ranges, relative to baseline, was observed for both groups. Resulting outcomes, from baseline to study end, did not differ between each group. These findings suggest that individuals without prior CGM experience, and those already using CGM, will benefit similarly with use of the FDA-approved MiniMed 670G HCL system therapy.

Accuracy of a Fourth-Generation Subcutaneous Continuous Glucose Sensor.

BACKGROUND: This study evaluated the accuracy and performance of a fourth-generation subcutaneous glucose sensor (Guardian™ Sensor 3) in the abdomen and arm. METHODS: Eighty-eight subjects (14-75 years of age, mean ± standard deviation [SD] of 42.0 ± 19.1 years) with type 1 or type 2 diabetes participated in the study. Subjects wore two sensors in the abdomen that were paired with either a MiniMed™ 640G insulin pump, or an iPhone® or iPod® touch® running a glucose monitoring mobile application (Guardian Connect system) and a third sensor in the arm, which was connected to a glucose sensor recorder (GSR). Subjects were also asked to undergo in-clinic visits of 12-14 h on study days 1, 3, and 7 for frequent blood glucose sample testing using a Yellow Springs Instrument (YSI) reference. RESULTS: The overall mean absolute relative difference (MARD ± SD) between abdomen sensor glucose (SG) and YSI reference values was 9.6% ± 9.0% and 9.4% ± 9.8% for the MiniMed 640G insulin pump and Guardian Connect system, respectively; and 8.7% ± 8.0% between arm SG and YSI reference values. The percentage of SG values within 20% agreement of the YSI reference value (for YSI >80 mg/dL) was 90.7% with the MiniMed 640G insulin pump, 91.8% with the Guardian Connect system, and 93.1% for GSR-connected arm sensors. Mean functional sensor life, when calibrating 3-4 times/day, was 145.9 ± 39.3 h for sensors paired with the MiniMed 640G insulin pump, 146.1 ± 41.6 h for sensors paired with the Guardian Connect system, and 147.6 ± 40.4 h for sensors connected to the GSR. Responses to survey questions regarding sensor comfort and ease of use were favorable. CONCLUSIONS: The Guardian Sensor 3 glucose sensor, whether located in abdomen or the arm, provided accurate glucose readings when compared with the YSI reference and demonstrated functional life commensurate with the intended 7-day use. ClinicalTrials.gov : NCT02246582.

Factors associated with improved glycemic control following continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion therapy in patients with type 2 diabetes uncontrolled with bolus-basal insulin regimens: An analysis from the OpT2mise randomized trial.

This analysis investigated factors associated with the decrease in HbA1c in patients receiving continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) in the OpT2mise randomized trial. In this study, patients with type 2 diabetes and HbA1c >8% following multiple daily injections (MDI) optimization were randomized to receive CSII (n = 168) or MDI (n = 163) for 6 months. Patient-related and treatment-related factors associated with decreased HbA1c in the CSII arm were identified by univariate and multivariate analyses. CSII produced a significantly greater reduction in HbA1c than MDI, and the treatment difference increased with baseline HbA1c. In the CSII arm, the only factors significantly associated with decreased HbA1c were higher baseline HbA1c (P < .001), geographical region (P < .001), higher educational level (P = .012), higher total cholesterol level (P = .002), lower variability of baseline glucose values on continuous glucose monitoring (P < .001) and the decrease in average fasting self-monitored blood glucose at 6 months (P < .001). These findings suggest that CSII offers an option to improve glycemic control in a broad range of patients with type 2 diabetes in whom control cannot be achieved with MDI. OpT2mise ClinicalTrials.gov number: NCT01182493 (https://clinicaltrials.gov/).

Glucose Outcomes with the In-Home Use of a Hybrid Closed-Loop Insulin Delivery System in Adolescents and Adults with Type 1 Diabetes.

BACKGROUND: The safety and effectiveness of the in-home use of a hybrid closed-loop (HCL) system that automatically increases, decreases, and suspends insulin delivery in response to continuous glucose monitoring were investigated. METHODS: Adolescents (n = 30, ages 14-21 years) and adults (n = 94, ages 22-75 years) with type 1 diabetes participated in a multicenter (nine sites in the United States, one site in Israel) pivotal trial. The Medtronic MiniMed® 670G system was used during a 2-week run-in phase without HCL control, or Auto Mode, enabled (Manual Mode) and, thereafter, with Auto Mode enabled during a 3-month study phase. A supervised hotel stay (6 days/5 nights) that included a 24-h frequent blood sample testing with a reference measurement (i-STAT) occurred during the study phase. RESULTS: Adolescents (mean ± standard deviation [SD] 16.5 ± 2.29 years of age and 7.7 ± 4.15 years of diabetes) used the system for a median 75.8% (interquartile range [IQR] 68.0%-88.4%) of the time (2977 patient-days). Adults (mean ± SD 44.6 ± 12.79 years of age and 26.4 ± 12.43 years of diabetes) used the system for a median 88.0% (IQR 77.6%-92.7%) of the time (9412 patient-days). From baseline run-in to the end of study phase, adolescent and adult HbA1c levels decreased from 7.7% ± 0.8% to 7.1% ± 0.6% (P < 0.001) and from 7.3% ± 0.9% to 6.8% ± 0.6% (P < 0.001, Wilcoxon signed-rank test), respectively. The proportion of overall in-target (71-180 mg/dL) sensor glucose (SG) values increased from 60.4% ± 10.9% to 67.2% ± 8.2% (P < 0.001) in adolescents and from 68.8% ± 11.9% to 73.8% ± 8.4% (P < 0.001) in adults. During the hotel stay, the proportion of in-target i-STAT® blood glucose values was 67.4% ± 27.7% compared to SG values of 72.0% ± 11.6% for adolescents and 74.2% ± 17.5% compared to 76.9% ± 8.3% for adults. There were no severe hypoglycemic or diabetic ketoacidosis events in either cohort. CONCLUSIONS: HCL therapy was safe during in-home use by adolescents and adults and the study phase demonstrated increased time in target, and reductions in HbA1c, hyperglycemia and hypoglycemia, compared to baseline. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT02463097.

Insulin pump treatment compared with multiple daily injections for treatment of type 2 diabetes (OpT2mise): a randomised open-label controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Many patients with advanced type 2 diabetes do not meet their glycated haemoglobin targets and randomised controlled studies comparing the efficacy of pump treatment and multiple daily injections for lowering glucose in insulin-treated patients have yielded inconclusive results. We aimed to resolve this uncertainty with a randomised controlled trial (OpT2mise). METHODS: We did this multicentre, controlled trial at 36 hospitals, tertiary care centres, and referal centres in Canada, Europe, Israel, South Africa, and the USA. Patients with type 2 diabetes who had poor glycaemic control despite multiple daily injections with insulin analogues were enrolled into a 2-month dose-optimisation run-in period. After the run-in period, patients with glycated haemoglobin of 8·0-12·0% (64-108 mmol/mol) were randomly assigned (1:1) by a computer-generated randomisation sequence (block size 2 with probability 0·75 and size 4 with probability 0·25) to pump treatment or to continue with multiple daily injections. Neither patients nor investigators were masked to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was change in mean glycated haemoglobin between baseline and end of the randomised phase for the intention-to-treat population. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01182493. FINDINGS: 495 of 590 screened patients entered the run-in phase and 331 were randomised (168 to pump treatment, 163 to multiple daily injections). Mean glycated haemoglobin at baseline was 9% (75 mmol/mol) in both groups. At 6 months, mean glycated haemoglobin had decreased by 1·1% (SD 1·2; 12 mmol/mol, SD 13) in the pump treatment group and 0·4% (SD 1·1; 4 mmol/mol, SD 12) in the multiple daily injection group, resulting in a between-group treatment difference of -0·7% (95% CI -0·9 to -0·4; -8 mmol/mol, 95% CI -10 to -4, p<0·0001). At the end of the study, the mean total daily insulin dose was 97 units (SD 56) with pump treatment versus 122 units (SD 68) for multiple daily injections (p<0·0001), with no significant difference in bodyweight change between the two groups (1·5 kg [SD 3·5] vs 1·1 kg [3·6], p=0·322). Two diabetes-related serious adverse events (hyperglycaemia or ketosis without acidosis) resulting in hospital admission occurred in the pump treatment group compared with one in the multiple daily injection group. No ketoacidosis occurred in either group and one episode of severe hypoglycaemia occurred in the multiple daily injection group. INTERPRETATION: In patients with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes despite using multiple daily injections of insulin, pump treatment can be considered as a safe and valuable treatment option. FUNDING: Medtronic.

Accuracy and acceptability of the 6-day Enlite continuous subcutaneous glucose sensor.

OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated the performance and acceptability of the Enlite(®) glucose sensor (Medtronic MiniMed, Inc., Northridge, CA). SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Ninety adults with type 1 or type 2 diabetes wore two Enlite sensors on the abdomen and/or buttock for 6 days and calibrated them at different frequencies. On Days 1, 3, and 6, accuracy was evaluated by comparison of sensor glucose values with frequently sampled plasma glucose values collected over a 12-h period. Accuracy was assessed at different reference glucose concentrations and during times when absolute glucose concentration rates of change were <1, 1-2, and >2 mg/dL/min. The sensor's ability to detect hypoglycemia or hyperglycemia was evaluated with simulated alerts. Subject satisfaction was evaluated with a 7-point Likert-type questionnaire, with a score of 7 indicating strong agreement. RESULTS: With abdomen sensors under actual-use calibration (mean, 2.8 ± 0.9 times/day), the overall mean (median) absolute relative difference (ARD) values between sensor and reference values were 13.6% (10.1%); the corresponding buttock sensor ARD values were 15.5% (10.5%). With abdomen sensors under minimal calibration (mean, 1.2 ± 0.9 times/day), the mean (median) ARD values were 14.7% (10.8%). Mean ARD values of abdomen sensors at rates of change of <1, 1-2, and >2 mg/dL/min were 13.6%, 12.9%, and 16.3%, respectively. With abdomen sensors, 79.5% and 94.1% of hypoglycemic and hyperglycemic events, respectively, were correctly detected; 81.9% and 94.9% of hypoglycemic and hyperglycemic alerts, respectively, were confirmed. The failure rates for abdomen and buttock sensors were 19.7% and 13.9%, respectively. Mean responses to survey questions for all subjects related to comfort and ease of use were favorable. CONCLUSIONS: The Enlite sensor provided accurate data at different glucose concentrations and rates of change. Subjects found the sensor comfortable and easy to use.