RESUMEN
Diabetes Technology Society hosted its annual Diabetes Technology Meeting from November 1 to November 4, 2023. Meeting topics included digital health; metrics of glycemia; the integration of glucose and insulin data into the electronic health record; technologies for insulin pumps, blood glucose monitors, and continuous glucose monitors; diabetes drugs and analytes; skin physiology; regulation of diabetes devices and drugs; and data science, artificial intelligence, and machine learning. A live demonstration of a personalized carbohydrate dispenser for people with diabetes was presented.
Asunto(s)
Automonitorización de la Glucosa Sanguínea , Diabetes Mellitus , Sistemas de Infusión de Insulina , Humanos , Diabetes Mellitus/sangre , Diabetes Mellitus/tratamiento farmacológico , Automonitorización de la Glucosa Sanguínea/instrumentación , Glucemia/análisis , Hipoglucemiantes/administración & dosificación , Hipoglucemiantes/uso terapéutico , Insulina/administración & dosificación , Inteligencia Artificial , Registros Electrónicos de SaludRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: A composite metric for the quality of glycemia from continuous glucose monitor (CGM) tracings could be useful for assisting with basic clinical interpretation of CGM data. METHODS: We assembled a data set of 14-day CGM tracings from 225 insulin-treated adults with diabetes. Using a balanced incomplete block design, 330 clinicians who were highly experienced with CGM analysis and interpretation ranked the CGM tracings from best to worst quality of glycemia. We used principal component analysis and multiple regressions to develop a model to predict the clinician ranking based on seven standard metrics in an Ambulatory Glucose Profile: very low-glucose and low-glucose hypoglycemia; very high-glucose and high-glucose hyperglycemia; time in range; mean glucose; and coefficient of variation. RESULTS: The analysis showed that clinician rankings depend on two components, one related to hypoglycemia that gives more weight to very low-glucose than to low-glucose and the other related to hyperglycemia that likewise gives greater weight to very high-glucose than to high-glucose. These two components should be calculated and displayed separately, but they can also be combined into a single Glycemia Risk Index (GRI) that corresponds closely to the clinician rankings of the overall quality of glycemia (r = 0.95). The GRI can be displayed graphically on a GRI Grid with the hypoglycemia component on the horizontal axis and the hyperglycemia component on the vertical axis. Diagonal lines divide the graph into five zones (quintiles) corresponding to the best (0th to 20th percentile) to worst (81st to 100th percentile) overall quality of glycemia. The GRI Grid enables users to track sequential changes within an individual over time and compare groups of individuals. CONCLUSION: The GRI is a single-number summary of the quality of glycemia. Its hypoglycemia and hyperglycemia components provide actionable scores and a graphical display (the GRI Grid) that can be used by clinicians and researchers to determine the glycemic effects of prescribed and investigational treatments.
Asunto(s)
Hiperglucemia , Hipoglucemia , Adulto , Humanos , Glucemia , Automonitorización de la Glucosa Sanguínea , Hipoglucemia/diagnóstico , Hiperglucemia/diagnóstico , GlucosaRESUMEN
The prevalence of type 1 diabetes (T1D) is increasing worldwide. T1D reduces life expectancy due to complications including cardiovascular disease. Sodium-glucose co-transporter (SGLT) inhibitors are a new class of drugs developed to treat type 2 diabetes (T2D), and now they can be used as an adjunct to insulin in T1D. In clinical trials, they have been shown to improve glycaemic control and decrease body weight without the risk of increased hypoglycaemia and with a reduction in insulin dose. Four SGLT2 inhibitors have been approved in Europe for the treatment of T2D, while only dapagliflozin and sotagliflozin, a dual SGLT1 and SGLT2 inhibitor approved in 2019, have been approved for the treatment of T1D. Both can be used as an adjunct therapy in combination with insulin in adults with a body mass index (BMI) of ≥27 kg/m2, inadequately controlled with insulin. In Europe, dapagliflozin is the only currently available SGLT2 inhibitor indcated as adjunct therapy for patients with T1D. The subgroup of patients with a BMI of ≥27 kg/m2 from the DEPICT-1 and -2 trials (Dapagliflozin Evaluation in Patients with Inadequately Controlled Type 1 diabetes) showed similar reduction in hyperglycaemia and body weight but no significant increased risk of diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) than the overall trial population. The risk of DKA has been shown to increase in patients with T1D treated with adjunct therapy with SGLT2 inhibitors, and studies on sotagliflozin and empagliflozin have suggested a dose response. Thus, it is important to educate patients and doctors how to recognize symptoms of upcoming DKA and mitigate it. An independent DKA education programme has recently been developed to instruct patients with T1D being treated with SGLT inhibitor therapies with and without insulin pumps to prevent, identify and treat DKA. Despite these considerations, clinical trials support the use of SGLT2 inhibitors in the management of T1D. The benefits and potential risks of dapagliflozin as an adjunct therapy to insulin in adults with T1D should be considered in each individual case. Here we discuss the efficacy and safety of dapagliflozin as adjunct therapy in patients with T1D.
RESUMEN
Diving by persons with diabetes has long been conducted, with formal guidelines published in the early 1990s. Subsequent consensus guidelines produced following a 2005 workshop helped to advance the recognition of relevant issues and promote discussion. The guidelines were intended as an interim step in guidance, with the expectation that revisions should follow the gathering of additional data and experience. Recent and ongoing developments in pharmacology and technology can further aid in reducing the risk of hypoglycemia, a critical acute concern of diving with diabetes. Careful and periodic evaluation remains crucial to ensure that participation in diving activity is appropriate. Close self-monitoring, thoughtful adjustments of medications and meals, and careful review of the individual response to diving can assist in optimising control and ensuring safety. Open communication with diving partners, support personnel, and medical monitors is important to ensure that all are prepared to effectively assist in case of need. Ongoing vigilance, best practice, including graduated clearance for diving exposures and adverse event reporting, are all required to ensure the safety of diving with diabetes and to promote community understanding and acceptance.
Asunto(s)
Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2 , Buceo , Hipoglucemia , Buceo/fisiología , Humanos , Hipoglucemia/etiología , Hipoglucemia/prevención & controlRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Real-world data regarding indications for use of insulin pump remain sparse. We investigated characteristics among individuals with type 1 diabetes (T1D) in relation to indication for use of insulin pump (CSII). Comparison was made with T1D subjects using multiple daily injections (MDI). METHODS: We included all individuals with T1D who had at least 1 registration in the National Diabetes Register during 2014-2015. Among 46 874 individuals, we excluded 2350 due to missing data. We examined 35 725 on MDI and 8799 on CSII regarding characteristics in relation to insulin delivery method, as well as association between insulin delivery and glycemic control (HbA1c) and presence of albuminuria. RESULTS: Unadjusted mean (SD) HbA1c was 63.84 (15.07) mmol/mol (7.99 [1.38]%) and 63.75 (13.19) mmol/mol (7.99 [1.21]%) in the MDI and CSII group, respectively. MDI and CSII users were on average 48.8 and 41.5 years old, respectively. MDI users were on average 26 years old and CSII users 17 years old at the time of diabetes diagnosis. Overall, a higher proportion of CSII users were females (53.5%). As compared with MDI, use of CSII was associated with up to 7.84 mmol/mol (0.72%) lower HbA1c in a multivariable adjusted model. Use of CSII was, however, not associated with risk of having albuminuria. CONCLUSIONS: CSII was used more frequently in younger individuals, early-onset diabetes, and problematic glycemic control. The use of CSII was associated with lower HbA1c among CSII users except from those who started CSII due to high HbA1c.
Asunto(s)
Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 1/tratamiento farmacológico , Hipoglucemiantes/administración & dosificación , Sistemas de Infusión de Insulina/estadística & datos numéricos , Insulina/administración & dosificación , Adulto , Femenino , Hemoglobina Glucada/análisis , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana EdadRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: Insulin degludec (IDeg) is a basal insulin that forms soluble multihexamers after subcutaneous injection, resulting in an ultra-long action profile. We assessed the efficacy and safety of IDeg formulations administered once daily in combination with mealtime insulin aspart in people with type 1 diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: In this 16-week, randomized, open-label trial, participants (mean: 45.8 years old, A1C 8.4%, fasting plasma glucose [FPG] 9.9 mmol/L, BMI 26.9 kg/m(2)) received subcutaneous injections of IDeg(A) (600 µmol/L; n = 59), IDeg(B) (900 µmol/L; n = 60), or insulin glargine (IGlar; n = 59), all given once daily in the evening. Insulin aspart was administered at mealtimes. RESULTS At 16 weeks, mean A1C was comparable for IDeg(A) (7.8 ± 0.8%), IDeg(B) (8.0 ± 1.0%), and IGlar (7.6 ± 0.8%), as was FPG (8.3 ± 4.0, 8.3 ± 2.8, and 8.9 ± 3.5 mmol/L, respectively). Estimated mean rates of confirmed hypoglycemia were 28% lower for IDeg(A) compared with IGlar (rate ratio [RR]: 0.72 [95% CI 0.52-1.00]) and 10% lower for IDeg(B) compared with IGlar (RR: 0.90 [0.65-1.24]); rates of nocturnal hypoglycemia were 58% lower for IDeg(A) (RR: 0.42 [0.25-0.69]) and 29% lower for IDeg(B) (RR: 0.71 [0.44-1.16]). Mean total daily insulin dose was similar to baseline. The frequency and pattern of adverse events was similar between insulin treatments. CONCLUSIONS: In this clinical exploratory phase 2 trial in people with type 1 diabetes, IDeg is safe and well tolerated and provides comparable glycemic control to IGlar at similar doses, with reduced rates of hypoglycemia.