Twelve-month results of the ADAPT randomized controlled trial: Reproducibility and sustainability of advanced hybrid closed-loop therapy outcomes versus conventional therapy in adults with type 1 diabetes.

AIMS: To reassess the 6-month efficacy and to assess the 12-month sustained efficacy of the MiniMed™ 780G advanced hybrid closed-loop automated insulin delivery (AID) system compared to multiple daily injections plus intermittently scanned glucose monitoring (MDI+isCGM) in people with type 1 diabetes not meeting glucose targets. METHODS: The ADAPT study was a prospective, multicentre, open-label, randomized control trial in people with type 1 diabetes, with a glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) concentration of at least 8.0% (64 mmol/mol), on MDI+isCGM therapy. After a 6-month study phase, participants randomized at baseline to MDI+isCGM switched to AID (SWITCH) while the others continued AID therapy (SUSTAIN) for an additional 6 months. The primary endpoint of this continuation phase was the within-group change in mean HbA1c between 6 and 12 months, with superiority in the SWITCH group and noninferiority in the SUSTAIN group (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04235504). RESULTS: A total of 39 SWITCH and 36 SUSTAIN participants entered the continuation phase. In the SWITCH group, HbA1c was significantly decreased by -1.4% (95% confidence interval [CI] -1.7% to -1.1%; P < 0.001) from a mean ± SD of 8.9% ± 0.8% (73.9 ± 8.6 mmol/mol) at 6 months to 7.5% ± 0.6% (58.5 ± 6.9 mmol/mol) at 12 months. Mean HbA1c increased by 0.1% (95% CI -0.05% to +0.25%), from 7.3% ± 0.6% (56.5 ± 6.7 mmol/mol) to 7.4% ± 0.8% (57.7 ± 9.1 mmol/mol) in the SUSTAIN group, meeting noninferiority criteria. Three severe hypoglycaemia events occurred in two SWITCH participants during the continuation phase. CONCLUSION: ADAPT study phase glycaemic improvements were reproduced and sustained in the continuation phase, supporting the early adoption of AID therapy in people with type 1 diabetes not meeting glucose targets on MDI therapy.

Clinical evaluation of UrgoStart Plus dressings in real-life conditions: results of a prospective multicentre study on 961 patients.

AIMS: This study aimed to evaluate the performances of lipid colloid technology with nano-oligosaccharide factor (TLC-NOSF) dressings with polyabsorbent fibres in an unselected population of patients under real-life conditions. METHODS: A large, prospective, multicentre, observational study with three polyabsorbent TLC-NOSF dressings (UrgoStart Plus Pad, UrgoStart Plus and UrgoStart Plus Border, Laboratoires Urgo, France) was conducted in Germany between January 2019 and June 2020. Main outcomes included wound healing rate, clinical assessment of wound healing progression, local tolerance and acceptance of dressings, and changes in health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of the patients, assessed with the validated Wound-QoL questionnaire. RESULTS: A total of 961 patients with wounds of various aetiologies (leg ulcers (LU), diabetic foot ulcers (DFU), pressure ulcers (PU) and other types of wounds) were treated with the evaluated dressings in 105 centres for a mean duration of 62 days (standard deviation 37 days). By the last visit, a wound closure or an improvement in wound healing was reported in 92.0% of the treated wounds. The highest wound closure rates were achieved when the dressings were used as first-line treatment: 71.3% in DFUs, 52.9% in LUs, 53.6% in PUs and 61.8% in the other wounds. Improvement of the wound healing process was also associated with an 87.5% relative reduction of sloughy tissue, a decrease of the level of exudate in 68.9% of the wounds, and an improvement in the periwound skin condition in 66.4% of the patients at the final visit. The dressings were 'very well' or 'well' tolerated and 'very well' or 'well' accepted by the large majority of patients. The HRQoL questionnaires were completed both at initial and final visits by 337 patients, representative of the total cohort. Despite the relatively short duration of the wounds, the HRQoL of the patients was already impaired at baseline, with 81.6% of the patients being severely affected in at least one aspect of their HRQoL. By the final visit, significant improvements in each dimension of the patients' HRQoL were reported (p<0.001), along with a reduction of the proportion of patients in need of intervention and in the number of actions needed per patient in relation to their HRQoL. CONCLUSIONS: These results are consistent with previous clinical evidence on TLC-NOSF dressings. They confirm the good healing properties and safety profile of these dressings, and that a significant improvement in patient HRQoL is achieved in non-selected patients treated in real-life practice. These data support the use of such dressings as a first-line intervention and until wound healing in the management of chronic wounds, in association with appropriate standard of care.

Efficacy of MMP-inhibiting wound dressings in the treatment of chronic wounds: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: Matrix metalloproteinases (MMPs) substantially contribute to the development of chronicity in wounds. Thus, MMP-inhibiting dressings may support healing. A systematic review was performed to determine the existing evidence base for the treatment of hard-to-heal wounds with these dressings. METHODS: A systematic literature search in databases and clinical trial registers was conducted to identify randomised controlled trials (RCTs) investigating the efficacy of MMP-inhibiting dressings. Studies were analysed regarding their quality and clinical evidence. RESULTS: Of 721 hits, 16 relevant studies were assessed. There were 13 studies performed with collagen and three with technology lipido-colloid nano oligosaccharide factor (TLC-NOSF) dressings. Indications included diabetic foot ulcers, venous leg ulcers, pressure ulcers or wounds of mixed origin. Patient-relevant endpoints comprised wound size reduction, complete wound closure, healing time and rate. Considerable differences in the quality and subsequent clinical evidence exist between the studies identified. Substantial evidence for significant improvement in healing was identified only for some dressings. CONCLUSION: Evidence for the superiority of some MMP-inhibiting wound dressings exists regarding wound closure, wound size reduction, healing time and healing rate. More research is required to substantiate the existing evidence for different types of hard-to-heal wounds and to generate evidence for some of the different types of MMP-inhibiting wound dressings.

[Sucrose octasulfate-evidence in the treatment of chronic wounds]. / Sucrose Octasulfat ­ Evidenz in der Behandlung chronischer Wunden.

Patients with chronic wounds should receive wound treatment in addition to causative therapy. In this context, the lack of adequate evidence for wound healing products has been repeatedly discussed. Using the example of TLC-sucrose octasulfate (TLC: technology lipido-colloid), the present review shows that there is significant data with good evidence and comparability in this area. One therapeutic approach to promote wound healing is the inhibition of matrix-metalloproteinases, for example by sucrose octasulfate. For wound products containing TLC-sucrose octasulfate, several sequential clinical studies have been conducted in recent years. The WHAT study was an open randomized controlled trial (RCT) with 117 patients with venous leg ulcers (VLU). The CHALLENGE study was a double-blind RCT with 187 patients with VLU. The SPID study was a pilot study with 33 patients with diabetic foot ulcers (DFU). The two prospective, multicenter clinical pilot studies NEREIDES and CASSIOPEE examined a total of 88 patients with VLU in different phases of healing. In the REALITY study, a pooled data analysis was performed on eight observational studies with 10,220 patients with chronic wounds of different genesis. In the double-blind, two-armed EXPLORER RCT, 240 patients with neuro-ischemic DFU were followed from first presentation until complete healing. In all studies, a significant promotion of wound healing could be shown by the use of wound healing products with TLC-sucrose octasulfate.

Advanced Hybrid Closed Loop in Adult Population With Type 1 Diabetes: A Substudy From the ADAPT Randomized Controlled Trial in Users of Real-Time Continuous Glucose Monitoring.

BACKGROUND: This analysis reports the findings from a predefined exploratory cohort (cohort B) from the ADAPT (ADvanced Hybrid Closed Loop Study in Adult Population with Type 1 Diabetes) study. Adults with type 1 diabetes (T1D) with suboptimal glucose control were randomly allocated to an advanced hybrid closed-loop (AHCL) system or multiple daily injections of insulin (MDI) plus real-time continuous glucose monitoring (RT-CGM). METHODS: In this prospective, multicenter, exploratory, open-label, randomized controlled trial, 13 participants using MDI + RT-CGM and with HbA1c ≥8.0% were randomized to switch to AHCL (n = 8) or continue with MDI + RT-CGM (n = 5) for six months. Prespecified endpoints included the between-group difference in mean change from baseline in HbA1c, CGM-derived measures of glycemic control, and safety. RESULTS: The mean HbA1c level decreased by 1.70 percentage points in the AHCL group versus a 0.60 percentage point decrease in the MDI + RT-CGM group, with a model-based treatment effect of -1.08 percentage points (95% confidence interval [CI] = -2.17 to 0.00 percentage points; P = .0508) in favor of AHCL. The percentage of time spent with sensor glucose levels between 70 and 180 mg/dL in the study phase was 73.6% in the AHCL group and 46.4% in the MDI + RT-CGM group; model-based between-group difference of 28.8 percentage points (95% CI = 12.3 to 45.3 percentage points; P = .0035). No diabetic ketoacidosis or severe hypoglycemia occurred in either group. CONCLUSIONS: In people with T1D with HbA1c ≥8.0%, the use of AHCL resulted in improved glycemic control relative to MDI + RT-CGM. The scale of improvement suggests that AHCL should be considered as an option for people not achieving good glycemic control on MDI + RT-CGM.

Level of Digitalization in Germany: Results of the Diabetes Digitalization and Technology (D.U.T) Report 2020.

BACKGROUND: New diagnostic and therapeutic technologies are increasingly changing the treatment of people with diabetes (PWD), along with increased usage of digital tools. To date, however, there is little data to which level and how diabetologists and PWD implement digitalization. Also, not much is known about the view of diabetologists on the current status and future developments in this respect. METHOD: In an online survey, diabetologists working in clinics and practices across Germany provided responses regarding their view on digitalization and the adoption of new technologies in diabetology to 56 questions. These comments reflect the opinion of several experts about the current importance and use of specific digital/technological topics. RESULTS: Overall, 326 diabetologists took part in the survey. They reported a positive attitude (75.8%) toward new technologies and digitalization, and they see more advantages rather than disadvantages. Younger age of the diabetologists was significantly associated with a more positive attitude (r = -0.176; P < .01), and there was no gender effect (P = .738). On average, in each practice, 5.5% of PWD are using an insulin pump for therapy, 4.8% a real-time continuous glucose monitoring system, 16.9% an intermittent scanning continuous glucose monitoring system, and 0.3% an automated insulin delivery (AID) system. With respect to digitalization, the three most important current topics are software for glucose data analysis (average rank on a scale from one to six, with one being the most important: 2.4), compatibility with other systems (2.9), and AID systems (3.8)). CONCLUSIONS: This survey, which is going to be repeated annually, showed that the diabetologists who participated predominantly have a positive attitude toward new technologies and digital applications and were aware of the associated advantages. However, perceived disadvantages need to be addressed to enable wider adoption of new technologies and digital solutions.

Advanced hybrid closed loop therapy versus conventional treatment in adults with type 1 diabetes (ADAPT): a randomised controlled study.

BACKGROUND: Adults with type 1 diabetes who are treated with multiple daily injections of insulin plus intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitoring (isCGM) can have suboptimal glucose control. We aimed to assess the efficacy of an advanced hybrid closed loop (AHCL) system compared with such therapy in this population. METHODS: The Advanced Hybrid Closed Loop Study in Adult Population with Type 1 Diabetes (ADAPT) trial is a prospective, multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled trial that involved 14 centres in three European countries (France, Germany, and the UK). We enrolled patients who were at least 18 years of age, had a type 1 diabetes duration of at least 2 years, HbA1c of at least 8% (64 mmol/mol), and were using multiple daily injections of insulin plus isCGM (cohort A) or real time continuous glucose monitoring (cohort B) for at least 3 months. Here, only results for cohort A are reported. Participants were randomly allocated 1:1 to AHCL therapy or continuation of multiple daily injections of insulin plus continuous glucose monitoring for 6 months with an investigator-blinded block randomisation procedure. Participants and treating clinicians could not be masked to the arm assignment. The primary endpoint was the between-group difference in mean HbA1c change from baseline to 6 months in the intention-to-treat population using AHCL therapy and those using multiple daily injections of insulin plus isCGM. The primary endpoint was analysed using a repeated measures random-effects model with the study arm and period as factors. Safety endpoints included the number of device deficiencies, severe hypoglycaemic events, diabetic ketoacidosis, and serious adverse events. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04235504. FINDINGS: Between July 13, 2020, and March 12, 2021, 105 people were screened and 82 randomly assigned to treatment (41 in each arm). At 6 months, mean HbA1c had decreased by 1·54% (SD 0·73), from 9·00% to 7·32% in the AHCL group and 0·20% (0·80) in the multiple daily injections of insulin plus isCGM from 9·07% to 8·91% (model-based difference -1·42%, 95% CI -1·74 to -1·10; p<0·0001). No diabetic ketoacidosis, severe hypoglycaemia, or serious adverse events related to study devices occurred in either group; two severe hypoglycaemic events occurred in the run-in phase. 15 device-related non-serious adverse events occurred in the AHCL group, compared with three in the multiple daily injections of insulin plus isCGM group. Two serious adverse events occurred (one in each group), these were breast cancer (in one patient in the AHCL group) and intravitreous haemorrhage (in one patient in the multiple daily injections of insulin plus isCGM group). INTERPRETATION: In people with type 1 diabetes using multiple daily injections of insulin plus isCGM and with HbA1c of at least 8%, the use of AHCL confers benefits in terms of glycaemic control beyond those that can be achieved with multiple daily injections of insulin plus isCGM. These data support wider access to AHCL in people with type 1 diabetes not at target glucose levels. FUNDING: Medtronic International Trading Sàrl.

Impact of Fast-Acting Insulin Aspart on Glycemic Control in Patients with Type 1 Diabetes Using Intermittent-Scanning Continuous Glucose Monitoring Within a Real-World Setting: The GoBolus Study.

Background: The GoBolus study investigated the real-world effectiveness of faster aspart in patients with type 1 diabetes (T1D) using intermittent-scanning continuous glucose monitoring (iscCGM) systems. Methods: This 24-week, multicenter, single-arm, noninterventional study investigated adults with T1D (HbA1c, 7.5%-9.5%) receiving multiple daily injections (MDI) of insulin and using iscCGM within local healthcare settings for ≥6 months before switching to faster aspart at study start (week 0; baseline). Primary endpoint was HbA1c change from baseline to week 24. Exploratory endpoint was change in iscCGM metrics from baseline to week 24. Results: Overall, 243 patients were included (55.6% male), with mean age/diabetes duration, 49.9/18.8 years; mean HbA1c, 8.1%. By week 24, HbA1c had decreased by 0.19% (-2.1 mmol/mol, P < 0.0001) with no mean change in insulin doses or basal/bolus insulin ratios. For patients with sufficient available iscCGM data (n = 92): "time in range" (TIR; 3.9-10.0 mmol/L) increased from 46.9% to 50.1% (P = 0.01), corresponding to an increase of 46.1 min/day; time in hyperglycemia decreased from 49.1% to 46.1% (>10.0 mmol/L, P = 0.026) and 20.4% to 17.9% (>13.9 mmol/L, P = 0.013), corresponding to 43.5 (P = 0.024) and 35.6 (P = 0.015) fewer minutes per day on average spent in these ranges, respectively; no change for time in hypoglycemia (<3.9 and <3.0 mmol/L). Mean interstitial and postprandial glucose improved from 10.4 to 10.1 mmol/L (P = 0.035) and 11.9 to 11.0 mmol/L (P = 0.002), respectively. Conclusion: Real-world switching to faster aspart in adults with T1D on MDI improved HbA1c, increased TIR, and decreased time in hyperglycemia without affecting time in hypoglycemia. The GoBolus study: NCT03450863.

AGP and Nutrition - Analysing postprandial glucose courses with CGM.

Nutritional therapies are one of the fundamentals of effective management of diabetes type 1 and type 2. Lifestyle interventions, including nutritional recommendations, are also part of the basic therapy for people with prediabetes or obesity. It is recommended that the diet should be individually adapted to personal circumstances, preferences and metabolic goals. In the age of digitalisation, mHealth interventions, like continuous glucose monitoring systems (CGM), are increasingly finding their way into nutrition therapy. The ambulatory glucose profile (AGP), a structured and graphical compilation of the obtained CGM data, can also be used as a support for dietary adjustment. After assessment of the glycaemic situation (hypoglycaemia, variability and stability of glucose levels). This publication aims to provide a general overview of nutritional recommendations, especially in Germany, and to describe the benefits of CGM measurements with regard to nutrition.

[Diabetes mellitus: Which risks do smartphone apps have?]. / Diabetes mellitus: Gefahr durch Smartphone-Apps?

Medical apps are increasingly used by patients and doctors. However, it lacks systematic studies that deal with potential hazards. In a recent study, two-thirds of the examined insulin bolus calculator apps were associated with some major risks for the patient.