Intermittently Scanned Continuous Glucose Monitoring for Type 1 Diabetes.

BACKGROUND: In persons with type 1 diabetes and high glycated hemoglobin levels, the benefits of intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitoring with optional alarms for high and low blood glucose levels are uncertain. METHODS: In a parallel-group, multicenter, randomized, controlled trial involving participants with type 1 diabetes and glycated hemoglobin levels between 7.5% and 11.0%, we investigated the efficacy of intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitoring as compared with participant monitoring of blood glucose levels with fingerstick testing. The primary outcome was the glycated hemoglobin level at 24 weeks, analyzed according to the intention-to-treat principle. Key secondary outcomes included sensor data, participant-reported outcome measures, and safety. RESULTS: A total of 156 participants were randomly assigned, in a 1:1 ratio, to undergo intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitoring (the intervention group, 78 participants) or to monitor their own blood glucose levels with fingerstick testing (the usual-care group, 78 participants). At baseline, the mean (±SD) age of the participants was 44±15 years, and the mean duration of diabetes was 21±13 years; 44% of the participants were women. The mean baseline glycated hemoglobin level was 8.7±0.9% in the intervention group and 8.5±0.8% in the usual-care group; these levels decreased to 7.9±0.8% and 8.3±0.9%, respectively, at 24 weeks (adjusted mean between-group difference, -0.5 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.7 to -0.3; P<0.001). The time per day that the glucose level was in the target range was 9.0 percentage points (95% CI, 4.7 to 13.3) higher or 130 minutes (95% CI, 68 to 192) longer in the intervention group than in the usual-care group, and the time spent in a hypoglycemic state (blood glucose level, <70 mg per deciliter [<3.9 mmol per liter]) was 3.0 percentage points (95% CI, 1.4 to 4.5) lower or 43 minutes (95% CI, 20 to 65) shorter in the intervention group. Two participants in the usual-care group had an episode of severe hypoglycemia, and 1 participant in the intervention group had a skin reaction to the sensor. CONCLUSIONS: Among participants with type 1 diabetes and high glycated hemoglobin levels, the use of intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitoring with optional alarms for high and low blood glucose levels resulted in significantly lower glycated hemoglobin levels than levels monitored by fingerstick testing. (Funded by Diabetes UK and others; FLASH-UK ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03815006.).

The use of technology in type 2 diabetes and prediabetes: a narrative review.

The increasing incidence of type 2 diabetes, which represents 90% of diabetes cases globally, is a major public health concern. Improved glucose management reduces the risk of vascular complications and mortality; however, only a small proportion of the type 2 diabetes population have blood glucose levels within the recommended treatment targets. In recent years, diabetes technologies have revolutionised the care of people with type 1 diabetes, and it is becoming increasingly evident that people with type 2 diabetes can also benefit from these advances. In this review, we describe the current knowledge regarding the role of technologies for people living with type 2 diabetes and the evidence supporting their use in clinical practice. We conclude that continuous glucose monitoring systems deliver glycaemic benefits for individuals with type 2 diabetes, whether treated with insulin or non-insulin therapy; further data are required to evaluate the role of these systems in those with prediabetes (defined as impaired glucose tolerance and/or impaired fasting glucose and/or HbA1c levels between 39 mmol/mol [5.7%] and 47 mmol/mol [6.4%]). The use of insulin pumps seems to be safe and effective in people with type 2 diabetes, especially in those with an HbA1c significantly above target. Initial results from studies exploring the impact of closed-loop systems in type 2 diabetes are promising. We discuss directions for future research to fully understand the potential benefits of integrating evidence-based technology into care for people living with type 2 diabetes and prediabetes.

Estimating the cost-effectiveness of intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitoring in adults with type 1 diabetes in England.

OBJECTIVE: We previously showed that intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitoring (isCGM) reduces HbA1c at 24 weeks compared with self-monitoring of blood glucose with finger pricking (SMBG) in adults with type 1 diabetes and high HbA1c levels (58-97 mmol/mol [7.5%-11%]). We aim to assess the economic impact of isCGM compared with SMBG. METHODS: Participant-level baseline and follow-up health status (EQ-5D-5L) and within-trial healthcare resource-use data were collected. Quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were derived at 24 weeks, adjusting for baseline EQ-5D-5L. Participant-level costs were generated. Using the IQVIA CORE Diabetes Model, economic analysis was performed from the National Health Service perspective over a lifetime horizon, discounted at 3.5%. RESULTS: Within-trial EQ-5D-5L showed non-significant adjusted incremental QALY gain of 0.006 (95% CI: -0.007 to 0.019) for isCGM compared with SMBG and an adjusted cost increase of £548 (95% CI: 381-714) per participant. The lifetime projected incremental cost (95% CI) of isCGM was £1954 (-5108 to 8904) with an incremental QALY (95% CI) gain of 0.436 (0.195-0.652) resulting in an incremental cost-per-QALY of £4477. In all subgroups, isCGM had an incremental cost-per-QALY better than £20,000 compared with SMBG; for people with baseline HbA1c >75 mmol/mol (9.0%), it was cost-saving. Sensitivity analysis suggested that isCGM remains cost-effective if its effectiveness lasts for at least 7 years. CONCLUSION: While isCGM is associated with increased short-term costs, compared with SMBG, its benefits in lowering HbA1c will lead to sufficient long-term health-gains and cost-savings to justify costs, so long as the effect lasts into the medium term.

Intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitoring in adults with type 1 diabetes: A subgroup analysis from the FLASH-UK study.

AIMS: The FLASH-UK trial showed lower HbA1c with intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitoring (isCGM), as compared with self monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG), in adults with type 1 diabetes and HbA1c ≥58 mmol/mol (≥7.5%). Here, we present results from the pre-specified subgroup analysis for the 24-week HbA1c (primary outcome) and selected sensor-based secondary outcomes. METHODS: This was a multi-centre, parallel-design, randomised controlled trial. The difference in treatment effect between subgroups (baseline HbA1c [≤75 vs. >75 mmol/mol] [≤9.0 vs >9.0%], treatment modality [pump vs injections], prior participation in structured education, age, educational level, impaired awareness of hypoglycaemia, deprivation index quintile sex, ethnic group and Patient Health Questionnaire-9 [PHQ-9] detected depression category) were evaluated. RESULTS: One hundred fifty-six participants (females 44%, mean [SD] baseline HbA1c 71 [9] mmol/mol 8.6 [0.8%], age 44 [15]) were randomly assigned, in a 1:1 ratio to isCGM (n = 78) or SMBG (n = 78). The mean (SD) baseline HbA1c (%) was 8.7 (0.9) in the isCGM group and 8.5 (0.8) in the SMBG group, lowering to 7.9 (0.8) versus 8.3 (0.9), respectively, at 24 weeks (adjusted mean difference -0.5, 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.7 to -0.3; p < 0.001]. For HbA1c, there was no impact of treatment modality, prior participation in structured education, deprivation index quintile, sex or baseline depression category. The between-group difference in HbA1c was larger for younger people (a reduction of 2.7 [95% CI 0.3-5.0; p = 0.028] mmol/mol for every additional 15 years of age). Those with HbA1c 76-97 mmol/mol (>9.0%-11.0%) had a marginally non-significant higher reduction in HbA1c of 8.4 mmol/mol (3.3-13.5) compared to 3.1 (0.3-6.0) in those with HbA1c 58-75 mmol/mol (p = 0.08). For 'Time in range' (% 3.9-10 mmol/L), the difference was larger for those with at least a bachelor's degree. For 'Time below range' (% <3.9 mmol/L), the difference was larger for those using injections, older people and those with less than bachelor's degree. CONCLUSIONS: Intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitoring is generally effective across a range of baseline characteristics.

Patient-reported outcomes in studies of diabetes technology: What matters.

In recent years, diabetes technologies have revolutionized the care of people with type 1 diabetes (T1D). Emerging evidence suggests that people with type 2 diabetes (T2D) can experience similar benefits from these advances in technology. While glycaemic outcomes are often a primary focus, the lived experience of the person with diabetes is equally important. In this review, we describe the impact of diabetes technologies on patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). We highlight that most of the published studies investigated PROMs as secondary outcomes. Continuous glucose monitoring systems may have an important role in improving PROMs in individuals with T1D, which may be driven by the prevention or proactive management of hypoglycaemia. In people with T2D, continuous glucose monitoring may also have an important role in improving PROMs, particularly in those treated with insulin therapy. The impact of insulin pumps on PROMs seems positive in T1D, while there is limited evidence in T2D. Studies of hybrid closed-loop therapies suggest increased treatment satisfaction, improved quality of life and decreased diabetes-related distress in T1D, but it is unclear whether these benefits are because of a 'class-effect' or individual systems. We conclude that PROMs deserve a more central role in trials and clinical practice, and we discuss directions for future research.

Effect of intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitoring in people with diabetes with a psychosocial indication for initiation.

AIM: To understand the effect of intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitoring (isCGM) in people with diabetes with a 'psychosocial' indication for access. METHODS: The study utilized baseline and follow-up data from the Association of British Clinical Diabetologists nationwide audit of people with diabetes in the UK. Diabetes-related distress (DRD) was assessed using the two-item diabetes-related distress scale (DDS). Participants were categorized into two groups: high DRD (DDS score ≥ 3) and lower DRD (DDS score < 3). The t-test was used to assess the difference in the pre- and post-isCGM continuous variables. RESULTS: The study consisted of 17 036 people with diabetes, with 1314 (7%) using isCGM for 'psychosocial' reasons. Follow-up data were available for 327 participants, 322 (99%) of whom had type 1 diabetes with a median diabetes duration of 15 years; 75% (n = 241) had high levels of DRD. With the initiation of isCGM, after a mean follow-up period of 6.9 months, there was a significant reduction in DDS score; 4 at baseline versus 2.5 at follow-up (P < .001). The prevalence of high DRD reduced from 76% to 38% at follow-up (50% reduction in DRD, P < .001). There was also a significant reduction in HbA1c (78.5 mmol/mol [9.3%] at baseline vs. 66.5 mmol/mol [8.2%] at follow-up; P < .001). This group also experienced an 87% reduction in hospital admissions because of hyperglycaemia/diabetic ketoacidosis (P < .001). CONCLUSION: People with diabetes who had isCGM initiated for a psychosocial indication had high levels of DRD and HbA1c, which improved with the use of isCGM.

Clinical features of type 1 diabetes in older adults and the impact of intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitoring: An Association of British Clinical Diabetologists (ABCD) study.

AIMS: To evaluate the clinical features and impact of flash glucose monitoring in older adults with type 1 diabetes (T1D) across age groups defined as young-old, middle-old, and old-old. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Clinicians were invited to submit anonymized intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitoring (isCGM) user data to a secure web-based tool within the National Health Service secure network. We collected baseline data before isCGM initiation, such as demographics, glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) values from the previous 12 months, Gold scores and Diabetes Distress Scale (DDS2) scores. For analysis, people with diabetes were classified as young-old (65-75 years), middle-old (>75-85 years) and old-old (>85 years). We compared baseline clinical characteristics across the age categories using a t test. All the analyses were performed in R 4.1.2. RESULTS: The study involved 1171 people with diabetes in the young-old group, 374 in the middle-old group, and 47 in the old-old group. There were no significant differences in baseline HbA1c and DDS2 scores among the young-old, middle-old, and old-old age groups. However, Gold score increased with age (3.20 [±1.91] in the young-old vs. 3.46 [±1.94] in the middle-old vs. 4.05 [±2.28] in the old-old group; p < 0.0001). This study showed reduced uptake of insulin pumps (p = 0.005) and structured education (Dose Adjustment For Normal Eating [DAFNE] course; p = 0.007) in the middle-old and old-old populations compared to the young-old population with T1D. With median isCGM use of 7 months, there was a significant improvement in HbA1c in the young-old (p < 0.001) and old-old groups, but not in the middle-old group. Diabetes-related distress score (measured by the DDS2) improved in all three age groups (p < 0.001) and Gold score improved (p < 0.001) in the young-old and old-old populations but not in the middle-old population. There was also a significant improvement in resource utilization across the three age categories following the use of is CGM. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated significant differences in hypoglycaemia awareness and insulin pump use across the older age groups of adults with T1D. The implementation of isCGM demonstrated significant improvements in HbA1c, diabetes-related distress, hypoglycaemia unawareness, and resource utilization in older adults with T1D.

Intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitoring and hypoglycaemia awareness in drivers with diabetes: Insights from the Association of British Clinical Diabetologists Nationwide audit.

AIM: Frequent hypoglycaemia results in disruption to usual hypoglycaemic autonomic responses leading to impaired awareness of hypoglycaemia, which is associated with an increased risk of severe hypoglycaemia requiring third-party assistance (SH). The UK Driving and Vehicle Licensing Agency (DVLA) does not permit car driving if they have either a complete loss of hypoglycaemia awareness or more than one SH event a year. METHODS: The FreeStyle Libre (FSL) Association of British Clinical Diabetologists (ABCD) Nationwide Audit consists of data collected by clinicians during routine clinical work, submitted into a secure web-based tool held within the National Health Service (NHS) N3 network. Analysis of paired baseline and follow-up data for people with type 1 diabetes who also held a driving licence was undertaken. RESULTS: The study consisted of 6304 people who had data recorded about driving status from 102 UK specialist diabetes centres, of which 4218 held a driving licence: 4178 a group 1, standard licence, 33 a group 2, large lorries and buses, seven a taxi licence; 1819 did not drive. Paired baseline and follow-up data were available for a sub-cohort of 1606/4218. At a mean follow-up of 6.9 months [95% CI (6.8, 7.1)], the Gold score had improved (2.3 ± 1.5 vs. 2.0 ± 1.3 p < .001), and the number of people who experienced an SH episode was also significantly lower (12.1% vs. 2.7%, p < .001). CONCLUSION: This study suggests that intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitoring may improve impaired awareness of hypoglycaemia and reduce the number of people with type 1 diabetes with a driving licence experiencing a severe hypoglycaemic episode.

The long-term impact of glucose monitoring with the FreeStyle Libre on glycaemic control and hypoglycaemia awareness in people with type 1 diabetes: Insights from the Association of British Clinical Diabetologists national audit.

AIMS: To investigate the change in glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c), hypoglycaemia awareness and diabetes-related distress in people with type 1 diabetes (T1D) using FreeStyle Libre (FSL) over a 2-year follow-up period. METHODS: FSL user data from U.K wide hospitals collected during routine clinical care were analysed. People living with T1D were categorised into four groups based on the duration of follow-up. Group I (< 1 year, n = 6940), group II (1 to 1.5 years, n = 662), group III (1.5 to 2 years, n = 385), and group IV (> 2 years, n = 642). The t-test was used to compare the baseline and follow-up HbA1c, GOLD score (a measure of hypoglycaemia awareness) and diabetes-related distress scale (DDS score) (quality of life measure). RESULTS: The study consisted of 16,834 people, with follow-up data available for 8,629 participants. The change in HbA1c, GOLD and DDS score from baseline within the follow-up sub-groups (group I vs group II vs group III vs group IV) was HbA1c (-6 vs -6 vs -4 vs -4 mmol/mol; p < 0.001) (-0.55 vs -0.55 vs -0.37 vs -0.37 %), GOLD score (-0.31 vs -0.45 vs -0.26 vs -0.42; p < 0.0001 group I, II, IV and p 0.07 group III), and DDS score(-0.59 vs -0.58 vs -0.63 vs -0.50; p < 0.001), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In people with T1D, FSL use resulted in a sustained improvement in HbA1c, hypoglycaemia awareness and diabetes-related distress for over two years.

UK's Association of British Clinical Diabetologist's Diabetes Technology Network (ABCD-DTN): Best practice guide for hybrid closed-loop therapy.

This best practice guide is written with the aim of providing an overview of current hybrid closed-loop (HCL) systems in use within the United Kingdom's (UK) National Health Service (NHS) and to provide education and advice for their management on both an individual and clinical service level. The environment of diabetes technology, and particularly HCL systems, is rapidly evolving. The past decade has seen unprecedented advances in the development of HCL systems. These systems improve glycaemic outcomes and reduce the burden of treatment for people with type 1 diabetes (pwT1D). It is anticipated that access to these systems will increase in England as a result of updates in National Institute of Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidance providing broader support for the use of real-time continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) for pwT1D. NICE is currently undertaking multiple-technology appraisal into HCL systems. Based on experience from centres involved in supporting advanced technologies as well as from the recent NHS England HCL pilot, this guide is intended to provide healthcare professionals with UK expert consensus on the best practice for initiation, optimisation and ongoing management of HCL therapy.

Impact of glycaemic technologies on quality of life and related outcomes in adults with type 1 diabetes: A narrative review.

AIMS: To explore the association between the use of glycaemic technologies and person-reported outcomes (PROs) in adults with type 1 diabetes (T1D). METHODS: We included T1D and technology publications reporting on PROs since 2014. Only randomised controlled trials and cohort studies that used validated PRO measures (PROMs) were considered. RESULTS: T1D studies reported on a broad range of validated PROMs, mainly as secondary outcome measures. Most studies examined continuous glucose monitoring (CGM), intermittently scanned CGM (isCGM), and the role of continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII), including sensor-augmented CSII and closed loop systems. Generally, studies demonstrated a positive impact of technology on hypoglycaemia-specific and diabetes-specific PROs, including reduced fear of hypoglycaemia and diabetes distress, and greater satisfaction with diabetes treatment. In contrast, generic PROMs (including measures of health/functional status, emotional well-being, depressive symptoms, and sleep quality) were less likely to demonstrate improvements associated with the use of glycaemic technologies. Several studies showed contradictory findings, which may relate to study design, population and length of follow-up. Differences in PRO findings were apparent between randomised controlled trials and cohort studies, which may be due to different populations studied and/or disparity between trial and real-world conditions. CONCLUSIONS: PROs are usually assessed as secondary outcomes in glycaemic technology studies. Hypoglycaemia-specific and diabetes-specific, but not generic, PROs show the benefits of glycaemic technologies, and deserve a more central role in future studies as well as routine clinical care.

CGM accuracy: Contrasting CE marking with the governmental controls of the USA (FDA) and Australia (TGA): A narrative review.

The National Institute for Clinical Excellence updated guidance for continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) in 2022, recommending that CGM be available to all people living with type 1 diabetes. Manufacturers can trade in the UK with Conformité Européenne (CE) marking without an initial national assessment. The regulatory process for CGM CE marking, in contrast to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and Australian Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) process, is described. Manufacturers operating in the UK provided clinical accuracy studies submitted for CE marking. Critical appraisal of the studies shows several CGM devices have CE marking for wide-ranging indications beyond available data, unlike FDA and TGA approval. The FDA and TGA use tighter controls, requiring comprehensive product-specific clinical data evaluation. In 2018, the FDA published the integrated CGM (iCGM) criteria permitting interoperability. Applying the iCGM criteria to clinical data provided by manufacturers trading in the UK identified several study protocols that minimized glucose variability, thereby improving CGM accuracy on all metrics. These results do not translate into real-life performance. Furthermore, for many CGM devices available in the UK, accuracy reported in the hypoglycaemic range is below iCGM standards, or measurement is absent. We offer a framework to evaluate CGM accuracy studies critically. The review concludes that FDA- and TGA-approved indications match the available clinical data, whereas CE marking indications can have discrepancies. The UK can bolster regulation with UK Conformity Assessed marking from January 2025. However, balanced regulation is needed to ensure innovation and timely technological access are not hindered.

A UK nationwide study of adults admitted to hospital with diabetic ketoacidosis or hyperosmolar hyperglycaemic state and COVID-19.

AIMS: To investigate characteristics of people hospitalized with coronavirus-disease-2019 (COVID-19) and diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) or hyperosmolar hyperglycaemic state (HHS), and to identify risk factors for mortality and intensive care admission. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Retrospective cohort study with anonymized data from the Association of British Clinical Diabetologists nationwide audit of hospital admissions with COVID-19 and diabetes, from start of pandemic to November 2021. The primary outcome was inpatient mortality. DKA and HHS were adjudicated against national criteria. Age-adjusted odds ratios were calculated using logistic regression. RESULTS: In total, 85 confirmed DKA cases, and 20 HHS, occurred among 4073 people (211 type 1 diabetes, 3748 type 2 diabetes, 114 unknown type) hospitalized with COVID-19. Mean (SD) age was 60 (18.2) years in DKA and 74 (11.8) years in HHS (p < .001). A higher proportion of patients with HHS than with DKA were of non-White ethnicity (71.4% vs 39.0% p = .038). Mortality in DKA was 36.8% (n = 57) and 3.8% (n = 26) in type 2 and type 1 diabetes respectively. Among people with type 2 diabetes and DKA, mortality was lower in insulin users compared with non-users [21.4% vs. 52.2%; age-adjusted odds ratio 0.13 (95% CI 0.03-0.60)]. Crude mortality was lower in DKA than HHS (25.9% vs. 65.0%, p = .001) and in statin users versus non-users (36.4% vs. 100%; p = .035) but these were not statistically significant after age adjustment. CONCLUSIONS: Hospitalization with COVID-19 and adjudicated DKA is four times more common than HHS but both associate with substantial mortality. There is a strong association of previous insulin therapy with survival in type 2 diabetes-associated DKA.

Safety and effectiveness of do-it-yourself artificial pancreas system compared with continuous subcutaneous insulin infusions in combination with free style libre in people with type 1 diabetes.

AIMS: The use of do-it-yourself artificial pancreas systems (DIYAPS) among people with type 1 diabetes is increasing. At present, it is unclear how DIYAPS compares with other technologies such as FreeStyle Libre (FSL) and continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII). The aim of this analysis is to compare safety, effectiveness and quality-of-life outcomes of DIYAPS use with the addition of FSL to CSII. METHOD: Data from two large UK hospitals were extracted from the Association of British Clinical Diabetologists (ABCD) DIYAPS and FSL audits. Outcomes included HbA1c , glucose TBR (time-below-range), TIR (time-in-range), Diabetes Distress Score (DDS), and Gold hypoglycaemia score. Any adverse events were noted. Changes at follow-up were assessed using paired t-tests and ANOVA in Stata; TIR/TBR at follow-up assessed using unpaired t-tests; chi-square tests assessed the change in frequency of health utilisation (e.g. hospital admissions). RESULTS: DIYAPS (n = 35) and FSL+CSII (n = 149) users, with median follow-up duration of 1.4 (IQR 0.8-2.1) and 1.3 (IQR 0.7-1.8) years, respectively, were included. HbA1c with DIYAPS use changed by -10 mmol/mol [0.9%] (p < 0.001, 95% CI 5, 14 [0.5, 1.3%]) significantly lower (p < 0.001) than in the FSL+CSII group -3 mmol/mol [0.25%] (p < 0.001, 95% CI 1, 4 [0.1, 0.4%]). TIR was higher and TBR was lower in the DIYAPS group. Adverse events were rare in both groups and no significant differences were observed in the frequency of healthcare utilisation. CONCLUSION: DIYAPS use was associated with a lower HbA1c levels, higher TIR and lower TBR compared with FSL+CSII. There was no significant increase in adverse events, although this should be interpreted cautiously given the low numbers of users. Full results from the ABCD DIYAPS audit are awaited.

Glycaemic measures for 8914 adult FreeStyle Libre users during routine care, segmented by age group and observed changes during the COVID-19 pandemic.

AIM: To evaluate the impact of the stay-at-home policy on different glucose metrics for time in range (%TIR 3.9-10 mmol/L), time below range (%TBR < 3.9 mmol/L) and time above range (%TAR > 10 mmol/L) for UK adult FreeStyle Libre (FSL) users within four defined age groups and on observed changes during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. METHODS: Data were extracted from 8914 LibreView de-identified user accounts for adult users aged 18 years or older with 5 or more days of sensor readings in each month from January to June 2020. Age-group categories were based on self-reported age on LibreView accounts (18-25, 26-49, 50-64 and ≥65 years). RESULTS: In January, prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, the 65 years or older age group had the highest %TIR (57.9%), while the 18-25 years age group had the lowest (51.2%) (P < .001). Within each age group, TIR increased during the analysed months, by 1.7% (26-49 years) to 3.1% (≥65 years) (P < .001 in all cases). %TBR was significantly reduced only in the 26-49 years age group, whereas %TAR was reduced by 1.5% (26-49 years) to 3.0% (≥65 years) (P < .001 in both cases). The proportion of adults achieving both of the more than 70% TIR and less than 4% TBR targets increased from 11.7% to 15.9% for those aged 65 years or older (P < .001) and from 6.0% to 9.1% for those aged 18-25 years (P < .05). Mean daily glucose-sensor scan rates were at least 12 per day and remained stable across the analysis period. CONCLUSIONS: Our data show the baseline glucose metrics for FSL users in the UK across different age groups under usual care. During lockdown in the UK, the proportion of adults achieving TIR consensus targets increased among FSL users.

A UK nationwide study of people with type 1 diabetes admitted to hospital with COVID-19 infection.

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: The aim of this work was to describe the clinical characteristics of adults with type 1 diabetes admitted to hospital and the risk factors associated with severe coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) in the UK. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was performed using data collected through a nationwide audit of people admitted to hospital with diabetes and COVID-19, conducted by the Association of British Clinical Diabetologists from March to October 2020. Prespecified demographic, clinical, medication and laboratory data were collected from the electronic and paper medical record systems of the participating hospitals by local clinicians. The primary outcome of the study, severe COVID-19, was defined as death in hospital and/or admission to the adult intensive care unit (AICU). Logistic regression models were used to generate age-adjusted ORs. RESULTS: Forty UK centres submitted data. The final dataset included 196 adults who were admitted to hospital and had both type 1 diabetes and COVID-19 on admission (male sex 55%, white 70%, with mean [SD] age 62 [19] years, BMI 28.3 [7.3] kg/m2 and last recorded HbA1c 76 [31] mmol/mol [9.1 (5.0)%]). The prevalence of pre-existing microvascular disease and macrovascular disease was 56% and 39%, respectively. The prevalence of diabetic ketoacidosis on admission was 29%. A total of 68 patients (35%) died or were admitted to AICU. The proportions of people that died were 7%, 38% and 38% of those aged <55, 55-74 and ≥75 years, respectively. BMI, serum creatinine levels and having one or more microvascular complications were positively associated with the primary outcome after adjusting for age. CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: In people with type 1 diabetes and COVID-19 who were admitted to hospital in the UK, higher BMI, poorer renal function and presence of microvascular complications were associated with greater risk of death and/or admission to AICU. Risk of severe COVID-19 is reassuringly very low in people with type 1 diabetes who are under 55 years of age without microvascular or macrovascular disease. IN PEOPLE WITH TYPE 1 DIABETES AND COVID-19 ADMITTED TO HOSPITAL IN THE UK, BMI AND ONE OR MORE MICROVASCULAR COMPLICATIONS HAD A POSITIVE ASSOCIATION AND LOW SERUM CREATINE LEVELS HAD A NEGATIVE ASSOCIATION WITH DEATH/ADMISSION TO INTENSIVE CARE UNIT AFTER ADJUSTING FOR AGE.

The SAGE study: Global observational analysis of glycaemic control, hypoglycaemia and diabetes management in T1DM.

AIMS: To describe glycaemic control and diabetes management in adults with type 1 diabetes (T1DM), in a real-life global setting. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Study of Adults' GlycEmia (SAGE) was a multinational, multicentre, single visit, noninterventional, cross-sectional study in adult patients 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. The primary endpoint was the proportion of participants achieving HbA1c  less than 7.0 % in each age group. Secondary endpoints included incidence of hypoglycaemia, severe hypoglycaemia and severe hyperglycaemia leading to diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) and therapeutic management of T1DM. RESULTS: Of 3903 included participants, 3858 (98.8%) were eligible for the study. Overall, 24.3% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 22.9-25.6) of participants achieved the glycaemic target of HbA1c  less than 7.0 %, with more participants achieving this target in the 26-44 years group (27.6% [95% CI: 25.5-29.8]). Target achievement was highest in Eastern and Western Europe, and lowest in the Middle East. The incidence of hypoglycaemia and of severe hyperglycaemia leading to DKA tended to decrease with age, and varied across regions. Age and regional differences were observed in therapeutic management, including types of device/insulin usage, frequency of insulin dose adjustment and technology usage. CONCLUSIONS: Glycaemic control remains poor in adults with T1DM globally. Several areas of treatment may be optimised to improve outcomes, including supporting patient self-management of insulin therapy, increasing use of technologies such as CGM, and greater provision of healthcare support.

Hybrid closed-loop therapy: Where are we in 2021?

Hybrid closed-loop systems are characterized by the coexistence of algorithm-driven automated insulin delivery combined with manual mealtime boluses. Used correctly, these insulin delivery systems offer better glucose control and reduced risk of hypoglycaemia and represent the most advanced form of insulin delivery available for people with type 1 diabetes. The aim of this paper was to compare the currently available commercial hybrid closed-loop systems in the UK: the Medtronic 670G/780G, Tandem t:slim X2 Control IQ and CamAPS FX systems. The Medtronic 670G/780G systems use Guardian 3 sensor (7-day use, two to four calibrations per day), while Tandem and CamAPS systems use the calibration-free Dexcom G6 sensor (10 days). The CamAPS system is available as an android app, whereas the other two systems have the algorithm embedded in the insulin pump. During pivotal studies, depending on the study population and baseline glycated haemoglobin level, these systems achieve a time spent in the target range 3.9 to 10 mmol/L (70 to 180 mg/dL) of 65% to 76% with low burden of hypoglycaemia. All three systems allow a higher glucose target for announced exercise, while the Tandem system offers an additional night-time tighter target. The CamAPS system offers fully customizable glucose targets and is the only system licensed for use during pregnancy. Additional education is required for both users and healthcare professionals to harness the best performance from these systems as well as to troubleshoot when "automode exits" occur. We provide consensus recommendations to develop pragmatic pathways to guide patients, clinicians and commissioners in making informed decisions on the appropriate use of the diabetes technology.

Predictors of diabetes-related distress before and after FreeStyle Libre-1 use: Lessons from the Association of British Clinical Diabetologists nationwide study.

AIM: To identify the baseline demographic and clinical characteristics associated with diabetes-related distress (DRD) and factors associated with improvement in DRD after initiating use of the FreeStyle Libre (FSL) in people living with type 1 diabetes (T1D). METHODS: The study was performed using baseline and follow-up data from the Association of British Clinical Diabetologists nationwide audit of people with diabetes who initiated use of the FSL in the United Kingdom. DRD was assessed using the two-item diabetes-related distress scale (DDS; defined as the average of the two-item score ≥3). People living with T1D were categorized into two groups: those with high DRD, defined as an average DDS score ≥3 and those with lower DRD, defined as a DDS score <3. We used a gradient-boosting machine-learning (GBM) model to identify the relative influence (RI) of baseline variables on average DDS score. RESULTS: The study population consisted of 9159 patients, 96.6% of whom had T1D. The median (interquartile range [IQR]) age was 45.1 (32-56) years, 50.1% were women, the median (IQR) baseline body mass index was 26.1 (23.2-29.6) kg/m2 and the median (IQR) duration of diabetes was 20 (11-32) years. The two components of the DDS were significantly correlated (r2  = 0.73; P < 0.0001). Higher DRD was prevalent in 53% (4879/9159) of people living with T1D at baseline. In the GBM model, the top baseline variables associated with average DDS score were baseline glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c; RI = 51.1), baseline Gold score (RI = 23.3), gender (RI = 7.05) and fear of hypoglycaemia (RI = 4.96). Follow-up data were available for 3312 participants. The top factors associated with improvement in DDS score following use of the FSL were change in Gold score (RI = 28.2) and change in baseline HbA1c (RI = 19.3). CONCLUSIONS: In this large UK cohort of people living with T1D, diabetes distress was prevalent and associated with higher HbA1c, impaired awareness of hypoglycaemia and female gender. Improvement in glycaemic control and hypoglycaemia unawareness with the use of the FSL was associated with improvement in DRD in people living with T1D.

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.