Multicenter, Randomized Trial of a Bionic Pancreas in Type 1 Diabetes.

BACKGROUND: Currently available semiautomated insulin-delivery systems require individualized insulin regimens for the initialization of therapy and meal doses based on carbohydrate counting for routine operation. In contrast, the bionic pancreas is initialized only on the basis of body weight, makes all dose decisions and delivers insulin autonomously, and uses meal announcements without carbohydrate counting. METHODS: In this 13-week, multicenter, randomized trial, we randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio persons at least 6 years of age with type 1 diabetes either to receive bionic pancreas treatment with insulin aspart or insulin lispro or to receive standard care (defined as any insulin-delivery method with unblinded, real-time continuous glucose monitoring). The primary outcome was the glycated hemoglobin level at 13 weeks. The key secondary outcome was the percentage of time that the glucose level as assessed by continuous glucose monitoring was below 54 mg per deciliter; the prespecified noninferiority limit for this outcome was 1 percentage point. Safety was also assessed. RESULTS: A total of 219 participants 6 to 79 years of age were assigned to the bionic-pancreas group, and 107 to the standard-care group. The glycated hemoglobin level decreased from 7.9% to 7.3% in the bionic-pancreas group and did not change (was at 7.7% at both time points) in the standard-care group (mean adjusted difference at 13 weeks, -0.5 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.6 to -0.3; P<0.001). The percentage of time that the glucose level as assessed by continuous glucose monitoring was below 54 mg per deciliter did not differ significantly between the two groups (13-week adjusted difference, 0.0 percentage points; 95% CI, -0.1 to 0.04; P<0.001 for noninferiority). The rate of severe hypoglycemia was 17.7 events per 100 participant-years in the bionic-pancreas group and 10.8 events per 100 participant-years in the standard-care group (P = 0.39). No episodes of diabetic ketoacidosis occurred in either group. CONCLUSIONS: In this 13-week, randomized trial involving adults and children with type 1 diabetes, use of a bionic pancreas was associated with a greater reduction than standard care in the glycated hemoglobin level. (Funded by the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04200313.).

The psychosocial burdens of living with diabetes.

AIM: To better understand the prevalence of self-reported psychosocial burdens and the unmet needs identified by people with diabetes in relation to routine diabetes visits. METHODS: An English language, online survey was distributed via social media, key stakeholder networks, charity and advocacy groups to adults with type 1 diabetes or type 2 diabetes. Survey items were designed by members of the FDA RESCUE Collaborative Community Governing Committee prior to pilot testing with potential participants. Descriptive statistical analyses were conducted, as well as thematic analyses on free-text responses using NVivo v14. RESULTS: Four hundred and seventy-eight participants completed the survey: 373 (78%) had type 1 diabetes, 346 (73%) identified as a woman and 433 (91%) were white. Most participants had experienced self-reported (rather than diagnosed) anxiety and depression (n = 323 and n = 313, respectively), as well as fear of low blood sugars (n = 294), low mood (n = 290) and diabetes-related distress (n = 257). Sixty-eight percent reported that diabetes had negatively affected self-esteem, 62% reported the feelings of loneliness, but 93% reported that friends/family/work colleagues were supportive when needed. Two hundred and seventy-two percent (57%) reported that their diabetes team had never raised the topic of mental health. The overwhelming majority stated that the best thing their diabetes team could do to help was to simply ask about mental well-being, listen with empathy and without judgement, and practice skills to understand psychosocial issues in diabetes. CONCLUSION: Integrating psychosocial discussions and support within routine healthcare visits is crucial to improve outcomes for people with diabetes. Such a biopsychosocial model of healthcare has long been advocated by regulatory bodies.

Towards the standardisation of adult person-reported outcome domains in diabetes research: A Consensus Statement development panel.

Diabetes is unique among chronic diseases because clinical outcomes are intimately tied to how the person living with diabetes reacts to and implements treatment recommendations. It is further characterised by widespread social stigma, judgement and paternalism. This physical, social and psychological burden collectively influences self-management behaviours. It is widely recognised that the individual's perspective about the impact of trying to manage the disease and the burden that self-management confers must be addressed to achieve optimal health outcomes. Standardised, rigorous assessment of mental and behavioural health status, in interaction with physical health outcomes is crucial to aid understanding of person-reported outcomes (PROs). Whilst tempting to conceptualise PROs as an issue of perceived quality of life (QoL), in fact health-related QoL is multi-dimensional and covers indicators of physical or functional health status, psychological and social well-being. This complexity is illuminated by the large number of person reported outcome measures (PROMs) that have been developed across multiple psychosocial domains. Often measures are used inappropriately or because they have been used in the scientific literature rather than based on methodological or outcome assessment rigour. Given the broad nature of psychosocial functioning/mental health, it is important to broadly define PROs that are evaluated in the context of therapeutic interventions, real-life and observational studies. This report summarises the central themes and lessons derived in the assessment and use of PROMs amongst adults with diabetes. Effective assessment of PROMs routinely in clinical research is crucial to understanding the true impact of any intervention. Selecting appropriate measures, relevant to the specific factors of PROs important in the research study will provide valuable data alongside physical health data.

Frequency and Causes of Nocturnal Alarms in Youth and Young Adults With Type 1 Diabetes Using a First-Generation Hybrid Closed-Loop System.

Background: Meeting glycemic recommendations is challenging for youth with type 1 diabetes. Diabetes technology, including continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) and hybrid closed-loop (HCL) automated insulin delivery systems, significantly increase achievement of glycemic targets; however, many youth struggle to sustain use of early HCL systems. Nocturnal alarm fatigue contributes to disrupted sleep and device discontinuation. Methods: We examined the frequency and causes of nocturnal (10:00 p.m. to 6:00 a.m.) alarms in pediatric patients (N = 76, median age 14.5 years [interquartile range 11.8-17.0 years, range 7-24 years]) starting on a first-generation HCL system in a prospective observational study. Device data were analyzed with linear mixed-effects models to examine change across time at 3-month intervals for 12 months. Results: At baseline (HCL system in nonautomated mode), participants averaged 3.3 ± 0.6 alarms per night. In the 2 weeks after starting HCL (automated) mode, alarm frequency significantly increased to 5.4 ± 0.5 times per night (P <0.001). Alarm frequency decreased through the remainder of the observational period; however, CGM sensor and HCL system use also declined. The types of alarms were evenly distributed among sensor maintenance, sensor threshold, pump, and HCL-specific alarms. Conclusion: These data show that HCL system nocturnal alarms are frequent and may be barriers to sleep quality and device use. Further research is needed to assess the impact of diabetes technology on sleep and to determine method to improve sleep quality with technology use.

Situational Awareness and Proactive Engagement Predict Higher Time in Range in Adolescents and Young Adults Using Hybrid Closed-Loop.

Background: Adolescents and young adults with type 1 diabetes have high HbA1c levels and often struggle with self-management behaviors and attention to diabetes care. Hybrid closed-loop systems (HCL) like the t:slim X2 with Control-IQ technology (Control-IQ) can help improve glycemic control. The purpose of this study is to assess adolescents' situational awareness of their glucose control and engagement with the Control-IQ system to determine significant factors in daily glycemic control. Methods: Adolescents (15-25 years) using Control-IQ participated in a 2-week prospective study, gathering detailed information about Control-IQ system engagements (boluses, alerts, and so on) and asking the participants' age and gender about their awareness of glucose levels 2-3 times/day without checking. Mixed models assessed which behaviors and awareness items correlated with time in range (TIR, 70-180 mg/dl, 3.9-10.0 mmol/L). Results: Eighteen adolescents/young adults (mean age 18 ± 1.86 years and 86% White non-Hispanic) completed the study. Situational awareness of glucose levels did not correlate with time since the last glucose check (p = 0.8). In multivariable modeling, lower TIR was predicted on days when adolescents underestimated their glucose levels (r = -0.22), received more CGM alerts (r = -0.31), and had more pump engagements (r = -0.27). A higher TIR was predicted when adolescents responded to CGM alerts (r = 0.20) and entered carbohydrates into the bolus calculator (r = 0.49). Conclusion: Situational awareness is an independent predictor of TIR and may provide insight into patterns of attention and focus that could positively influence glycemic outcomes in adolescents. Proactive engagements predict better TIR, whereas reactive engagement predicted lower TIR. Future interventions could be designed to train users to develop awareness and expertise in effective diabetes self-management.

Increasing Use of Diabetes Devices: What Do Health Care Professionals Need?

Despite evidence of improved diabetes outcomes with diabetes technology such as continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) systems, insulin pumps, and hybrid closed-loop (HCL) insulin delivery systems, these devices are underutilized in clinical practice for the management of insulin-requiring diabetes. This low uptake may be the result of health care providers' (HCPs') lack of confidence or time to prescribe and manage devices for people with diabetes. We administered a survey to HCPs in primary care, pediatric endocrinology, and adult endocrinology practices in the United States. Responding HCPs expressed a need for device-related insurance coverage tools and online data platforms with integration to electronic health record systems to improve diabetes technology uptake in these practice settings across the United States.

Effect of Tight Glycemic Control on Pancreatic Beta Cell Function in Newly Diagnosed Pediatric Type 1 Diabetes: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Near normalization of glucose levels instituted immediately after diagnosis of type 1 diabetes has been postulated to preserve pancreatic beta cell function by reducing glucotoxicity. Previous studies have been hampered by an inability to achieve tight glycemic goals. Objective: To determine the effectiveness of intensive diabetes management to achieve near normalization of glucose levels on preservation of pancreatic beta cell function in youth with newly diagnosed type 1 diabetes. Design, Setting, and Participants: This randomized, double-blind, clinical trial was conducted at 6 centers in the US (randomizations from July 20, 2020, to October 13, 2021; follow-up completed September 15, 2022) and included youths with newly diagnosed type 1 diabetes aged 7 to 17 years. Interventions: Random assignment to intensive diabetes management, which included use of an automated insulin delivery system (n = 61), or standard care, which included use of a continuous glucose monitor (n = 52), as part of a factorial design in which participants weighing 30 kg or more also were assigned to receive either oral verapamil or placebo. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was mixed-meal tolerance test-stimulated C-peptide area under the curve (a measure of pancreatic beta cell function) 52 weeks from diagnosis. Results: Among 113 participants (mean [SD] age, 11.8 [2.8] years; 49 females [43%]; mean [SD] time from diagnosis to randomization, 24 [5] days), 108 (96%) completed the trial. The mean C-peptide area under the curve decreased from 0.57 pmol/mL at baseline to 0.45 pmol/mL at 52 weeks in the intensive management group, and from 0.60 to 0.50 pmol/mL in the standard care group (treatment group difference, -0.01 [95% CI, -0.11 to 0.10]; P = .89). The mean time in the target range of 70 to 180 mg/dL, measured with continuous glucose monitoring, at 52 weeks was 78% in the intensive management group vs 64% in the standard care group (adjusted difference, 16% [95% CI, 10% to 22%]). One severe hypoglycemia event and 1 diabetic ketoacidosis event occurred in each group. Conclusions and Relevance: In youths with newly diagnosed type 1 diabetes, intensive diabetes management, which included automated insulin delivery, achieved excellent glucose control but did not affect the decline in pancreatic C-peptide secretion at 52 weeks. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04233034.

Effect of Verapamil on Pancreatic Beta Cell Function in Newly Diagnosed Pediatric Type 1 Diabetes: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: In preclinical studies, thioredoxin-interacting protein overexpression induces pancreatic beta cell apoptosis and is involved in glucotoxicity-induced beta cell death. Calcium channel blockers reduce these effects and may be beneficial to beta cell preservation in type 1 diabetes. Objective: To determine the effect of verapamil on pancreatic beta cell function in children and adolescents with newly diagnosed type 1 diabetes. Design, Setting, and Participants: This double-blind, randomized clinical trial including children and adolescents aged 7 to 17 years with newly diagnosed type 1 diabetes who weighed 30 kg or greater was conducted at 6 centers in the US (randomized participants between July 20, 2020, and October 13, 2021) and follow-up was completed on September 15, 2022. Interventions: Participants were randomly assigned 1:1 to once-daily oral verapamil (n = 47) or placebo (n = 41) as part of a factorial design in which participants also were assigned to receive either intensive diabetes management or standard diabetes care. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was area under the curve values for C-peptide level (a measure of pancreatic beta cell function) stimulated by a mixed-meal tolerance test at 52 weeks from diagnosis of type 1 diabetes. Results: Among 88 participants (mean age, 12.7 [SD, 2.4] years; 36 were female [41%]; and the mean time from diagnosis to randomization was 24 [SD, 4] days), 83 (94%) completed the trial. In the verapamil group, the mean C-peptide area under the curve was 0.66 pmol/mL at baseline and 0.65 pmol/mL at 52 weeks compared with 0.60 pmol/mL at baseline and 0.44 pmol/mL at 52 weeks in the placebo group (adjusted between-group difference, 0.14 pmol/mL [95% CI, 0.01 to 0.27 pmol/mL]; P = .04). This equates to a 30% higher C-peptide level at 52 weeks with verapamil. The percentage of participants with a 52-week peak C-peptide level of 0.2 pmol/mL or greater was 95% (41 of 43 participants) in the verapamil group vs 71% (27 of 38 participants) in the placebo group. At 52 weeks, hemoglobin A1c was 6.6% in the verapamil group vs 6.9% in the placebo group (adjusted between-group difference, -0.3% [95% CI, -1.0% to 0.4%]). Eight participants (17%) in the verapamil group and 8 participants (20%) in the placebo group had a nonserious adverse event considered to be related to treatment. Conclusions and Relevance: In children and adolescents with newly diagnosed type 1 diabetes, verapamil partially preserved stimulated C-peptide secretion at 52 weeks from diagnosis compared with placebo. Further studies are needed to determine the longitudinal durability of C-peptide improvement and the optimal length of therapy. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04233034.

Novel predictors of daily fluctuations in glycemia and self-management in adolescents and young adults with type 1 diabetes.

AIMS: To understand morning biopsychosocial factors that predict glycemia, adherence, and goal attainment in adolescents and young adults (AYA) with type 1 diabetes (T1D) on a daily basis. METHODS: Eight-eight AYA (mean 17.6 ± 2.6 years, 54% female, HbA1c 7.9 ± 1.4%, diabetes duration 8.5 ± 4.5 years) with T1D who use Continuous Glucose Monitoring (CGM) completed a 2-week prospective study. Participants chose a self-management goal to focus on during participation. For six days, participants prospectively completed a 25-item Engagement Prediction Survey to assess biopsychosocial factors to predict daily diabetes outcomes and an end-of-day Goal Survey. Lasso and mixed-model regression were used to determine items in the Engagement Prediction Survey most predictive of perceived goal attainment, CGM Time-in-Range (TIR, 70-180 mg/dl), sensor mean glucose, number of insulin boluses and hyperglycemia response (bolus within 30 min of high alert or glucose <200 mg/dl within 2 hours). RESULTS: A 7-item model (including current glucose, planning/wanting to manage diabetes, wanting to skip self-management, feeling good about self, health perception and support needs) explained 16.7% of the daily variance in TIR, 18.6% of mean sensor glucose, 2.1% of the number of boluses, 14% of hyperglycemia response, and 28.7% of goal attainment perceptions. The mean absolute change in day-to-day TIR was 16%, sensor glucose was 30 mg/dl, and the number of boluses was 2. AYA reported more positive Engagement Prediction Survey responses on mornings when they awoke with lower glucose levels. CONCLUSIONS: Morning biopsychosocial state factors predict glycemic and adherence outcomes in AYA with diabetes and could be a novel intervention target for future behavioural interventions.

Predicting optimal use of continuous glucose monitors in adolescents with type 1 diabetes: It's about benefit and burden.

PURPOSE: Youth with type 1 diabetes (T1D) often use Continuous Glucose Monitoring (CGM) devices; however, many do not wear them consistently enough to obtain optimal glycemic benefit. This study aimed to identify demographic and psychosocial predictors of optimal CGM use in adolescents with T1D to inform nurse-led interventions to improve adherence. DESIGN AND METHODS: Cross-sectional survey data from youth (12-19 years) using CGM were analyzed to determine whether perceived benefits/burdens of CGM, self-efficacy, and coping predicted being a "CGM Optimizer" (wearing CGM 6-7 days/week) or "CGM Sub-user." RESULTS: Of 282 adolescents (54% female), 161 were CGM Optimizers and 121 were CGM Sub-Users. Optimizers were younger (15.91 ± 2.17 years vs. 16.79 ± 2.17, p = 0.001), more likely non-Hispanic White (91.9% vs 83.5%, p = 0.029), and more likely to have private insurance (82.0% vs. 69.4%, p = 0.009). Every 1-point increase on Benefits of CGM scale was associated with 2.8 times greater odds of being an Optimizer (OR = 2.82, 95% CI 1.548-5.132, p = 0.001), and every 1-point increase on the Burdens of CGM scale was associated with a 52% decrease in odds (OR = 0.48, 95% CI = 0.283-0.800, p = 0.005), with final logistic regression model (including only these two predictors) explaining 22.3% of variance. CONCLUSION: CGM Optimizing adolescents were more likely to perceive higher benefit and lower burden of CGM. PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: Nurse-led interventions to promote benefits of CGM and mitigate burden may help youth increase adherence with CGM to achieve glycemic benefit.

Real-world performance of hybrid closed loop in youth, young adults, adults and older adults with type 1 diabetes: Identifying a clinical target for hybrid closed-loop use.

AIM: To describe real-world hybrid closed loop (HCL) use and glycaemic outcomes across the lifespan and identify a clinical threshold for HCL use associated with meeting the internationally recommended target of 70% sensor glucose time in range (TIR; 70-180 mg/dL). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Mixed models examined MiniMed 670G HCL use and glycaemic outcomes in 276 people with type 1 diabetes from four age groups: youth (aged <18 years), young adults (18-25 years), adults (26-49 years) and older adults (≥50 years) for 1 year. ROC analysis identified the minimum percentage HCL use associated with meeting the TIR goal of 70%. RESULTS: HCL use at month 1 was 70.7% ± 2.9% for youth, 71.0% ± 3.8% for young adults, 78.9% ± 2.1% for adults and 84.7% ± 3.8% in older adults. HCL use declined significantly at 12 months to 49.3% ± 3.2% in youth (P < .001) and 55.7% ± 4.3% in young adults (P = .002). HCL use was sustained at 12 months in adults (76.4% ± 2.2%, P = .36) and older adults (80.4% ± 3.9%, P = .36). HCL use of 70.6% was associated with 70% TIR (sensitivity 58.3%, specificity 85%, AUC 0.77). Older age, 80% or higher continuous glucose monitor use and four or more blood glucose checks per day were associated with attaining the HCL-use threshold. CONCLUSIONS: HCL use of 70% or higher may be a useful target for clinicians to use to assist people with diabetes in attaining glycaemic goals. Youth may struggle with HCL use more than adults and require clinical intervention to help sustain HCL use across time.

Initiating hybrid closed loop: A program evaluation of an educator-led Control-IQ follow-up at a large pediatric clinic.

BACKGROUND: Control-IQ (Tandem Diabetes) is a hybrid closed-loop (HCL) system that users self-initiate after completing online training. Best practices for clinical follow-up are not known. Our quality improvement objective was to evaluate the usefulness of an educator-led follow-up program for new HCL users in a type 1 diabetes pediatric clinic. METHODS: We implemented an ''HCLCheck-in'' program, first determining when users started HCL, then having diabetes educators contact them for a follow-up call 2-weeks after start. Educators used a Clinical Tool to inform insulin dose and behavior recommendations, and used four benchmarks to determine need for further follow-up: ≥71% HCL use, ≥71% CGM use, ≥60% Time-in-Range (TIR, 70-180 mg/dL), <5% below 70 mg/dL. Family and educator satisfaction were surveyed. RESULTS: One-hundred-twenty-three youth [mean age 13.6 ± 3.7 y, 53.7% female, mean HbA1c 7.6 ± 1.4% (60 mmol/mol)] completed an HCLCheck-in call a median (IQR) of 18(15, 21) days post-HCL start. 74 users (60%) surpassed benchmarks with 94% HCL use and 71% TIR. Of the 49 who did not, 16 completed a second call, and improved median TIR 12.5% (p = 0.03). HCL users reported high satisfaction with the program overall [median 10 (9, 10) out of 10]. Educators spent a median of 45 (32,70) minutes per user and rated satisfaction with the program as 8 (7,9.5) and the Tool as 9 (9, 10). CONCLUSION: Our HCLCheck-in program received high satisfaction ratings and resulted in improved TIR for those initially not meeting benchmarks, suggesting users may benefit from early follow-up. Similar programs may be beneficial for other new technologies.

Real world hybrid closed-loop discontinuation: Predictors and perceptions of youth discontinuing the 670G system in the first 6 months.

OBJECTIVE: To describe predictors of hybrid closed loop (HCL) discontinuation and perceived barriers to use in youth with type 1 diabetes. SUBJECTS: Youth with type 1 diabetes (eligible age 2-25 y; recruited age 8-25 y) who initiated the Minimed 670G HCL system were followed prospectively for 6 mo in an observational study. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Demographic, glycemic (time-in-range, HbA1c), and psychosocial variables [Hypoglycemia Fear Survey (HFS); Problem Areas in Diabetes (PAID)] were collected for all participants. Participants who discontinued HCL (<10% HCL use at clinical visit) completed a questionnaire on perceived barriers to HCL use. RESULTS: Ninety-two youth (15.7 ± 3.6 y, HbA1c 8.8 ± 1.3%, 50% female) initiated HCL, and 28 (30%) discontinued HCL, with the majority (64%) discontinuing between 3 and 6 mo after HCL start. Baseline HbA1c predicted discontinuation (P = .026) with the odds of discontinuing 2.7 times higher (95% CI: 1.123, 6.283) for each 1% increase in baseline HbA1c. Youth who discontinued HCL rated difficulty with calibrations, number of alarms, and too much time needed to make the system work as the most problematic aspects of HCL. Qualitatively derived themes included technological difficulties (error alerts, not working correctly), too much work (calibrations, fingersticks), alarms, disappointment in glycemic control, and expense (cited by parents). CONCLUSIONS: Youth with higher HbA1c are at greater risk for discontinuing HCL than youth with lower HbA1c, and should be the target of new interventions to support device use. The primary reasons for discontinuing HCL relate to the workload required to use HCL.

Six months of hybrid closed loop in the real-world: An evaluation of children and young adults using the 670G system.

OBJECTIVE: To describe glycemic and psychosocial outcomes in youth with type 1 diabetes using a hybrid closed loop (HCL) system. SUBJECTS: Youth with type 1 diabetes (2-25 years) starting the 670G HCL system for their diabetes care were enrolled in an observational study. METHODS: Prospective data collection occurred during routine clinical care and included glycemic variables (sensor time in range [70-180 mg/dL], HbA1c), and psychosocial variables (Hypoglycemia Fear Survey [HFS]; Problem Areas in Diabetes [PAID]). Mixed models were used to analyze change across time. RESULTS: Ninety-two youth (mean age 15.7 ± 3.6 years, 50% female, HbA1c 8.8% ± 1.8%) started HCL for their diabetes care. Youth used Auto Mode 65.5% ± 3.0% of the time at month 1, which decreased to 51.2% ± 3.4% at month 6 (P = .001). Sensor time in range increased from 50.7% ± 1.8% at baseline to 56.9% ± 2.1% at 6 months (P = .007). HbA1c decreased from 8.7% ± 0.2% at baseline to 8.4% ± 0.2% after 6 months of use (P ≤ .0001), with the greatest HbA1c decline in participants with high baseline HbA1c. Increased percent time in auto mode was associated with lower HbA1c (P = .02). Thirty percent of youth discontinued HCL in the first 6 months of use. There were no changes in the HFS or PAID scores across time. CONCLUSIONS: HCL use is associated with improved glycemic control and no change in psychosocial outcomes in this clinical sample. The decline in HCL use across time suggests that youth experience barriers in sustaining use of HCL. Further research is needed to understand reasons for HCL discontinuation and determine intervention strategies.

Effect of Continuous Glucose Monitoring on Glycemic Control in Adolescents and Young Adults With Type 1 Diabetes: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Adolescents and young adults with type 1 diabetes exhibit the worst glycemic control among individuals with type 1 diabetes across the lifespan. Although continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) has been shown to improve glycemic control in adults, its benefit in adolescents and young adults has not been demonstrated. Objective: To determine the effect of CGM on glycemic control in adolescents and young adults with type 1 diabetes. Design, Setting, and Participants: Randomized clinical trial conducted between January 2018 and May 2019 at 14 endocrinology practices in the US including 153 individuals aged 14 to 24 years with type 1 diabetes and screening hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) of 7.5% to 10.9%. Interventions: Participants were randomized 1:1 to undergo CGM (CGM group; n = 74) or usual care using a blood glucose meter for glucose monitoring (blood glucose monitoring [BGM] group; n = 79). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was change in HbA1c from baseline to 26 weeks. There were 20 secondary outcomes, including additional HbA1c outcomes, CGM glucose metrics, and patient-reported outcomes with adjustment for multiple comparisons to control for the false discovery rate. Results: Among the 153 participants (mean [SD] age, 17 [3] years; 76 [50%] were female; mean [SD] diabetes duration, 9 [5] years), 142 (93%) completed the study. In the CGM group, 68% of participants used CGM at least 5 days per week in month 6. Mean HbA1c was 8.9% at baseline and 8.5% at 26 weeks in the CGM group and 8.9% at both baseline and 26 weeks in the BGM group (adjusted between-group difference, -0.37% [95% CI, -0.66% to -0.08%]; P = .01). Of 20 prespecified secondary outcomes, there were statistically significant differences in 3 of 7 binary HbA1c outcomes, 8 of 9 CGM metrics, and 1 of 4 patient-reported outcomes. The most commonly reported adverse events in the CGM and BGM groups were severe hypoglycemia (3 participants with an event in the CGM group and 2 in the BGM group), hyperglycemia/ketosis (1 participant with an event in CGM group and 4 in the BGM group), and diabetic ketoacidosis (3 participants with an event in the CGM group and 1 in the BGM group). Conclusions and Relevance: Among adolescents and young adults with type 1 diabetes, continuous glucose monitoring compared with standard blood glucose monitoring resulted in a small but statistically significant improvement in glycemic control over 26 weeks. Further research is needed to understand the clinical importance of the findings. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03263494.

Closed loop control in adolescents and children during winter sports: Use of the Tandem Control-IQ AP system.

OBJECTIVE: Artificial pancreas (AP) systems have been shown to improve glycemic control throughout the day and night in adults, adolescents, and children. However, AP testing remains limited during intense and prolonged exercise in adolescents and children. We present the performance of the Tandem Control-IQ AP system in adolescents and children during a winter ski camp study, where high altitude, low temperature, prolonged intense activity, and stress challenged glycemic control. METHODS: In a randomized controlled trial, 24 adolescents (ages 13-18 years) and 24 school-aged children (6-12 years) with Type 1 diabetes (T1D) participated in a 48 hours ski camp (∼5 hours skiing/day) at three sites: Wintergreen, VA; Kirkwood, and Breckenridge, CO. Study participants were randomized 1:1 at each site. The control group used remote monitored sensor-augmented pump (RM-SAP), and the experimental group used the t: slim X2 with Control-IQ Technology AP system. All subjects were remotely monitored 24 hours per day by study staff. RESULTS: The Control-IQ system improved percent time within range (70-180 mg/dL) over the entire camp duration: 66.4 ± 16.4 vs 53.9 ± 24.8%; P = .01 in both children and adolescents. The AP system was associated with a significantly lower average glucose based on continuous glucose monitor data: 161 ± 29.9 vs 176.8 ± 36.5 mg/dL; P = .023. There were no differences between groups for hypoglycemia exposure or carbohydrate interventions. There were no adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: The use of the Control-IQ AP improved glycemic control and safely reduced exposure to hyperglycemia relative to RM-SAP in pediatric patients with T1D during prolonged intensive winter sport activities.

A Clinical Overview of Insulin Pump Therapy for the Management of Diabetes: Past, Present, and Future of Intensive Therapy.

IN BRIEF Insulin pump therapy is advancing rapidly. This article summarizes the variety of insulin pump technologies available to date and discusses important clinical considerations for each type of technology.

Applying two minds theory to self-management of Type 1 diabetes.

Two minds theory (TMT) offers a new approach to changing health behavior. Here, TMT is applied to self-management of Type 1 diabetes. TMT can be conceptualized as a cycle where a stimulus produces an immediate Intuitive system response leading to health behavior, followed by a conscious narrative system response that is temporally delayed. Narrative responses do not produce behaviors directly but instead lead to conscious beliefs about past events and behavioral intentions for the future, both of which become part of the material considered by the intuitive system in selecting future behaviors. Because of the temporal delay between intuitive behavior and narrative interpretation, and the nonconscious nature of intuitive thought, there is often a gap between intentions and behaviors. This has implications for nursing practice. First, nurses should consider that patient-reported impressions of the past or future are fundamentally narrative system responses and understand that these may be less predictive of behavior than biopsychosocial measures that are more temporally immediate. Second, nurses can use TMT to inform new strategies for behavior change interventions. For diabetes self-management, nurses can encourage individuals to leverage environmental cues to prompt self-management (tricking the intuitive system), provide rewards for self-management (training the intuitive system), or engage the narrative system via planning, reframing, or attention practices for healthier future decisions. Overall, the TMT addresses the gap between intentions and behavior and should be further developed to inform behavioral health interventions.

Biopsychosocial Factors Associated With Satisfaction and Sustained Use of Artificial Pancreas Technology and Its Components: a Call to the Technology Field.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Summarize biopsychosocial factors associated with using continuous glucose monitors (CGMs), insulin pumps, and artificial pancreas (AP) systems and provide a "call to the field" about their importance to technology uptake and maintained use. RECENT FINDINGS: Insulin pumps and CGMs are becoming standard of care for individuals with type 1 diabetes (T1D). AP systems combining a CGM, insulin pump, and automated dosing algorithm are available for commercial use. Despite improved glycemic control with AP system use, numerous barriers exist which may limit their benefit. Studies on components of AP systems (pumps, CGMs) are limited and demonstrate mixed results of their impact on fear of hypoglycemia, adherence, quality of life, depression and anxiety, and diabetes distress. Studies examining biopsychological factors associated specifically with sustained use of AP systems are also sparse. Biological, psychological and social impacts of AP systems have been understudied and the information they provide has not been capitalized upon.

In-home nighttime predictive low glucose suspend experience in children and adults with type 1 diabetes.

Overnight predictive low glucose suspend (PLGS) reduces hypoglycemia across all ages; however, there are no reports on behavior or experience differences across age groups, especially in pediatrics. As run-in for a subsequent randomized clinical trial (RCT), 127 subjects (50% male) ages 4-45 yr utilized the experimental PLGS system nightly for 5-10 nights (PLGS active phase). We analyzed the number of blood glucose (BG) checks and boluses given per age group. During the subsequent 42 night RCT phase, we analyzed sensor use, skin reactions, errors, and reasons why the experimental system was not used. In 821 nights of active PLGS, subjects ages 4-6 yr (and their parents) tested BG levels 75% of nights compared with 65% of nights (7-10 yr), 53% of nights (11-14 yr), 33% of nights (15-25 yr), and 28% of nights (26-45 yr), respectively (p < 0.001). Likewise, youngest subjects (and parents) administered insulin boluses 56% of nights during active PLGS use compared with 48%, 33%, 20%, and 25%, respectively (p < 0.001). This was unrelated to study requirements. During the RCT phase, subjects 4-6 yr experienced more frequent and severe skin reactions (p = 0.02), while adult subjects (26-45 yr) wore individual sensors a median of 26 h longer than the youngest subjects (p < 0.001). Technical problems with the sensor (errors, miscalibrations, etc.), traveling, and BG levels >270 at bedtime (study requirement) were primary contributors to non-system use. Understanding the different use patterns and challenges in pediatrics and adolescence is needed to direct patient education to optimize use of PLGS and future artificial pancreas systems.