Flash Glucose Monitoring in Israel: Understanding Real-World Associations between Self-Monitoring Frequency and Metrics of Glycemic Control.

OBJECTIVE: Flash glucose monitoring has been widely used in Israel for diabetes treatment and since 2018, the cost is reimbursed for all people with type 1 diabetes nationally. In the current study, we present the daily scanning behavior for FreeStyle Libre users in Israel and how this was associated with a range of metrics for glycemic assessment. METHODS: Deidentified data from FreeStyle Libre readers were collected between September 2014 and October 2020. Scan-rate data from Israel was extracted and sorted into 10 equal-sized groups based on scan frequency. The glucose parameters derived for each group were: estimated HbA1c (eA1c), time in range (TIR) between 70 and 180 mg/dL, and time with glucose levels of <70 mg/dL, <54 mg/dL, and >180 mg/dL. RESULTS: The data set for Israel included 12 370 readers, with data from 131 639 separate glucose sensors representing 152 million automatically recorded individual glucose readings. Users performed an average of 15 daily glucose scans, ranging from a mean of 4.1 scans per day (lowest, 10%), rising to a mean of 38.7 scans/day (highest, 10%) (median, 12; IQR, 8-18 for all readers). As the scan rates increased, the eA1c decreased from 7.6% to 6.7% (P < .001). Mean TIR increased from 56.9% to 70.0% with increasing scan rates (P < .001). Concordantly, time with glucose levels of >180 mg/dL and <54 mg/dL decreased from 37.2% to 23.6% (P < .001) and from 2.23% to 1.99%, respectively, as scan frequency increased. CONCLUSION: In Israel, people with diabetes under real-world conditions record higher rates of FreeStyle Libre scanning. These are associated with improvements in TIR, eA1c, and reduced time with glucose levels of >180 mg/dL or <54 mg/dL.

Importance of the Average Glucose Level and Estimated Glycated Hemoglobin in a Diabetic Patient with Hereditary Hemolytic Anemia and Liver Cirrhosis.

Glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) is a widely used marker of glycemic control but can be affected by hemolytic anemia. Glycated albumin (GA) is also affected in patients with liver cirrhosis. We herein report the assessment of glycemic control in a 41-year-old man with dehydrated hereditary stomatocytosis and a PIEZO1 gene mutation complicated by diabetes mellitus and liver cirrhosis due to hemochromatosis. The estimated HbA1c calculated from the average glucose level obtained by continuous glucose monitoring or by self-monitoring of blood glucose was useful for evaluating the glycemic control in this patient, as HbA1c and GA were unreliable due to the coexisting conditions.

Evaluation of a Methodology for Estimating HbA1c Value by a New Glucose Meter.

BACKGROUND: Accuracy/robustness of HbA1c estimation (eA1c) with an algorithm built into the MyStar Extra blood glucose (BG) meter has been demonstrated by in silico testing. We evaluated the performance and use of eA1c in a clinical setting. METHODS: Subjects took the BG meter home for 4 months to obtain eA1c in this open-label, single-center study. Laboratory HbA1c values were obtained approximately every 2 weeks and the corresponding eA1c documented. Subjects completed a questionnaire at study end (NCT01885546). RESULTS: There were 133 enrolled subjects (mean [SD] age 60.0 [15.0] years, 69 males, 104 with diabetes, HbA1c 7.0% [1.4]). A total of 1008 pairs of eA1c and laboratory HbA1c values were available. In subjects with diabetes, 97.5% of the eA1c results fell within ± 20% of the laboratory HbA1c, 95.0% within ± 18%, and 90.7% within ± 15%. When results were limited to the reportable HbA1c range of ≥ 6 to ≤ 10%, 99.3% of eA1c values fell within ± 20% of the laboratory HbA1c, 98.5% within ± 18%, and 96.2% within ± 15% Most subjects agreed/strongly agreed that the eA1c section in the user guide and flash cards was easy to follow (72%), they would use the system to track their eA1c (70%), they found the eA1c tool helpful (79%), and the tool may motivate them to manage their diabetes better (83%). CONCLUSIONS: Accuracy of the eA1c feature in this clinical setting was similar to the performance in silico. The majority of subjects found this tool helpful and agreed it may motivate to manage their diabetes better.