The Association Between Diet Quality and Glycemic Outcomes Among People with Type 1 Diabetes.

Background: The amount and type of food consumed impacts the glycemic response and insulin needs of people with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM). Daily variability in consumption, reflected in diet quality, may acutely impact glycemic levels and insulin needs. Objective: Type 1 Diabetes Exercise Initiative (T1DEXI) data were examined to evaluate the impact of daily diet quality on near-term glycemic control and interaction with exercise. Methods: Using the Remote Food Photography Method, ≤8 d of dietary intake data were analyzed per participant. Diet quality was quantified with the Healthy Eating Index-2015 (HEI), where a score of 100 indicates the highest-quality diet. Each participant day was classified as low HEI (≤57) or high HEI (>57) based on the mean of nationally reported HEI data. Within participants, the relationship between diet quality and subsequent glycemia measured by continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) and total insulin dose usage was evaluated using a paired t-test and robust regression models. Results: Two hundred twenty-three adults (76% female) with mean ± SD age, HbA1c, and body mass index (BMI) of 37 ± 14 y, 6.6% ± 0.7%, and 25.1 ± 3.6 kg/m2, respectively, were included in these analyses. The mean HEI score was 56 across all participant days. On high HEI days (mean, 66 ± 4) compared with low HEI days (mean, 47 ± 5), total time in range (70-180 mg/dL) was greater (77.2% ± 14% compared with 75.7% ± 14%, respectively, P = 0.01), whereas time above 180 mg/dL (19% ± 14% compared with 21% ± 15%, respectively, P = 0.004), mean glucose (143 ± 22 compared with 145 ± 22 mg/dL, respectively, P = 0.02), and total daily insulin dose (0.52 ± 0.18 compared with 0.54 ± 0.18 U/kg/d, respectively, P = 0.009) were lower. The interaction between diet quality and exercise on glycemia was not significant. Conclusions: Higher HEI scores correlated with improved glycemia and lower insulin needs, although the impact of diet quality was modest and smaller than the previously reported impact of exercise.

Impact of impaired awareness of hypoglycemia on glucose decline during and after exercise in T1D: The T1DEXI Study.

OBJECTIVE: To assess whether impaired awareness of hypoglycemia (IAH) affects exercise-associated hypoglycemia in adults with type 1 diabetes (T1D). METHODS: We compared continuous glucose monitoring (CGM)-measured glucose during exercise and for 24-hours following exercise from 95 adults with T1D and IAH (Clarke score ≥4 or ≥1 severe hypoglycemic event within the past year) to 95 'Aware' adults (Clarke score ≤2 and no severe hypoglycemic event within the past year) matched on sex, age, insulin delivery modality, and HbA1c. A total of 4,236 exercise sessions, and 1,794 exercise days and 839 sedentary days, defined as 24-hours following exercise or a day without exercise, respectively, were available for analysis. RESULTS: Participants with IAH exhibited a non-significant trend towards greater decline in glucose during exercise compared to 'Aware' (-21 ± 44 vs. -19 ± 43 mg/dL [-1.17 ± 2.44 vs. -1.05 ± 2.39 mmol/L], adjusted group difference of -4.2 [95% CI: -8.4 to 0.05] mg/dL [-0.23 95% CI: -0.47 to 0.003 mmol/L], P = 0.051). Individuals with IAH had higher proportion of days with hypoglycemic events <70 mg/dL[3.89 mmol/L] (≥15 minutes <70 mg/dL[<3.89 mmol/L]) both on exercise days (51% vs. 43%, P = 0.006) and sedentary days (48% vs. 30%, P = 0.001). The increased odds of experiencing a hypoglycemic event <70 mg/dL[<3.89 mmol/L] for individuals with IAH compared to 'Aware' did not differ significantly between exercise and sedentary days (interaction P = 0.36). CONCLUSION: Individuals with IAH have a higher underlying risk of hypoglycemia than 'Aware' individuals. Exercise does not appear to differentially increase risk for hypoglycemia during the activity, or in the subsequent 24-hours for IAH compared to Aware individuals with T1D.

Associations between daily step count classifications and continuous glucose monitoring metrics in adults with type 1 diabetes: analysis of the Type 1 Diabetes Exercise Initiative (T1DEXI) cohort.

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: Adults with type 1 diabetes should perform daily physical activity to help maintain health and fitness, but the influence of daily step counts on continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) metrics are unclear. This analysis used the Type 1 Diabetes Exercise Initiative (T1DEXI) dataset to investigate the effect of daily step count on CGM-based metrics. METHODS: In a 4 week free-living observational study of adults with type 1 diabetes, with available CGM and step count data, we categorised participants into three groups-below (<7000), meeting (7000-10,000) or exceeding (>10,000) the daily step count goal-to determine if step count category influenced CGM metrics, including per cent time in range (TIR: 3.9-10.0 mmol/l), time below range (TBR: <3.9 mmol/l) and time above range (TAR: >10.0 mmol/l). RESULTS: A total of 464 adults with type 1 diabetes (mean±SD age 37±14 years; HbA1c 48.8±8.1 mmol/mol [6.6±0.7%]; 73% female; 45% hybrid closed-loop system, 38% standard insulin pump, 17% multiple daily insulin injections) were included in the study. Between-participant analyses showed that individuals who exceeded the mean daily step count goal over the 4 week period had a similar TIR (75±14%) to those meeting (74±14%) or below (75±16%) the step count goal (p>0.05). In the within-participant comparisons, TIR was higher on days when the step count goal was exceeded or met (both 75±15%) than on days below the step count goal (73±16%; both p<0.001). The TBR was also higher when individuals exceeded the step count goals (3.1%±3.2%) than on days when they met or were below step count goals (difference in means -0.3% [p=0.006] and -0.4% [p=0.001], respectively). The total daily insulin dose was lower on days when step count goals were exceeded (0.52±0.18 U/kg; p<0.001) or were met (0.53±0.18 U/kg; p<0.001) than on days when step counts were below the current recommendation (0.55±0.18 U/kg). Step count had a larger effect on CGM-based metrics in participants with a baseline HbA1c ≥53 mmol/mol (≥7.0%). CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: Our results suggest that, compared with days with low step counts, days with higher step counts are associated with slight increases in both TIR and TBR, along with small reductions in total daily insulin requirements, in adults living with type 1 diabetes. DATA AVAILABILITY: The data that support the findings reported here are available on the Vivli Platform (ID: T1-DEXI; https://doi.org/10.25934/PR00008428 ).

Factors Affecting Reproducibility of Change in Glucose During Exercise: Results From the Type 1 Diabetes and EXercise Initiative.

AIMS: To evaluate factors affecting within-participant reproducibility in glycemic response to different forms of exercise. METHODS: Structured exercise sessions ~30 minutes in length from the Type 1 Diabetes Exercise Initiative (T1DEXI) study were used to assess within-participant glycemic variability during and after exercise. The effect of several pre-exercise factors on the within-participant glycemic variability was evaluated. RESULTS: Data from 476 adults with type 1 diabetes were analyzed. A participant's change in glucose during exercise was reproducible within 15 mg/dL of the participant's other exercise sessions only 32% of the time. Participants who exercised with lower and more consistent glucose level, insulin on board (IOB), and carbohydrate intake at exercise start had less variability in glycemic change during exercise. Participants with lower mean glucose (P < .001), lower glucose coefficient of variation (CV) (P < .001), and lower % time <70 mg/dL (P = .005) on sedentary days had less variable 24-hour post-exercise mean glucose. CONCLUSIONS: Reproducibility of change in glucose during exercise was low in this cohort of adults with T1D, but more consistency in pre-exercise glucose levels, IOB, and carbohydrates may increase this reproducibility. Mean glucose variability in the 24 hours after exercise is influenced more by the participant's overall glycemic control than other modifiable factors.

Design and In Silico Evaluation of an Exercise Decision Support System Using Digital Twin Models.

BACKGROUND: Managing glucose levels during exercise is challenging for individuals with type 1 diabetes (T1D) since multiple factors including activity type, duration, intensity and other factors must be considered. Current decision support tools lack personalized recommendations and fail to distinguish between aerobic and resistance exercise. We propose an exercise-aware decision support system (exDSS) that uses digital twins to deliver personalized recommendations to help people with T1D maintain safe glucose levels (70-180 mg/dL) and avoid low glucose (<70 mg/dL) during and after exercise. METHODS: We evaluated exDSS using various exercise and meal scenarios recorded from a large, free-living study of aerobic and resistance exercise. The model inputs were heart rate, insulin, and meal data. Glucose responses were simulated during and after 30-minute exercise sessions (676 aerobic, 631 resistance) from 247 participants. Glucose outcomes were compared when participants followed exDSS recommendations, clinical guidelines, or did not modify behavior (no intervention). RESULTS: exDSS significantly improved mean time in range for aerobic (80.2% to 92.3%, P < .0001) and resistance (72.3% to 87.3%, P < .0001) exercises compared with no intervention, and versus clinical guidelines (aerobic: 82.2%, P < .0001; resistance: 80.3%, P < .0001). exDSS reduced time spent in low glucose for both exercise types compared with no intervention (aerobic: 15.1% to 5.1%, P < .0001; resistance: 18.2% to 6.6%, P < .0001) and was comparable with following clinical guidelines (aerobic: 4.5%, resistance: 8.1%, P = N.S.). CONCLUSIONS: The exDSS tool significantly improved glucose outcomes during and after exercise versus following clinical guidelines and no intervention providing motivation for clinical evaluation of the exDSS system.

Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning for Improving Glycemic Control in Diabetes: Best Practices, Pitfalls, and Opportunities.

OBJECTIVE: Artificial intelligence and machine learning are transforming many fields including medicine. In diabetes, robust biosensing technologies and automated insulin delivery therapies have created a substantial opportunity to improve health. While the number of manuscripts addressing the topic of applying machine learning to diabetes has grown in recent years, there has been a lack of consistency in the methods, metrics, and data used to train and evaluate these algorithms. This manuscript provides consensus guidelines for machine learning practitioners in the field of diabetes, including best practice recommended approaches and warnings about pitfalls to avoid. METHODS: Algorithmic approaches are reviewed and benefits of different algorithms are discussed including importance of clinical accuracy, explainability, interpretability, and personalization. We review the most common features used in machine learning applications in diabetes glucose control and provide an open-source library of functions for calculating features, as well as a framework for specifying data sets using data sheets. A review of current data sets available for training algorithms is provided as well as an online repository of data sources. SIGNIFICANCE: These consensus guidelines are designed to improve performance and translatability of new machine learning algorithms developed in the field of diabetes for engineers and data scientists.

Combining uncertainty-aware predictive modeling and a bedtime Smart Snack intervention to prevent nocturnal hypoglycemia in people with type 1 diabetes on multiple daily injections.

OBJECTIVE: Nocturnal hypoglycemia is a known challenge for people with type 1 diabetes, especially for physically active individuals or those on multiple daily injections. We developed an evidential neural network (ENN) to predict at bedtime the probability and timing of nocturnal hypoglycemia (0-4 vs 4-8 h after bedtime) based on several glucose metrics and physical activity patterns. We utilized these predictions in silico to prescribe bedtime carbohydrates with a Smart Snack intervention specific to the predicted minimum nocturnal glucose and timing of nocturnal hypoglycemia. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We leveraged free-living datasets collected from 366 individuals from the T1DEXI Study and Glooko. Inputs to the ENN used to model nocturnal hypoglycemia were derived from demographic information, continuous glucose monitoring, and physical activity data. We assessed the accuracy of the ENN using area under the receiver operating curve, and the clinical impact of the Smart Snack intervention through simulations. RESULTS: The ENN achieved an area under the receiver operating curve of 0.80 and 0.71 to predict nocturnal hypoglycemic events during 0-4 and 4-8 h after bedtime, respectively, outperforming all evaluated baseline methods. Use of the Smart Snack intervention reduced probability of nocturnal hypoglycemia from 23.9 ± 14.1% to 14.0 ± 13.3% and duration from 7.4 ± 7.0% to 2.4 ± 3.3% in silico. DISCUSSION: Our findings indicate that the ENN-based Smart Snack intervention has the potential to significantly reduce the frequency and duration of nocturnal hypoglycemic events. CONCLUSION: A decision support system that combines prediction of minimum nocturnal glucose and proactive recommendations for bedtime carbohydrate intake might effectively prevent nocturnal hypoglycemia and reduce the burden of glycemic self-management.

Integrating metabolic expenditure information from wearable fitness sensors into an AI-augmented automated insulin delivery system: a randomised clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Exercise can rapidly drop glucose in people with type 1 diabetes. Ubiquitous wearable fitness sensors are not integrated into automated insulin delivery (AID) systems. We hypothesised that an AID can automate insulin adjustments using real-time wearable fitness data to reduce hypoglycaemia during exercise and free-living conditions compared with an AID not automating use of fitness data. METHODS: Our study population comprised of individuals (aged 21-50 years) with type 1 diabetes from from the Harold Schnitzer Diabetes Health Center clinic at Oregon Health and Science University, OR, USA, who were enrolled into a 76 h single-centre, two-arm randomised (4-block randomisation), non-blinded crossover study to use (1) an AID that detects exercise, prompts the user, and shuts off insulin during exercise using an exercise-aware adaptive proportional derivative (exAPD) algorithm or (2) an AID that automates insulin adjustments using fitness data in real-time through an exercise-aware model predictive control (exMPC) algorithm. Both algorithms ran on iPancreas comprising commercial glucose sensors, insulin pumps, and smartwatches. Participants executed 1 week run-in on usual therapy followed by exAPD or exMPC for one 12 h primary in-clinic session involving meals, exercise, and activities of daily living, and 2 free-living out-patient days. Primary outcome was time below range (<3·9 mmol/L) during the primary in-clinic session. Secondary outcome measures included mean glucose and time in range (3·9-10 mmol/L). This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04771403. FINDINGS: Between April 13, 2021, and Oct 3, 2022, 27 participants (18 females) were enrolled into the study. There was no significant difference between exMPC (n=24) versus exAPD (n=22) in time below range (mean [SD] 1·3% [2·9] vs 2·5% [7·0]) or time in range (63·2% [23·9] vs 59·4% [23·1]) during the primary in-clinic session. In the 2 h period after start of in-clinic exercise, exMPC had significantly lower mean glucose (7·3 [1·6] vs 8·0 [1·7] mmol/L, p=0·023) and comparable time below range (1·4% [4·2] vs 4·9% [14·4]). Across the 76 h study, both algorithms achieved clinical time in range targets (71·2% [16] and 75·5% [11]) and time below range (1·0% [1·2] and 1·3% [2·2]), significantly lower than run-in period (2·4% [2·4], p=0·0004 vs exMPC; p=0·012 vs exAPD). No adverse events occurred. INTERPRETATION: AIDs can integrate exercise data from smartwatches to inform insulin dosing and limit hypoglycaemia while improving glucose outcomes. Future AID systems that integrate exercise metrics from wearable fitness sensors may help people living with type 1 diabetes exercise safely by limiting hypoglycaemia. FUNDING: JDRF Foundation and the Leona M and Harry B Helmsley Charitable Trust, National Institutes of Health, National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases.

Quantifying insulin-mediated and noninsulin-mediated changes in glucose dynamics during resistance exercise in type 1 diabetes.

Exercise can cause dangerous fluctuations in blood glucose in people living with type 1 diabetes (T1D). Aerobic exercise, for example, can cause acute hypoglycemia secondary to increased insulin-mediated and noninsulin-mediated glucose utilization. Less is known about how resistance exercise (RE) impacts glucose dynamics. Twenty-five people with T1D underwent three sessions of either moderate or high-intensity RE at three insulin infusion rates during a glucose tracer clamp. We calculated time-varying rates of endogenous glucose production (EGP) and glucose disposal (Rd) across all sessions and used linear regression and extrapolation to estimate insulin- and noninsulin-mediated components of glucose utilization. Blood glucose did not change on average during exercise. The area under the curve (AUC) for EGP increased by 1.04 mM during RE (95% CI: 0.65-1.43, P < 0.001) and decreased proportionally to insulin infusion rate (0.003 mM per percent above basal rate, 95% CI: 0.001-0.006, P = 0.003). The AUC for Rd rose by 1.26 mM during RE (95% CI: 0.41-2.10, P = 0.004) and increased proportionally with insulin infusion rate (0.04 mM per percent above basal rate, CI: 0.03-0.04, P < 0.001). No differences were observed between the moderate and high resistance groups. Noninsulin-mediated glucose utilization rose significantly during exercise before returning to baseline roughly 30-min postexercise. Insulin-mediated glucose utilization remained unchanged during exercise sessions. Circulating catecholamines and lactate rose during exercise despite relatively small changes observed in Rd. Results provide an explanation of why RE may pose a lower overall risk for hypoglycemia.NEW & NOTEWORTHY Aerobic exercise is known to cause decreases in blood glucose secondary to increased glucose utilization in people living with type 1 diabetes (T1D). However, less is known about how resistance-type exercise impacts glucose dynamics. Twenty-five participants with T1D performed in-clinic weight-bearing exercises under a glucose clamp. Mathematical modeling of infused glucose tracer allowed for quantification of the rate of hepatic glucose production as well as rates of insulin-mediated and noninsulin-mediated glucose uptake experienced during resistance exercise.

The Type 1 Diabetes and EXercise Initiative: Predicting Hypoglycemia Risk During Exercise for Participants with Type 1 Diabetes Using Repeated Measures Random Forest.

Objective: Exercise is known to increase the risk for hypoglycemia in type 1 diabetes (T1D) but predicting when it may occur remains a major challenge. The objective of this study was to develop a hypoglycemia prediction model based on a large real-world study of exercise in T1D. Research Design and Methods: Structured study-specified exercise (aerobic, interval, and resistance training videos) and free-living exercise sessions from the T1D Exercise Initiative study were used to build a model for predicting hypoglycemia, a continuous glucose monitoring value <70 mg/dL, during exercise. Repeated measures random forest (RMRF) and repeated measures logistic regression (RMLR) models were constructed to predict hypoglycemia using predictors at the start of exercise and baseline characteristics. Models were evaluated with area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) and balanced accuracy. Results: RMRF and RMLR had similar AUC (0.833 vs. 0.825, respectively) and both models had a balanced accuracy of 77%. The probability of hypoglycemia was higher for exercise sessions with lower pre-exercise glucose levels, negative pre-exercise glucose rates of change, greater percent time <70 mg/dL in the 24 h before exercise, and greater pre-exercise bolus insulin-on-board (IOB). Free-living aerobic exercises, walking/hiking, and physical labor had the highest probability of hypoglycemia, while structured exercises had the lowest probability of hypoglycemia. Conclusions: RMRF and RMLR accurately predict hypoglycemia during exercise and identify factors that increase the risk of hypoglycemia. Lower glucose, decreasing levels of glucose before exercise, and greater pre-exercise IOB largely predict hypoglycemia risk in adults with T1D.

Enabling fully automated insulin delivery through meal detection and size estimation using Artificial Intelligence.

We present a robust insulin delivery system that includes automated meal detection and carbohydrate content estimation using machine learning for meal insulin dosing called robust artificial pancreas (RAP). We conducted a randomized, single-center crossover trial to compare postprandial glucose control in the four hours following unannounced meals using a hybrid model predictive control (MPC) algorithm and the RAP system. The RAP system includes a neural network model to automatically detect meals and deliver a recommended meal insulin dose. The meal detection algorithm has a sensitivity of 83.3%, false discovery rate of 16.6%, and mean detection time of 25.9 minutes. While there is no significant difference in incremental area under the curve of glucose, RAP significantly reduces time above range (glucose >180 mg/dL) by 10.8% (P = 0.04) and trends toward increasing time in range (70-180 mg/dL) by 9.1% compared with MPC. Time below range (glucose <70 mg/dL) is not significantly different between RAP and MPC.

Examining the Acute Glycemic Effects of Different Types of Structured Exercise Sessions in Type 1 Diabetes in a Real-World Setting: The Type 1 Diabetes and Exercise Initiative (T1DEXI).

OBJECTIVE: Maintenance of glycemic control during and after exercise remains a major challenge for individuals with type 1 diabetes. Glycemic responses to exercise may differ by exercise type (aerobic, interval, or resistance), and the effect of activity type on glycemic control after exercise remains unclear. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: The Type 1 Diabetes Exercise Initiative (T1DEXI) was a real-world study of at-home exercise. Adult participants were randomly assigned to complete six structured aerobic, interval, or resistance exercise sessions over 4 weeks. Participants self-reported study and nonstudy exercise, food intake, and insulin dosing (multiple daily injection [MDI] users) using a custom smart phone application and provided pump (pump users), heart rate, and continuous glucose monitoring data. RESULTS: A total of 497 adults with type 1 diabetes (mean age ± SD 37 ± 14 years; mean HbA1c ± SD 6.6 ± 0.8% [49 ± 8.7 mmol/mol]) assigned to structured aerobic (n = 162), interval (n = 165), or resistance (n = 170) exercise were analyzed. The mean (± SD) change in glucose during assigned exercise was -18 ± 39, -14 ± 32, and -9 ± 36 mg/dL for aerobic, interval, and resistance, respectively (P < 0.001), with similar results for closed-loop, standard pump, and MDI users. Time in range 70-180 mg/dL (3.9-10.0 mmol/L) was higher during the 24 h after study exercise when compared with days without exercise (mean ± SD 76 ± 20% vs. 70 ± 23%; P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Adults with type 1 diabetes experienced the largest drop in glucose level with aerobic exercise, followed by interval and resistance exercise, regardless of insulin delivery modality. Even in adults with well-controlled type 1 diabetes, days with structured exercise sessions contributed to clinically meaningful improvement in glucose time in range but may have slightly increased time below range.

A Glycemia Risk Index (GRI) of Hypoglycemia and Hyperglycemia for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Validated by Clinician Ratings.

BACKGROUND: A composite metric for the quality of glycemia from continuous glucose monitor (CGM) tracings could be useful for assisting with basic clinical interpretation of CGM data. METHODS: We assembled a data set of 14-day CGM tracings from 225 insulin-treated adults with diabetes. Using a balanced incomplete block design, 330 clinicians who were highly experienced with CGM analysis and interpretation ranked the CGM tracings from best to worst quality of glycemia. We used principal component analysis and multiple regressions to develop a model to predict the clinician ranking based on seven standard metrics in an Ambulatory Glucose Profile: very low-glucose and low-glucose hypoglycemia; very high-glucose and high-glucose hyperglycemia; time in range; mean glucose; and coefficient of variation. RESULTS: The analysis showed that clinician rankings depend on two components, one related to hypoglycemia that gives more weight to very low-glucose than to low-glucose and the other related to hyperglycemia that likewise gives greater weight to very high-glucose than to high-glucose. These two components should be calculated and displayed separately, but they can also be combined into a single Glycemia Risk Index (GRI) that corresponds closely to the clinician rankings of the overall quality of glycemia (r = 0.95). The GRI can be displayed graphically on a GRI Grid with the hypoglycemia component on the horizontal axis and the hyperglycemia component on the vertical axis. Diagonal lines divide the graph into five zones (quintiles) corresponding to the best (0th to 20th percentile) to worst (81st to 100th percentile) overall quality of glycemia. The GRI Grid enables users to track sequential changes within an individual over time and compare groups of individuals. CONCLUSION: The GRI is a single-number summary of the quality of glycemia. Its hypoglycemia and hyperglycemia components provide actionable scores and a graphical display (the GRI Grid) that can be used by clinicians and researchers to determine the glycemic effects of prescribed and investigational treatments.

Consensus Recommendations for the Use of Automated Insulin Delivery Technologies in Clinical Practice.

The significant and growing global prevalence of diabetes continues to challenge people with diabetes (PwD), healthcare providers, and payers. While maintaining near-normal glucose levels has been shown to prevent or delay the progression of the long-term complications of diabetes, a significant proportion of PwD are not attaining their glycemic goals. During the past 6 years, we have seen tremendous advances in automated insulin delivery (AID) technologies. Numerous randomized controlled trials and real-world studies have shown that the use of AID systems is safe and effective in helping PwD achieve their long-term glycemic goals while reducing hypoglycemia risk. Thus, AID systems have recently become an integral part of diabetes management. However, recommendations for using AID systems in clinical settings have been lacking. Such guided recommendations are critical for AID success and acceptance. All clinicians working with PwD need to become familiar with the available systems in order to eliminate disparities in diabetes quality of care. This report provides much-needed guidance for clinicians who are interested in utilizing AIDs and presents a comprehensive listing of the evidence payers should consider when determining eligibility criteria for AID insurance coverage.

Implementation of a pharmacist-led diabetes management service in an endocrinology clinic.

BACKGROUND: Diabetes is a complicated health condition that can lead to significant health complications. Pharmacists are in an ideal position to make therapeutic interventions, provide clinical education, and can provide necessary follow-up to evaluate response to therapy for patients with diabetes. OBJECTIVES: The primary objective of this study is to evaluate the mean change in hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) in patients receiving short-term diabetes management services from a clinical pharmacist through collaborative drug therapy management. METHODS: This study is a single-center retrospective chart review of patients with diabetes who have been referred by their endocrinologist to the clinical pharmacist for short-term intensification of pharmacologic management of hyperglycemia. Patients included in the study completed at least 2 visits with the pharmacist during the study period. The primary outcome was to evaluate the mean absolute change in HbA1c at 3-6 months from baseline. RESULTS: Data were collected from 117 patients. The average age was 55 years (19-91 years, SD ± 14.5), 65 patients (55.6%) were female, average duration of diabetes was 14.9 years (0.5-49 years, SD ± 9.9), 21 patients (17.9%) had type 1 diabetes, 96 patients (82.1%) had type 2 diabetes, and 88 patients (75.2%) had a baseline HbA1c of at least 8.5%. On average, patients reduced their HbA1c by 2.0% (P < 0.001) at 3-6 months. For patients with a baseline HbA1c of at least 8.5%, they experienced a 2.5% (P < 0.001) reduction in HbA1c at 3-6 months. CONCLUSION: The addition of a clinical pharmacist within the endocrinology practice was associated with significant improvements in glycemic control for those referred. This short-term, intensive service model demonstrates that patients can achieve significant reductions in HbA1c with temporary support from a clinical pharmacist.

Assessment of a Decision Support System for Adults with Type 1 Diabetes on Multiple Daily Insulin Injections.

Introduction: DailyDose is a decision support system designed to provide real-time dosing advice and weekly insulin dose adjustments for adults living with type 1 diabetes using multiple daily insulin injections. Materials and Methods: Twenty-five adults were enrolled in this single-arm study. All participants used Dexcom G6 for continuous glucose monitoring, InPen for short-acting insulin doses, and Clipsulin to track long-acting insulin doses. Participants used DailyDose on an iPhone for 8 weeks. The primary endpoint was % time in range (TIR) comparing the 2-week baseline to the final 2-week period of DailyDose use. Results: There were no significant differences between TIR or other glycemic metrics between the baseline period compared to final 2-week period of DailyDose use. TIR significantly improved by 6.3% when more than half of recommendations were accepted and followed compared with 50% or fewer recommendations (95% CI 2.5%-10.1%, P = 0.001). Conclusions: Use of DailyDose did not improve glycemic outcomes compared to the baseline period. In a post hoc analysis, accepting and following recommendations from DailyDose was associated with improved TIR. Clinical Trial Registration Number: NCT04428645.

Quantifying the impact of physical activity on future glucose trends using machine learning.

Prevention of hypoglycemia (glucose <70 mg/dL) during aerobic exercise is a major challenge in type 1 diabetes. Providing predictions of glycemic changes during and following exercise can help people with type 1 diabetes avoid hypoglycemia. A unique dataset representing 320 days and 50,000 + time points of glycemic measurements was collected in adults with type 1 diabetes who participated in a 4-arm crossover study evaluating insulin-pump therapies, whereby each participant performed eight identically designed in-clinic exercise studies. We demonstrate that even under highly controlled conditions, there is considerable intra-participant and inter-participant variability in glucose outcomes during and following exercise. Participants with higher aerobic fitness exhibited significantly lower minimum glucose and steeper glucose declines during exercise. Adaptive, personalized machine learning (ML) algorithms were designed to predict exercise-related glucose changes. These algorithms achieved high accuracy in predicting the minimum glucose and hypoglycemia during and following exercise sessions, for all fitness levels.