Project Extension for Community Healthcare Outcomes Intervention Evaluations: A Scoping Review of Research Methods.

INTRODUCTION: Since its inception in 2003, the Project Extension for Community Healthcare Outcomes (ECHO) tele-education model has reached and improved outcomes for patients, providers, and health centers through interventions in >180 countries. Utilization of this model has recently increased due to the COVID-19 pandemic and a higher demand for remote education. However, limited research has examined the methodologies used to evaluate Project ECHO interventions. METHODS: We conducted a scoping review to determine the extent and types of research methods used to evaluate outcomes and implementation success of Project ECHO interventions and to identify gaps and opportunities for future investigation. Using Arksey and O'Malley's scoping review framework and the PRISMA-ScR checklist, we reviewed study designs, temporality, analysis methods, data sources, and levels and types of data in 121 articles evaluating Project ECHO interventions. RESULTS: Most interventions addressed substance use disorders (24.8%, n = 30), infectious diseases (24%, n = 29), psychiatric and behavioral health conditions (21.5%, n = 26), and chronic diseases (19%, n = 23). The most frequently reported evaluation methods included cohort studies (86.8%, n = 105), longitudinal designs (74.4%, n = 90), mixed methods analysis (52.1%, n = 63), surveys (61.2%, n = 74), process evaluation measures (98.3%, n = 119), and provider-level outcome measures (84.3%, n = 102). Few evaluations used experimental designs (1.7%, n = 2), randomization (5.8%, n = 7), or comparison groups (14%, n = 17), indicating limited rigor. DISCUSSION: This scoping review demonstrates the need for more rigorous evaluation methods to test the effectiveness of the Project ECHO model at improving outcomes and standardized reporting guidelines to enhance the dissemination of evaluation data from future Project ECHO interventions.

'We're taught green is good': Perspectives on time in range and time in tight range from youth with type 1 diabetes, and parents of youth with type 1 diabetes.

AIMS: Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) systems are standard of care for youth with type 1 diabetes with the goal of spending >70% time in range (TIR; 70-180 mg/dL, 3.9-10 mmol/L). We aimed to understand paediatric CGM user experiences with TIR metrics considering recent discussion of shifting to time in tight range (TITR; >50% time between 70 and 140 mg/dL, 3.9 and 7.8 mmol/L). METHODS: Semi-structured interviews and focus groups with adolescents with type 1 diabetes and parents of youth with type 1 diabetes focused on experiences with TIR goals and reactions to TITR. Groups and interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed and analysed using content analysis. RESULTS: Thirty participants (N = 19 parents: age 43.6 ± 5.3 years, 79% female, 47% non-Hispanic White, 20 ± 5 months since child's diagnosis; N = 11 adolescents: age 15.3 ± 2 years, 55% female, 55% non-Hispanic White, 16 ± 3 months since diagnosis) attended. Participants had varying levels of understanding of TIR. Some developed personally preferred glucose ranges. Parents often aimed to surpass 70% TIR. Many described feelings of stress and disappointment when they did not meet a TIR goal. Concerns about TITR included increased stress and burden; risk of hypoglycaemia; and family conflict. Some participants said TITR would not change their daily lives; others said it would improve their diabetes management. Families requested care team support and a clear scientific rationale for TITR. CONCLUSIONS: The wealth of CGM data creates frequent opportunities for assessing diabetes management and carries implications for management burden. Input from people with type 1 diabetes and their families will be critical in considering a shift in glycaemic goals and targets.

CD39 delineates chimeric antigen receptor regulatory T cell subsets with distinct cytotoxic & regulatory functions against human islets.

Human regulatory T cells (Treg) suppress other immune cells. Their dysfunction contributes to the pathophysiology of autoimmune diseases, including type 1 diabetes (T1D). Infusion of Tregs is being clinically evaluated as a novel way to prevent or treat T1D. Genetic modification of Tregs, most notably through the introduction of a chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) targeting Tregs to pancreatic islets, may improve their efficacy. We evaluated CAR targeting of human Tregs to monocytes, a human ß cell line and human islet ß cells in vitro. Targeting of HLA-A2-CAR (A2-CAR) bulk Tregs to HLA-A2+ cells resulted in dichotomous cytotoxic killing of human monocytes and islet ß cells. In exploring subsets and mechanisms that may explain this pattern, we found that CD39 expression segregated CAR Treg cytotoxicity. CAR Tregs from individuals with more CD39low/- Tregs and from individuals with genetic polymorphism associated with lower CD39 expression (rs10748643) had more cytotoxicity. Isolated CD39- CAR Tregs had elevated granzyme B expression and cytotoxicity compared to the CD39+ CAR Treg subset. Genetic overexpression of CD39 in CD39low CAR Tregs reduced their cytotoxicity. Importantly, ß cells upregulated protein surface expression of PD-L1 and PD-L2 in response to A2-CAR Tregs. Blockade of PD-L1/PD-L2 increased ß cell death in A2-CAR Treg co-cultures suggesting that the PD-1/PD-L1 pathway is important in protecting islet ß cells in the setting of CAR immunotherapy. In summary, introduction of CAR can enhance biological differences in subsets of Tregs. CD39+ Tregs represent a safer choice for CAR Treg therapies targeting tissues for tolerance induction.

Consensus guidance for monitoring individuals with islet autoantibody-positive pre-stage 3 type 1 diabetes.

Given the proven benefits of screening to reduce diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) likelihood at the time of stage 3 type 1 diabetes diagnosis, and emerging availability of therapy to delay disease progression, type 1 diabetes screening programmes are being increasingly emphasised. Once broadly implemented, screening initiatives will identify significant numbers of islet autoantibody-positive (IAb+) children and adults who are at risk of (confirmed single IAb+) or living with (multiple IAb+) early-stage (stage 1 and stage 2) type 1 diabetes. These individuals will need monitoring for disease progression; much of this care will happen in non-specialised settings. To inform this monitoring, JDRF in conjunction with international experts and societies developed consensus guidance. Broad advice from this guidance includes the following: (1) partnerships should be fostered between endocrinologists and primary-care providers to care for people who are IAb+; (2) when people who are IAb+ are initially identified there is a need for confirmation using a second sample; (3) single IAb+ individuals are at lower risk of progression than multiple IAb+ individuals; (4) individuals with early-stage type 1 diabetes should have periodic medical monitoring, including regular assessments of glucose levels, regular education about symptoms of diabetes and DKA, and psychosocial support; (5) interested people with stage 2 type 1 diabetes should be offered trial participation or approved therapies; and (6) all health professionals involved in monitoring and care of individuals with type 1 diabetes have a responsibility to provide education. The guidance also emphasises significant unmet needs for further research on early-stage type 1 diabetes to increase the rigour of future recommendations and inform clinical care.

Consensus Guidance for Monitoring Individuals With Islet Autoantibody-Positive Pre-Stage 3 Type 1 Diabetes.

Given the proven benefits of screening to reduce diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) likelihood at the time of stage 3 type 1 diabetes diagnosis, and emerging availability of therapy to delay disease progression, type 1 diabetes screening programs are being increasingly emphasized. Once broadly implemented, screening initiatives will identify significant numbers of islet autoantibody-positive (IAb+) children and adults who are at risk for (confirmed single IAb+) or living with (multiple IAb+) early-stage (stage 1 and stage 2) type 1 diabetes. These individuals will need monitoring for disease progression; much of this care will happen in nonspecialized settings. To inform this monitoring, JDRF, in conjunction with international experts and societies, developed consensus guidance. Broad advice from this guidance includes the following: 1) partnerships should be fostered between endocrinologists and primary care providers to care for people who are IAb+; 2) when people who are IAb+ are initially identified, there is a need for confirmation using a second sample; 3) single IAb+ individuals are at lower risk of progression than multiple IAb+ individuals; 4) individuals with early-stage type 1 diabetes should have periodic medical monitoring, including regular assessments of glucose levels, regular education about symptoms of diabetes and DKA, and psychosocial support; 5) interested people with stage 2 type 1 diabetes should be offered trial participation or approved therapies; and 6) all health professionals involved in monitoring and care of individuals with type 1 diabetes have a responsibility to provide education. The guidance also emphasizes significant unmet needs for further research on early-stage type 1 diabetes to increase the rigor of future recommendations and inform clinical care.

Equitable implementation of a precision digital health program for glucose management in individuals with newly diagnosed type 1 diabetes.

Few young people with type 1 diabetes (T1D) meet glucose targets. Continuous glucose monitoring improves glycemia, but access is not equitable. We prospectively assessed the impact of a systematic and equitable digital-health-team-based care program implementing tighter glucose targets (HbA1c < 7%), early technology use (continuous glucose monitoring starts <1 month after diagnosis) and remote patient monitoring on glycemia in young people with newly diagnosed T1D enrolled in the Teamwork, Targets, Technology, and Tight Control (4T Study 1). Primary outcome was HbA1c change from 4 to 12 months after diagnosis; the secondary outcome was achieving the HbA1c targets. The 4T Study 1 cohort (36.8% Hispanic and 35.3% publicly insured) had a mean HbA1c of 6.58%, 64% with HbA1c < 7% and mean time in the range (70-180 mg dl-1) of 68% at 1 year after diagnosis. Clinical implementation of the 4T Study 1 met the prespecified primary outcome and improved glycemia without unexpected serious adverse events. The strategies in the 4T Study 1 can be used to implement systematic and equitable care for individuals with T1D and translate to care for other chronic diseases. ClinicalTrials.gov registration: NCT04336969 .

24-h energy expenditure in people with type 1 diabetes: impact on equations for clinical estimation of energy expenditure.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Type 1 diabetes (T1D) is associated with an increase in resting metabolic rate (RMR), but the impact of T1D on other components of 24-h energy expenditure (24-h EE) is not known. Also, there is a lack of equations to estimate 24-h EE in patients with T1D. The aims of this analysis were to compare 24-h EE and its components in young adults with T1D and healthy controls across the spectrum of body mass index (BMI) and derive T1D-specific equations from clinical variables. SUBJECTS/METHODS: Thirty-three young adults with T1D diagnosed ≥1 year prior and 33 healthy controls matched for sex, age and BMI were included in this analysis. We measured 24-h EE inside a whole room indirect calorimeter (WRIC) and body composition with dual x-ray absorptiometry. RESULTS: Participants with T1D had significantly higher 24-h EE than healthy controls (T1D = 2047 ± 23 kcal/day vs control= 1908 ± 23 kcal/day; P < 0.01). We derived equations to estimate 24-h EE with both body composition (fat free mass + fat mass) and anthropometric (weight + height) models, which provided high coefficients of determination (R2 = 0.912 for both). A clinical model that did not incorporate spontaneous physical activity yielded high coefficients of determination as well (R2 = 0.897 and R2 = 0.880 for body composition and anthropometric models, respectively). CONCLUSION: These results confirm that young adults with established T1D have increased 24-h EE relative to controls without T1D. The derived equations from clinically available variables can assist clinicians with energy prescriptions for weight management in patients with T1D.

COVID-19 impacts and inequities among underserved communities with diabetes.

Background: People with diabetes have higher COVID-19 morbidity and mortality. These risks are amplified for underserved communities including racial/ethnic minorities and people with lower socioeconomic status. However, limited research has examined COVID-19 outcomes specifically affecting underserved communities with diabetes. Methods: From November 2021 to July 2022, adults with insulin-requiring diabetes at federally qualified health centers in Florida and California (n = 450) completed surveys examining COVID-19 outcomes and demographics. Surveys assessed COVID-19 severity, vaccination uptake, mask-wearing habits, income changes, and healthcare access changes. Surveys also included the full Coronavirus Anxiety Scale (CAS-19). Descriptive statistics were computed for all outcomes. Between-group comparisons for state and race/ethnicity were evaluated via Chi-Squared, Fisher's Exact, Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel, One-Way ANOVA, and t-tests. Logistic regression determined factors associated with COVID-19 vaccination uptake. Data were self-reported and analyzed cross-sectionally. Results: Overall, 29.7 % reported contracting COVID-19; of those, 45.3 % sought care or were hospitalized. Most (81.3 %) received ≥ 1 vaccine. Hispanics had the highest vaccination rate (91.1 %); Non-Hispanic Blacks (NHBs) had the lowest (73.9 %; p =.0281). Hispanics had 4.63x greater vaccination odds than Non-Hispanic Whites ([NHWs]; 95 % CI = [1.81, 11.89]). NHWs least often wore masks (18.8 %; p <.001). Participants reported pandemic-related healthcare changes (62 %) and higher costs of diabetes medications (41 %). Income loss was more frequent in Florida (76 %; p <.001). NHBs most frequently reported "severe" income loss (26.4 %; p =.0124). Loss of health insurance was more common among NHBs (13.3 %; p =.0416) and in Florida (9.7 %; p =.039). COVID-19 anxiety was highest among NHBs and Hispanics (IQR = [0.0, 3.0]; p =.0232) and in Florida (IQR = [0.0, 2.0]; p =.0435). Conclusions: Underserved communities with diabetes had high COVID-19 vaccine uptake but experienced significant COVID-19-related physical, psychosocial, and financial impacts. NHBs and those in Florida had worse outcomes than other racial/ethnic groups and those in California. Further research, interventions, and policy changes are needed to promote health equity for this population.

A Machine Learning Model for Week-Ahead Hypoglycemia Prediction From Continuous Glucose Monitoring Data.

BACKGROUND: Remote patient monitoring (RPM) programs augment type 1 diabetes (T1D) care based on retrospective continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) data. Few methods are available to estimate the likelihood of a patient experiencing clinically significant hypoglycemia within one week. METHODS: We developed a machine learning model to estimate the probability that a patient will experience a clinically significant hypoglycemic event, defined as CGM readings below 54 mg/dL for at least 15 consecutive minutes, within one week. The model takes as input the patient's CGM time series over a given week, and outputs the predicted probability of a clinically significant hypoglycemic event the following week. We used 10-fold cross-validation and external validation (testing on cohorts different from the training cohort) to evaluate performance. We used CGM data from three different cohorts of patients with T1D: REPLACE-BG (226 patients), Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation (JDRF; 355 patients) and Tidepool (120 patients). RESULTS: In 10-fold cross-validation, the average area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC-AUC) was 0.77 (standard deviation [SD]: 0.0233) on the REPLACE-BG cohort, 0.74 (SD: 0.0188) on the JDRF cohort, and 0.76 (SD: 0.02) on the Tidepool cohort. In external validation, the average ROC-AUC across the three cohorts was 0.74 (SD: 0.0262). CONCLUSIONS: We developed a machine learning algorithm to estimate the probability of a clinically significant hypoglycemic event within one week. Predictive algorithms may provide diabetes care providers using RPM with additional context when prioritizing T1D patients for review.

Smart Start - Designing Powerful Clinical Trials Using Pilot Study Data.

BACKGROUND: Digital health interventions may be optimized before evaluation in a randomized clinical trial. Although many digital health interventions are deployed in pilot studies, the data collected are rarely used to refine the intervention and the subsequent clinical trials. METHODS: We leverage natural variation in patients eligible for a digital health intervention in a remote patient-monitoring pilot study to design and compare interventions for a subsequent randomized clinical trial. RESULTS: Our approach leverages patient heterogeneity to identify an intervention with twice the estimated effect size of an unoptimized intervention. CONCLUSIONS: Optimizing an intervention and clinical trial based on pilot data may improve efficacy and increase the probability of success. (Funded by the National Institutes of Health and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04336969.)

Removing Barriers, Bridging the Gap, and the Changing Role of the Health Care Professional with Automated Insulin Delivery Systems.

As all people with type 1 diabetes (T1D) and some with type 2 diabetes (T2D) require insulin, there is a need to develop management methods that not only achieve glycemic targets but also reduce the burden of living with diabetes. After insulin pumps and continuous glucose monitors, the next step in the evolution of diabetes technology is automated insulin delivery (AID) systems, which have transformed intensive insulin management over the past decade, as these systems address the shortcomings of previous management options. However, AID use remains fairly limited, and access represents a major barrier to use for many people with diabetes, despite these systems being standard of care. Therefore, the future of AID will necessitate addressing barriers related to social determinants of health, finances, and an expansion of the number and type of health care professionals (HCPs) prescribing AID systems. These crucial steps will be essential to ensure that everyone with intensively managed diabetes can use AID systems. The impact of implementing these changes will create a shift in the future of diabetes care that will result in achievement of more targeted glycemia and psychosocial outcomes for all people with diabetes and an expansion of the role of all HCPs in AID-related diabetes care. Even more importantly, by addressing social determinants of health and clinical inertia related to AID, the field can address disparities in outcomes across countries, race, gender, socioeconomic status, and insurance status. Furthermore, the increased use of AID system will provide more time during appointments for a shift in the discussion away from fine tuning insulin dosing and toward a focus on more topics related to behavior and conversations about general health. This will include psychosocial outcomes, and quality of life. In addition, these changes can hopefully allow for time to discuss more general issues, such as cardiovascular health, obesity prevention, diabetes-related complications, and other health-related concerns.

Demographic, Clinical, Management, and Outcome Characteristics of 8,004 Young Children With Type 1 Diabetes.

OBJECTIVE: To compare demographic, clinical, and therapeutic characteristics of children with type 1 diabetes age <6 years across three international registries: Diabetes Prospective Follow-Up Registry (DPV; Europe), T1D Exchange Quality Improvement Network (T1DX-QI; U.S.), and Australasian Diabetes Data Network (ADDN; Australasia). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: An analysis was conducted comparing 2019-2021 prospective registry data from 8,004 children. RESULTS: Mean ± SD ages at diabetes diagnosis were 3.2 ± 1.4 (DPV and ADDN) and 3.7 ± 1.8 years (T1DX-QI). Mean ± SD diabetes durations were 1.4 ± 1.3 (DPV), 1.4 ± 1.6 (T1DX-QI), and 1.5 ± 1.3 years (ADDN). BMI z scores were in the overweight range in 36.2% (DPV), 41.8% (T1DX-QI), and 50.0% (ADDN) of participants. Mean ± SD HbA1c varied among registries: DPV 7.3 ± 0.9% (56 ± 10 mmol/mol), T1DX-QI 8.0 ± 1.4% (64 ± 16 mmol/mol), and ADDN 7.7 ± 1.2% (61 ± 13 mmol/mol). Overall, 37.5% of children achieved the target HbA1c of <7.0% (53 mmol/mol): 43.6% in DPV, 25.5% in T1DX-QI, and 27.5% in ADDN. Use of diabetes technologies such as insulin pump (DPV 86.6%, T1DX 46.6%, and ADDN 39.2%) and continuous glucose monitoring (CGM; DPV 85.1%, T1DX-QI 57.6%, and ADDN 70.5%) varied among registries. Use of hybrid closed-loop (HCL) systems was uncommon (from 0.5% [ADDN] to 6.9% [DPV]). CONCLUSIONS: Across three major registries, more than half of children age <6 years did not achieve the target HbA1c of <7.0% (53 mmol/mol). CGM was used by most participants, whereas insulin pump use varied across registries, and HCL system use was rare. The differences seen in glycemia and use of diabetes technologies among registries require further investigation to determine potential contributing factors and areas to target to improve the care of this vulnerable group.

Pre-exercise protein intake is associated with reduced time in hypoglycaemia among adolescents with type 1 diabetes.

AIM: Secondary analyses were conducted from a randomized trial of an adaptive behavioural intervention to assess the relationship between protein intake (g and g/kg) consumed within 4 h before moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA) bouts and glycaemia during and following MVPA bouts among adolescents with type 1 diabetes (T1D). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Adolescents (n = 112) with T1D, 14.5 (13.8, 15.7) years of age and 36.6% overweight/obese, provided measures of glycaemia using continuous glucose monitoring [percentage of time above range (>180 mg/dl), time in range (70-180 mg/dl), time below range (TBR; <70 mg/dl)], self-reported physical activity (previous day physical activity recalls), and 24 h dietary recall data at baseline and 6 months post-intervention. Mixed effects regression models adjusted for design (randomization assignment, study site), demographic, clinical, anthropometric, dietary, physical activity and timing covariates estimated the association between pre-exercise protein intake on percentage of time above range, time in range and TBR during and following MVPA. RESULTS: Pre-exercise protein intakes of 10-19.9 g and >20 g were associated with an absolute reduction of -4.41% (p = .04) and -4.83% (p = .02) TBR during physical activity compared with those who did not consume protein before MVPA. Similarly, relative protein intakes of 0.125-0.249 g/kg and ≥0.25 g/kg were associated with -5.38% (p = .01) and -4.32% (p = .03) absolute reductions in TBR during physical activity. We did not observe a significant association between protein intake and measures of glycaemia following bouts of MVPA. CONCLUSIONS: Among adolescents with T1D, a dose of ≥10 g or ≥0.125 g/kg of protein within 4 h before MVPA may promote reduced time in hypoglycaemia during, but not following, physical activity.