Insulin Analogs and the Mode of Insulin Delivery: Recent Advances and Challenges.

Diabetes is a medical condition associated with impaired glucose regulation caused either due to insufficient insulin production or resistance to insulin (Type 2 diabetes, gestational diabetes) or the absence of insulin through the selective killing of beta cells in the pancreas (Type 1 diabetes). Irregular insulin production leads to various health complications. To prevent such complications, patients must adhere to medical recommendations before availing of any advanced insulin therapy(ies), considered productive for the treatment. Natural insulin, although highly effective in controlling blood glucose levels, patients are often at risk of developing hypoglycemia and many other complications. This has led to the development of insulin analogs, the modified variants of natural insulin having a minimal risk of causing hypoglycemia. Besides the development of analogs, the mode of insulin delivery is also considered critical in achieving better glycemic control in diabetic patients. Until recently, various exogenous insulin delivery methods were practiced, but effective glycemic control without any associated risk and ease of delivery remains a subject of paramount concern. It countered attenuation or delayed onset of diabetes-associated complications without a permanent cure, raising an unmet demand for insulin formulations and delivery methods that offer stability, biocompatibility, reproducibility, precision dosing, non-immunogenicity, and safety. The current practice utilizes non-physiological delivery methods with less invasive administration routes, offering glycemic stability and therapeutic effectiveness. This review focuses on the recent advances made and future perspectives envisioned about newer insulin therapies and delivery methods that tend to improve the management of diabetes by inculcating ideas to reduce the disease's severity and improve the quality of life.

Comparative Effectiveness of Hybrid Closed-Loop Automated Insulin Delivery Systems Among Patients with Type 1 Diabetes.

BACKGROUND: Clinical trials have demonstrated the efficacy and safety of hybrid closed-loop (HCL) systems, yet few studies have compared outcomes in the real-world setting. METHOD: This retrospective study analyzed patients from an academic endocrinology practice between January 1, 2018, and November 18, 2022. The inclusion criteria were diagnosis code for type I diabetes (T1D), >18 years of age, new to any HCL system [Medtronic 670G/770G (MT), Tandem Control IQ (CIQ), or Omnipod 5 (OP5)], and availability of a pump download within three months. The outcomes included %time in range (TIR) of 70 to 180 mg/dL, %time below range (TBR) <70 mg/dL at 90 days, and HbA1c for 91 to 180 days. RESULT: Of the 176 participants, 47 were MT, 74 CIQ, and 55 OP5. Median (25%, 75%) change in HbA1c was -0.1 (-0.8, 0.3), -0.6 (-1.1, -0.15), and -0.55 (-0.98, 0)% for MT, CIQ, and OP5, respectively, (P = .04). TIR was 70 (57, 76), 67 (59, 75), and 68 (60, 76)% (P = .95) at 90 days while TBR was 2 (1, 3), 1 (0, 2), and 1 (0, 1)%, respectively, (P = .002). The %time in automated delivery was associated with TIR and change in HbA1c. After controlling other factors including %time in automated delivery, HCL type was not an independent predictor of change in HbA1c nor TIR but remained a significant predictor of TBR. CONCLUSION: There were significant reductions in HbA1c in CIQ and OP5. TIR was similar across pumps, but TBR was highest with MT. The %time in automated delivery likely explains differences in change in HbA1c but not TBR between HCL systems.

Hypoglycemia and Hyperglycemia According to Type of Diabetes: Observations During Fully Closed-Loop Insulin Delivery in Adults With Type 1 and Type 2 Diabetes.

BACKGROUND: CamAPS HX fully closed-loop (FCL) system, with no user input required at mealtimes, has been shown to be safe and effective in adults with type 1 and type 2 diabetes. We assessed whether time spent in hypoglycemia and hyperglycemia during FCL insulin delivery in adults varied by type of diabetes over the 24-hour period. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed eight weeks of data from 52 participants (adults with type 1 diabetes and adults with insulin-treated type 2 diabetes) recruited to two single-center randomized controlled studies using FCL insulin delivery during unrestricted-living conditions. Key outcomes were time spent in hypoglycemia <70 mg/dL and marked hyperglycemia >300 mg/dL by type of diabetes. RESULTS: The median percentage of time spent in hypoglycemia <70 mg/dL over the 24-hour period was lower for those with type 2 diabetes than for those with type 1 diabetes (median [interquartile range (IQR)] 0.43% [0.20-0.77] vs 0.86%, [0.54-1.46]; mean difference 0.46 percentage points [95% CI 0.23-0.70]; P < .001). Median percentage time in marked hyperglycemia >300 mg/dL was lower for those with type 2 diabetes than for those with type 1 diabetes (median [IQR] 1.8% [0.6-3.5] vs 9.3% [6.9-11.8]; mean difference 7.8 percentage points [95% CI 5.5-10.0]; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Using the FCL system, hypoglycemia and marked hyperglycemia exposure were lower in type 2 diabetes than in type 1 diabetes.

Development of a Real-time Force-based Algorithm for Infusion Failure Detection.

BACKGROUND: Continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) is a common treatment option for people with diabetes (PWD), but insulin infusion failures pose a significant challenge, leading to hyperglycemia, diabetes burnout, and increased hospitalizations. Current CSII pumps' occlusion alarm systems are limited in detecting infusion failures; therefore, a more effective detection method is needed. METHODS: We conducted five preclinical animal studies to collect data on infusion failures, utilizing both insulin and non-insulin boluses. Data were captured using in-line pressure and flow rate sensors, with additional force data from CSII pumps' onboard sensors in one study. A novel classifier model was developed using this dataset, aimed at detecting different types of infusion failures through direct utilization of force sensor data. Performance was compared against various occlusion alarm thresholds from commercially available CSII pumps. RESULTS: The testing dataset included 251 boluses. The Bagging classifier model showed the highest performance metrics among the models tested, exhibiting high accuracy (96%), sensitivity (94%), and specificity (98%), with lower false-positive and false-negative rate compared with traditional occlusion alarm pressure thresholds. CONCLUSIONS: Our study developed a novel non-threshold classifier that outperforms current occlusion alarm systems in CSII pumps in detecting infusion failures. This advancement has the potential to reduce the risk of hyperglycemia and hospitalizations due to undetected infusion failures, offering a more reliable and effective CSII therapy for PWD. Further studies involving human participants are recommended to validate these findings and assess the classifier's performance in a real-world setting.

Comparing Equil patch versus traditional catheter insulin pump in type 2 diabetes using continuous glucose monitoring metrics and profiles.

AIMS: It is not clear whether there are differences in glycemic control between the Equil patch and the MMT-712 insulin pump. Our objective was to compare two types of insulin pumps in the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), using continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) metrics and profiles. METHODS: This was a randomized case-crossover clinical trial. Participants were hospitalized and randomly allocated to two groups and underwent two types of insulin pump treatments (group A: Equil patch-Medtronic MMT-712 insulin pump; group B: Medtronic MMT-712-Equil patch insulin pump) separated by a 1-day washout period. Glycemic control was achieved after 7-8 days of insulin pump therapy. Each patient received CGM for 5 consecutive days (from day 1 to day 5). On day 3 of CGM performance, the Equil patch insulin pump treatment was switched to Medtronic MMT-712 insulin pump treatment at the same basal and bolus insulin doses or vice versa. CGM metrics and profiles including glycemic variability (GV), time in range (TIR, 3.9-10.0 mmol/L), time below range (TBR, <3.9 mmol/L), time above range (TAR, >10.0 mmol/L), and postprandial glucose excursions, as well as incidence of hypoglycemia. RESULTS: Forty-six T2DM patients completed the study. There was no significant difference in parameters of daily GV and postprandial glucose excursions between the Equil patch insulin pump treatment and the Medtronic insulin pump treatment. Similarly, there was no between-treatment difference in TIR, TBR, and TAR, as well as the incidence of hypoglycemia. CONCLUSION: The Equil patch insulin pump was similar to the traditional MMT-712 insulin pump in terms of glycemic control. Equil patch insulin pump is a reliable tool for glycemic management of diabetes mellitus.

Automated Insulin Delivery in Adults With Type 1 Diabetes and Suboptimal HbA1c During Prior Use of Insulin Pump and Continuous Glucose Monitoring: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Automated insulin delivery (AID) systems offer promise in improving glycemic outcomes for individuals with type 1 diabetes. However, data on those who struggle with suboptimal glycemic levels despite insulin pump and continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) are limited. We conducted a randomized controlled trial to assess the effects of an AID system in this population. METHODS: Participants with hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) ≥ 58 mmol/mol (7.5%) were allocated 1:1 to 14 weeks of treatment with the MiniMed 780G system (AID) or continuation of usual care (UC). The primary endpoint was change in time in range (TIR: 3·9-10·0 mmol/L) from baseline to week 14. After this trial period, the UC group switched to AID treatment while the AID group continued using the system. Both groups were monitored for a total of 28 weeks. RESULTS: Forty adults (mean ± SD: age 52 ± 11 years, HbA1c 67 ± 7 mmol/mol [8.3% ± 0.6%], diabetes duration 29 ±13 years) were included. After 14 weeks, TIR increased by 18.7% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 14.5, 22.9%) in the AID group and remained unchanged in the UC group (P < .0001). Hemoglobin A1c decreased by 10.0 mmol/mol (95% CI = 7.0, 13.0 mmol/mol) (0.9% [95% CI = 0.6%, 1.2%]) in the AID group but remained unchanged in the UC group (P < .0001). The glycemic benefits of AID treatment were reproduced after the 14-week extension phase. There were no episodes of severe hypoglycemia or diabetic ketoacidosis during the study. CONCLUSIONS: For adults with type 1 diabetes not meeting glycemic targets despite use of insulin pump and CGM, transitioning to an AID system confers considerable glycemic benefits.

Differences in Glycemic Control for Inpatients with Type 1 Diabetes on Insulin Pump Versus Subcutaneous Insulin Therapy.

BACKGROUND: Inpatient use of insulin pump therapy has been increasing due to greater availability of this technology, however there is a paucity of research that investigates glycemic control of inpatient insulin pump users. OBJECTIVE: To compare the glycemic control of hospitalized patients with type 1 diabetes (T1D) who used insulin pump vs. multiple daily injections (MDI). DESIGN: Retrospective chart review. PARTICIPANTS: Patients with T1D who were hospitalized between January 1, 2017, and December 31, 2019, in an academic medical center in the New York metropolitan area. MAIN MEASURES: Patients were categorized into three groups based on their method of insulin administration: "pump only" group used insulin pump exclusively, "MDI only" group used MDI only, and "intermittent pump" group used a combination of both methods. The primary endpoints are mean blood glucose, rates of hypoglycemic events (blood glucose < 70 mg/dL), and rates of hyperglycemic events (blood glucose > 250 mg/dL). Separate multivariable Poisson regressions were performed to determine the association between the type of insulin administration and rate outcomes (i.e., rate of hypoglycemic events and rate of hyperglycemic events). RESULTS: The study included 78 patients with a mean age of 51, who were mostly male (54%), and white (72%). The average proportion of glucose measurements that were hyperglycemic for the "pump only", "MDI only", and "intermittent pump" groups were 0.11 (SD = 0.11), 0.25 (SD = 0.19), and 0.24 (SD = 0.25), respectively. The "pump only" group has a significantly lower proportion of hyperglycemic events as compared to the "MDI only" group (p = 0.0227). CONCLUSIONS: In this sample, patients who exclusively used their insulin pump while inpatient had a lower rate of hyperglycemic events than patients who used MDI only; suggesting that select patients can safely continue their insulin pump therapy in the inpatient setting.

The role of sex on the prevalence of cardiovascular risk factors in children and adolescents with Type 1 diabetes: The SWEET international database.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the prevalence of cardiovascular risk factors (CVRFs) in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes (T1D) in the International SWEET registry and the possible role of clinical variables in modifying the risk of having single or multiple CVRFs. STUDY DESIGN: The study is a cross-sectional study. Cut-off points for CVRFs were fixed according to International Society for Pediatric and Adolescent Diabetes (ISPAD) guidelines and WHO parameters: LDL cholesterol (LDL-C) > 100 mg/dL; Systolic Blood Pressure (BP-SDS) > 90th percentile for sex, age, and height; BMI-SDS > 2SD for sex and age. Logistic regression models were applied to evaluate variables associated with at least 1 or 2 CVRFs among registry children and adolescents. RESULTS: 29,649 individuals with T1D (6-18 years, T1D ≥ 2 years) participating in the SWEET prospective multicenter diabetes registry were included. In the cohort, 41 % had one or more CVRFs, and 10 % had two or more CVRFs. Thirty-five percent of enrolled individuals had LDL-C > 100 mg/dL, 26 % had BMI-SDS > 2SD, and 17 % had Systolic BP-SDS > 90th percentile. Females had higher frequency than males of having 1 or 2 CVRFs (45.1 % vs 37.4 %, 11.8 % vs 7.8 %; p < 0.001). Multivariable logistic regression models showed that sex (female), HbA1c category (>7.0 %), and age (>10 years) were associated with a higher chance of having at least 1 or 2 CVRFs (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In children and adolescents with T1D, female sex, in addition to HbA1c above 7 %, and older age (>10 years) was associated with a higher risk of having at least a CVRF (LDL-C, BMI-SDS, BP) according to internationally defined cut-offs.

Glycemic Control Among Adults With Type 1 Diabetes During Passover: A Pre-Post Single-center Study.

OBJECTIVES: No data are available regarding glycemic control of patients with type 1 diabetes (T1D) during Passover. Our aim in this study was to assess the effect of Passover on diabetes management and glycemic control in adult patients with T1D with nutritional changes during Passover (observant) compared with patients who did not change their dietary habits during Passover (nonobservant). METHODS: Observational pre-post study of adult patients with T1D, followed in a diabetes clinic in Israel. Data were downloaded from insulin pumps and continuous glucose monitoring for 37 days: 2 weeks before Passover; 9 days of Passover; and 2 weeks thereafter. Differences in percentage of time spent above target (>10.0 to >13.9 mmol/L), at target (3.9 to 10.0 mmol/L) and below target (<3.9 to <3.0 mmol/L), were compared using paired t tests or paired signed rank tests. RESULTS: The study cohort included 43 patients (23 observant, 20 nonobservant). The average blood glucose was significantly higher during Passover compared with the period before Passover---in nonobservant patients 8.2±1.5 mmol/L and 7.9±1.3 mmol/L (p=0.043), respectively, and in observant patients 8.7±1.6 mmol/L and 8.4±1.6 mmol/L (p=0.048), respectively. Time above range 10 to 13.9 mmol/L was increased in observant patients during Passover, as compared with the period before Passover, was 24.9±16.2% and 20.6±12.4% (p=0.04), respectively. The dose of bolus insulin had increased significantly in observant patients: 27.4±13.9 units during Passover, as compared with 24.2±11.2 units before Passover (p=0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Passover alters glycemic control and insulin needs in Jewish patients with T1D. It is advisable to make specific adjustments to maintain the recommended glycemic control.

Effectiveness of Insulin Pump Therapy Versus Multiple Daily Injections for Glycemic Control and Rate of Diabetic Ketoacidosis Among Children With Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus.

Background Advances in pump technology and the availability of insulin analogs, as well as the results of the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial (DCCT), which established the benefit of improved glycemic control, have all contributed to the increased use of insulin pump therapy in recent years, particularly in children. Purpose This research aims to compare the impact of insulin delivery method, i.e., continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) or multiple daily injections (MDI) on glycemic control and the rate of diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) among children with type 1 diabetes mellitus in Al Ahsa, Saudi Arabia. Methods  A retrospective cohort study was carried out in a diabetic center in Al Ahsa, Saudi Arabia, over 24 months (2020-2022) among children with type I diabetes mellitus (age group 1-14 years). Results  In total, 351 patients with diabetes were induced, with 316 (90%) on MDI and 35 (10%) on CSII. After six months of diagnosis, precisely 38 (12%) of patients with diabetes on the MDI regimen experienced DKA, compared to 4 (11.4%) of those on the CSII regimen, with no statistically significant difference (P=0.918). At six months and nine months of follow-up, the average hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) was considerably higher in diabetic patients on MDI (8.9 ± 1.7% vs. 8.2 ± 1.5% and 9.1 ± 1.6% vs. 8.0 ± 1.3%, respectively, with a significant p-value ≤0.05). Conclusion In this study, we found that patients on the MDI regimen had considerably higher HbA1c levels than patients on the CSII regimen, but there was no statistically significant difference in DKA rates between them. This is a short-term follow-up study, and we recommend that patients be followed for a longer period of time for further accurate outcomes.

Two Cases With Type 1 Diabetes Treated With Insulin Pump Therapy Using a Telemedicine Approach During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1D) is an autoimmune-related disease resulting in insulin dependency, treated with insulin injection via pen devices or continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII). Face-to-face instruction for managing insulin injection and dosing and machine-to-device troubleshooting are required early to initiate CSII from insulin injections. Thus, T1D individuals may encounter significant barriers to pen devices or CSII introduction if they live in remote rural areas. In this regard, intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitoring (isCGM) can share visualized glucose profiles via a cloud-platform-based system, offering the potential as an effective tool in telemedicine. Herewith, we report two cases of subjects with T1D living in remote rural areas whose CSII was safely introduced in outpatient settings with the aid of cloud-platform-based isCGM and a video-meeting tool. They showed improved glucose profiles after CSII initiation. Even under the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, the telemedicine system enabled healthcare providers to monitor glucose profiles and confirm device procedures of CSII. We emphasize the usefulness of online instruction with cloud-platform-based isCGM for introducing CSII in cases with barriers to healthcare access, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Diabetes Technology in People with Type 2 Diabetes: Novel Indications.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Diabetes technology has been continuously evolving. Current versions of continuous glucose monitors (CGM) use minimally invasive designs, monitor glucose values with high accuracy, and can be used to guide insulin dosing. Extensive evidence supports the use of diabetes technology for monitoring and insulin administration in people with type 1 diabetes. However, there is emerging evidence for people with type 2 diabetes. In this review, we present the different technological devices used to monitor glucose and deliver insulin and the evidence supporting their use in people with type 2 diabetes. RECENT FINDINGS: The use of CGMs in people with type 2 diabetes treated with insulin or non-insulin therapies has been associated with improvements in glycemic control and time spent in hypoglycemia. Smart insulin pens and smart connected devices are options to track compliance and guide insulin delivery in people who do not require insulin pump therapy. Mechanical patch pumps can be used to reduce the burden of multiple daily insulin injections. Automated insulin delivery algorithms improve glycemic control without an increase in hypoglycemia. The use of technology in the management of type 2 diabetes generates glycemic data previously inaccessible, reduces barriers for insulin initiation, improves glycemic control, tracks adherence to therapy, and improves user satisfaction.

Real-world outcomes of Omnipod DASH system use in people with type 1 diabetes: Evidence from the Association of British Clinical Diabetologists (ABCD) study.

AIMS: To evaluate real-world outcomes in people with Type 1 Diabetes (PwT1D) initiated on Omnipod DASH® Insulin Management System. METHODS: Anonymized clinical data were submitted to a secure web-based tool within the National Health Service network. Hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), sensor-derived glucometrics, total daily dose of insulin (TDD), and patient-reported outcome changes between baseline and follow-up were assessed. Individuals were classified to "new-to-pump" (switched from multiple daily injections) and "established-on-pump" (switched from a tethered insulin pump) groups. RESULTS: 276 individuals from 11 centers [66.7 % female; 92 % White British; median age 41 years (IQR 20-50); diabetes duration 20 years (IQR 11-31); 49.3 % within "new-to-pump" group] were included. Baseline HbA1c was 8.0 ± 1.3 % (64 ± 14 mmol/mol). At follow-up [3 years (IQR 1.5-3.2)], HbA1c reduced by 0.3 % [(3 mmol/mol); p = 0.002] across the total population, 0.4 % [(5 mmol/mol); p = 0.001] in those "new-to-pump" and remained unchanged in those "established-on-pump". TDD decreased in the "new-to-pump" cohort (baseline:44.9 ± 21.0units vs follow-up:38.1 ± 15.4units, p = 0.002). Of those asked, 141/143 (98.6 %) stated Omnipod DASH had a positive impact on quality of life. CONCLUSIONS: Omnipod DASH was associated with improvements in HbA1c in PwT1D "new-to-pump" and maintained previous HbA1c levels in those "established-on-pump". User satisfaction in all groups and TDD reduction in those "new-to-pump" were reported.

Treatment satisfaction with Omnipod DASH in adults with type 1 diabetes: A non-blinded 1:1 randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: We compared treatment satisfaction with a tubeless insulin pump (Omnipod DASH® Insulin Management System) to usual care (multiple daily injections [MDI] or tubed insulin pump therapy [IPT]) in adults with type 1 diabetes using self-monitoring blood glucose (SMBG). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Adults with type 1 diabetes on MDI (n = 40) or IPT (n = 25) from four diabetes centers in Australia were randomized in a 1:1 non-blinded manner to Omnipod DASH System (Omnipod group) or continue usual care (Usual Care group) for 12 weeks, followed by a further 12-week extension where all participants used the device. The primary outcome was treatment satisfaction assessed by change in Diabetes Technology Questionnaire 'current' (ΔDTQ-current) score at 12-weeks (study-end). Secondary outcomes included ΔDTQ-current following extension and other participant-reported outcomes (PROs) measuring quality of life, burden of disease treatment, glycemic and device-related outcomes at 12-weeks (study-end) and 24-weeks (end-extension). RESULTS: Treatment satisfaction improved more in Omnipod group vs. Usual Care group (ΔDTQ-current score of 16.4 [21.2] vs. 0.0 [12.8]; p < 0.001) at study-end. Significantly greater improvements in other PROs and HbA1c were also observed. Improvements in DTQ-current and other PROs comparing study-end and end-extension were similar. While %TIR change from baseline did not differ at study-end (-2.0 [12.7] %), it was significantly greater at end-extension (5.6 [10.9] %; p = 0.016). CONCLUSIONS: Omnipod DASH System resulted in greater treatment satisfaction at 12 weeks in adults with type 1 diabetes using SMBG which was sustained after 24 weeks of device use without compromising sleep quality and fear of hypoglycemia. Improvements in glycemia were also observed.

"You can hide it if you want to, you can let it be seen if you want to": A qualitative study of the lived experiences of Australian adults with type 1 diabetes using the Omnipod DASH® system.

AIMS: Understanding the lived experience of using a tubeless insulin pump and how this differs compared to usual care (tubed insulin pump therapy (IPT) vs multiple daily injections (MDI)). METHODS: Interviews were conducted after 12-weeks of using the Omnipod DASH Insulin Management System (Insulet, Acton, MA) and analysed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: Fifty-eight adults (35 female; mean age 42;SD 13 years; 35 previous MDI) were interviewed. Most (84 %) wanted to continue using the device. Experiences fit two themes: 1. Taking back control of my diabetes: many previous MDI users perceived improved glycaemic control, explained by more "nuanced" control, with some reporting positive effects during exercise and sleep. Many previous MDI and IPT users endorsed positive experiences in concealing or disclosing their diabetes to others. However, some previous MDI users reported negative psychosocial experiences due to feeling continuously "attached" to their diabetes. 2. Barriers and facilitators of device acceptability: both MDI and IPT users cited wearability, alarms and the financial cost impacted their choice to continue device use. IPT users reported positive wearability experiences. CONCLUSIONS: The tubeless pump improved diabetes management perceptions for both MDI and tubed pump users. However, participants' prior glucose management affected perceptions of its advantages and disadvantages.

Insulin Pump Therapy vs Multiple Daily Insulin Injections for Glycemic Control in Children With Type 1 Diabetes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM), characterized by the autoimmune destruction of pancreatic beta cells and consequent insulin deficiency, leads to various complications. Management primarily focuses on optimal glycemic control through intensive insulin therapy, either via multiple daily injections (MDI) or continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) using insulin pumps, which offer flexibility and improved basal insulin delivery. Despite the benefits of insulin pumps, such as reduced hypoglycemia risk and better mealtime insulin management, they pose challenges such as complexity in site changes and potential ketoacidosis due to tubing issues. This systematic review adheres to PRISMA guidelines and compares CSII with MDI in children and adolescents with T1DM, concentrating on outcomes such as glycemic control measured with HbA1c and glucose levels. The review includes studies meeting stringent criteria, encompassing a broad range of methodologies and geographies. The findings of this meta-analysis indicate the differences in glycemic control with CSII compared to MDI. However, significant heterogeneity in results and methodological variations across studies necessitate cautious interpretation. The study underscores the potential of CSII in offering better control for some patients, supporting a more personalized approach to T1DM management. It highlights the need for further research to understand the long-term effects and to refine treatment protocols, considering the variations in healthcare systems, treatment approaches, and patient demographics globally.

Insulin requirements during pregnancy in women with type 1 diabetes treated with insulin pump.

INTRODUCTION: Insulin requirement in women with Type 1 diabetes (T1DM) changes throughout pregnancy. The aim of this study was to determine the total change in insulin requirements and the effect of gestational weight gain (GWG) and pre-gestational BMI on insulin requirements during pregnancy in women with T1DM treated with continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion and continuous glucose monitoring. METHODS: This historical cohort study included all consecutive women with T1DM who were monitored during pregnancy at the high-risk pregnancy clinic at a tertiary medical center during April 2011-April 2019. One Way Repeated Measures ANOVA with Bonferroni adjustment was conducted to compare the effects of gestational age on insulin requirements and a Two Way Repeated Measures ANOVA was employed to test for the interaction between gestational age intervals and maternal BMI and GWG. RESULTS: Data regarding insulin requirements of 185 pregnancies were included in the analyses. There was a significant effect of gestational age on total insulin (Wilks' Lambda = 0.34, F(6,14) = 4.52, p = 0.009), basal insulin (Wilks' Lambda = 0.41, F(6,14) = 3.30, p = 0.031) and bolus insulin (Wilks' Lambda = 0.43, F(6,14) = 3.02, p = 0.041). Total insulin/kg requirements increased by 5.5% from 13-20 weeks to 20-26 weeks, 19% from 20-26 weeks to 26-33 weeks, and 17.4% from 26 to 33 weeks to delivery (p for trend = 0.009). Overall, insulin requirements increased by 42.1% from conception to delivery (p < 0.01). There was no significant main effect of maternal BMI or GWG on insulin requirements. CONCLUSIONS: There is a significant increase in insulin requirements per kg during pregnancy in women with T1DM who were treated with an insulin pump.

Future of Time-in-Range Goals in the Era of Advanced Hybrid Closed-Loop Automated Insulin Delivery Systems.

The concept of maintaining blood glucose levels within the 70-180 mg/dL range, known as time-in-range, has raised questions regarding its representation of true physiological euglycemia. Some have speculated that focusing on the time spent within the 70-140 mg/dL range, introduced as time in tight range (TITR) through the International Consensus statement, could serve as a more precise metric for assessing normoglycemia in individuals with type 1 diabetes. This article delves into the current status of TITR as an emerging marker and explores how advanced hybrid closed-loop systems may offer a promising avenue for achieving this higher level of glycemic control.

The Health Economics of Automated Insulin Delivery Systems and the Potential Use of Time in Range in Diabetes Modeling: A Narrative Review.

Intensive therapy with exogenous insulin is the treatment of choice for individuals living with type 1 diabetes (T1D) and some with type 2 diabetes, alongside regular glucose monitoring. The development of systems allowing (semi-)automated insulin delivery (AID), by connecting glucose sensors with insulin pumps and algorithms, has revolutionized insulin therapy. Indeed, AID systems have demonstrated a proven impact on overall glucose control, as indicated by effects on glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c), risk of severe hypoglycemia, and quality of life measures. An alternative endpoint for glucose control that has arisen from the use of sensor-based continuous glucose monitoring is the time in range (TIR) measure, which offers an indication of overall glucose control, while adding information on the quality of control with regard to blood glucose level stability. A review of literature on the health-economic value of AID systems was conducted, with a focus placed on the growing place of TIR as an endpoint in studies involving AID systems. Results showed that the majority of economic evaluations of AID systems focused on individuals with T1D and found AID systems to be cost-effective. Most studies incorporated HbA1c, rather than TIR, as a clinical endpoint to determine treatment effects on glucose control and subsequent quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gains. Likely reasons for the choice of HbA1c as the chosen endpoint is the use of this metric in most validated and established economic models, as well as the limited publicly available evidence on appropriate methodologies for TIR data incorporation within conventional economic evaluations. Future studies could include the novel TIR metric in health-economic evaluations as an additional measure of treatment effects and subsequent QALY gains, to facilitate a holistic representation of the impact of AID systems on glycemic control. This would provide decision makers with robust evidence to inform future recommendations for health care interventions.

Tandem T:Slim X2 Insulin Pump Use in Clinical Practice Among Pregnant Individuals With Type 1 Diabetes: A Retrospective Observational Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Insulin pump use is increasing in frequency among pregnant individuals with type 1 diabetes (T1D). Automated insulin delivery (AID) technologies have not been studied extensively in pregnancy. METHOD: We present a retrospective case series of eight individuals with T1D who used the Tandem t:slim X2 insulin pump (Tandem Diabetes Care, Inc., CA, USA) during pregnancy. Weekly continuous glucose monitor and insulin pump data were analyzed from electronic medical records and data-sharing portals. Safety, glycemic control, and pregnancy outcomes were examined with both the control IQ (CIQ) and basal IQ (BIQ) algorithms. RESULTS: Six CIQ and two BIQ users were studied. The mean glycated hemoglobin (A1C) during pregnancy was 6.1%, and the average time in pregnancy-recommended glycemic range (TIR; 63-140mg/dL) was 67.9%. There were no instances of diabetic ketoacidosis or severe hypoglycemia. CIQ users had a higher mean sensor glucose (127.6 mg/dL) compared to BIQ participants (118.4 mg/dL). However, the average time below range (<63 mg/dL) was 6.1% in BIQ participants compared to 1.5% in CIQ participants. CIQ participants used several strategies to achieve glycemic targets, including daytime use of sleep activity. An increased basal-to-bolus insulin ratio was negatively correlated with TIR (r=-0.415). CONCLUSIONS: Tandem t:slim X2 insulin pumps were safely used during pregnancy in eight individuals with T1D, with variable success in achieving recommended glycemic targets. Further research is needed to understand differences in CIQ and BIQ use in pregnancy. AID device manufacturers must additionally develop further methods to target lower glucose for pregnant users.