RESUMO
AIMS: Time in Tight Range (TITR) is a novel glycaemic metric in monitoring type 1 diabetes (T1D) management. The aim of this study was to assess the attainability of the TITR target in children and adolescents using the advanced hybrid closed loop (AHCL). METHODS: The 2128-day CGM data from 56 children and adolescents with T1D using AHCL (Minimed-780G) were analysed. Time in Range (TIR) (3.9-10 mmol/L), TITR (3.9-7.7 mmol/L), and other glycaemic parameters were separately analysed in terms of whole day, daytime (06.00-23:59), and nighttime (00.00-05.59) results. The participants were divided into two groups by autocorrection rate where Group 1 had a rate of <30% and Group 2 had a rate of ≥30. RESULTS: All glycaemic parameters indicated a better glycaemic outcome in the nighttime with higher TIR and TITR values compared with daytime (for TIR 87.5 ± 9.5% vs. 78.8 ± 8%, p < 0.001, and TITR 68.2 ± 13.5% vs. 57.5 ± 8.8%, p < 0.001). The rates of TITR >50% and >60% were 87% and 52%, respectively. When those with TITR >60% (n: 29) and those without (n: 27) were evaluated in terms of hypoglycaemia, no statistically significant difference was found in time below range (TBR) 3-3.9 mmol/L (0.3% vs. 2.1%, p: 0.084) and TBR < 3 mmol/L (0.47% vs. 0.3%, p: 0.298). Group 1 had a significantly higher TIR and TITR compared to Group 2 (82.6 ± 6.1% vs. 75.6 ± 8.6%, p: 0.008 and 62.1 ± 7.5% vs. 53.8 ± 7.5%, p: 0.002, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Most children and adolescents on AHCL achieved the 50% target for TITR whereas more than half achieved the >60% target. A target of >50% for TITR seems realistic in children with T1D using AHCL.
Assuntos
Automonitorização da Glicemia , Glicemia , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 1 , Estudos de Viabilidade , Hipoglicemiantes , Sistemas de Infusão de Insulina , Insulina , Humanos , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 1/tratamento farmacológico , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 1/sangue , Adolescente , Criança , Feminino , Masculino , Automonitorização da Glicemia/métodos , Glicemia/metabolismo , Hipoglicemiantes/uso terapêutico , Hipoglicemiantes/administração & dosagem , Insulina/administração & dosagem , Insulina/uso terapêutico , Controle Glicêmico/métodos , Hemoglobinas Glicadas/metabolismo , Hemoglobinas Glicadas/análise , Hipoglicemia/induzido quimicamente , Fatores de TempoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Tirzepatide is approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for the management of type 2 diabetes. The efficacy and safety of this drug have not been studied in people with type 1 diabetes (T1D). METHODS: In this single-center, retrospective, observational study, hemoglobin A1C (HbA1c), weight, body mass index (BMI), and continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) data were collected from electronic health records of adults with T1D at initiation of tirzepatide and at subsequent clinic visits over 8 months. Primary outcomes were reduction in HbA1c and percent change in body weight and secondary outcomes were change in CGM metrics and BMI over 8 months from baseline. RESULTS: The mean (±SD) age of the 26 adults (54% female) with T1D was 42 ± 8 years with a mean BMI of 36.7 ± 5.3 kg/m2. There was significant reduction in HbA1c by 0.45% at 3 months and 0.59% at 8 months, and a significant reduction in body weight by 3.4%, 10.5%, and 10.1% at 3, 6, and 8 months after starting tirzepatide. Time in target range (TIR = 70-180 mg/dL) and time in tight target range (TITR = 70-140 mg/dL) increased (+12.6%, P = .002; +10.7%, P = .0016, respectively) and time above range (TAR >180 mg/dL) decreased (-12.6%, P = .002) at 3 months, and these changes were sustained over 8 months. The drug was relatively safe and well tolerated with only 2 patients discontinuing the medication. CONCLUSIONS: Tirzepatide significantly reduced HbA1c and body weight in adults with T1D. A randomized controlled trial is needed to establish efficacy and safety of this drug in T1D.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: We investigated the risk of incident diabetic retinopathy (DR) among high glycator compared to low glycator patients based on the hemoglobin glycation index (HGI). Visit-to-visit variations in HGI also were assessed. METHODS: Glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) and continuous glucose monitoring data were collected up to 7 years prior to the date of eye examination defining incident DR or no retinopathy (control). Hemoglobin glycation index was calculated as difference in measured HbA1c and an estimated A1c from sensor glucose (eA1c) to define high (HbA1c - eA1c >0%) or low (HbA1c - eA1c <0%) glycator. Stable glycators were defined as ≥75% of visits with same HGI category. Logistic regression was used to assess the association between glycation category and incident DR. RESULTS: Of 119 adults with type 1 diabetes (T1D), 49 (41%) were stable low glycator (HbA1c - eA1c <0%), 36 (30%) were stable high glycator (HbA1c - eA1c >0%), and 34 (29%) were unstable glycator. Using alternate criteria to define high vs low glycator (consistent difference in HbA1c - eA1c of > 0.4% or <0.4%, respectively), 53% of the adults were characterized as unstable glycator. Compared to low glycators, high glycators did not have a significantly higher risk for incident DR over time when adjusted for age, T1D duration and continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) sensor type (odds ratio [OR] = 1.31, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.48-3.62, P = .15). CONCLUSIONS: The risk of diabetic retinopathy was not found to differ significantly comparing high glycators to low glycators in adults with T1D. Moreover, HbA1c - eA1c relationship was not stable in nearly 30% to 50% adults with T1D, suggesting that discordance in HbA1c and eA1c are mostly related either HbA1c measurements or estimation of A1c from sensor glucose rather than physiological reasons.
RESUMO
Successful management of type 1 diabetes (T1D) requires not only optimal glycemic outcomes, but also a holistic approach that encompasses all aspects of life and recommendations to address needs. Current goals include optimal glycaemic values, quality of life and life expectancy similar to peers, prevention of long-term complications, prevention of severe hypoglycaemia as much as possible, facilitation of glucose management, etc. International Society for Pediatric and Adolescent Diabetes (ISPAD) has been updating its guidelines for diabetes care every 4 years since 1995, covering more and more topics. For optimal metabolic outcomes, diabetes teams need to follow these current recommendations, adapt them to their clinical practice and provide guidance to people with type 1 diabetes/families. In this review, in the light of ISPAD 2018-2022 guidelines and clinical experiences, "10 Key Recommendations", emphasizing the importance of teamwork and the use of technology, current type 1 diabetes treatment is described for practical applications.
RESUMO
Objective: To determine inequalities in access to diabetes technologies and the effect of socioeconomic factors on families with children with type 1 diabetes. Methods: In this multicenter cross-sectional study, parents of children with type 1 diabetes completed a questionnaire about household sociodemographic characteristics, latest HbA1c values, continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) and insulin pump use of children, the education and working status of parents. These characteristics were compared between technology use (only-CGM, only-pump, CGM+pump, no technology use). Results: Among 882 families, only-CGM users, only-pump users, and CGM+pump users compared with no technology users, adjusting for age, sex, region, education levels, number of working parents, and household income. Children living in the least developed region had lower odds of having only-CGM (OR=0.20, 95%CI 0.12-0.34) and having CGM+pump (OR=0.07, 95%CI 0.03-0.22) compared with those living in the most developed region. Children with parents who had not finished high school had lower odds of having only-CGM (Mothers: OR=0.36, 95%CI 0.19-0.66; fathers: OR=0.32, 95%CI 0.18-0.60) or both CGM+pump (OR=0.27, 95%CI 0.11-0.64; fathers: OR=0.34, 95%CI 0.15-0.79) rather than no-technology compared to children whose parents has a university degree. Every $840 increase in the household income increased the odds by 5% for having only-CGM (OR=1.05, 95%CI 1.02-1.09) and CGM+pump (OR=1.05, 95%CI 1.01-1.08). Conclusion: Socioeconomic factors such as education, regions, and income were associated with inequality in access to technologies. The inequalities are more prominent in access to CGM while CGM had a bigger contribution to glycemic control.
RESUMO
Monogenic diabetes, including mitochondrial diabetes, constitutes 1% to 3% of all diabetes. Although there is an increased interest in understanding the mechanisms of bone fragility in people with diabetes, skeletal research is mostly focused on type 1 and type 2 diabetes. Little is known on skeletal health among people with mitochondrial diabetes. In this single-center study, we presented clinical characteristics of individuals with mitochondrial diabetes and clinical diagnosis of osteoporosis. Of 10 patients with mitochondrial diabetes, 4 (40%) had a clinical diagnosis of osteoporosis. Patients with osteoporosis were older, had lower body mass index, longer diabetes duration, lower fasting C-peptide, and presence of multiple comorbidities compared with patients without osteoporosis. In addition to our cases, we also systematically reviewed literature on skeletal health in people with mitochondrial diabetes and provided an overview of potential factors affecting skeletal health and future clinical and research directions to improve the care of people with mitochondrial disease. © 2023 The Authors. JBMR Plus published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.
RESUMO
Introduction: The Glycemia Risk Index (GRI) and Continuous Glucose Monitoring Index (COGI) are newly defined composite metric parameters derived from continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) data. GRI is divided into five separate risk zones (from lowest to highest: A-E). In this study, the effect of the advanced hybrid closed loop (AHCL) system on GRI and COGI in children with type 1 diabetes was evaluated. Materials and Methods: Forty-five children who had started using the AHCL and whose baseline and sixth-month CGM data were available were analyzed in terms of achievement of CGM consensus goals and changes in GRI scores and zones. The paired t-test was used for the analyses. Results: The mean age and duration of diabetes of the participants were 10.95 ± 3.41 and 3.85 ± 2.67 years, respectively. The mean GRI score significantly decreased from 35.66 ± 17.46 at baseline to 22.83 ± 9.08 at 6 months (P < 0.001). Although the proportion of those in the A zone was 20% at baseline, it increased to 42% at 6 months. AHCL also improved COGI from 72.59 ± 12.44 to 82.90 ± 7.72 (P < 0.001). Time in range (TIR) increased significantly from 70.54% to 80.51% (P < 0.001) at 6 months. Conclusion: AHCL provides not only an improvement in TIR but also a significant improvement in both GRI and COGI at 6 months. The incorporation of GRI and COGI alongside TIR may enhance the assessment of the glycemic profile by providing a more comprehensive and in-depth analysis.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: The insulin requirements of people with type 1 diabetes (T1D) can vary throughout the day due to factors such as biorhythm, exercise, and food intake. The MiniMed 780G system delivers micro boluses to adjust basal insulin and delivers auto-correction boluses to meet insulin needs when micro bolus increases are insufficient. Through analysis of MiniMed 780G data, this study investigates the variations in insulin requirements throughout the day. METHODS: 4193 days' pump and continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) data of 34 children using MiniMed 780G were collected from Medtronic CareLink. Micro and auto-correction boluses were analyzed on an hourly basis for two age groups: below nine years old and above nine years old. Glycemic metrics were analyzed based on International CGM consensus. RESULTS: The mean age was 12.3 years and mean duration of diabetes was 6.1 years. The mean time in range (TIR) and glucose management indicator (GMI) were 80.5% and 6.6%, respectively. The micro bolus (basal) ratio between 05.00 and 07.00 was significantly higher than the ratio between 10.00 and 03.00 (P < .01), whereas micro bolus was significantly lower between 19.00 and 21.00 than those between 00.00 and 10.00 (P < .001). The auto-correction ratio between 21.00 and 00.00 was significantly higher than those between 03.00-17.00 (P < .001) and 19.00-21.00 (P = .008), whereas auto-correction was significantly lower between 07.00 and 10.00 than those between 10.00 and 03.00 (P < .001). The micro bolus ratio was significantly higher in children below nine years old than in children above nine years old between 21.00-00.00 (P = .026) and 00.00-03.00 (P = .003). CONCLUSION: The basal insulin need follows a diurnal pattern with two significantly different periods-high between 00.00 and 10.00 and low between 10.00 and 00.00. The auto-correction rates are low between 05.00 and 10.00 and show an increasing pattern peaking between 21.00 and 00.00. These findings are compatible with the dawn and reverse dawn phenomena.
RESUMO
Investigating the daily life experiences of patients using Continuous Glucose Monitoring (CGM) can highlight the benefits and barriers in using this system for people with type 1 diabetes (T1D). Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with the caregivers of 10 children aged <9 years, all of whom had been treated for T1D and had used CGM >6 months. These interviews were analyzed using the content analysis approach and from these interviews, four meta themes emerged: metabolic control, barriers to CGM use, CGM use in daily life, and comparison with fingersticks. Families reported the following as benefits of CGM: pain relief, better hypoglycemia and hyperglycemia management, increased control over diet and social life, reduced worries at school and during the night, and convenience in entrusting the child to the care of others. Cost, concerns related to accuracy and reliability of measurements, insertion, adhesion and removal issues all emerged as barriers to CGM use. The most prominent issue was the economic burden of CGM. Families accept this burden, even though it is challenging, as their experiences in using CGM are positive and they feel that CGM is necessary for T1D management.
RESUMO
Type 1 diabetes (T1D) is an autoimmune disease that usually strikes early in life, but can affect individuals at almost any age. It is caused by autoreactive T cells that destroy insulin-producing beta cells in the pancreas. Epidemiological studies estimate a prevalence of 1 in 300 children in the United States with an increasing incidence of 2%-5% annually worldwide. The daily responsibility, clinical management, and vigilance required to maintain blood sugar levels within normal range and avoid acute complications (hypoglycemic episodes and diabetic ketoacidosis) and long term micro- and macro-vascular complications significantly affects quality of life and public health care costs. Given the expansive impact of T1D, research work has accelerated and T1D has been intensively investigated with the focus to better understand, manage and cure this condition. Many advances have been made in the past decades in this regard, but key questions remain as to why certain people develop T1D, but not others, with the glaring example of discordant disease incidence among monozygotic twins. In this review, we discuss the field's current understanding of its pathophysiology and the role of genetics and environment on the development of T1D. We examine the potential implications of these findings with an emphasis on T1D inheritance patterns, twin studies, and disease prevention. Through a better understanding of this process, interventions can be developed to prevent or halt it at early stages.