A Randomized Trial of Closed-Loop Control in Children with Type 1 Diabetes.

BACKGROUND: A closed-loop system of insulin delivery (also called an artificial pancreas) may improve glycemic outcomes in children with type 1 diabetes. METHODS: In a 16-week, multicenter, randomized, open-label, parallel-group trial, we assigned, in a 3:1 ratio, children 6 to 13 years of age who had type 1 diabetes to receive treatment with the use of either a closed-loop system of insulin delivery (closed-loop group) or a sensor-augmented insulin pump (control group). The primary outcome was the percentage of time that the glucose level was in the target range of 70 to 180 mg per deciliter, as measured by continuous glucose monitoring. RESULTS: A total of 101 children underwent randomization (78 to the closed-loop group and 23 to the control group); the glycated hemoglobin levels at baseline ranged from 5.7 to 10.1%. The mean (±SD) percentage of time that the glucose level was in the target range of 70 to 180 mg per deciliter increased from 53±17% at baseline to 67±10% (the mean over 16 weeks of treatment) in the closed-loop group and from 51±16% to 55±13% in the control group (mean adjusted difference, 11 percentage points [equivalent to 2.6 hours per day]; 95% confidence interval, 7 to 14; P<0.001). In both groups, the median percentage of time that the glucose level was below 70 mg per deciliter was low (1.6% in the closed-loop group and 1.8% in the control group). In the closed-loop group, the median percentage of time that the system was in the closed-loop mode was 93% (interquartile range, 91 to 95). No episodes of diabetic ketoacidosis or severe hypoglycemia occurred in either group. CONCLUSIONS: In this 16-week trial involving children with type 1 diabetes, the glucose level was in the target range for a greater percentage of time with the use of a closed-loop system than with the use of a sensor-augmented insulin pump. (Funded by Tandem Diabetes Care and the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03844789.).

Twelve-month psychosocial outcomes of continuous glucose monitoring with behavioural support in parents of young children with type 1 diabetes.

AIM: Managing type 1 diabetes in young children can cause significant stress for parents. Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) may reduce parental burden. The Strategies to Enhance CGM Use in Early Childhood (SENCE) trial randomized parents of children (ages 2 to <8 years) with type 1 diabetes to CGM with family behavioural intervention (CGM + FBI), CGM alone (Standard-CGM) or blood glucose monitoring for 26 weeks before receiving CGM + FBI (BGM-Crossover). This report assesses changes in psychosocial outcomes for all groups over 52 weeks. METHODS: CGM + FBI (n = 45), Standard-CGM (n = 42) and BGM-Crossover (n = 44) participants completed psychosocial assessments at baseline, 26 weeks and 52 weeks. Repeated measures linear regression models evaluated change within and between treatment groups. RESULTS: The BGM-Crossover group reported improved diabetes burden (Δ -6.9, 95% CI [-11.3, -2.6], p = 0.003), fear of hypoglycaemia (Δ -6.4, CI [-10.1, -2.6], p = 0.002) and technology satisfaction (Δ 7.3, CI [2.4, 12.2], p = 0.005) from 26 to 52 weeks, similar to published findings in the CGM + FBI group over the first 26 weeks. The Standard-CGM group reported increased technology satisfaction (Δ 7.3, CI [0.6, 14.0], p = 0.027) from baseline to 52 weeks. The CGM + FBI group reported less diabetes burden and fear of hypoglycaemia from baseline to 52 weeks, but changes were not statistically significant. Scores from 26 to 52 weeks did not deteriorate. CONCLUSIONS: Parents demonstrated psychosocial benefits following FBI that appeared to maintain without additional intervention. CGM-focused education with behavioural support likely helps parents of young children with type 1 diabetes reduce burden and worry in the short- and long-term.

Effect of Continuous Glucose Monitoring on Glycemic Control in Adolescents and Young Adults With Type 1 Diabetes: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Adolescents and young adults with type 1 diabetes exhibit the worst glycemic control among individuals with type 1 diabetes across the lifespan. Although continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) has been shown to improve glycemic control in adults, its benefit in adolescents and young adults has not been demonstrated. Objective: To determine the effect of CGM on glycemic control in adolescents and young adults with type 1 diabetes. Design, Setting, and Participants: Randomized clinical trial conducted between January 2018 and May 2019 at 14 endocrinology practices in the US including 153 individuals aged 14 to 24 years with type 1 diabetes and screening hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) of 7.5% to 10.9%. Interventions: Participants were randomized 1:1 to undergo CGM (CGM group; n = 74) or usual care using a blood glucose meter for glucose monitoring (blood glucose monitoring [BGM] group; n = 79). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was change in HbA1c from baseline to 26 weeks. There were 20 secondary outcomes, including additional HbA1c outcomes, CGM glucose metrics, and patient-reported outcomes with adjustment for multiple comparisons to control for the false discovery rate. Results: Among the 153 participants (mean [SD] age, 17 [3] years; 76 [50%] were female; mean [SD] diabetes duration, 9 [5] years), 142 (93%) completed the study. In the CGM group, 68% of participants used CGM at least 5 days per week in month 6. Mean HbA1c was 8.9% at baseline and 8.5% at 26 weeks in the CGM group and 8.9% at both baseline and 26 weeks in the BGM group (adjusted between-group difference, -0.37% [95% CI, -0.66% to -0.08%]; P = .01). Of 20 prespecified secondary outcomes, there were statistically significant differences in 3 of 7 binary HbA1c outcomes, 8 of 9 CGM metrics, and 1 of 4 patient-reported outcomes. The most commonly reported adverse events in the CGM and BGM groups were severe hypoglycemia (3 participants with an event in the CGM group and 2 in the BGM group), hyperglycemia/ketosis (1 participant with an event in CGM group and 4 in the BGM group), and diabetic ketoacidosis (3 participants with an event in the CGM group and 1 in the BGM group). Conclusions and Relevance: Among adolescents and young adults with type 1 diabetes, continuous glucose monitoring compared with standard blood glucose monitoring resulted in a small but statistically significant improvement in glycemic control over 26 weeks. Further research is needed to understand the clinical importance of the findings. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03263494.

Effect of Continuous Glucose Monitoring on Hypoglycemia in Older Adults With Type 1 Diabetes: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) provides real-time assessment of glucose levels and may be beneficial in reducing hypoglycemia in older adults with type 1 diabetes. Objective: To determine whether CGM is effective in reducing hypoglycemia compared with standard blood glucose monitoring (BGM) in older adults with type 1 diabetes. Design, Setting, and Participants: Randomized clinical trial conducted at 22 endocrinology practices in the United States among 203 adults at least 60 years of age with type 1 diabetes. Interventions: Participants were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to use CGM (n = 103) or standard BGM (n = 100). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was CGM-measured percentage of time that sensor glucose values were less than 70 mg/dL during 6 months of follow-up. There were 31 prespecified secondary outcomes, including additional CGM metrics for hypoglycemia, hyperglycemia, and glucose control; hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c); and cognition and patient-reported outcomes, with adjustment for multiple comparisons to control for false-discovery rate. Results: Of the 203 participants (median age, 68 [interquartile range {IQR}, 65-71] years; median type 1 diabetes duration, 36 [IQR, 25-48] years; 52% female; 53% insulin pump use; mean HbA1c, 7.5% [SD, 0.9%]), 83% used CGM at least 6 days per week during month 6. Median time with glucose levels less than 70 mg/dL was 5.1% (73 minutes per day) at baseline and 2.7% (39 minutes per day) during follow-up in the CGM group vs 4.7% (68 minutes per day) and 4.9% (70 minutes per day), respectively, in the standard BGM group (adjusted treatment difference, -1.9% (-27 minutes per day); 95% CI, -2.8% to -1.1% [-40 to -16 minutes per day]; P <.001). Of the 31 prespecified secondary end points, there were statistically significant differences for all 9 CGM metrics, 6 of 7 HbA1c outcomes, and none of the 15 cognitive and patient-reported outcomes. Mean HbA1c decreased in the CGM group compared with the standard BGM group (adjusted group difference, -0.3%; 95% CI, -0.4% to -0.1%; P <.001). The most commonly reported adverse events using CGM and standard BGM, respectively, were severe hypoglycemia (1 and 10), fractures (5 and 1), falls (4 and 3), and emergency department visits (6 and 8). Conclusions and Relevance: Among adults aged 60 years or older with type 1 diabetes, continuous glucose monitoring compared with standard blood glucose monitoring resulted in a small but statistically significant improvement in hypoglycemia over 6 months. Further research is needed to understand the long-term clinical benefit. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03240432.

CHEIROARTHROPATHY: A COMMON DISORDER IN PATIENTS IN THE T1D EXCHANGE.

OBJECTIVE: Diabetic cheiroarthropathy is a long-term complication of diabetes that causes significant morbidity and can impair functional abilities. It has not been well studied in individuals with type 1 diabetes (T1D). The T1D Exchange registry provided an opportunity to assess the frequency of cheiroarthropathy and related characteristics. METHODS: An internet-based survey was sent to 6,199 registry participants ≥18 years old, with 1,911 (31%) responding (62% female, 90% non-Hispanic White, mean age 40 years, median diabetes duration 20 years, mean glycated hemoglobin [HbA1c] 7.7% [61 mmol/mol]). RESULTS: A total of 586 (31%) adults reported a diagnosis of ≥1 upper extremity disorder: 293 (15%) reported frozen shoulder, 293 (15%) trigger finger, 261 (14%) carpal tunnel, and 92 (5%) Dupuytren contracture, with 281 (15%) reporting ≥2 disorders. Those with upper extremity joint disorders were more likely older ( P<.001) and had longer duration of diabetes ( P<.001) than those without. HbA1c levels at the time of survey completion were 7.6% in participants with cheiroarthropathy versus 7.8% (62 mmol/mol) in participants without cheiroarthropathy. CONCLUSION: Cheiroarthropathy is common in adults with T1D. Additional research is needed to understand the pathogenesis and risk factors for this disorder. Standards of care for early recognition and treatment of diabetic cheiroarthropathy are also needed, particularly for adults with long-term diabetes. Improved awareness of cheiroarthropathy signs and symptoms of is needed so that patients can be identified and seek treatment before the condition causes disability. ABBREVIATIONS: BMI = body mass index; CGM = continuous glucose monitor; DCCT/EDIC = Diabetes Control and Complications Trial/Epidemiology of Diabetes Interventions and Complications; HbA1C = glycated hemoglobin; T1D = type 1 diabetes; T2D = type 2 diabetes.

Use of the Community-Derived Open-Source Automated Insulin Delivery Loop System in Type 2 Diabetes.

Background: No published data are available on the use of the community-derived open-source Loop hybrid closed-loop controller ("Loop") by individuals with type 2 diabetes (T2D). Methods: Through social media postings, we invited individuals with T2D currently using the Loop system to join an observational study. Thirteen responded of whom seven were eligible for the study, were using the Loop algorithm, and provided data. Results: Mean (±standard deviation) age was 61 ± 13 years, and mean body mass index was 31 ± 5 kg/m2. All but one participant were using noninsulin glucose-lowering medications. Self-reported mean hemoglobin A1c decreased from 7.3% ± 1.1% before starting Loop to 6.0% ± 0.5% on Loop. Time in range 70-180 mg/dL increased from 84% to 93%. The amount of time in hypoglycemia was extremely low before and with Loop (time <54 mg/dL was 0.04% ± 0.06% vs. 0.09% ± 0.07%, respectively). No severe hypoglycemia or diabetic ketoacidosis events were reported while using Loop. Conclusion: These data, though limited, suggest that the Loop system is likely to be effective when used by individuals with T2D and should be evaluated in large-scale studies. Clinical Trial Registration numbers: NCT05951569.

The Association of High and Low Glycation With Incident Diabetic Retinopathy in Adults With Type 1 Diabetes.

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.

Time in Range Is Associated with Incident Diabetic Retinopathy in Adults with Type 1 Diabetes: A Longitudinal Study.

Abstract Objective: To evaluate the association between continuous glucose monitoring (CGM)-based time in various ranges and the subsequent development of diabetic retinopathy (incident DR) in adults with type 1 diabetes. Methods: Between June 2018 and March 2022, adults with type 1 diabetes with incident DR or no retinopathy (control) were identified. CGM data were collected retrospectively for up to 7 years before the date of eye examination defining incident DR or control. Associations between incident DR and CGM metrics were evaluated using logistic regression models. Results: This analysis included 71 adults with incident DR (mean age 27 years, 52% females, and mean diabetes duration 15 years) and 92 adults without DR (mean age 38 years, 48% females, and mean diabetes duration 20 years). Adjusting for age, diabetes duration, and CGM type, each 0.5% increase in glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c), 10 mg/dL increase in mean glucose, 5% decrease in time in target range 70-180 mg/dL (TIR), 5% decrease in time in tight target range 70-140 mg/dL (TITR), and 5% increase in time above 180 mg/dL (TAR) were associated with 24%, 22%, 18%, 28%, and 20% increase in odds of incident DR, respectively. Spearman correlations of TIR, TITR, TAR, and mean glucose with each other were all ≥0.97. Conclusion: Similar to HbA1c, TIR, TITR, TAR, and mean glucose were associated with increased risk for incident DR in adults with type 1 diabetes. These CGM metrics are highly correlated indicating that they provide similar information on glycemic control and diabetic retinopathy risk.

A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trial Outcomes for the t:slim X2 Insulin Pump with Control-IQ Technology in Youth and Adults from Age 2 to 72.

Objective: To evaluate the effect of hybrid-closed loop Control-IQ technology (Control-IQ) in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in subgroups based on baseline characteristics such as race/ethnicity, socioeconomic status (SES), prestudy insulin delivery modality (pump or multiple daily injections), and baseline glycemic control. Methods: Data were pooled and analyzed from 3 RCTs comparing Control-IQ to a Control group using continuous glucose monitoring in 369 participants with type 1 diabetes (T1D) from age 2 to 72 years old. Results: Time in range 70-180 mg/dL (TIR) in the Control-IQ group (n = 256) increased from 57% ± 17% at baseline to 70% ± 11% during follow-up, and in the Control group (n = 113) was 56% ± 15% and 57% ± 14%, respectively (adjusted treatment group difference = 11.5%, 95% confidence interval +9.7% to +13.2%, P < 0.001), an increase of 2.8 h/day on average. Significant reductions in mean glucose, hyperglycemia metrics, hypoglycemic metrics, and HbA1c were also observed. A statistically similar beneficial treatment effect on time in range 70-180 mg/dL was observed across the full age range irrespective of race-ethnicity, household income, prestudy continuous glucose monitor use, or prestudy insulin delivery method. Participants with the highest baseline HbA1c levels showed the greatest improvements in TIR and HbA1c. Conclusion: This pooled analysis of Control-IQ RCTs demonstrates the beneficial effect of Control-IQ in T1D across a broad spectrum of participant characteristics, including racial-ethnic minority, lower SES, lack of prestudy insulin pump experience, and high HbA1c levels. The greatest benefit was observed in participants with the worst baseline glycemic control in whom the auto-bolus feature of the Control-IQ algorithm appears to have substantial impact. Since no subgroups were identified that did not benefit from Control-IQ, hybrid-closed loop technology should be strongly considered for all youth and adults with T1D. Clinical Trials Registry: clinicaltrials.gov; NCT03563313, NCT03844789, and NCT04796779.

Long-term Continuous Glucose Monitor Use in Very Young Children With Type 1 Diabetes: One-Year Results From the SENCE Study.

OBJECTIVES: Achieving optimal glycemic outcomes in young children with type 1 diabetes (T1D) is challenging. This study examined the durability of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) coupled with a family behavioral intervention (FBI) to improve glycemia. STUDY DESIGN: This one-year study included an initial 26-week randomized controlled trial of CGM with FBI (CGM+FBI) and CGM alone (Standard-CGM) compared with blood glucose monitoring (BGM), followed by a 26-week extension phase wherein the BGM Group received the CGM+FBI (BGM-Crossover) and both original CGM groups continued this technology. RESULTS: Time in range (70-180 mg/dL) did not improve with CGM use (CGM+FBI: baseline 37%, 52 weeks 41%; Standard-CGM: baseline 41%, 52 weeks 44%; BGM-Crossover: 26 weeks 38%, 52 weeks 40%). All three groups sustained decreases in hypoglycemia (<70 mg/dL) with CGM use (CGM+FBI: baseline 3.4%, 52 weeks 2.0%; Standard-CGM: baseline 4.1%, 52 weeks 2.1%; BGM-Crossover: 26 weeks 4.5%, 52 weeks 1.7%, P-values <.001). Hemoglobin A1c was unchanged with CGM use (CGM+FBI: baseline 8.3%, 52 weeks 8.2%; Standard-CGM: baseline 8.2%, 52 weeks 8.0%; BGM-Crossover: 26 weeks 8.1%, 52 weeks 8.3%). Sensor use remained high (52-week study visit: CGM+FBI 91%, Standard-CGM 92%, BGM-Crossover 88%). CONCLUSION: Over 12 months young children with T1D using newer CGM technology sustained reductions in hypoglycemia and, in contrast to prior studies, persistently wore CGM. However, pervasive hyperglycemia remained unmitigated. This indicates an urgent need for further advances in diabetes technology, behavioral support, and diabetes management educational approaches to optimize glycemia in young children.

Insulin Pump Infusion Set Failures Associated with Prolonged Hyperglycemia: Frequency and Relationship to Age and Type of Infusion Set During 22,741 Infusion Set Wears.

Background: Although insulin pump infusion set failures are common, studies assessing the failure rate are limited. Methods: Data were analyzed from two clinical trials, in which 263 participants aged 6-72 years used 22,741 infusion sets. The frequency of removal due to prolonged hyperglycemia (continuous glucose monitor measuring >300 mg/dL immediately before removal and >250 mg/dL continuously for at least 2 h before removal with at least 90 min >300 mg/dL out of the prior 120 min) was determined. Differences in failure rates among age groups and infusion set types were evaluated. Results: Among 22,741 infusion sets, 748 (3.3%) were removed before 72 h in association with prolonged hyperglycemia. The percentage replaced within 48 h and within 24 h with prolonged hyperglycemia were 1.8% and 1.0%, respectively. Mean duration of continuous time >250 mg/dL before removal was 5.1 ± 3.7 h. Using a less restrictive definition of failure related to hyperglycemia, 1688 (7.4%) sets were removed before 72 h with a glucose level >300 mg/dL at the time of removal. The frequency of insulin set failure with prolonged hyperglycemia was lower in adults ≥18 years old (1.9%) than in those 14-17 years old (5.8%, P < 0.001) or 6-13 years old (4.4%, P = 0.002). The 90° Teflon sets had the highest frequency of prolonged hyperglycemia failure within 72 h (4.0%) compared with the angled Teflon set frequency (1.3%, P = 0.01) or the steel set frequency (1.9%, P = 0.006). Conclusions: Based on the data from these 22,741 infusion sets, infusion set changes associated with prolonged hyperglycemia occur on average about four times a year, with the frequency being higher in youth than adults. The frequency also appears to be higher with straight Teflon sets compared with angled Teflon sets and steel sets. Clinical Trials Registration Number: NCT03563313.

Continuous Glucose Monitoring Profiles in Healthy, Nondiabetic Young Children.

Context: Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) is increasingly being used both for day-to-day management in patients with diabetes and in clinical research. While data on glycemic profiles of healthy, nondiabetic individuals exist, data on nondiabetic very young children are lacking. Objective: This work aimed to establish reference sensor glucose ranges in healthy, nondiabetic young children, using a current-generation CGM sensor. Methods: This prospective observational study took place in an institutional practice with healthy, nondiabetic children aged 1 to 6 years with normal body mass index. A blinded Dexcom G6 Pro CGM was worn for approximately 10 days by each participant. Main outcome measures included CGM metrics of mean glucose, hyperglycemia, hypoglycemia, and glycemic variability. Results: Thirty-nine participants were included in the analyses. Mean average glucose was 103 mg/dL (5.7 mmol/L). Median percentage time between 70 and 140 mg/dL (3.9-7.8 mmol/L) was 96% (interquartile range, 92%-97%), mean within-individual coefficient of variation was 17 ±â€…3%, median time spent with glucose levels greater than 140 mg/dL was 3.4% (49 min/day), and median time less than 70 mg/dL (3.9 mmol/L) was 0.4% (6 min/day). Conclusion: Collecting normative sensor glucose data and describing glycemic measures for young children fill an important informational gap and will be useful as a benchmark for future clinical studies.

The Insulin-Only Bionic Pancreas Pivotal Trial Extension Study: A Multi-Center Single-Arm Evaluation of the Insulin-Only Configuration of the Bionic Pancreas in Adults and Youth with Type 1 Diabetes.

Objective: To evaluate a transition from standard-of-care (SC) management of type 1 diabetes (any insulin delivery method including hybrid closed-loop systems plus real-time continuous glucose monitoring [CGM]) to use of the insulin-only configuration of the iLet® bionic pancreas (BP) in 90 adults and children (age 6-71 years). Research Design and Methods: After the SC group completed the randomized controlled trial (RCT) portion of the Insulin-Only BP Pivotal Trial, 90 of the 107 participants participated in a 13-week study using the BP. The key outcomes were change from baseline in HbA1c and CGM metrics after 13 weeks on the BP. Results: Using the BP, mean HbA1c decreased from 7.7% ± 1.0% (61 ± 10.9 mmol/mol) at baseline to 7.1% ± 0.6% (54 ± 6.6 mmol/mol) at 13 weeks (mean change -0.55% ± 0.72% [-6 ± 7.9 mmol/mol], P < 0.001), time in range 70-180 mg/dL increased by 12.0% ± 12.5% (from 53% ± 17% to 65% ± 9%, P < 0.001), and mean glucose decreased by -18 ± 23 mg/dL (from 182 ± 32 to 164 ± 15 mg/dL, P < 0.001). The higher the baseline HbA1c level, the greater the change in HbA1c. Results were similar in the adult (N = 42) and pediatric (N = 48) cohorts. Time <70 mg/dL decreased from baseline over the 13 weeks by -0.50% ± 1.86% (P = 0.02), and time <54 mg/dL was similar (change from baseline -0.08% ± 0.59%, P = 0.24). Two severe hypoglycemia events (in same participant) and one diabetic ketoacidosis event occurred. Conclusions: Glycemic control improved after adult and pediatric participants in the SC arm in the Insulin-Only BP Pivotal Trial transitioned to use of the BP. Improvement using the BP was of similar magnitude to that observed during the RCT. ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04200313.

Benefit of Continuous Glucose Monitoring in Reducing Hypoglycemia Is Sustained Through 12 Months of Use Among Older Adults with Type 1 Diabetes.

Objective: To evaluate glycemic outcomes in the Wireless Innovation for Seniors with Diabetes Mellitus (WISDM) randomized clinical trial (RCT) participants during an observational extension phase. Research Design and Methods: WISDM RCT was a 26-week RCT comparing continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) with blood glucose monitoring (BGM) in 203 adults aged ≥60 years with type 1 diabetes. Of the 198 participants who completed the RCT, 100 (98%) CGM group participants continued CGM (CGM-CGM cohort) and 94 (98%) BGM group participants initiated CGM (BGM-CGM cohort) for an additional 26 weeks. Results: CGM was used a median of >90% of the time at 52 weeks in both cohorts. In the CGM-CGM cohort, median time <70 mg/dL decreased from 5.0% at baseline to 2.6% at 26 weeks and remained stable with a median of 2.8% at 52 weeks (P < 0.001 baseline to 52 weeks). Participants spent more time in range 70-180 mg/dL (TIR) (mean 56% vs. 64%; P < 0.001) and had lower hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) (mean 7.6% [59 mmol/mol] vs. 7.4% [57 mmol/mol]; P = 0.01) from baseline to 52 weeks. In BGM-CGM, from 26 to 52 weeks median time <70 mg/dL decreased from 3.9% to 1.9% (P < 0.001), TIR increased from 56% to 60% (P = 0.006) and HbA1c decreased from 7.5% (58 mmol/mol) to 7.3% (57 mmol/mol) (P = 0.025). In BGM-CGM, a severe hypoglycemic event was reported for nine participants while using BGM during the RCT and for two participants during the extension phase with CGM (P = 0.02). Conclusions: CGM use reduced hypoglycemia without increasing hyperglycemia in older adults with type 1 diabetes. These data provide further evidence for fully integrating CGM into clinical practice. Clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03240432).

Health-Related Quality of Life and Treatment Satisfaction in Parents and Children with Type 1 Diabetes Using Closed-Loop Control.

Introduction: Hybrid closed-loop systems increase time-in-range (TIR) and reduce glycemic variability. Person-reported outcomes (PROs) are essential to assess the utility of new devices and their impact on quality of life. This article focuses on the PROs for pediatric participants (ages 6-13 years) with type 1 diabetes (T1D) and their parents during a trial using the Tandem Control-IQ system, which was shown to increase TIR and improve other glycemic metrics. Research Design and Methods: One hundred and one children 6 to 13 years old with T1D were randomly assigned to closed-loop control (CLC) or sensor-augmented pump (SAP) in a 16-week randomized clinical trial with extension to 28 weeks during which the SAP group crossed over to CLC. Health-related quality of life and treatment satisfaction measures were obtained from children and their parents at baseline, 16 weeks, and 28 weeks. Results: Neither the children in the CLC group nor their parents had statistically significant changes in PRO outcomes compared with the SAP group at the end of the 16-week randomized controlled trial and the 28-week extension. Parents in the CLC group reported nonsignificant improvements in some PRO scores when compared with the SAP group at 16 weeks, which were sustained at 28 weeks. Sleep scores for parents improved from "poor sleep quality" to "adequate sleep quality" between baseline and 16 weeks, however, the change in scores was not statistically different between groups. Conclusions: Children with T1D who used the Control-IQ system did not experience increased burden compared with those using SAP based on person-reported outcomes from the children and their parents. Clinical Trials Registration: NCT03844789.

Hypoglycemia and Glycemic Control in Older Adults With Type 1 Diabetes: Baseline Results From the WISDM Study.

BACKGROUND: Knowledge regarding the burden and predictors of hypoglycemia among older adults with type 1 diabetes (T1D) is limited. METHODS: We analyzed baseline data from the Wireless Innovations for Seniors with Diabetes Mellitus (WISDM) study, which enrolled participants at 22 sites in the United States. Eligibility included clinical diagnosis of T1D, age ≥60 years, no real-time continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) use in prior three months, and HbA1c <10.0%. Blinded CGM data from 203 participants with at least 240 hours were included in the analyses. RESULTS: Median age of the cohort was 68 years (52% female, 93% non-Hispanic white, and 53% used insulin pumps). Mean HbA1c was 7.5%. Median time spent in the glucose range <70 mg/dL was 5.0% (72 min/day) and <54 mg/dL was 1.6% (24 min/day). Among all factors analyzed, only reduced hypoglycemia awareness was associated with greater time spent <54 mg/dL (median time of 2.7% vs 1.3% [39 vs 19 minutes per day] for reduced awareness vs aware/uncertain, respectively, P = .03). Participants spent a mean 56% of total time in target glucose range of 70-180 mg/dL and 37% of time above 180 mg/dL. CONCLUSIONS: Over half of older T1D participants spent at least an hour a day with glucose levels <70 mg/dL. Those with reduced hypoglycemia awareness spent over twice as much time than those without in a serious hypoglycemia range (glucose levels <54 mg/dL). Interventions to reduce exposure to clinically significant hypoglycemia and increase time in range are urgently needed in this age group.

Extended Use of the Control-IQ Closed-Loop Control System in Children With Type 1 Diabetes.

OBJECTIVE: To further evaluate the safety and efficacy of the Control-IQ closed-loop control (CLC) system in children with type 1 diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: After a 16-week randomized clinical trial (RCT) comparing CLC with sensor-augmented pump (SAP) therapy in 101 children 6-13 years old with type 1 diabetes, 22 participants in the SAP group initiated use of the CLC system (referred to as SAP-CLC cohort), and 78 participants in the CLC group continued use of CLC (CLC-CLC cohort) for 12 weeks. RESULTS: In the SAP-CLC cohort, mean percentage of time in range 70-180 mg/dL (TIR) increased from 55 ± 13% using SAP during the RCT to 65 ± 10% using CLC (P < 0.001), with 36% of the cohort achieving TIR >70% plus time <54 mg/dL <1% compared with 14% when using SAP (P = 0.03). Substantial improvement in TIR was seen after the 1st day of CLC. Time <70 mg/dL decreased from 1.80% to 1.34% (P < 0.001). In the CLC-CLC cohort, mean TIR increased from 53 ± 17% prerandomization to 67 ± 10% during the RCT and remained reasonably stable at 66 ± 10% through the 12 weeks post-RCT. No episodes of diabetic ketoacidosis or severe hypoglycemia occurred in either cohort. CONCLUSIONS: This further evaluation of the Control-IQ CLC system supports the findings of the preceding RCT that use of a closed-loop system can safely improve glycemic control in children 6-13 years old with type 1 diabetes from the 1st day of use and demonstrates that these improvements can be sustained through 28 weeks of use.

Predictors of Time-in-Range (70-180 mg/dL) Achieved Using a Closed-Loop Control System.

Background: Studies of closed-loop control (CLC) in patients with type 1 diabetes (T1D) consistently demonstrate improvements in glycemic control as measured by increased time-in-range (TIR) 70-180 mg/dL. However, clinical predictors of TIR in users of CLC systems are needed. Materials and Methods: We analyzed data from 100 children aged 6-13 years with T1D using the Tandem Control-IQ CLC system during a randomized trial or subsequent extension phase. Continuous glucose monitor data were collected at baseline and during 12-16 weeks of CLC use. Participants were stratified into quartiles of TIR on CLC to compare clinical characteristics. Results: TIR for those in the first, second, third, and fourth quartiles was 54%, 65%, 71%, and 78%, respectively. Lower baseline TIR was associated with lower TIR on CLC (r = 0.69, P < 0.001). However, lower baseline TIR was also associated with greater improvement in TIR on CLC (r = -0.81, P < 0.001). During CLC, participants in the highest versus lowest TIR-quartile administered more user-initiated boluses daily (8.5 ± 2.8 vs. 5.8 ± 2.6, P < 0.001) and received fewer automated boluses (3.5 ± 1.0 vs. 6.0 ± 1.6, P < 0.001). Participants in the lowest (vs. the highest) TIR-quartile received more insulin per body weight (1.13 ± 0.27 vs. 0.87 ± 0.20 U/kg/d, P = 0.008). However, in a multivariate model adjusting for baseline TIR, user-initiated boluses and insulin-per-body-weight were no longer significant. Conclusions: Higher baseline TIR is the strongest predictor of TIR on CLC in children with T1D. However, lower baseline TIR is associated with the greatest improvement in TIR. As with open-loop systems, user engagement is important for optimal glycemic control.

Racial-Ethnic Inequity in Young Adults With Type 1 Diabetes.

CONTEXT: Minority young adults (YA) currently represent the largest growing population with type 1 diabetes (T1D) and experience very poor outcomes. Modifiable drivers of disparities need to be identified, but are not well-studied. OBJECTIVE: To describe racial-ethnic disparities among YA with T1D and identify drivers of glycemic disparity other than socioeconomic status (SES). DESIGN: Cross-sectional multicenter collection of patient and chart-reported variables, including SES, social determinants of health, and diabetes-specific factors, with comparison between non-Hispanic White, non-Hispanic Black, and Hispanic YA and multilevel modeling to identify variables that account for glycemic disparity apart from SES. SETTING: Six diabetes centers across the United States. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 300 YA with T1D (18-28 years: 33% non-Hispanic White, 32% non-Hispanic Black, and 34% Hispanic). MAIN OUTCOME: Racial-ethnic disparity in HbA1c levels. RESULTS: Non-Hispanic Black and Hispanic YA had lower SES, higher HbA1c levels, and much lower diabetes technology use than non-Hispanic White YA (P < 0.001). Non-Hispanic Black YA differed from Hispanic, reporting higher diabetes distress and lower self-management (P < 0.001). After accounting for SES, differences in HbA1c levels disappeared between non-Hispanic White and Hispanic YA, whereas they remained for non-Hispanic Black YA (+ 2.26% [24 mmol/mol], P < 0.001). Diabetes technology use, diabetes distress, and disease self-management accounted for a significant portion of the remaining non-Hispanic Black-White glycemic disparity. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated large racial-ethnic inequity in YA with T1D, especially among non-Hispanic Black participants. Our findings reveal key opportunities for clinicians to potentially mitigate glycemic disparity in minority YA by promoting diabetes technology use, connecting with social programs, and tailoring support for disease self-management and diabetes distress to account for social contextual factors.