G6 Real-time Continuous Glucose Monitoring Research Articles

Reduction in Diabetes-Related Hospitalizations and Medical Costs After Dexcom G6 Continuous Glucose Monitor Initiation in People with Type 2 Diabetes Using Intensive Insulin Therapy.

Some people with type 2 diabetes (T2D) require intensive insulin therapy to manage their diabetes. This can increase the risk of diabetes-related hospitalizations. We hypothesize that initiation of real-time continuous glucose monitoring (RT-CGM), which continuously measures a user's glucose values and provides threshold- and trend-based alerts, will reduce diabetes-related emergency department (ED) and inpatient hospitalizations and concomitant costs. A retrospective analysis of US healthcare claims data using Optum's de-identified Clinformatics® Data Mart database was performed. The cohort consisted of commercially insured, CGM-naïve individuals with T2D who initiated Dexcom G6 RT-CGM system between August 1, 2018, and March 31, 2021. Twelve months of continuous health plan enrollment before and after RT-CGM initiation was required to capture baseline and follow-up rates of diabetes-related hospitalizations and associated healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) costs. Analyses were performed for claims with a diabetes-related diagnosis code in either (1) any position or (2) first or second position on the claim. A total of 790 individuals met the inclusion criteria. The average age was 52.8 (10.5) [mean (SD)], 53.3% were male, and 76.3% were white. For claims with a diabetes-related diagnosis code in any position, the number of individuals with ≥ 1 ED visit decreased by 30.0% (p = 0.01) and with ≥ 1 inpatient visit decreased by 41.5% (p < 0.0001). The number of diabetes-related visits and average number of visits per person similarly decreased by at least 31.4%. Larger relative decreases were observed for claims with a diabetes-related diagnosis code in the first or second position on the claim. Total diabetes-related costs expressed as per-person-per-month (PPPM) decreased by $341 PPPM for any position and $330 PPPM for first or second position. Initiation of Dexcom G6 among people with T2D using intensive insulin therapy was associated with a significant reduction in diabetes-related ED and inpatient visits and related HCRU costs. Expanded use of RT-CGM could augment these benefits and result in further cost reductions.

Cost-utility analysis of Dexcom G6 real-time continuous glucose monitoring versus FreeStyle Libre 1 intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitoring in adults with type 1 diabetes in Belgium.

The aim of this study was to assess the long-term cost-effectiveness of Dexcom G6 real-time continuous glucose monitoring (rtCGM) with alert functionality compared with FreeStyle Libre1 intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitoring (isCGM) without alerts in adults with type 1 diabetes in Belgium. The IQVIA CORE Diabetes Model was used to estimate cost-effectiveness. Input data for the simulated baseline cohort were sourced from the randomised ALERTT1 trial (ClinicalTrials.gov. NCT03772600). The age of the participants was 42.9 ± 14.1 years (mean ± SD), and the baseline HbA1c was 57.8 ± 9.5 mmol/mol (7.4 ± 0.9%). Participants using rtCGM showed a reduction in HbA1c of 3.6 mmol/mol (0.36 percentage points) based on the 6-month mean between-group difference. In the base case, both rtCGM and isCGM were priced at €3.92/day (excluding value-added tax [VAT]) according to the Belgian reimbursement system. The analysis was performed from a Belgian healthcare payer perspective over a lifetime time horizon. Health outcomes were expressed as quality-adjusted life years. Probabilistic and one-way sensitivity analyses were used to account for parameter uncertainty. In the base case, rtCGM dominated isCGM, resulting in lower diabetes-related complication costs and better health outcomes. The associated main drivers favouring rtCGM were lower HbA1c, fewer severe hypoglycaemic events and reduced fear of hypoglycaemia. The results were robust under a wide range of one-way sensitivity analyses. In models where the price of rtCGM is €5.11/day (a price increase of 30.4%) or €12.34/day (a price increase of 214.8%), rtCGM was cost-neutral or reached an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of €40,000 per quality-adjusted life year, respectively. When priced similarly, Dexcom G6 rtCGM with alert functionality has both economic and clinical benefits compared with FreeStyle Libre1 isCGM without alerts in adults with type 1 diabetes in Belgium, and appears to be a cost-effective glucose monitoring modality. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03772600.

Diabetes Technology and the Human Factor.

Diabetes Technology and the Human Factor.

649-P: Real-Time Continuous Glucose Monitoring in the Hospital Identifies and Prompts Treatment for Hypoglycemia

Reliance on point-of-care (POC) blood glucose measurements for inpatient diabetes management can result in long between-measurement intervals, which contribute to undetected and untreated dysglycemia. The G6 real-time continuous glucose monitoring (RT-CGM) system (Dexcom) allows for remote monitoring. In the hospital, this may reduce the need for close interactions and infectious disease transmission between patients and hospital staff. A man in his mid-60s was admitted to a non-intensive care unit in an acute care facility with a diagnosis of COVID-19. His preadmission type 2 diabetes was managed with twice-daily intermediate-acting insulin and prandial rapid-acting insulin; steroids and POC glucose testing (prandial and bedtime with a FreeStyle Precision Pro meter [Abbott]) were added to this regimen. A G6 was placed on the abdomen and was set to alert the staff to glucose values ≤85 mg/dL or predicted to be &amp;lt;55 mg/dL within 20 minutes. Two hypoglycemic events occurred which triggered three G6 alerts (Figure) . The G6 alerts prompted ad hoc POC measurements that confirmed the hypoglycemic events, prompted appropriate interventions, and documented the patient’s return to euglycemia. All seven G6 readings were within 20 mg/dL or 20% of POC values ≤100 or &amp;gt;100 mg/dL, respectively. Inpatient RT-CGM use can detect existing or impending hypoglycemia and assist in diabetes management. Disclosure M.Baker: Other Relationship; Dexcom, Inc. J.Welsh: Employee; Dexcom, Inc. Funding Dexcom, Inc.

The Role of Retrospective Data Review in the Personal Use of Real-Time Continuous Glucose Monitoring: Perceived Impact on Quality of Life and Health Outcomes.

Background: To explore whether regularly reviewing one's own retrospective continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) data might be linked with perceived quality of life (QoL) and glycemic benefits. Methods: Adults with type 1 diabetes (N = 300) or insulin-using type 2 diabetes (N = 198) using the Dexcom G5 Mobile or G6 Real-Time CGM (RT-CGM) system and receiving the weekly CLARITY summary report of their glucose data completed a survey exploring their use of the report and its perceived value and impact on QoL and glycemic outcomes. Regression analyses examined whether personal use of the report was associated with QoL, perceived glycemic outcomes, and RT-CGM metrics. Results: The majority reported that receiving and viewing the report contributed to improved hypoglycemic confidence (75.9%) and overall well-being (50.0%), reduced diabetes distress (59.3%-74.1%), and helped to improve A1C (73.1%) and reduce problems with hypoglycemia (61.8%) and chronic hyperglycemia (73.1%). Regularly reviewing the report with family or friends (positive predictor) and doing nothing with the report's information (negative predictor) were independently associated with QoL and perceived glycemic outcomes. Surprisingly, both predictors were also associated with poorer glycemic control (e.g., greater % time above range >180). Conclusions: These findings suggest that receiving a weekly RT-CGM summary report may contribute to QoL and health benefits, especially if the individual chooses to actively review and make use of the report's findings and openly reviews the findings with family or friends. Prospective studies are needed to more precisely determine how retrospective RT-CGM data summaries can best be presented and utilized effectively by adults with diabetes to enhance health outcomes.

Long-term cost-effectiveness of Dexcom G6 real-time continuous glucose monitoring system in people with type 1 diabetes in Australia.

IntroductionReal‐time continuous glucose monitoring (rt‐CGM) allows patients with diabetes to adjust insulin dosing, potentially improving glucose control. This study aimed to compare the long‐term cost‐effectiveness of the Dexcom G6 rt‐CGM device versus self‐monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) and flash glucose monitoring (FGM) in Australia in people with type 1 diabetes (T1D).MethodsLong‐term costs and clinical outcomes were estimated using the CORE Diabetes Model. Clinical input data for the analysis of rt‐CGM versus SMBG and FGM were sourced from the DIAMOND study and a network meta‐analysis, respectively. Rt‐CGM and FGM were associated with quality of life (QoL) benefits due to reduced fear of hypoglycaemia (FoH) and fingerstick testing. Analyses were performed over a lifetime time horizon from an Australian healthcare payer perspective, including direct costs from published data. Future costs and clinical outcomes were discounted at 5% per annum.ResultsRt‐CGM was associated with an increased quality‐adjusted life expectancy of 1.199 quality‐adjusted life years (QALYs), increased mean total lifetime costs of AUD 21,596 and an incremental cost‐effectiveness ratio (ICER) of AUD 18,020 per QALY gained compared with SMBG.Compared with FGM, rt‐CGM was associated with an increased quality‐adjusted life expectancy of 0.569 QALYs, increased mean total lifetime costs of AUD 11,064 and an ICER of AUD 19,455 per QALY gained. Key drivers of outcomes included HbA1c benefits and QoL benefits associated with reduced FoH and fingerstick testing.ConclusionsDue to improved clinical outcomes and QoL gains rt‐CGM is highly cost‐effective compared with SMBG and FGM in people with T1D in Australia.

Evaluation of the Long-Term Cost-Effectiveness of the Dexcom G6 Continuous Glucose Monitor versus Self-Monitoring of Blood Glucose in People with Type 1 Diabetes in Canada.

BackgroundThe Dexcom G6 real-time continuous glucose monitoring (RT-CGM) system is one of the most sophisticated RT-CGM systems developed to date and became available in Canada in 2019. A health economic analysis was performed to determine the long-term cost-effectiveness of the Dexcom G6 RT-CGM system versus SMBG in adults with type 1 diabetes (T1D) in Canada.MethodsThe analysis was performed using the IQVIA Core Diabetes Model. Based on clinical trial data, patients with mean baseline HbA1c of 8.6% were assumed to have a HbA1c reduction of 1.0% with RT-CGM versus 0.4% reduction with SMBG. RT-CGM was also associated with a quality of life (QoL) benefit owing to reduced incidence of hypoglycemia, reduced fear of hypoglycemia (FoH) and elimination of fingerstick testing. Direct medical costs were sourced from published literature, and inflated to 2019 Canadian dollars (CAD).ResultsDexcom G6 RT-CGM was projected to improve mean quality-adjusted life expectancy by 2.09 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) relative to SMBG (15.52 versus 13.43 QALYs) but mean total lifetime cots were CAD 35,353 higher with RT-CGM (CAD 227,357 versus CAD 192,004) resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of CAD 16,931 per QALY gained. Sensitivity analyses revealed that assumptions relating to the QoL benefit associated with reduced FoH and the elimination of fingerstick testing with RT-CGM as well as SMBG usage and change in HbA1c were the key drivers of cost-effectiveness.ConclusionFor adults with T1D in Canada, RT-CGM is associated with improved glycemic control and QoL benefits owing to a reduced FoH and elimination of the requirement for fingerstick testing and over a lifetime time horizon is cost-effective relative to SMBG.

Impact of Real-Time Continuous Glucose Monitoring Data Sharing on Quality of Life and Health Outcomes in Adults with Type 1 Diabetes.

Background: To examine experiences with real-time continuous glucose monitoring (RT-CGM) data sharing and its impact on health-related outcomes.Methods: Adults with type 1 diabetes (T1D) (N = 302) using the Dexcom G5 Mobile or G6 RT-CGM system and sharing data with ≥1 family/friend follower completed a survey exploring their perceived value of data sharing, the impact of sharing on health and quality of life (QoL) outcomes, and how their chief follower (CF) used shared data to support their diabetes management. Regression analyses examined whether CF actions were linked to reported changes in health and QoL outcomes for the T1D adult.Results: The majority had lived with T1D >10 years, (76.5%), used RT-CGM >1 year (58.0%), and identified their spouse/partner as CF (51.9%). Data sharing reportedly contributed to improved hypoglycemic confidence (for 89.4% of respondents), improved overall well-being (54.3%), and reduced diabetes distress (36.1%). Benefits related to data sharing included fewer episodes of severe hypoglycemia (62.2%), better sleep (52.4%), and A1C improvement (47.3%). In particular, three positive CF actions were independent predictors of health and QoL benefits: celebrating success related to glycemic control, providing encouragement when glycemic control is challenging, and teamwork discussions about how CF should respond to out-of-range values.Conclusions: RT-CGM data sharing was associated with a range of health and QoL-related benefits. The occurrence of benefits was influenced by the collaborative management approaches taken by RT-CGM users and their data-sharing followers. Longitudinal trials are needed to determine the most effective patterns of collaborative data sharing, leading to their implementation into routine diabetes management.

Impact of Real-Time CGM Data Sharing on Quality of Life in the Caregivers of Adults and Children With Type 1 Diabetes.

To examine caregivers' experiences with real-time continuous glucose monitoring (RT-CGM) data sharing and its impact on quality of life (QoL) and health outcomes. Parents of children with type 1 diabetes (T1D) (N = 303) and spouses/partners of T1D adults (N = 212) using the Dexcom G5 Mobile or G6 RT-CGM system and who were actively following their T1Ds' RT-CGM data completed a survey examining their perceived value of data sharing, the impact of sharing on their own QoL and their child/partner's health, and how they used RT-CGM data to support their T1Ds' diabetes management. Regression analyses examined whether their actions were linked to reported changes in QoL and health outcomes. Respondents were predominantly non-Hispanic White (91.1% parents; 88.7% partners), female (78.2% parents; 54.7% partners), and college-educated (65.3% parents; 61.8% partners). The majority reported that data sharing had enhanced hypoglycemic confidence (97.7% parents; 98.1% partners), overall well-being (60.4% parents; 63.2% partners), and sleep quality (78.0% parents; 61.3% partners). Of note, three positive caregiver actions were broadly consistent and significant predictors of QoL and health benefits for both parents and partners: celebrating success related to glycemic control, providing encouragement when glycemic control is challenging, and teamwork discussions about how the caregiver should respond to out-of-range values. RT-CGM data sharing was associated with a range of QoL and health benefits for caregivers. Degree of benefits was influenced by the collaborative actions taken by caregivers to support their child's or partner's diabetes management. To determine the most effective strategies for collaborative data sharing, longitudinal trials are needed.

Long-Term Cost-Effectiveness the Dexcom G6 Real-Time Continuous Glucose Monitoring System Compared with Self-Monitoring of Blood Glucose in People with Type 1 Diabetes in France.

IntroductionThe aim was to determine the long-term cost-effectiveness of the Dexcom G6 real-time continuous glucose monitoring (RT-CGM) system versus self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) in adults with type 1 diabetes (T1D) in France.MethodsThe analysis was performed using the IQVIA Core Diabetes Model and utilized clinical input data from the DIAMOND clinical trial in adults with T1D. Simulated patients were assumed to have a mean baseline HbA1c of 8.6%, and those in the RT-CGM arm were assumed to have a HbA1c reduction of 1.0% compared with 0.4% in the SMBG arm. A quality of life (QoL) benefit associated with a reduced fear of hypoglycemia (FoH) and elimination of the requirement for fingerstick testing in the RT-CGM arm was also applied.ResultsThe G6 RT-CGM system was associated with an incremental gain in quality-adjusted life expectancy of 1.38 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) compared with SMBG (10.64 QALYs versus 9.23 QALYs). Total mean lifetime costs were 21,087 euros higher with RT-CGM (148,077 euros versus 126,990 euros), resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of 15,285 euros per QALY gained.ConclusionsIn France, based on a willingness-to-pay threshold of 50,000 euros per QALY gained, the use of the G6 RT-CGM system is cost-effective relative to SMBG for adults with long-standing T1D, driven primarily by improved glycemic control and the QoL benefit associated with reduced FoH and elimination of the requirement for fingerstick testing.

Long-term Cost-Effectiveness of Dexcom G6 Real-time Continuous Glucose Monitoring Versus Self-Monitoring of Blood Glucose in Patients With Type 1 Diabetes in the U.K.

A long-term health economic analysis was performed to establish the cost-effectiveness of real-time continuous glucose monitoring (RT-CGM) (Dexcom G6) versus self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) alone in U.K.-based patients with type 1 diabetes (T1D). The analysis used the IQVIA CORE Diabetes Model. Clinical input data were sourced from the DIAMOND trial in adults with T1D. Simulations were performed separately in the overall population of patients with baseline HbA1c ≥7.5% (58 mmol/mol), and a secondary analysis was performed in patients with baseline HbA1c ≥8.5% (69 mmol/mol). The analysis was performed from the National Health Service health care payer perspective over a lifetime time horizon. In the overall population, G6 RT-CGM was associated with a mean incremental gain in quality-adjusted life expectancy of 1.49 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) versus SMBG (mean [SD] 11.47 [2.04] QALYs versus 9.99 [1.84] QALYs). Total mean (SD) lifetime costs were also pounds sterling (GBP) 14,234 higher with RT-CGM (GBP 102,468 [35,681] versus GBP 88,234 [39,027]) resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of GBP 9,558 per QALY gained. Sensitivity analyses revealed that the findings were sensitive to changes in the quality-of-life benefit associated with reduced fear of hypoglycemia and avoidance of fingerstick testing as well as the HbA1c benefit associated with RT-CGM use. For U.K.-based T1D patients, the G6 RT-CGM device is associated with significant improvements in clinical outcomes and, over patient lifetimes, is a cost-effective disease management option relative to SMBG on the basis of a willingness-to-pay threshold of GBP 20,000 per QALY gained.

91-LB: Ongoing Requirements for SMBG Testing among isCGM Users

Some factory-calibrated continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) systems are approved for non-adjunctive use, although these systems require adjunctive self-monitored blood glucose (SMBG) tests in specific instances. We estimated how often users of an intermittently-scanned CGM (isCGM) system might be required to perform SMBG testing. Criteria under which an adjunctive SMBG test is required were obtained from the U.S.-specific 14-day isCGM user guide (Figure). Real-world glucose values were obtained from a random sample of 10,000 adults (ages 18+) who used Dexcom G6 real-time CGM at least 90% of the time for at least 14 days between 7/1/2018-9/30/2018. The percentage of values meeting one or more of the criteria for mandatory SMBG testing was calculated as hours per day. Glucose readings were changing &amp;gt; 2 mg/dL/min a mean (SD) of 1.34 (0.77) hours/day, predicted to be &amp;lt; 70 mg/dL within 15 minutes for 1.03 (0.95) hours/day, and &amp;lt; 70 mg/dL for 0.67 (0.79) hours/day; one or more of these criteria were present for 2.35 (1.30) hours/day. Added to the 0.86 hour/day warmup period, SMBG testing would be indicated for an isCGM user for an average of 3.20 (1.30) hours/day. This may be a conservative estimate as the isCGM label demonstrates that the system overestimates hypoglycemia. Users of the isCGM system are likely to confront multiple intervals during which SMBG is required and reliance on their isCGM glucose values for diabetes management decisions is contraindicated. Disclosure D.A. Price: Employee; Self; Dexcom, Inc. Stock/Shareholder; Self; Johnson &amp; Johnson.