Hybrid Closed-loop Research Articles

Response to Comment on Beato-Víbora et al. A Multicenter Prospective Evaluation of the Benefits of Two Advanced Hybrid Closed-Loop Systems in Glucose Control and Patient-Reported Outcomes in a Real-world Setting. Diabetes Care 2024;47:216-224.

Response to Comment on Beato-Víbora et al. A Multicenter Prospective Evaluation of the Benefits of Two Advanced Hybrid Closed-Loop Systems in Glucose Control and Patient-Reported Outcomes in a Real-world Setting. Diabetes Care 2024;47:216-224.

Comment on Beato-Víbora et al. A Multicenter Prospective Evaluation of the Benefits of Two Advanced Hybrid Closed-Loop Systems in Glucose Control and Patient-Reported Outcomes in a Real-World Setting. Diabetes Care 2024;47:216-224.

Comment on Beato-Víbora et al. A Multicenter Prospective Evaluation of the Benefits of Two Advanced Hybrid Closed-Loop Systems in Glucose Control and Patient-Reported Outcomes in a Real-World Setting. Diabetes Care 2024;47:216-224.

Validation of the UVA Simulation Replay Methodology Using Clinical Data: Reproducing a Randomized Clinical Trial.

Background: Computer simulators of human metabolism are powerful tools to design and validate new diabetes treatments. However, these platforms are often limited in the diversity of behaviors and glycemic conditions they can reproduce. Replay methodologies leverage field-collected data to create ad hoc simulation environments representative of real-life conditions. After formal validations of our method in prior publications, we demonstrate its capacity to reproduce a recent clinical trial. Methods: Using the replay methodology, an ensemble of replay simulators was generated using data from a randomized crossover clinical trial comparing the hybrid closed loop (HCL) and fully closed loop (FCL) control modalities in automated insulin delivery (AID), creating 64 subject/modality pairs. Each virtual subject was exposed to the alternate AID modality to compare the simulated versus observed glycemic outcomes. Equivalence tests were performed for time in, below, and above range (TIR, TBR, and TAR) and high and low blood glucose indices (HBGI and LBGI) considering equivalence margins corresponding to clinical significance. Results: TIR, TAR, LBGI, and HBGI showed statistical and clinical equivalence between the original and the simulated data; TBR failed the equivalence test. For example, in the HCL mode, simulated TIR was 84.89% versus an observed 84.31% (P = 0.0170, confidence interval [CI] [-3.96, 2.79]), and for FCL mode, TIR was 76.58% versus 77.41% (P = 0.0222, CI [-2.54, 4.20]). Conclusion: Clinical trial data confirm the prior in silico validation of the UVA replay method in predicting the glycemic impact of modified insulin treatments. This invivo demonstration justifies the application of the replay method to the personalization and adaptation of treatment strategies in people with type 1 diabetes.

The psychosocial outcomes of advanced hybrid closed-loop system in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes

The study was carried out to determine the psychosocial outcomes of advanced hybrid closed-loop (AHCL) systems in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes (T1D). Single-center and cohort study with a duration 6 months consisted of 60 children and adolescents with T1D. Standard clinical procedures, including both glycemic indicators, e.g., sensor-measured time within the 70–180 mg/dL range and glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) levels, and psychosocial metrics were used for data collection. The psychosocial metrics included the Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory (PedsQL) 3.0 Diabetes Module for both children (8–12 years) and parents; the Quality of Life for Youth scale for adolescents (13–18 years); the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ); the Hypoglycemia Fear Survey for Children (HFS-C); the Revised Child Anxiety and Depression Scale (R-CADS); and AHCLS-specific DTSEQ satisfaction and expectation survey. These metrics were evaluated at the baseline and after 6 months of AHCL use. Of the 60 children and adolescents with T1D for whom the AHCL system was utilized, 41 of them, 23 female and 18 male, completed the surveys. The mean age of the 41 children and adolescents was 12.5 ± 3.2 (min. 6.7, max. 18) years. The time spent within the target glycemic range, i.e., time-in-range (TIR), improved from 76.9 ± 9% at the baseline to 80.4 ± 5% after 6 months of AHCL system use (p = 0.03). Additionally, HbA1c levels reduced from 7.1% ± 0.7% at the baseline to 6.8% ± 0.8% after 6 months of AHCL system use (p = 0.03). The most notable decline in HbA1c was observed in participants with higher baseline HbA1c levels. All patients’ HFS-C and AHCL system-specific DTSEQ satisfaction and expectation survey scores were within the normal range at the baseline and remained unchanged during the follow-up period. No significant difference was found in the R-CADS scores of children and adolescents between baseline and after 6 months of AHCL system use. However, there was a significant decrease in the R-CADS scores of the parents. Patients’ PedsQL scores were high both at the baseline and after 6 months. The SDQ scores were high at baseline, and there was no significant improvement at the end of 6 months. Conclusion: This is the first study to investigate in detail the psychosocial outcomes of AHCL system use in T1D patients and their parents. Although state-of-the-art technologies such as AHCL provide patients with more flexibility in their daily lives and information about glucose fluctuations, the AHCL resulted in a TIR above the recommended target range without a change in QOL, HFS-C, SDQ, and R-CADS scores. The scores obtained from the R-CADS conducted by the parents of the children indicated that the use of pumps caused a psychological improvement in the long term, with a significant decrease in the R-CADS scores of the children and adolescents with T1D.What is Known:• Previous studies focused on clinical outcomes of AHCL systems in pediatric T1D patients, showing glycemic control improvements.• Limited attention given to psychosocial outcomes of AHCL systems in children and adolescents with T1D.• Crucial psychosocial factors like quality of life, emotional well-being, and fear of hypoglycemia underexplored in AHCL system context.What is New:• First study to comprehensively examine psychosocial outcomes of AHCL systems in pediatric T1D patients.• Study's robust methodology sets new standard for diabetes technology research and its impact on qualiy of life.

Long-term assessment of the NHS hybrid closed-loop real-world study on glycaemic outcomes, time-in-range, and quality of life in children and young people with type 1 diabetes

Hybrid closed-loop (HCL) systems seamlessly interface continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) with insulin pumps, employing specialised algorithms and user-initiated automated insulin delivery. This study aimed to assess the efficacy of HCLs at 12 months post-initiation on glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c), time-in-range (TIR), hypoglycaemia frequency, and quality of life measures among children and young people (CYP) with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) and their caregivers in a real-world setting. Conducted between August 1, 2021, and December 10, 2022, the prospective recruitment took place in eight paediatric diabetes centres across England under the National Health Service England’s (NHSE) HCL pilot real-world study. A cohort of 251 CYP (58% males, mean age 12.3 years) with T1DM participated (89% white, 3% Asian, 4% black, 3% mixed ethnicity, and 1% other). The study utilised three HCL systems: (1) Tandem Control-IQ AP system, which uses the Tandem t:slim X2 insulin pump (Tandem Diabetes Care, San Diego, CA, USA) with the Dexcom G6® CGM (Dexcom, San Diego, CA, USA) sensor; (2) Medtronic MiniMed™ 780G with the Guardian 4 sensor (Medtronic, Northridge, CA, USA); and (3) the CamAPS FX (CamDiab, Cambridge, UK) with the Ypsomed insulin pump (Ypsomed Ltd, Escrick, UK) and Dexcom G6® CGM.All systems were fully funded by the NHS. Results demonstrated significant improvements in HbA1c (average reduction at 12 months 7 mmol/mol; P < 0.001), time-in-range (TIR) (average increase 13.4%; P < 0.001), hypoglycaemia frequency (50% reduction), hypoglycaemia fear, and quality of sleep (P < 0.001) among CYP over a 12-month period of HCL usage. Additionally, parents and carers experienced improvements in hypoglycaemia fear and quality of sleep after 6 and 12 months of use. In addition to the improvements in glycaemic management, these findings underscore the positive impact of HCL systems on both the well-being of CYP with T1DM and the individuals caring for them.

Effects, Safety, and Treatment Experience of Advanced Hybrid Closed-Loop Systems in Clinical Practice Among Adults Living With Type 1 Diabetes.

There are few studies providing a more comprehensive picture of advanced hybrid closed-loop (AHCL) systems in clinical practice. The aim was to evaluate the effects of the AHCL systems, Tandem® t: slim X2™ with Control IQ™, and MiniMed™ 780G, on glucose control, safety, treatment satisfaction, and practical barriers for individuals with type 1 diabetes. One hundred forty-two randomly selected adults with type 1 diabetes at six diabetes outpatient clinics in Sweden at any time treated with either the Tandem Control IQ (TCIQ) or the MiniMed 780G system were included. Glycated hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) and glucose metrics were evaluated. Treatment satisfaction and practical barriers were examined via questionnaires. Mean age was 42 years, median follow-up was 1.7 years, 58 (40.8%) were females, 65% used the TCIQ system. Glycated hemoglobin A1c was reduced by 0.6% (6.8 mmol/mol; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.5-0.8% [5.3-8.2 mmol/mol]; P < .001), from 7.3% to 6.7% (57-50 mmol/mol). Time in range (TIR) increased with 14.5% from 57.0% to 71.5% (95% CI = 12.2%-16.9%; P < .001). Time below range (TBR) (<70 mg/dL, <3.9 mmol/L) decreased from 3.8% to 1.6% (P < .001). The standard deviation of glucose values was reduced from 61 to 51 mg/dL (3.4-2.9 mmol/L, P < .001) and the coefficient of variation from 35% to 33% (P < .001). Treatment satisfaction increased, score 14.8 on the Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire (DTSQ) (change version ranging from -18 to 18, P < .001). Four severe hypoglycemia events were detected and no cases of ketoacidosis. Skin problems were experienced by 32.4% of the study population. Advanced hybrid closed-loop systems improve glucose control with a reasonable safety profile and high treatment satisfaction. Skin problems are common adverse events.

Sustained Effectiveness of an Advanced Hybrid Closed-Loop System in a Cohort of Children and Adolescents With Type 1 Diabetes: A 1-Year Real-World Study.

To investigate glucose metrics and identify potential predictors of the achievement of glycemic outcomes in children and adolescents during their first 12 months of MiniMed 780G use. This multicenter, longitudinal, real-world study recruited 368 children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes (T1D) starting SmartGuard technology between June 2020 and June 2022. Ambulatory glucose profile data were collected during a 15-day run-in period (baseline), 2 weeks after automatic mode activation, and every 3 months. The influence of covariates on glycemic outcomes after 1 year of MiniMed 780G use was assessed. After 15 days of automatic mode use, all glucose metrics improved compared with baseline (P < 0.001), except for time below range (P = 0.113) and coefficient of variation (P = 0.330). After 1 year, time in range (TIR) remained significantly higher than at baseline (75.3% vs. 62.8%, P < 0.001). The mean glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) over the study duration was lower than the previous year (6.9 ± 0.6% vs. 7.4 ± 0.9%, P < 0.001). Time spent in tight range (70-140 mg/dL) was 51.1%, and the glycemia risk index was 27.6. Higher TIR levels were associated with a reduced number of automatic correction boluses (P < 0.001), fewer SmartGuard exits (P = 0.021), and longer time in automatic mode (P = 0.030). Individuals with baseline HbA1c >8% showed more relevant improvement in TIR levels (from 54.3% to 72.3%). Our study highlights the sustained effectiveness of MiniMed 780G among youth with T1D. Findings suggest that even children and adolescents with low therapeutic engagement may benefit from SmartGuard technology.

Hybrid Closed Loop in Adults With Type 1 Diabetes and Severely Impaired Hypoglycemia Awareness.

Benefits of hybrid closed-loop (HCL) systems in a high-risk group with type 1 diabetes and impaired awareness of hypoglycemia (IAH) have not been well-explored. Adults with Edmonton HYPO scores ≥1047 were randomized to 26-weeks HCL (MiniMed™ 670G) vs standard therapy (multiple daily injections or insulin pump) without continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) (control). Primary outcome was percentage CGM time-in-range (TIR; 70-180 mg/dL) at 23 to 26 weeks post-randomization. Major secondary endpoints included magnitude of change in counter-regulatory hormones and autonomic symptom responses to hypoglycemia at 26-weeks post-randomization. A post hoc analysis evaluated glycemia risk index (GRI) comparing HCL with control groups at 26 weeks post-randomization. Nine participants (median [interquartile range (IQR)] age 51 [41, 59] years; 44% male; enrolment HYPO score 1183 [1058, 1308]; Clarke score 6 [6, 6]; n = 5 [HCL]; n = 4 [control]) completed the study. Time-in-range was higher using HCL vs control (70% [68, 74%] vs 48% [44, 50%], P = .014). Time <70 mg/dL did not differ (HCL 3.8% [2.7, 3.9] vs control 6.5% [4.3, 8.6], P = .14) although hypoglycemia episode duration was shorter (30 vs 50 minutes, P < .001) with HCL. Glycemia risk index was lower with HCL vs control (38.1 [30.0, 39.2] vs 70.8 [58.5, 72.4], P = .014). Following 6 months of HCL use, greater dopamine (24.0 [12.3, 27.6] vs -18.5 [-36.5, -4.8], P = .014), and growth hormone (6.3 [4.6, 16.8] vs 0.5 [-0.8, 3.0], P = .050) responses to hypoglycemia were observed. Six months of HCL use in high-risk adults with severe IAH increased glucose TIR and improved GRI without increased hypoglycemia, and partially restored counter-regulatory responses. ACTRN12617000520336.

Efficacy of the hybrid closedloop insulin delivery system in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes: a meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis.

The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of hybrid closed-loop (HCL) systems for insulin delivery in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes (T1D). We searched Embase, PubMed, and Cochrane Library for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published until March 2023 comparing the HCL therapy with control therapies for children and adolescents with T1D. We computed weighted mean differences (WMDs) for continuous outcomes and risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for binary endpoints. Four RCTs and 501 patients were included, of whom 323 were randomized to HCL therapy. Compared with control therapies, HCL significantly improved the period during which glucose level was 70-180 mg/dL (WMD 10.89%, 95% CI 8.22-13.56%) and the number of participants with glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) level < 7% (RR 2.61, 95% CI 1.29-5.28). Also, HCL significantly reduced the time during which glucoselevel was > 180 mg/dL (WMD-10.46%, 95% CI-13.99 to-6.93%) and the mean levels of glucose (WMD-16.67 mg/dL, 95% CI-22.25 to-11.09 mg/dL) and HbA1c (WMD-0.50%, 95% CI-0.68 to-0.31). There were no significant differences between therapies regarding time during which glucose level was < 70 mg/dL or <54 mg/dL or number of episodes of ketoacidosis, hyperglycemia, and hypoglycemia. In this meta-analysis, HCL compared with control therapies was associated with improved time in range and HbA1c control in children and adolescents with T1D and a similar profile of side effects. These findings support the efficacy of HCL in the treatment of T1D in this population.

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.

Automated closed-loop insulin delivery for the management of type 1 diabetes during pregnancy: the AiDAPT RCT

Background There are over 2000 pregnancies annually in women with type 1 diabetes in the UK. Despite recent improvements in diabetes technology, most women cannot achieve and maintain the recommended pregnancy glucose targets. Thus, one in two babies experience complications requiring neonatal care unit admission. Recent studies demonstrate that hybrid closed-loop therapy, in which algorithms adjust insulin delivery according to continuous glucose measurements, is effective for managing type 1 diabetes outside of pregnancy, but efficacy during pregnancy is unclear. Objective To examine the clinical efficacy of hybrid closed-loop compared to standard insulin therapy in pregnant women with type 1 diabetes. Design A multicentre, parallel-group, open-label, randomised, controlled trial in pregnant women with type 1 diabetes. Setting Nine antenatal diabetes clinics in England, Scotland and Northern Ireland. Participants Pregnant women with type 1 diabetes and above-target glucose levels, defined as glycated haemoglobin A1c of ≥ 48 mmol/mol (6.5%) in early pregnancy. Interventions A hybrid closed-loop system compared to standard insulin delivery (via insulin pump or multiple daily injections) with continuous glucose monitoring. Outcome measures The primary outcome is the difference between the intervention and control groups in percentage time spent in the pregnancy glucose target range (3.5–7.8 mmol/l) as measured by continuous glucose monitoring from 16 weeks’ gestation until delivery. Secondary outcomes include overnight time in range, time above range (&gt; 7.8 mmol/l), glycated haemoglobin A1c, safety outcomes (diabetic ketoacidosis, severe hypoglycaemia, adverse device events), psychosocial functioning obstetric and neonatal outcomes. Results The percentage of time that maternal glucose levels were within target range was higher with closed-loop than standard insulin therapy: 68.2 ± 10.5 in closed-loop and 55.6 ± 12.5 in the control group (mean‑adjusted difference 10.5 percentage points, 95% confidence interval 7.0 to 14.0; p &lt; 0.001). Results were consistent in secondary outcomes, with less time above range (−10.2%, 95% confidence interval −13.8 to −6.6%; p &lt; 0.001), higher overnight time in range (12.3%, 95% confidence interval 8.3 to 16.2%; p &lt; 0.001) and lower glycated haemoglobin A1c (−0.31%, 95% confidence interval −0.50 to −0.12%; p &lt; 0.002) all favouring closed-loop. The treatment effect was apparent from early pregnancy and consistent across clinical sites, maternal glycated haemoglobin A1c categories and previous insulin regimen. Maternal glucose improvements were achieved with 3.7 kg less gestational weight gain and without additional hypoglycaemia or total daily insulin dose. There were no unanticipated safety problems (six vs. five severe hypoglycaemia cases, one diabetic ketoacidosis per group) and seven device-related adverse events associated with closed-loop. There were no between-group differences in patient-reported outcomes. There was one shoulder dystocia in the closed-loop group and four serious birth injuries, including one neonatal death in the standard care group. Limitations Our results cannot be extrapolated to closed-loop systems with higher glucose targets, and our sample size did not provide definitive data on maternal and neonatal outcomes. Conclusions Hybrid closed-loop therapy significantly improved maternal glycaemia during type 1 diabetes pregnancy. Our results support National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guideline recommendations that hybrid closed-loop therapy should be offered to all pregnant women with type 1 diabetes. Future work Future trials should examine the effectiveness of hybrid closed-loop started before pregnancy, or as soon as possible after pregnancy confirmation. Trial registration This trial is registered as ISRCTN56898625. Funding This award was funded by the National Institute of Health and Care Research (NIHR) Efficacy and Mechanism Evaluation (EME) programme (NIHR award ref: 16/35/01) and is published in full in Efficacy and Mechanism Evaluation; Vol. 11, No. 7. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information. Dexcom supplied the continuous glucose monitoring systems used by AiDAPT intervention- and control-arm participants at reduced cost.

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

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. 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. 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. 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.

The Cost-Effectiveness of an Advanced Hybrid Closed-Loop System Compared to Standard Management of Type 1 Diabetes in a Singapore Setting.

Background: Despite advances in technology, glycemic outcomes in people with type 1 diabetes (T1D) remain suboptimal. The MiniMed 780G (MM780G) advanced hybrid closed-loop (AHCL) system is the latest technology for T1D management with established safety and efficacy. This study explores the cost-effectiveness of MM780G AHCL compared against multiple daily injections (MDI) plus intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitor (isCGM). Methods: A cost-utility analysis was conducted, simulating lifetime outcomes for 1000 T1D individuals, with baseline hemoglobin A1c of 8.4%, using the IQVIA Core Diabetes Model (CDM) v9.5. A Singapore health care payer perspective was taken with 2023 costs applied. Treatment effects were taken from the ADAPT study and treatment-related events from a combination of sources. T1D complication costs were derived from local literature, and health state utilities and disutilities from published literature. Scenario analyses and probabilistic sensitivity analyses (PSAs) explored uncertainty. Cost-effectiveness was assessed based on willingness-to-pay (WTP) thresholds set to Singapore Dollars (SGD) 45,000 (United States Dollars [USD] 33,087) per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) and Singapore's gross domestic product (GDP) per capita of SGD 114,165 (USD 83,941) per QALY. Results: A switch from MDI plus isCGM to MM780G resulted in expected gains in life-years (+0.78) and QALYs (+1.45). Cost savings through reduction in T1D complications (SGD 25,465; USD 18,723) partially offset the higher treatment costs in the AHCL arm (+SGD 74,538; +USD 54,805), resulting in an estimated incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of SGD 33,797 (USD 24,850) per QALY gained. Findings were robust, with PSA outputs indicating 81% and 99% probabilities of cost-effectiveness at the stated WTP thresholds. Conclusion: MM780G is a cost-effective option for people with T1D managed in a Singapore setting.

Characteristics Associated With Elevated Time Below Range in Elderly Patients With Type 1 Diabetes Using an Automated Insulin Delivery System.

This study investigated the characteristics associated with an increased risk of hypoglycemia, in elderly patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1D) using automated insulin delivery (AID) systems. Cross-sectional observational study including patients >60 years, using sensor-augmented insulin pump therapy with predictive low-glucose management (SAPT-PLGM), hybrid closed-loop (HCL), and advanced hybrid closed-loop (AHCL), for more than three months. A geriatric assessment was performed, and body composition was determined to investigate its association with achieving time below range (TBR) <70 mg/dL goals. The study included 59 patients (47.5% of men, mean age of 67.6 years, glycated hemoglobin [HbA1c] of 7.5 ± 0.6%, time in range (TIR) 77.8 ± 9.9%). Time below range <70 and <54 mg/dL were 2.2 ± 2.3% and 0.4 ± 0.81%, respectively. Patients with elevated TBR <70 mg/dL (>1%) had higher HbA1c levels, lower TIR, elevated time above range (TAR), and high glycemic variability. Regarding body composition, greater muscle mass, grip strength, and visceral fat were associated with a lower TBR <70 mg/dL. These factors were independent of the type of technology used, but TIR was higher when using AHCL systems compared with SAPT-PLGM and HCL systems. In elderly patients treated with AID systems with good functional status, lower lean mass, lower grip strength, and lower visceral fat percentage were associated with TBR greater than 1%, regardless of the device used. A similar finding along was found with CGM indicators such as higher HbA1c levels, lower TIR, higher TAR, and higher CV. Geriatric assessment is crucial for personalizing patient management.

Associations between daily step count classifications and continuous glucose monitoring metrics in adults with type 1 diabetes: analysis of the Type 1 Diabetes Exercise Initiative (T1DEXI) cohort.

Adults with type 1 diabetes should perform daily physical activity to help maintain health and fitness, but the influence of daily step counts on continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) metrics are unclear. This analysis used the Type 1 Diabetes Exercise Initiative (T1DEXI) dataset to investigate the effect of daily step count on CGM-based metrics. In a 4 week free-living observational study of adults with type 1 diabetes, with available CGM and step count data, we categorised participants into three groups-below (<7000), meeting (7000-10,000) or exceeding (>10,000) the daily step count goal-to determine if step count category influenced CGM metrics, including per cent time in range (TIR: 3.9-10.0 mmol/l), time below range (TBR: <3.9 mmol/l) and time above range (TAR: >10.0 mmol/l). A total of 464 adults with type 1 diabetes (mean±SD age 37±14 years; HbA1c 48.8±8.1 mmol/mol [6.6±0.7%]; 73% female; 45% hybrid closed-loop system, 38% standard insulin pump, 17% multiple daily insulin injections) were included in the study. Between-participant analyses showed that individuals who exceeded the mean daily step count goal over the 4 week period had a similar TIR (75±14%) to those meeting (74±14%) or below (75±16%) the step count goal (p>0.05). In the within-participant comparisons, TIR was higher on days when the step count goal was exceeded or met (both 75±15%) than on days below the step count goal (73±16%; both p<0.001). The TBR was also higher when individuals exceeded the step count goals (3.1%±3.2%) than on days when they met or were below step count goals (difference in means -0.3% [p=0.006] and -0.4% [p=0.001], respectively). The total daily insulin dose was lower on days when step count goals were exceeded (0.52±0.18 U/kg; p<0.001) or were met (0.53±0.18 U/kg; p<0.001) than on days when step counts were below the current recommendation (0.55±0.18 U/kg). Step count had a larger effect on CGM-based metrics in participants with a baseline HbA1c ≥53 mmol/mol (≥7.0%). Our results suggest that, compared with days with low step counts, days with higher step counts are associated with slight increases in both TIR and TBR, along with small reductions in total daily insulin requirements, in adults living with type 1 diabetes. The data that support the findings reported here are available on the Vivli Platform (ID: T1-DEXI; https://doi.org/10.25934/PR00008428 ).

Time in Range Analysis in Automated Insulin Delivery Era: Should Day and Nighttime Targets be the Same?

Hybrid closed-loop systems (HCLS) use has shown that time in range (TIR) tends to improve more during the nighttime than during the day. This study aims to compare the conventional TIR, currently accepted as 70 to 180 mg/dL, with a proposed recalculated time in range (RTIR) considering a tighter glucose target of 70 to 140 mg/dL for the nighttime fasting period in T1DM patients under HCLS. We conducted a retrospective study that included adults patients receiving treatment with Tandem t:slim X2 Control-IQ. Daytime TIR was characterized as glucose values between 70 and 180 mg/dL during the 07:01 to 23:59 time frame. Nighttime fasting TIR was specified as glucose values from 70 to 140 mg/dL between 00:00 and 07:00. The combination of the daytime and nighttime fasting glucose targets results in an RTIR, which was compared with the conventional TIR for each patient. The 14 days Dexcom G6 CGM data were downloaded from Tidepool platform and analyzed. We included 22 patients with a mean age of 49.7 years and diabetes duration of 24.7 years, who had been using automatic insulin delivery (AID) HCLS for a median of 305.3 days. We verified a mean conventional TIR of 68.7% vs a mean RTIR of 60.3%, with a mean percentage difference between these two metrics of -8.4%. A significant decrease in conventional TIR was verified when tighter glucose targets were considered during the nighttime period. No significant correlation was found between the percentage difference values and RTIR, even among the group of patients with the lowest conventional TIR. Currently, meeting the conventional TIR metrics may fall short of achieving an ideal level of glycemic control. An individualized strategy should be adopted until further data become available for a precise definition of optimal glucose targets.

Randomized Trial of Assisted Hybrid Closed-Loop Therapy Versus Sensor-Augmented Pump Therapy in Pregnancy.

Objective: Examine gestational safety, glycemic and health outcomes, of a hybrid closed-loop (HCL) system without pregnancy-specific glucose targets. Research Design: This was a pilot feasibility investigator-initiated, two-site, single-blind, randomized controlled trial of sensor-augmented pump therapy (SAPT) versus HCL therapy in type 1 diabetes pregnancies. Participants were enrolled in the first trimester and randomized at 14-18 weeks of gestation and used SAPT or HCL until 4-6 weeks postpartum. We compared continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) metrics, severe hypoglycemia (SH), diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA), adverse skin reactions, and pregnancy outcomes between groups. Results: Baseline characteristics were similar between groups (n = 11 HCL and n = 12 SAPT). There was no SH or DKA episode after randomization. Time spent <54 mg/dL did not differ between groups. Time spent <63 mg/dL decreased in both groups, significantly in the HCL group (3.5% [1.3% standard error] second trimester and 2.8% [1.3%] third trimester vs. 7.9% [1.3%] run-in phase, P < 0.05 for both). Mean sensor glucose was lower with SAPT compared to HCL therapy in the third trimester (119 [4] mg/dL SAPT vs. 132 [4] mg/dL HCL, P < 0.05). Third trimester time-in-range (TIR; 63-140 mg/dL) increased with SAPT (68.2% [3.1%] vs. 64.3% [3.1%] run-in phase, P < 0.05). Gestational health outcomes did not differ between groups. The HCL group used assistive techniques, such as fake carbohydrate boluses and exiting HCL overnight. Conclusions: CGM within group differences were seen for time <63 mg/dL favoring HCL therapy and TIR favoring SAPT (third trimester vs. baseline). Safety and adverse pregnancy outcomes were similar between groups.

Cost-Effectiveness of Closed-Loop Automated Insulin Delivery Using the Cambridge Hybrid Algorithm in Children and Adolescents with Type 1 Diabetes: Results from a Multicenter 6-Month Randomized Trial.

The main objective of this study is to evaluate the incremental cost-effectiveness (ICER) of the Cambridge hybrid closed-loop automated insulin delivery (AID) algorithm versus usual care for children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes (T1D). This multicenter, binational, parallel-controlled trial randomized 133 insulin pump using participants aged 6 to 18 years to either AID (n = 65) or usual care (n = 68) for 6 months. Both within-trial and lifetime cost-effectiveness were analyzed. Analysis focused on the treatment subgroup (n = 21) who received the much more reliable CamAPS FX hardware iteration and their contemporaneous control group (n = 24). Lifetime complications and costs were simulated via an updated Sheffield T1D policy model. Within-trial, both groups had indistinguishable and statistically unchanged health-related quality of life, and statistically similar hypoglycemia, severe hypoglycemia, and diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) event rates. Total health care utilization was higher in the treatment group. Both the overall treatment group and CamAPS FX subgroup exhibited improved HbA1C (-0.32%, 95% CI: -0.59 to -0.04; P = .02, and -1.05%, 95% CI: -1.43 to -0.67; P < .001, respectively). Modeling projected increased expected lifespan of 5.36 years and discounted quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) of 1.16 (U.K. tariffs) and 1.52 (U.S. tariffs) in the CamAPS FX subgroup. Estimated ICERs for the subgroup were £19 324/QALY (United Kingdom) and -$3917/QALY (United States). For subgroup patients already using continuous glucose monitors (CGM), ICERs were £10 096/QALY (United Kingdom) and -$33 616/QALY (United States). Probabilistic sensitivity analysis generated mean ICERs of £19 342/QALY (95% CI: £15 903/QALY to £22 929/QALY) (United Kingdom) and -$28 283/QALY (95% CI: -$59 607/QALY to $1858/QALY) (United States). For children and adolescents with T1D on insulin pump therapy, AID using the Cambridge algorithm appears cost-effective below a £20 000/QALY threshold (United Kingdom) and cost saving (United States).

Glucometrics and device satisfaction in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes using different treatment modalities: A multicenter real-world observational study

AimsTo analyze metabolic outcomes, diabetes impact and device satisfaction in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes in Italy who used different treatment modalities for diabetes care in a real-life context. MethodsIn this multicenter, nationwide, cross-sectional study, 1464 participants were enrolled at a routine visit. The following treatment modalities were considered MDI + SMBG; MDI + CGM; Sensor Augmented Pump Therapy; predictive management of low glucose; Hybrid Closed Loop (HCL); Advanced Hybrid Closed Loop (AHCL). Health related quality of life was evaluated by the Italian version of the Diabetes Impact and Device Satisfaction Scale (DIDS) questionnaire. ResultsPatients treated with AID systems were more likely to have HbA1c ≤ 6.5 %, higher percentage of time with glucose levels between 70 and 180 mg/dL, lower percentage of time with glucose levels above 180 mg/dL, higher device satisfaction, and reduced impact of diabetes. All the therapeutic modalities with respect to MDI + CGM, except for MDI + SMBG, contributed to increase the device satisfaction. HCL and AHCL respect to MDI + CGM were associated with lower diabetes impact. ConclusionReal-life use of automated insulin delivery systems is associated with reduced type 1 diabetes impact, increased device satisfaction, and achievement of glycemic goals.

Evaluation of hybrid closed-loop insulin delivery system in type 1 diabetes in real-world clinical practice: One-year observational study.

In 2016, the Food and Drug Administration approved the first hybrid closed-loop (HCL) insulin delivery system for adults with type 1 diabetes (T1D). There is limited information on the impact of using HCL systems on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in patients with T1D in real-world clinical practice. In this independent study, we evaluated glycemic parameters and PROs over one year of continuous use of Medtronic's 670G HCL in real-world clinical practice. To assess the effects of hybrid closed loop system on glycemic control and quality of life in adults with T1D. We evaluated 71 patients with T1D (mean age: 45.5 ± 12.1 years; 59% females; body weight: 83.8 ± 18.7 kg, body mass index: 28.7 ± 5.6 kg/m2, A1C: 7.6% ± 0.8%) who were treated with HCL at Joslin Clinic from 2017 to 2019. We measured A1C and percent of glucose time-in-range (%TIR) at baseline and 12 months. We measured percent time in auto mode (%TiAM) for the last two weeks preceding the final visit and assessed PROs through several validated quality-of-life surveys related to general health and diabetes management. At 12 mo, A1C decreased by 0.3% ± 0.1% (P = 0.001) and %TIR increased by 8.1% ± 2.5% (P = 0.002). The average %TiAM was only 64.3% ± 32.8% and was not associated with A1C, %TIR or PROs. PROs, provided at baseline and at the end of the study, showed that the physical functioning submodule of 36Item Short-Form Health Survey increased significantly by 22.9% (P < 0.001). Hypoglycemia fear survey/worry scale decreased significantly by 24.9% (P < 0.000); Problem Areas In Diabetes reduced significantly by -17.2% (P = 0.002). The emotional burden submodules of dietary diversity score reduced significantly by -44.7% (P = 0.001). Furthermore, analysis of Clarke questionnaire showed no increase in awareness of hypoglycemic episodes. WHO-5 showed no improvements in subject's wellbeing among participants after starting the 670G HCL system. Finally, analysis of Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index showed no difference in sleep quality, sleep latency, or duration of sleep from baseline to 12 mo. The use of HCL in real-world clinical practice for one year was associated with significant improvements in A1C, %TIR, physical functioning, hypoglycemia fear, emotional distress, and emotional burden related to diabetes management. However, these changes were not associated with time in auto mode.