Affiliation:
1. 3rd Department of Internal Medicine, 1st Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic
2. Department of Paediatrics, 2nd Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic
3. Grunberger Diabetes Institute, Bloomfield Hills, MI; and Department of Internal Medicine and Center for Molecular Medicine & Genetics, Wayne State University School of Medicine, Detroit, MI
4. Department of Internal Medicine, William Beaumont School of Medicine, Oakland University, Rochester, MI
5. 1st Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic
6. CGParkin Communications, Inc., Henderson, NV
Abstract
OBJECTIVE
This study assessed the clinical impact of four treatment strategies in adults with type 1 diabetes (T1D): real-time continuous glucose monitoring (rtCGM) with multiple daily insulin injections (rtCGM+MDI), rtCGM with continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (rtCGM+CSII), self-monitoring of blood glucose with MDI (SMBG+MDI), and SMBG with CSII (SMBG+CSII).
RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS
This 3-year, nonrandomized, prospective, real-world, clinical trial followed 94 participants with T1D (rtCGM+MDI, n = 22; rtCGM+CSII, n = 26; SMBG+MDI, n = 21; SMBG+CSII, n = 25). The main end points were changes in A1C, time in range (70–180 mg/dL [3.9–10 mmol/L]), time below range (<70 mg/dL [<3.9 mmol/L]), glycemic variability, and incidence of hypoglycemia.
RESULTS
At 3 years, the rtCGM groups (rtCGM+MDI and rtCGM+CSII) had significantly lower A1C (7.0% [53 mmol/mol], P = 0.0002, and 6.9% [52 mmol/mol], P < 0.0001, respectively), compared with the SMBG+CSII and SMBG+MDI groups (7.7% [61 mmol/mol], P = 0.3574, and 8.0% [64 mmol/mol], P = 1.000, respectively), with no significant difference between the rtCGM groups. Significant improvements in percentage of time in range were observed in the rtCGM subgroups (rtCGM+MDI, 48.7–69.0%, P < 0.0001; and rtCGM+CSII, 50.9–72.3%, P < 0.0001) and in the SMBG+CSII group (50.6–57.8%, P = 0.0114). Significant reductions in time below range were found only in the rtCGM subgroups (rtCGM+MDI, 9.4–5.5%, P = 0.0387; and rtCGM+CSII, 9.0–5.3%, P = 0.0235). Seven severe hypoglycemia episodes occurred: SMBG groups, n = 5; sensor-augmented insulin regimen groups, n = 2.
CONCLUSIONS
rtCGM was superior to SMBG in reducing A1C, hypoglycemia, and other end points in individuals with T1D regardless of their insulin delivery method. rtCGM+MDI can be considered an equivalent but lower-cost alternative to sensor-augmented insulin pump therapy and superior to treatment with SMBG+MDI or SMBG+CSII therapy.
Publisher
American Diabetes Association
Subject
Advanced and Specialized Nursing,Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism,Internal Medicine
Reference27 articles.
1. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence
. Type 1 diabetes in adults: diagnosis and management [Internet], 2015. Available from https://www.niceorguk/guidance/ng17. Accessed 2 February 2018
2. 6. Glycemic targets: Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes—2018;American Diabetes Association;Diabetes Care,2018
3. Practical implementation, education and interpretation guidelines for continuous glucose monitoring: a French position statement;Borot,2018
4. International consensus on use of continuous glucose monitoring;Danne;Diabetes Care,2017
5. Continuous glucose monitoring: a consensus conference of the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists and American College of Endocrinology;Fonseca;Endocr Pract,2016