What Makes the Difference? Predicting Glycemic Trajectories Following Initiation of Automated Insulin Delivery Systems in Youth With Type 1 Diabetes

IF 22.6 1区 医学 Q1 ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM
Diabetes Care Pub Date : 2026-07-16 DOI:10.2337/dc26-0634
Jayde Hooven-Davis, Christina M. Lalama, Sarah A. Syer, Scott D. Rothenberger, Ingrid M. Libman, Christine A. March
{"title":"What Makes the Difference? Predicting Glycemic Trajectories Following Initiation of Automated Insulin Delivery Systems in Youth With Type 1 Diabetes","authors":"Jayde Hooven-Davis, Christina M. Lalama, Sarah A. Syer, Scott D. Rothenberger, Ingrid M. Libman, Christine A. March","doi":"10.2337/dc26-0634","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"OBJECTIVE To identify glycemic trajectories following automated insulin delivery (AID) initiation in youth with type 1 diabetes and associated factors. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS We used group-based trajectory modeling to characterize groups for time in range (TIR) and hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), measured at baseline and at 3, 6, 12, and 18 months of AID use, in 713 youth (ages 6–18). Multinomial logistic regression estimated associations between clinical and sociodemographic predictors and glycemic trajectories. RESULTS Four TIR and three HbA1c trajectories emerged. All trajectories showed rapid improvement from baseline to 3 months, continued but gradual improvement between 3 and 6 months, followed by waning or sustained improvements after 6 months. Only a small subset (group 4, 12.7%) achieved TIR ≥70%, although more (43.3%) reached an HbA1c <7%. In the TIR model after adjusting for age, sex, type 1 diabetes duration, and prior treatment, participants with fewer user-initiated boluses (odds ratio [OR] 2.46; 95% CI 1.78, 3.39), higher insulin doses/kg (OR 1.54; 95% CI 1.25, 1.91), and fewer appointments (OR 2.69; 95% CI 1.21, 6.00) had higher odds of membership in the lowest TIR group (group 1) than in the highest TIR group (group 4). In the HbA1c model, lower baseline insulin doses/kg and more boluses were associated with membership in the most optimal group. CONCLUSIONS Distinct glycemic trajectories exist following AID initiation, with all groups experiencing rapid early improvements in TIR and HbA1c that plateau or decline over time. Baseline bolus frequency and insulin doses/kg remain key predictors, highlighting the persistent influence of preexisting behaviors and insulin needs on long-term outcomes.","PeriodicalId":11140,"journal":{"name":"Diabetes Care","volume":"44 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":22.6000,"publicationDate":"2026-07-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Diabetes Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2337/dc26-0634","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

OBJECTIVE To identify glycemic trajectories following automated insulin delivery (AID) initiation in youth with type 1 diabetes and associated factors. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS We used group-based trajectory modeling to characterize groups for time in range (TIR) and hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), measured at baseline and at 3, 6, 12, and 18 months of AID use, in 713 youth (ages 6–18). Multinomial logistic regression estimated associations between clinical and sociodemographic predictors and glycemic trajectories. RESULTS Four TIR and three HbA1c trajectories emerged. All trajectories showed rapid improvement from baseline to 3 months, continued but gradual improvement between 3 and 6 months, followed by waning or sustained improvements after 6 months. Only a small subset (group 4, 12.7%) achieved TIR ≥70%, although more (43.3%) reached an HbA1c <7%. In the TIR model after adjusting for age, sex, type 1 diabetes duration, and prior treatment, participants with fewer user-initiated boluses (odds ratio [OR] 2.46; 95% CI 1.78, 3.39), higher insulin doses/kg (OR 1.54; 95% CI 1.25, 1.91), and fewer appointments (OR 2.69; 95% CI 1.21, 6.00) had higher odds of membership in the lowest TIR group (group 1) than in the highest TIR group (group 4). In the HbA1c model, lower baseline insulin doses/kg and more boluses were associated with membership in the most optimal group. CONCLUSIONS Distinct glycemic trajectories exist following AID initiation, with all groups experiencing rapid early improvements in TIR and HbA1c that plateau or decline over time. Baseline bolus frequency and insulin doses/kg remain key predictors, highlighting the persistent influence of preexisting behaviors and insulin needs on long-term outcomes.
是什么造成了差异?预测1型糖尿病青年患者自动胰岛素输送系统启动后的血糖轨迹
目的探讨1型糖尿病青年患者自动胰岛素给药(AID)后的血糖变化轨迹及其相关因素。研究设计和方法我们使用基于组的轨迹模型来描述各组的范围时间(TIR)和血红蛋白A1c (HbA1c),在基线和AID使用3、6、12和18个月时测量,713名青少年(6 - 18岁)。多项逻辑回归估计临床和社会人口学预测因子与血糖轨迹之间的关联。结果出现了4条TIR轨迹和3条HbA1c轨迹。从基线到3个月,所有的轨迹都显示出快速的改善,在3到6个月之间持续但渐进的改善,随后在6个月后逐渐减弱或持续改善。只有一小部分患者(第4组,12.7%)达到TIR≥70%,尽管更多患者(43.3%)达到HbA1c≥7%。在调整了年龄、性别、1型糖尿病病程和既往治疗后的TIR模型中,使用较少的用户初始剂量(比值比[OR] 2.46; 95% CI 1.78, 3.39)、较高的胰岛素剂量/kg(比值比[OR] 1.54; 95% CI 1.25, 1.91)和较少的预约(比值比[OR] 2.69; 95% CI 1.21, 6.00)的参与者在最低TIR组(组1)中的加入几率高于最高TIR组(组4)。在HbA1c模型中,较低的基线胰岛素剂量/kg和更多的剂量与最优组的成员资格相关。结论:AID启动后存在不同的血糖轨迹,所有组的TIR和HbA1c都经历了快速的早期改善,随着时间的推移达到平台或下降。基线给药频率和胰岛素剂量/kg仍然是关键的预测指标,强调了既往行为和胰岛素需求对长期预后的持续影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Diabetes Care
Diabetes Care 医学-内分泌学与代谢
CiteScore
27.80
自引率
4.90%
发文量
449
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: The journal's overarching mission can be captured by the simple word "Care," reflecting its commitment to enhancing patient well-being. Diabetes Care aims to support better patient care by addressing the comprehensive needs of healthcare professionals dedicated to managing diabetes. Diabetes Care serves as a valuable resource for healthcare practitioners, aiming to advance knowledge, foster research, and improve diabetes management. The journal publishes original research across various categories, including Clinical Care, Education, Nutrition, Psychosocial Research, Epidemiology, Health Services Research, Emerging Treatments and Technologies, Pathophysiology, Complications, and Cardiovascular and Metabolic Risk. Additionally, Diabetes Care features ADA statements, consensus reports, review articles, letters to the editor, and health/medical news, appealing to a diverse audience of physicians, researchers, psychologists, educators, and other healthcare professionals.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书