Advanced Hybrid Closed Loop in Adult Population With Type 1 Diabetes: A Substudy From the ADAPT Randomized Controlled Trial in Users of Real-Time Continuous Glucose Monitoring.

IF 4.1 Q2 ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM
Tim van den Heuvel, Ralf Kolassa, Winfried Keuthage, Jens Kroeger, Roseline Ré, Simona de Portu, Linda Vorrink, John Shin, Javier Castañeda, Robert Vigersky, Ohad Cohen
{"title":"Advanced Hybrid Closed Loop in Adult Population With Type 1 Diabetes: A Substudy From the ADAPT Randomized Controlled Trial in Users of Real-Time Continuous Glucose Monitoring.","authors":"Tim van den Heuvel, Ralf Kolassa, Winfried Keuthage, Jens Kroeger, Roseline Ré, Simona de Portu, Linda Vorrink, John Shin, Javier Castañeda, Robert Vigersky, Ohad Cohen","doi":"10.1177/19322968231161320","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>This analysis reports the findings from a predefined exploratory cohort (cohort B) from the ADAPT (ADvanced Hybrid Closed Loop Study in Adult Population with Type 1 Diabetes) study. Adults with type 1 diabetes (T1D) with suboptimal glucose control were randomly allocated to an advanced hybrid closed-loop (AHCL) system or multiple daily injections of insulin (MDI) plus real-time continuous glucose monitoring (RT-CGM).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this prospective, multicenter, exploratory, open-label, randomized controlled trial, 13 participants using MDI + RT-CGM and with HbA1c ≥8.0% were randomized to switch to AHCL (n = 8) or continue with MDI + RT-CGM (n = 5) for six months. Prespecified endpoints included the between-group difference in mean change from baseline in HbA1c, CGM-derived measures of glycemic control, and safety.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The mean HbA1c level decreased by 1.70 percentage points in the AHCL group versus a 0.60 percentage point decrease in the MDI + RT-CGM group, with a model-based treatment effect of -1.08 percentage points (95% confidence interval [CI] = -2.17 to 0.00 percentage points; <i>P</i> = .0508) in favor of AHCL. The percentage of time spent with sensor glucose levels between 70 and 180 mg/dL in the study phase was 73.6% in the AHCL group and 46.4% in the MDI + RT-CGM group; model-based between-group difference of 28.8 percentage points (95% CI = 12.3 to 45.3 percentage points; <i>P</i> = .0035). No diabetic ketoacidosis or severe hypoglycemia occurred in either group.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In people with T1D with HbA1c ≥8.0%, the use of AHCL resulted in improved glycemic control relative to MDI + RT-CGM. The scale of improvement suggests that AHCL should be considered as an option for people not achieving good glycemic control on MDI + RT-CGM.</p>","PeriodicalId":15475,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Diabetes Science and Technology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11418449/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Diabetes Science and Technology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/19322968231161320","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/3/22 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: This analysis reports the findings from a predefined exploratory cohort (cohort B) from the ADAPT (ADvanced Hybrid Closed Loop Study in Adult Population with Type 1 Diabetes) study. Adults with type 1 diabetes (T1D) with suboptimal glucose control were randomly allocated to an advanced hybrid closed-loop (AHCL) system or multiple daily injections of insulin (MDI) plus real-time continuous glucose monitoring (RT-CGM).

Methods: In this prospective, multicenter, exploratory, open-label, randomized controlled trial, 13 participants using MDI + RT-CGM and with HbA1c ≥8.0% were randomized to switch to AHCL (n = 8) or continue with MDI + RT-CGM (n = 5) for six months. Prespecified endpoints included the between-group difference in mean change from baseline in HbA1c, CGM-derived measures of glycemic control, and safety.

Results: The mean HbA1c level decreased by 1.70 percentage points in the AHCL group versus a 0.60 percentage point decrease in the MDI + RT-CGM group, with a model-based treatment effect of -1.08 percentage points (95% confidence interval [CI] = -2.17 to 0.00 percentage points; P = .0508) in favor of AHCL. The percentage of time spent with sensor glucose levels between 70 and 180 mg/dL in the study phase was 73.6% in the AHCL group and 46.4% in the MDI + RT-CGM group; model-based between-group difference of 28.8 percentage points (95% CI = 12.3 to 45.3 percentage points; P = .0035). No diabetic ketoacidosis or severe hypoglycemia occurred in either group.

Conclusions: In people with T1D with HbA1c ≥8.0%, the use of AHCL resulted in improved glycemic control relative to MDI + RT-CGM. The scale of improvement suggests that AHCL should be considered as an option for people not achieving good glycemic control on MDI + RT-CGM.

1型糖尿病成年人群的高级混合闭环:实时连续血糖监测用户ADAPT随机对照试验的子研究。
背景:本分析报告了ADAPT(1型糖尿病成年人群的高级混合闭环研究)研究的预定义探索性队列(队列B)的发现。将血糖控制不理想的1型糖尿病(T1D)成人随机分配到高级混合闭环(AHCL)系统或每天多次注射胰岛素(MDI)加实时连续血糖监测(RT-CGM)。方法:在这项前瞻性、多中心、探索性、开放标签、随机对照试验中,13名使用MDI+RT-CGM且HbA1c≥8.0%的参与者被随机分配为AHCL(n=8)或继续使用MDI+TT-CGM(n=5)6个月。预先指定的终点包括HbA1c与基线平均变化的组间差异、CGM衍生的血糖控制指标和安全性。结果:AHCL组的平均HbA1c水平下降了1.70个百分点,而MDI+RT-CGM组下降了0.60个百分点,基于模型的治疗效果为-1.08个百分点(95%置信区间[CI]=-2.17至0.00个百分点;P=.0508),有利于AHCL。传感器葡萄糖水平在70到180之间所花费的时间百分比 研究阶段AHCL组为73.6%,MDI+RT-CGM组为46.4%;基于模型的组间差异为28.8个百分点(95%CI=12.3至45.3 百分点;P=0.035)。两组均未发生糖尿病酮症酸中毒或严重低血糖。结论:在HbA1c≥8.0%的T1D患者中,与MDI+RT-CGM相比,AHCL的使用可改善血糖控制。改善程度表明,AHCL应被视为MDI+RT-CGM血糖控制不佳的患者的一种选择。
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
Journal of Diabetes Science and Technology
Journal of Diabetes Science and Technology Medicine-Internal Medicine
CiteScore
7.50
自引率
12.00%
发文量
148
期刊介绍: The Journal of Diabetes Science and Technology (JDST) is a bi-monthly, peer-reviewed scientific journal published by the Diabetes Technology Society. JDST covers scientific and clinical aspects of diabetes technology including glucose monitoring, insulin and metabolic peptide delivery, the artificial pancreas, digital health, precision medicine, social media, cybersecurity, software for modeling, physiologic monitoring, technology for managing obesity, and diagnostic tests of glycation. The journal also covers the development and use of mobile applications and wireless communication, as well as bioengineered tools such as MEMS, new biomaterials, and nanotechnology to develop new sensors. Articles in JDST cover both basic research and clinical applications of technologies being developed to help people with diabetes.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信