Search

Objective: Very young children with type 1 diabetes often struggle to achieve glycemic targets, putting them at risk for long-term complications and creating an immense management burden for caregivers. We conducted the first evaluation of the Omnipod 5 Automated Insulin Delivery System in this population.Research Design and Methods: A total of 80 children aged 2.0-5.9 years used the investigational system in a single-arm study for 13 weeks following 14 days of baseline data collection with their usual therapy.Results: There were no episodes of severe hypoglycemia or diabetic ketoacidosis. By study end, HbA1c decreased by 0.55% (6.0 mmol/mol) (P < 0.0001). Time with sensor glucose levels in target range 70-180 mg/dL increased by 10.9%, or 2.6 h/day (P < 0.0001), while time with levels <70 mg/dL declined by median 0.27% (P = 0.0204).Conclusions: Use of the automated insulin delivery system was safe, and participants experienced improved glycemic measures and reduced hypoglycemia during the study phase compared with baseline. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To further evaluate the safety and efficacy of the Control-IQ closed-loop control (CLC) system in children with type 1 diabetes.Research Design and Methods: After a 16-week randomized clinical trial (RCT) comparing CLC with sensor-augmented pump (SAP) therapy in 101 children 6-13 years old with type 1 diabetes, 22 participants in the SAP group initiated use of the CLC system (referred to as SAP-CLC cohort), and 78 participants in the CLC group continued use of CLC (CLC-CLC cohort) for 12 weeks.Results: In the SAP-CLC cohort, mean percentage of time in range 70-180 mg/dL (TIR) increased from 55 ± 13% using SAP during the RCT to 65 ± 10% using CLC (P < 0.001), with 36% of the cohort achieving TIR >70% plus time <54 mg/dL <1% compared with 14% when using SAP (P = 0.03). Substantial improvement in TIR was seen after the 1st day of CLC. Time <70 mg/dL decreased from 1.80% to 1.34% (P < 0.001). In the CLC-CLC cohort, mean TIR increased from 53 ± 17% prerandomization to 67 ± 10% during the RCT and remained reasonably stable at 66 ± 10% through the 12 weeks post-RCT. No episodes of diabetic ketoacidosis or severe hypoglycemia occurred in either cohort.Conclusions: This further evaluation of the Control-IQ CLC system supports the findings of the preceding RCT that use of a closed-loop system can safely improve glycemic control in children 6-13 years old with type 1 diabetes from the 1st day of use and demonstrates that these improvements can be sustained through 28 weeks of use. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: We have shown that "euglycemic DKA" in patients with type 1 diabetes receiving a sodium-glucose cotransporter 2-inhibitor (SGLT2i) is due to normal increases in rates of ketogenesis but blunted increases in plasma glucose levels. In this analysis, we assessed whether rescue treatment of early ketoacidosis with insulin is altered by SGLT2i use.Research Design and Methods: Participants received 0.2 U/kg of aspart insulin after two 6-h interruptions of basal insulin that increased beta-hydroxybutyrate (BHB) by 1.2 ± 0.7 mmol/L before and by 1.5 ± 0.2 mmol/L during canagliflozin treatment. BHB and free fatty acid (FFA) were monitored every 30 min for 120 min after receiving a 0.2 U/kg subcutaneous injection of aspart insulin.Results: Ten adults (23 ± 5 years) were studied. During the 120 min after rescue therapy with insulin, the reductions in BHB and FFA were nearly identical between the pre- and during canagliflozin treatment studies, respectively (-1.27 ± 0.76 and -1.13 ± 0.69, P = 0.671 for BHB and -0.50 ± 0.35 vs. -0.41 ± 0.41, P = 0.603 for FFA).Conclusion: These data indicate that turning ketogenesis off, as well as on, does not appear to be affected by SGLT2i use. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: This study evaluated a new insulin delivery system designed to reduce insulin delivery when trends in continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) glucose concentrations predict future hypoglycemia.Research Design and Methods: Individuals with type 1 diabetes (n = 103, age 6-72 years, mean HbA1c 7.3% [56 mmol/mol]) participated in a 6-week randomized crossover trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of a Tandem Diabetes Care t:slim X2 pump with Basal-IQ integrated with a Dexcom G5 sensor and a predictive low-glucose suspend algorithm (PLGS) compared with sensor-augmented pump (SAP) therapy. The primary outcome was CGM-measured time <70 mg/dL.Results: Both study periods were completed by 99% of participants; median CGM usage exceeded 90% in both arms. Median time <70 mg/dL was reduced from 3.6% at baseline to 2.6% during the 3-week period in the PLGS arm compared with 3.2% in the SAP arm (difference [PLGS - SAP] = -0.8%, 95% CI -1.1 to -0.5, P < 0.001). The corresponding mean values were 4.4%, 3.1%, and 4.5%, respectively, represent-ing a 31% reduction in the time <70 mg/dL with PLGS. There was no increase in mean glucose concentration (159 vs. 159 mg/dL, P = 0.40) or percentage of time spent >180 mg/dL (32% vs. 33%, P = 0.12). One severe hypoglycemic event occurred in the SAP arm and none in the PLGS arm. Mean pump suspension time was 104 min/day.Conclusions: The Tandem Diabetes Care Basal-IQ PLGS system significantly reduced hypoglycemia without rebound hyperglycemia, indicating that the system can benefit adults and youth with type 1 diabetes in improving glycemic control. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Automated insulin delivery systems, utilizing a control algorithm to dose insulin based upon subcutaneous continuous glucose sensor values and insulin pump therapy, will soon be available for commercial use. The objective of this study was to determine the preliminary safety and efficacy of initialization parameters with the Medtronic hybrid closed-loop controller by comparing percentage of time in range, 70-180 mg/ dL (3.9-10 mmol/L), mean glucose values, as well as percentage of time above and below target range between sensor-augmented pump therapy and hybrid closed-loop, in adults and adolescents with type 1 diabetes. Methods We studied an initial cohort of 9 adults followed by a second cohort of 15 adolescents, using the Medtronic hybrid closed-loop system with the proportional-integral-derivative with insulin feed-back ( PID-IFB) algorithm. Hybrid closed-loop was tested in supervised hotel-based studies over 4-5 days. Results The overall mean percentage of time in range (70-180 mg/ dL, 3.9-10 mmol/L) during hybrid closed-loop was 71.8% in the adult cohort and 69.8% in the adolescent cohort. The overall percentage of time spent under 70 mg/ dL (3.9 mmol/L) was 2.0% in the adult cohort and 2.5% in the adolescent cohort. Mean glucose values were 152 mg/ dL (8.4 mmol/L) in the adult cohort and 153 mg/ dL (8.5 mmol/L) in the adolescent cohort. Conclusions Closed-loop control using the Medtronic hybrid closed-loop system enables adaptive, real-time basal rate modulation. Initializing hybrid closed-loop in clinical practice will involve individualizing initiation parameters to optimize overall glucose control. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Closed-loop (CL) insulin delivery effectively maintains glucose overnight but struggles when challenged with meals. Use of single-day, 30-μg/meal pramlintide lowers meal excursions during CL. We sought to further elucidate the potential benefits of adjunctive agents after 3-4 weeks of outpatient dose titration.Research Design and Methods: Two CL studies were conducted: one evaluating adjunctive pramlintide and the other liraglutide. Ten subjects (age 16-23 years; A1C 7.2 ± 0.6% [55 ± 6.6 mmol/mol]) completed two 24-h sessions: one on CL alone and one on CL plus 60-μg pramlintide (CL + P), after a 3-4-week outpatient dose escalation. Eleven subjects (age 18-27 years; A1C 7.5 ± 0.9% [58 ± 9.8 mmol/mol]) were studied before and after treatment with 1.8 mg liraglutide (CL + L) after a similar 3-4-week dose escalation period. Timing and content of meals during CL were identical within experiments; meals were not announced.Results: Pramlintide delayed the time to peak plasma glucose (PG) excursion (CL 1.6 ± 0.5 h vs. CL + P 2.6 ± 0.9 h, P < 0.001) with concomitant blunting of peak postprandial increments in PG (P < 0.0001) and reductions in postmeal incremental PG area under the curve (AUC) (P = 0.0002). CL + L also led to reductions in PG excursions (P = 0.05) and incremental PG AUC (P = 0.004), with a 28% reduction in prandial insulin delivery. Outpatient liraglutide therapy led to a weight loss of 3.2 ± 1.8 kg, with a 26% reduction in total daily insulin dose.Conclusions: Adjunctive pramlintide and liraglutide treatment mitigated postprandial hyperglycemia during CL control; liraglutide demonstrated the additional benefit of weight loss in an insulin-sparing manner. Further investigations of these and other adjunctive agents in long-term outpatient CL studies are needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Youth newly diagnosed with T1D, and their families, require intensive education on management of this chronic condition. Traditionally, our center has conducted many hours of in-person training during a hospital admission. We studied family perceptions of our education method in an effort to elucidate strategies to augment education in the pandemic environment, where provider time in the room and visitation rules may limit face to face encounters. Eligible patients were ≤18y and diagnosed with T1D between 8/2019-11/2020. A request to complete an online questionnaire was sent to 66 patients, with 21% responding, to date. A 5-point Likert scale assessed attitudes towards education. Fourteen families completed the survey. Mean age at diagnosis was 9.5 ± 4.2 y with diabetes duration ranging from 2-57 weeks. Most (n=12) have been followed out to 6-months post-diagnosis with 17% using pumps and 92% using sensors. Almost all participants reported being satisfied with new onset education (Table). Current strategies utilized to educate families of youth newly diagnosed with T1D are well received by primary caregivers. Additional strategies are needed in educating families on sick day management and on how to train secondary caregivers. Based on these results we have developed video content as an adjunct to training and are evaluating the impact of this strategy on family perceptions. Disclosure: G. Betancur: None. M. N. Brei: None. K. Weyman: None. L. R. Carria: None. K. R. Stephenson: None. M. A. Van name: None. J. Sherr: Advisory Panel; Self; Cecelia Health, Insulet Corporation, Medtronic, Consultant; Self; Insulet Corporation, Lexicon Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Lilly Diabetes, Medtronic, Research Support; Self; Dexcom, Inc., Insulet Corporation, Medtronic, Speaker's Bureau; Self; Lilly Diabetes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: A smartphone-based automated insulin delivery (AID) controller device can facilitate use of interoperable components and acceptance in adolescents and children., Methods: Pediatric participants (N = 20, 8F) with type 1 diabetes were enrolled in three sequential age-based cohorts: adolescents (12-<18 years, n = 8, 5F), school-age (8-<12 years, n = 7, 2F), and young children (2-<8 years, n = 5, 1F). Participants used the interoperable artificial pancreas system (iAPS) and zone model predictive control (MPC) on an unlocked smartphone for 48 hours, consumed unrestricted meals of their choice, and engaged in various unannounced exercises. Primary outcomes and stopping criteria were defined using fingerstick blood glucose (BG) data; secondary outcomes compared continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) data with preceding sensor augmented pump (SAP) therapy., Results: During AID, there was no more than one BG <50 mg/dL except in one young child participant; no instance of more than two episodes of BG ≥300 mg/dL lasting longer than 2 hours; and no adverse events. Despite large meals (total of 404.9 grams of carbs) and unannounced exercise (total of 182 minutes), overall CGM percent time in range (TIR) of 70 to 180 mg/dL during AID was statistically similar to SAP (63.5% vs 57.3%, respectively, P = .145). Overnight glucose standard deviation was 43 mg/dL (vs SAP 57.9 mg/dL, P = .009) and coefficient of variation was 25.7% (vs SAP 34.9%, P < .001). The percent time in closed-loop mode and connected to the CGM was 92.7% and 99.6%, respectively. Surveys indicated that participants and parents/guardians were satisfied with the system., Conclusions: The smartphone-based AID was feasible and safe in sequentially younger cohorts of adolescents and children., Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT04255381 (https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04255381)., Competing Interests: Declaration of Conflicting InterestsThe author(s) declared the following potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: S.A.W. has received honoraria for serving as a speaker for Abbott and Dexcom, has served as consultant for Zealand, and receives grant support from NIH and Abbott. L.M.N. receives grant support from the NIH and product support from Dexcom. L.M.L. participates in consulting and on advisory boards for Medtronic, Insulet, Dexcom, Roche, Janssen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, Provention, and Dompe, and receives grant support from NIH, JDRF, and Helmsley Charitable Trust. F.J.D. reports equity, licensed IP and is a member of the Scientific Advisory Board of Mode AGC. E.D. reports receiving grants from JDRF, NIH, and Helmsley Charitable Trust, personal fees from Roche and Eli Lilly, patents on artificial pancreas technology, and product support from Dexcom, Insulet, Tandem, and Roche. E.D. is currently an employee and shareholder of Eli Lilly and Company. The work presented in this manuscript was performed as part of his academic appointment and is independent of his employment with Eli Lilly and Company. All other authors report no conflict of interest related to this article.

Background: A closed-loop system of insulin delivery (also called an artificial pancreas) may improve glycemic outcomes in children with type 1 diabetes., Methods: In a 16-week, multicenter, randomized, open-label, parallel-group trial, we assigned, in a 3:1 ratio, children 6 to 13 years of age who had type 1 diabetes to receive treatment with the use of either a closed-loop system of insulin delivery (closed-loop group) or a sensor-augmented insulin pump (control group). The primary outcome was the percentage of time that the glucose level was in the target range of 70 to 180 mg per deciliter, as measured by continuous glucose monitoring., Results: A total of 101 children underwent randomization (78 to the closed-loop group and 23 to the control group); the glycated hemoglobin levels at baseline ranged from 5.7 to 10.1%. The mean (±SD) percentage of time that the glucose level was in the target range of 70 to 180 mg per deciliter increased from 53±17% at baseline to 67±10% (the mean over 16 weeks of treatment) in the closed-loop group and from 51±16% to 55±13% in the control group (mean adjusted difference, 11 percentage points [equivalent to 2.6 hours per day]; 95% confidence interval, 7 to 14; P<0.001). In both groups, the median percentage of time that the glucose level was below 70 mg per deciliter was low (1.6% in the closed-loop group and 1.8% in the control group). In the closed-loop group, the median percentage of time that the system was in the closed-loop mode was 93% (interquartile range, 91 to 95). No episodes of diabetic ketoacidosis or severe hypoglycemia occurred in either group., Conclusions: In this 16-week trial involving children with type 1 diabetes, the glucose level was in the target range for a greater percentage of time with the use of a closed-loop system than with the use of a sensor-augmented insulin pump. (Funded by Tandem Diabetes Care and the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03844789.)., (Copyright © 2020 Massachusetts Medical Society.)

Context: Postprandial hyperglycemia remains a challenge in type 1 diabetes (T1D) due, in part, to dysregulated increases in plasma glucagon levels after meals., Objective: This study was undertaken to examine whether 3 to 4 weeks of therapy with pramlintide or liraglutide might help to blunt postprandial hyperglycemia in T1D by suppressing plasma glucagon responses to mixed-meal feedings., Design: Two parallel studies were conducted in which participants underwent mixed-meal tolerance tests (MMTTs) without premeal bolus insulin administration before and after 3 to 4 weeks of treatment with either pramlintide (8 participants aged 20 ± 3 years, hemoglobin A1c 6.9 ± 0.5%) or liraglutide (10 participants aged 22 ± 3 years, hemoglobin A1c 7.6 ± 0.9%)., Results: Compared with pretreatment responses to the MMTT, treatment with pramlintide reduced the peak increment in glucagon from 32 ± 16 to 23 ± 12 pg/mL (P < 0.02). In addition, the incremental area under the plasma glucagon curve from 0 to 120 minutes dropped from 1988 ± 590 to 737 ± 577 pg/mL/min (P < 0.001), which was accompanied by a similar reduction in the meal-stimulated increase in the plasma glucose curve from 11,963 ± 1424 mg/dL/min pretreatment vs 2493 ± 1854 mg/dL/min after treatment (P < 0.01). In contrast, treatment with liraglutide had no effect on plasma glucagon and glucose responses during the MMTT., Conclusions: Adjunctive treatment with pramlintide may provide an effective means to blunt postmeal hyperglycemia in T1D by suppressing dysregulated plasma glucagon responses. In contrast, plasma glucose and glucagon responses were unchanged after 3 to 4 weeks of treatment with liraglutide.

Background: Closed-loop (CL) insulin delivery systems utilizing proportional-integral-derivative (PID) controllers have demonstrated susceptibility to late postprandial hypoglycemia because of delays between insulin delivery and blood glucose (BG) response. An insulin feedback (IFB) modification to the PID algorithm has been introduced to mitigate this risk. We examined the effect of IFB on CL BG control., Methods: Using the Medtronic ePID CL system, four subjects were studied for 24 h on PID control and 24 h during a separate admission with the IFB modification (PID + IFB). Target glucose was 120 mg/dl; meals were served at 8:00 AM, 1:00 PM, and 6:00 PM and were identical for both admissions. No premeal manual boluses were given. Reference BG excursions, defined as incremental glucose rise from premeal to peak, and postprandial BG area under the curve (AUC; 0-5 h) were compared. Results are reported as mean ± standard deviation., Results: The PID + IFB control resulted in higher mean BG levels compared with PID alone (153 ± 54 versus 133 ± 56 mg/dl; p < .0001). Postmeal BG excursions (114 ± 28 versus 114 ± 47 mg/dl) and AUCs (285 ± 102 versus 255 ± 129 mg/dl/h) were similar under both conditions. Total insulin delivery averaged 57 ± 20 U with PID versus 45 ± 13 U with PID + IFB (p = .18). Notably, eight hypoglycemic events (BG < 60 mg/dl) occurred during PID control versus none during PID + IFB., Conclusions: Addition of IFB to the PID controller markedly reduced the occurrence of hypoglycemia without increasing meal-related glucose excursions. Higher average BG levels may be attributable to differences in the determination of system gain (Kp) in this study. The prevention of postprandial hypoglycemia suggests that the PID + IFB algorithm may allow for lower target glucose selection and improved overall glycemic control., (© 2012 Diabetes Technology Society.)