Search

“Relative hypoglycemia” is an often-overlooked complication of diabetes characterized by an increase in the glycemic threshold for detecting and responding to hypoglycemia. The clinical relevance of this problem is linked to growing evidence that among patients with critical illness, higher blood glucose in the intensive care unit is associated with higher mortality among patients without diabetes but lower mortality in patients with preexisting diabetes and an elevated prehospitalization HbA1c. Although additional studies are needed, the cardiovascular stress associated with hypoglycemia perception, which can occur at normal or even elevated glucose levels in patients with diabetes, offers a plausible explanation for this difference in outcomes. Little is known, however, regarding how hypoglycemia is normally detected by the brain, much less how relative hypoglycemia develops in patients with diabetes. In this article, we explore the role in hypoglycemia detection played by glucose-responsive sensory neurons supplying peripheral vascular beds and/or circumventricular organs. These observations support a model wherein relative hypoglycemia results from diabetes-associated impairment of this neuronal glucose-sensing process. By raising the glycemic threshold for hypoglycemia perception, this impairment may contribute to the increased mortality risk associated with standard glycemic management of critically ill patients with diabetes.

The greatest change in the treatment of people living with type 1 diabetes in the last decade has been the explosion of technology assisting in all aspects of diabetes therapy, from glucose monitoring to insulin delivery and decision making. Through screening of 835 peer-reviewed articles followed by systematic review of 70 of them (focusing on randomized trials and extension studies with ≥50 participants from the past 10 years), we conclude that novel technologies, ranging from continuous glucose monitoring systems, insulin pumps and decision support tools to the most advanced hybrid closed loop systems, improve important measures like HbA1c, time in range, and glycemic variability, while reducing hypoglycemia risk. Several studies included person-reported outcomes, allowing assessment of the burden or benefit of the technology in the lives of those with type 1 diabetes, demonstrating positive results or, at a minimum, no increase in self-care burden compared with standard care. Important limitations of the trials to date are their small size, the scarcity of pre-planned or powered analyses in sub-populations such as children, racial/ethnic minorities, people with advanced complications, and variations in baseline glycemic levels. In addition, confounders including education with device initiation, concomitant behavioral modifications, and frequent contact with the healthcare team are rarely described in enough detail to assess their impact. Our review highlights the potential of technology in the treatment of people living with type 1 diabetes and provides suggestions for optimization of outcomes and areas of further study for precision medicine-directed technology use in type 1 diabetes.Preface (Lay Abstract)We reviewed literature of the last decade to evaluate the impact of technology on the treatment of people living with type 1 diabetes. Screening of 835 articles and in-depth review of 70 showed that novel technologies, ranging from continuous glucose monitoring systems, insulin pumps and decision support tools to the most advanced hybrid closed loop systems, improve important measures like HbA1c and time in range, while reducing hypoglycemia risk. Of importance, several studies showed a positive impact on person-reported outcomes, like quality of life or, at a minimum, no increase in self-care burden compared with standard care.

BackgroundAdult patients with diabetes or newly recognized hyperglycemia account for over 30% of noncritically ill hospitalized patients. These patients are at increased risk for adverse clinical outcomes in the absence of defined approaches to glycemic management.ObjectiveTo review and update the 2012 Management of Hyperglycemia in Hospitalized Patients in Non-Critical Care Settings: An Endocrine Society Clinical Practice Guideline and to address emerging areas specific to the target population of noncritically ill hospitalized patients with diabetes or newly recognized or stress-induced hyperglycemia.MethodsA multidisciplinary panel of clinician experts, together with a patient representative and experts in systematic reviews and guideline development, identified and prioritized 10 clinical questions related to inpatient management of patients with diabetes and/or hyperglycemia. The systematic reviews queried electronic databases for studies relevant to the selected questions. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology was used to assess the certainty of evidence and make recommendations.ResultsThe panel agreed on 10 frequently encountered areas specific to glycemic management in the hospital for which 15 recommendations were made. The guideline includes conditional recommendations for hospital use of emerging diabetes technologies including continuous glucose monitoring and insulin pump therapy; insulin regimens for prandial insulin dosing, glucocorticoid, and enteral nutrition–associated hyperglycemia; and use of noninsulin therapies. Recommendations were also made for issues relating to preoperative glycemic measures, appropriate use of correctional insulin, and diabetes self-management education in the hospital. A conditional recommendation was made against preoperative use of caloric beverages in patients with diabetes.ConclusionThe recommendations are based on the consideration of important outcomes, practicality, feasibility, and patient values and preferences. These recommendations can be used to inform system improvement and clinical practice for this frequently encountered inpatient population.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate glycemic outcomes in the Wireless Innovation for Seniors with Diabetes Mellitus (WISDM) randomized clinical trial (RCT) participants during an observational extension phase. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: WISDM RCT was a 26-week RCT comparing continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) with blood glucose monitoring (BGM) in 203 adults aged ≥60 years with type 1 diabetes. Of the 198 participants who completed the RCT, 100 (98%) CGM group participants continued CGM (CGM-CGM cohort) and 94 (98%) BGM group participants initiated CGM (BGM-CGM cohort) for an additional 26 weeks. RESULTS: CGM was used a median of >90% of the time at 52 weeks in both cohorts. In the CGM-CGM cohort, median time

OBJECTIVE Examine the utility of suicide-risk items embedded within depression screeners for identifying the presence of suicide risk in adolescents and young adults (AYA) with type 1 diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS Sensitivity, specificity, and predictive value of self-report of suicide risk on the Patient Health Questionniaire-9 (PHQ-9) were compared with the pediatric psychologist–administered Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale (C-SSRS) as the reference standard for AYA with type 1 diabetes seen in a multidisciplinary AYA Diabetes Program clinic. RESULTS Of 133 participants, 9.8% and 11.3% reported suicide risk on the PHQ-9 and C-SSRS, respectively. Sensitivity of the PHQ-9 risk item was 53.3% (95% CI 27.4%–77.7%), specificity was 95.7% (95% CI 89.9%–98.4%), positive predictive value was 61.5% (95% CI 32.3%–84.9%), and negative predictive value was 94.2% (95% CI 87.9–97.4%). CONCLUSIONS Depression screeners appear to under-identify AYA with type 1 diabetes who may otherwise be at risk for suicide.

To determine the associations of relative hypoglycemia and hemoglobin A1c-adjusted time in blood glucose (BG) band (HA-TIB) with mortality in critically ill patients.Retrospective cohort investigation.University-affiliated adult medical-surgical ICU.Three thousand six hundred fifty-five patients with at least four BG tests and hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) level admitted between September 14, 2014, and November 30, 2019.None.Patients were stratified for HbA1c bands of6.5%; 6.5-7.9%; greater than or equal to 8.0% with optimal affiliated glucose target ranges of 70-140, 140-180, and 180-250 mg/dL, respectively. HA-TIB, a new glycemic metric, defined the HbA1c-adjusted time in band. Relative hypoglycemia was defined as BG 70-110 mg/dL for patients with HbA1c ≥ 8.0%. Further stratification included diabetes status-no diabetes (NO-DM, n = 2,616) and preadmission treatment with or without insulin (DM-INS, n = 352; DM-No-INS, n = 687, respectively). Severity-adjusted mortality was calculated as the observed:expected mortality ratio (O:EMR), using the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation IV prediction of mortality. Among NO-DM, mortality and O:EMR, decreased with higher TIB 70-140 mg/dL ( p0.0001) and were lowest with TIB 90-100%. O:EMR was lower for HA-TIB greater than or equal to 50% than less than 50% and among all DM-No-INS but for DM-INS only those with HbA1 greater than or equal to 8.0%.Among all patients with hba1c greater than or equal to 8.0% And no bg less than 70 mg/dl, mortality was 18.0% For patients with relative hypoglycemia (bg, 70-110 mg/dl) ( p0.0001) And was 0.0%, 12.9%, 13.0%, And 34.8% For patients with 0, 0.1-2.9, 3.0-11.9, And greater than or equal to 12.0 Hours of relative hypoglycemia ( p0.0001).These findings have considerable bearing on interpretation of previous trials of intensive insulin therapy in the critically ill. Moreover, they suggest that BG values in the 70-110 range may be deleterious for patients with HbA1c greater than or equal to 8.0% and that the appropriate target for BG should be individualized to HbA1c levels. These conclusions need to be tested in randomized trials.

HbA1c is the most used parameter to assess glycaemic control. However, evidence suggests that the concept of hyperglycaemia has profoundly changed and that different facets of hyperglycaemia must be considered. A modern approach to glycaemic control should focus not only on reaching and maintaining optimal HbA1c concentrations as early as possible, but to also do so by reducing postprandial hyperglycaemia, glycaemic variability, and to extend as much as possible the time in range in near-normoglycaemia. These goals should be achieved while avoiding hypoglycaemia, which, should it occur, should be reverted to normoglycaemia. Modern technology, such as intermittently scanned glucose monitoring and continuous glucose monitoring, together with new drug therapies (eg, ultra-fast insulins, SGLT2 inhibitors, and GLP-1 receptor agonists), could help to change the landscape of glycaemia management based on HbA1c in favour of a more holistic approach that considers all the different aspects of this commonly oversimplified pathophysiological feature of diabetes.

The American Diabetes Association (ADA) and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes (EASD) convened a writing group to develop a consensus statement on the management of type 1 diabetes in adults. The writing group has considered the rapid development of new treatments and technologies and addressed the following topics: diagnosis, aims of management, schedule of care, diabetes self-management education and support, glucose monitoring, insulin therapy, hypoglycaemia, behavioural considerations, psychosocial care, diabetic ketoacidosis, pancreas and islet transplantation, adjunctive therapies, special populations, inpatient management and future perspectives. Although we discuss the schedule for follow-up examinations and testing, we have not included the evaluation and treatment of the chronic microvascular and macrovascular complications of diabetes as these are well-reviewed and discussed elsewhere. The writing group was aware of both national and international guidance on type 1 diabetes and did not seek to replicate this but rather aimed to highlight the major areas that healthcare professionals should consider when managing adults with type 1 diabetes. Though evidence-based where possible, the recommendations in the report represent the consensus opinion of the authors. [Figure not available: see fulltext.]

OBJECTIVE Advances in diabetes technology have transformed the treatment paradigm for type 1 diabetes, yet the burden of disease is significant. We report on a pivotal safety study of the first tubeless, on-body automated insulin delivery system with customizable glycemic targets. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS This single-arm, multicenter, prospective study enrolled 112 children (age 6–13.9 years) and 129 adults (age 14–70 years). A 2-week standard therapy phase (usual insulin regimen) was followed by 3 months of automated insulin delivery. Primary safety outcomes were incidence of severe hypoglycemia and diabetic ketoacidosis. Primary effectiveness outcomes were change in HbA1c and percent time in sensor glucose range 70–180 mg/dL (“time in range”). RESULTS A total of 235 participants (98% of enrolled, including 111 children and 124 adults) completed the study. HbA1c was significantly reduced in children by 0.71% (7.8 mmol/mol) (mean ± SD: 7.67 ± 0.95% to 6.99 ± 0.63% [60 ± 10.4 mmol/mol to 53 ± 6.9 mmol/mol], P < 0.0001) and in adults by 0.38% (4.2 mmol/mol) (7.16 ± 0.86% to 6.78 ± 0.68% [55 ± 9.4 mmol/mol to 51 ± 7.4 mmol/mol], P < 0.0001). Time in range was improved from standard therapy by 15.6 ± 11.5% or 3.7 h/day in children and 9.3 ± 11.8% or 2.2 h/day in adults (both P < 0.0001). This was accomplished with a reduction in time in hypoglycemia CONCLUSIONS This tubeless automated insulin delivery system was safe and allowed participants to significantly improve HbA1c levels and time in target glucose range with a very low occurrence of hypoglycemia.

Currently available semiautomated insulin-delivery systems require individualized insulin regimens for the initialization of therapy and meal doses based on carbohydrate counting for routine operation. In contrast, the bionic pancreas is initialized only on the basis of body weight, makes all dose decisions and delivers insulin autonomously, and uses meal announcements without carbohydrate counting.In this 13-week, multicenter, randomized trial, we randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio persons at least 6 years of age with type 1 diabetes either to receive bionic pancreas treatment with insulin aspart or insulin lispro or to receive standard care (defined as any insulin-delivery method with unblinded, real-time continuous glucose monitoring). The primary outcome was the glycated hemoglobin level at 13 weeks. The key secondary outcome was the percentage of time that the glucose level as assessed by continuous glucose monitoring was below 54 mg per deciliter; the prespecified noninferiority limit for this outcome was 1 percentage point. Safety was also assessed.A total of 219 participants 6 to 79 years of age were assigned to the bionic-pancreas group, and 107 to the standard-care group. The glycated hemoglobin level decreased from 7.9% to 7.3% in the bionic-pancreas group and did not change (was at 7.7% at both time points) in the standard-care group (mean adjusted difference at 13 weeks, -0.5 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.6 to -0.3; P0.001). The percentage of time that the glucose level as assessed by continuous glucose monitoring was below 54 mg per deciliter did not differ significantly between the two groups (13-week adjusted difference, 0.0 percentage points; 95% CI, -0.1 to 0.04; P0.001 for noninferiority). The rate of severe hypoglycemia was 17.7 events per 100 participant-years in the bionic-pancreas group and 10.8 events per 100 participant-years in the standard-care group (P = 0.39). No episodes of diabetic ketoacidosis occurred in either group.In this 13-week, randomized trial involving adults and children with type 1 diabetes, use of a bionic pancreas was associated with a greater reduction than standard care in the glycated hemoglobin level. (Funded by the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04200313.).

Background: Interventional studies investigating blood glucose (BG) management in intensive care units (ICU) have been inconclusive. New insights are needed. We assessed the ability of a new metric, the Glycemic Ratio (GR), to determine the relationship of ICU glucose control relative to preadmission glycemia and mortality. Methods: Retrospective cohort investigation (n = 4790) in an adult medical-surgical ICU included patients with minimum four BGs, hemoglobin (Hgb), and hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c). The GR is the quotient of mean ICU BGs (mBG) and estimated preadmission BG, derived from HbA1c. Results: Mortality displayed a J-shaped curve with GR (nadir GR 0.9), independent of background glycemia, consistent for HbA1c 6.5%, and Hgb >10 g/dL vs 6.5%, and dependent on preadmission glycemia. In adjusted analysis, GR remained associated with mortality (odds ratio = 2.61, 95% confidence interval = 1.48-4.62, P = .0012), but mBG did not (1.004, 1.000-1.009, .059). A single value on admission was not independently associated with mortality. Conclusions: The GR provided new insight into malglycemia that was not apparent using mBG, or an admission value. Mortality was associated with acute change from preadmission glycemia (GR). Further assessment of the impact of GR deviations from the nadir in mortality at GR 0.80 to 0.99, as both relative hypo- and hyperglycemia, and as duration of exposure and intensity, may further define the multifaceted nature of malglycemia.

Context The outcome of patients requiring intensive care can be influenced by the presence of previously undiagnosed diabetes (undiagDM). Objective This work aimed to define the clinical characteristics, glucose control metrics, and outcomes of patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) with undiagDM, and compare these to patients with known DM (DM). Methods This case-control investigation compared undiagDM (glycated hemoglobin A1c [HbA1c] ≥ 6.5%, no history of diabetes) to patients with DM. Glycemic ratio (GR) was calculated as the quotient of mean ICU blood glucose (BG) and estimated preadmission glycemia, based on HbA1c ([28.7 × HbA1c] – 46.7 mg/dL). GR was analyzed by bands: less than 0.7, 0.7 to less than or equal to 0.9, 0.9 to less than 1.1, and greater than or equal to 1.1. Risk-adjusted mortality was represented by the Observed:Expected mortality ratio (OEMR), calculated as the quotient of observed mortality and mortality predicted by the severity of illness (APACHE IV prediction of mortality). Results Of 5567 patients 294 (5.3%) were undiagDM. UndiagDM had lower ICU mean BG (P < .0001) and coefficient of variation (P < .0001) but similar rates of hypoglycemia (P = .08). Mortality and risk-adjusted mortality were similar in patients with GR less than 1.1 comparing undiagDM and DM. However, for patients with GR greater than or equal to 1.1, mortality (38.5% vs 10.3% [P = .0072]) and risk-adjusted mortality (OEMR 1.18 vs 0.52 [P < .0001]) were higher in undiagDM than in DM. Conclusion These data suggest that DM patients may develop tolerance to hyperglycemia that occurs during critical illness, a protective mechanism not observed in undiagDM, for whom hyperglycemia remains strongly associated with higher risk of mortality. These results may shed light on the natural history of diabetes.

Baseline risk variables and visit-to-visit variability (VV) of systolic blood pressure (SBP), HbAPost-hoc analysis of a double-blind randomized placebo-controlled clinical trial investigating allopurinol's effect on iohexol-derived glomerular filtration rate (iGFR) in type 1 diabetes with elevated UA. Primary outcome was iGFR change over three years. Linear regression with backwards selection of baseline clinical variables was performed to identify an optimized model forecasting iGFR change. Furthermore, VVs of SBP, HbA404 participants were included in the primary analyses. In the optimized baseline variable model, higher HbAWe identified several risk markers for faster iGFR decline in a high-risk population with type 1 diabetes. While further research is needed, our results indicate possible new and clinically feasible measures to risk stratify for DKD in type 1 diabetes.

Randomised controlled trials and other prospective clinical studies for novel medical interventions in people with diabetes have traditionally reported HbA

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this clinical practice guideline is to provide updated and new evidence-based recommendations for the comprehensive care of persons with diabetes mellitus to clinicians, diabetes-care teams, other health care professionals and stakeholders, and individuals with diabetes and their caregivers. METHODS: The American Association of Clinical Endocrinology selected a task force of medical experts and staff who updated and assessed clinical questions and recommendations from the prior 2015 version of this guideline and conducted literature searches for relevant scientific papers published from January 1, 2015, through May 15, 2022. Selected studies from results of literature searches composed the evidence base to update 2015 recommendations as well as to develop new recommendations based on review of clinical evidence, current practice, expertise, and consensus, according to established American Association of Clinical Endocrinology protocol for guideline development. RESULTS: This guideline includes 170 updated and new evidence-based clinical practice recommendations for the comprehensive care of persons with diabetes. Recommendations are divided into four sections: (1) screening, diagnosis, glycemic targets, and glycemic monitoring; (2) comorbidities and complications, including obesity and management with lifestyle, nutrition, and bariatric surgery, hypertension, dyslipidemia, retinopathy, neuropathy, diabetic kidney disease, and cardiovascular disease; (3) management of prediabetes, type 2 diabetes with antihyperglycemic pharmacotherapy and glycemic targets, type 1 diabetes with insulin therapy, hypoglycemia, hospitalized persons, and women with diabetes in pregnancy; (4) education and new topics regarding diabetes and infertility, nutritional supplements, secondary diabetes, social determinants of health, and virtual care, as well as updated recommendations on cancer risk, nonpharmacologic components of pediatric care plans, depression, education and team approach, occupational risk, role of sleep medicine, and vaccinations in persons with diabetes. CONCLUSIONS: This updated clinical practice guideline provides evidence-based recommendations to assist with person-centered, team-based clinical decision-making to improve the care of persons with diabetes mellitus.

 Introduction: The prevalence of type 1 diabetes (T1D) has been increasing over the last few decades and is commonly believed to negatively impact male fertility. We aimed to estimate the prevalence of infertility among men with T1D and to characterize potential clinical predictors for male infertility among men with T1D. Methods: We used data collected from the T1D Exchange Registry from 2012 to 2017. Men with T1D completed an infertility questionnaire indicating whether they had ever had problems conceiving a child or had ever received abnormal results from infertility testing. Collected data included age at questionnaire, age at diagnosis of T1D, duration of T1D, race/ethnicity, insurance status, education level, annual household income, hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), low density lipoprotein (LDL), diabetic retinopathy, micro/macroalbuminuria, and renal failure. Results: The survey was completed by 2171 registry members, 33 (1.5%) of whom reported male infertility. Mean age at questionnaire was 38 and 56 years in the fertile and infertile groups, respectively (P < 0.001). There was no statistically significant difference in the mean age at T1D diagnosis (16 and 27 years), mean duration of T1D at questionnaire (22 and 30 years), white non-Hispanic ethnicity (1906/2138, 89% versus 30/33, 91%), private insurance (1509/2138, 79% versus 30/33, 91%), and annual household income in US dollars ≥ $100,000 (757/2138, 45% versus 16/33, 55%) in the fertile and infertile men, respectively. On multivariate analysis, for each year of advancing age, men were 5% more likely to experience infertility. Age at questionnaire was the only significant predictor of infertility (OR 1.05; 95%CI 1.03 to 1.08). Age at T1D diagnosis (OR 1.01; 95%CI 0.99 to 1.04), duration of T1D (OR 0.99; 95%CI 0.96 to 1.01), mean HbA1C (OR 1.03; 95%CI 0.77 to 1.37), diabetic retinopathy (OR 1.04; 95%CI 0.50 to 2.15), and mean LDL (OR 1.01; 95%CI 0.99 to 1.02) failed to independently predict infertility; however, presence of renal failure (OR 3.38; 95%CI 0.94 to 12.13) and micro/macroalbuminuria (OR 1.27; 95%CI 0.42 to 3.82) trended toward increased odds of infertility. Conclusions: This study highlights the prevalence of male infertility among men with T1D. Beyond age, there were no independent clinical predictors for male infertility among men with T1D; however, men with clinical evidence of diabetes-associated renal compromise trended toward greater odds of infertility. Further studies of fertility in this growing, at-risk population are warranted.

Background: People with type 1 diabetes generally view it easier to exercise when having continuous information of the glucose levels. We evaluated whether patients with type 1 diabetes managed with multiple daily insulin injections (MDI) exercised more after initiating continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) and whether the improved glycemic control and well-being associated with CGM translates into improved blood lipids and markers of inflammation. Method: The GOLD trial was a randomized cross-over trial over 16 months where patients used either CGM or capillary self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) over six months, with a four-month wash-out period between the two treatment periods. We compared grade of physical activity, blood lipids, apolipoproteins, and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hsCRP) levels during CGM and SMBG. Results: There were 116 patients with information of physical activity estimated by the International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ) during both CGM and SMBG. No changes were found during CGM or SMBG, IPAQ scores 3305 versus 3878 ( P = .16). In 136 participants with information of blood lipid levels with no change in lipid-lowering medication during the two treatment periods, HbA1c differed by 4.2 mmol/mol (NGSP 0.39%) between SMBG and CGM treatment ( P < .001). No significant changes existed in low-density lipoprotein, high-density lipoprotein, triglycerides, total cholesterol, apolipoprotein A1, apolipoprotein B1, or hsCRP, during CGM and SMBG. Conclusion: Although many patients experience it easier to perform physical activity when monitoring glucose levels with CGM, it does not influence the amount of physical activity in persons with type 1 diabetes. Blood lipids, apolipoprotein, and hsCRP levels were similar during CGM and SMBG.

Introduction: The difference between bedtime and morning glucose levels (BeAM value) is a clinically relevant measure that can guide clinicians regarding insulin titrations. As chronic kidney disease (CKD) develops, changes in insulin sensitivity and kinetics and limitations to available medications may contribute to over-basalization, insufficient prandial control, and large BeAM. We hypothesized that CKD and less time in range (TIR) derived from continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) are associated with large BeAM in T2DM. Methods: This was a prospective observational cohort study of 1people with T2DM treated with insulin or sulfonylurea, 81 participants with CKD (eGFR Results: Participants had a mean age of 68 years, diabetes duration years and HbA1c 7.7%. CKD and controls had a mean eGFR 38 and 83 mL/min/1.73 m2 respectively. Median (IQR) BeAM was 29 (9-52) mg/dL for participants with CKD and (-4-31) mg/dL for controls (p = 0.11) . Forty participants with CKD (49%) and 7 controls (29%) had a large BeAM. Those with a large BeAM had less TIR (58 v 68%) , higher HbA1c (8.0 vs. 7.5%) , and higher glucose management indicator (GMI, 7.5 vs. 7.2%) compared to those with BeAM Conclusions: Large BeAM was common among participants with long-standing T2DM and CKD and was associated with less TIR and higher GMI. These data suggest that there is opportunity for improvement in daytime and prandial diabetes management among patients with CKD. Disclosure L.Mayeda: None. L.Zelnick: None. S.Trikudanathan: Research Support; Bionic pancreas, Bionic pancreas , Insulet Corporation, Insulet Corporation. I.B.Hirsch: Consultant; Abbott Diabetes, Bigfoot Biomedical, Inc., GWave, Roche Diabetes Care, Research Support; Beta Bionics, Inc., Insulet Corporation, Medtronic. I.De boer: Advisory Panel; AstraZeneca, Bayer AG, Cyclerion Therapeutics, Inc., George Clinical, Goldfinch Bio, Inc., Other Relationship; American Society of Nephrology, Research Support; Dexcom, Inc. Funding American Diabetes Association (4-15-CKD-20) ; National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (R01DK088762, R01087726)

While poor glycemic control increases the risk of diabetic kidney disease (DKD) , its impact on renal function decline among those with established DKD is unclear. To examine this, we tested the relationship between baseline HbA1c and renal outcomes in the 3-year Preventing Early Renal Loss (PERL) trial (n=530) , which included persons with type 1 diabetes (T1D) and early-to-moderate DKD (eGFR 40-100 ml/min/1.73m2 and persistent albuminuria and/or ongoing GFR decline) . In Cox regression models, baseline HbA1c was associated (p Disclosure H.Shah: None. J.B.Mcgill: Advisory Panel; Gilead Sciences, Inc., Lilly Diabetes, MannKind Corporation, Novo Nordisk A/S, Provention Bio, Inc., Salix Pharmaceuticals, Consultant; Bayer AG, Boehringer Ingelheim International GmbH, Research Support; Dexcom, Inc., Novo Nordisk. I.B.Hirsch: Consultant; Abbott Diabetes, Bigfoot Biomedical, Inc., GWave, Roche Diabetes Care, Research Support; Beta Bionics, Inc., Insulet Corporation, Medtronic. C.Wu: None. A.Galecki: None. M.Mauer: None. A.Doria: Research Support; Novo Nordisk Foundation. Perl consortium: n/a. Funding National Institutes of Health UC4DK101108Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation 17-2012-377The Leona M. and Harry B. Helmsley Charitable Trust 2018PG-T1D014

Background: CSII is used with increased frequency; however, there are no studies evaluating human skin histology related to its use. Objectives: 1) to investigate the skin histology and metabolite changes at CSII sites and 2) associate possible changes with clinical characteristics in a cohort of patients with T1D. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional study which included individuals with T1D using CSII. Skin and blood samples in addition to clinical data were collected. Histological, immunohistochemical (IHC) , and metabolomic analyses were performed using skin biopsies from three sites: 1) current 2) recent and 3) never used site (control) for CSII. Results: A total of 30 participants were enrolled in the study (age 48.3 ± 17.9 years, female 66.7%, diabetes duration 30.4 ± 16.0 years, insulin pump use 15.7 ± 11.7 years, BMI 25.3 ± 3.4 kg/m2, HbA1c 6.66 ± 0.79%, mean glucose from CGM 150.7 ± 26.4 mg/dL, coefficient of variation 31.2 ± 4.4%, insulin dose 0.53 ± 0.17 IU/kg) . Histologic data showed a significant increase in inflammation, fibrin, fat necrosis, vascularity, eosinophils, and IHC staining of IGF-1 and TGFβ3 at both CSII sites compared to control sites (all p Conclusion: Biologic changes were observed in skin histology and metabolites at CSII sites that may be associated with inflammation, oxidative stress response, protein synthesis and wound healing. These could have a clinical impact on insulin availability and diabetes control. Disclosure J. D. Baran: n/a. D. Khakpour: None. A. Kalus: None. M. Shinohara: Other Relationship; Aztex, Cabaletta Bio, Elorac. X. Dong: None. D. S. Hippe: Research Support; Canon America Medical Systems, GE Healthcare Systems, Philips Healthcare. I. B. Hirsch: Consultant; Abbott Diabetes, Bigfoot Biomedical, Inc., GWave, Roche Diabetes Care, Research Support; Beta Bionics, Inc., Insulet Corporation, Medtronic. Funding Leona M. and Harry B. Helmsley Charitable Trust

Background: The UW AYA Diabetes Program is a partnership between Seattle Children’s Hospital and UW Medicine designed to meet AYA health care transition and mental health needs. Objective: To evaluate the impact of the UW AYA Diabetes Program on glycemic control. Methods: The study included 453 AYA with diabetes (baseline visit: mean age 20.8 years, 51% male, 70% Non-Hispanic White, 27% public insurance, 95% type 1 diabetes, 55% continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) use, 55% pump/automated insulin delivery use) who have received diabetes care within the UW AYA Diabetes Program for ≥6 months. Mixed-effects linear regression with a random effect for individual to account for repeated measures was used to evaluate change in A1C over time. Regression model was adjusted for age, race, ethnicity, diabetes technology use, and health insurance. Results: Mean adjusted A1C decreased steadily with increasing time in the UW AYA Diabetes Program (Figure) . The difference was statistically significant compared to baseline A1C levels by the time participants had been in the program for 2 years (8.1%, 95% CI: 7.8-8.4 vs. 8.8%, 95% CI: 8.6-9.0) . A1C improvement did not vary by age, diabetes technology use, or health insurance (all p>0.05) . Conclusion: The UW AYA Diabetes Program offers a promising approach to improve glycemic control in AYA transitioning from pediatric to adult diabetes care. Disclosure F.Malik: n/a. N.M.Ehrhardt: Advisory Panel; Dexcom, Inc., Novo Nordisk, Research Support; Dexcom, Inc., Merck & Co., Inc., Novo Nordisk. A.Paget: None. K.Hoch: None. K.W.Weaver: None. I.B.Hirsch: Consultant; Abbott Diabetes, Bigfoot Biomedical, Inc., GWave, Roche Diabetes Care, Research Support; Beta Bionics, Inc., Insulet Corporation, Medtronic. C.Pihoker: None. C.Taplin: Advisory Panel; Insulet Corporation, Speaker's Bureau; Medtronic. A.J.Roberts: None. S.J.Lowry: None. J.Yi-frazier: None. A.Moss: None. A.Huang: None. Funding Forest Foundation, Sequoia Foundation

Objective: To determine the prevalence of sodium-glucose contransporter-2 inhibitor (SGLT2i) and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP1RA) use among adults with type 2 diabetes (T2D) in the United States. Methods: We studied adults with T2D and eGFR ≥30mL/min/1.73m2 who participated in the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) , focusing on the 2017-2020 examination cycle. We tested prevalence of SGLT2i and GLP1RA use among subgroups based on demographic variables and relevant comorbidities, including chronic kidney disease (CKD) , congestive heart failure (CHF) , and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) . We compared use of SGLT2i and GLP1RA to other glucose-lowering medications and assessed trends from prior NHANES cycles. Results: Among 1,375 participants studied in 2017-2020, mean age was 60 years, 46% were women, 13% self-identified as non-Hispanic Black, 10% self-identified as Mexican American, 37% had CKD, 8.5% had CHF, and 23% had ASCVD. The prevalence of SGLT2i and GLP1RA use was 5.8% and 4.4%, respectively. SGLT2i were used by 7.2% of adults with CKD or CHF, and GLP1RA were used by 3.5% of adults with ASCVD. Differences in SGLT2i or GLP1RA use were observed by age, race, ethnicity, and health insurance status. Biguanides, sulfonylureas, DPP-4 inhibitors, and insulin were used more frequently than SGLT2i or GLP1RA. Overall, prevalence of SGLT2i but not GLP1RA use increased significantly from 2013-2014 to 2017-2020. Conclusions: SGLT2i and GLP1RA use is low among adults with T2D, including among those with strong indications. Enhanced implementation of these agents is crucial to improving kidney and cardiovascular outcomes and mitigating health disparities in T2D. Disclosure C.Limonte: None. Y.Hall: None. S.Trikudanathan: Research Support; Bionic pancreas, Bionic pancreas , Insulet Corporation, Insulet Corporation. K.R.Tuttle: Advisory Panel; Boehringer Ingelheim International GmbH, Gilead Sciences, Inc., Consultant; AstraZeneca, Eli Lilly and Company, Research Support; Bayer AG, Goldfinch Bio, Inc., Novo Nordisk, Travere. I.B.Hirsch: Consultant; Abbott Diabetes, Bigfoot Biomedical, Inc., GWave, Roche Diabetes Care, Research Support; Beta Bionics, Inc., Insulet Corporation, Medtronic. I.De boer: Advisory Panel; AstraZeneca, Bayer AG, Cyclerion Therapeutics, Inc., George Clinical, Goldfinch Bio, Inc., Other Relationship; American Society of Nephrology, Research Support; Dexcom, Inc. L.Zelnick: None. Funding This work was supported by an unrestricted fund from the Northwest Kidney Centers. CPL was funded by NIDDK grant T32DK007467 and the American Kidney Fund Clinical Scientist in Nephrology grant program. Additional funding was provided by R01DK126373, R01DK125084, R01DK088762.

The increasing prevalence of diabetes, combined with a growing global shortage of health care professionals (HCP), necessitates the need to develop new approaches to diabetes care delivery to expand access to care, lessen the burden on people with diabetes, improve efficiencies, and reduce the unsustainable financial liability on health systems and payers. Use of digital diabetes technologies and telehealth protocols within a digital/virtual diabetes clinic has the potential to address these challenges. However, several issues must be resolved to move forward. In February 2020, organizers of the Advanced Technologies & Treatments for Diabetes Annual Conference convened an international panel of HCP, researchers, patient advocates, and industry representatives to review the status of digital diabetes technologies, characterize deficits in current technologies, and identify issues for consideration. Since that meeting, the importance of using telehealth and digital diabetes technologies has been demonstrated amid the global coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic. This article summarizes the panel's discussion of the opportunities, obstacles, and requisites for advancing the use of these technologies as a standard of care for the management of diabetes.

Summary The discovery of insulin 100 years ago was one of the most important achievements of all time. The plan from the scientists involved was easy access for all. Unfortunately, a century later that idealistic goal was not to be in many places around the world, including the US.

OBJECTIVE Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) reduces HbA1c and time spent in hypoglycemia in people with type 1 diabetes (T1D) treated with multiple daily insulin injections (MDI) when evaluated over shorter time periods. It is unclear to what extent CGM improves and helps to maintain glucose control, treatment satisfaction, diabetes distress, hypoglycemic concerns, and overall well-being over longer periods of time. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS The GOLD trial was a randomized crossover trial performed over 16 months of CGM treatment in people with T1D treated with MDI. People completing the trial (n = 141) were invited to participate in the current SILVER extension study in which 107 patients continued CGM treatment over 1 year along with the support of a diabetes nurse every 3 months. RESULTS The primary end point of the change in HbA1c over 1.0–1.5 years of CGM use compared with previous self-monitoring of blood glucose during GOLD showed a decrease in HbA1c of 0.35% (95% CI 0.19–0.50, P < 0.001). Time spent in hypoglycemia CONCLUSIONS The SILVER study supports beneficial long-term effects from CGM on HbA1c, hypoglycemia, treatment satisfaction, well-being, and hypoglycemic confidence in people with T1D managed with MDI.

To evaluate psychosocial outcomes for adults with type 1 diabetes (T1D) using the tubeless Omnipod® 5 Automated Insulin Delivery (AID) System.A single-arm, multicenter (across the United States), prospective safety and efficacy study of the tubeless AID system included 115 adults with T1D. Participants aged 18-70 years completed questionnaires assessing psychosocial outcomes - diabetes distress (T1-DDS), hypoglycemic confidence (HCS), well-being (WHO-5), sleep quality (PSQI), insulin delivery satisfaction (IDSS), diabetes treatment satisfaction (DTSQ), and system usability (SUS) - before and after 3 months of AID use. Associations among participant characteristics, psychosocial measures and glycemic outcomes were evaluated using linear regression analyses.Adults using the tubeless AID system demonstrated improvements in diabetes-specific psychosocial measures, including diabetes distress, hypoglycemic confidence, insulin delivery satisfaction, diabetes treatment satisfaction, and system usability after 3 months (all P 0.001). No changes in general well-being or sleep quality were observed. The psychosocial outcomes assessed were not consistently associated with baseline participant characteristics (i.e., age, sex, diabetes duration, glycemic outcomes including percent time in range 70-180 mg/dL, percent time below range 70 mg/dL, hemoglobin A1c, or insulin regimen).Use of the Omnipod 5 AID system was associated with significant improvements in diabetes-related psychosocial outcomes for adults with T1D.NCT04196140.

OBJECTIVE Rapid loss of estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) within its normal range has been proposed as a strong predictor of future kidney disease. We investigated this association of eGFR slope early in the course of type 1 diabetes with long-term incidence of kidney and cardiovascular complications. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS The annual percentage change in eGFR (slope) was calculated during the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial (DCCT) for each of 1,441 participants over a mean of 6.5 years and dichotomized by the presence or absence of early rapid eGFR loss (slope ≤−3% per year) as the exposure of interest. Outcomes were incident reduced eGFR (eGFR RESULTS At DCCT closeout (the baseline for this analysis), diabetes duration was 12 ± 4.8 years, most participants (85.9%) had normoalbuminuria, mean eGFR was 117.0 ± 13.4 mL/min/1.73 m2, and 149 (10.4%) had experienced early rapid eGFR loss over the preceding trial phase. Over the 24-year subsequent follow-up, there were 187 reduced eGFR (6.3 per 1,000 person-years) and 113 MACE (3.6 per 1,000 person-years) events. Early rapid eGFR loss was associated with risk of reduced eGFR (hazard ratio [HR] 1.81, 95% CI 1.18–2.79, P = 0.0064), but not after adjustment for baseline eGFR level (HR 0.94, 95% CI 0.53–1.66, P = 0.84). There was no association with composite cardiovascular events or MACE. CONCLUSIONS In people with type 1 diabetes primarily with normal eGFR and normoalbuminuria, the preceding slope of eGFR confers no additional association with kidney or cardiovascular outcomes beyond knowledge of an individual’s current level.

BACKGROUND: Higher serum urate levels are associated with an increased risk of diabetic kidney disease. Lowering of the serum urate level with allopurinol may slow the decrease in the glomerular filtration rate (GFR) in persons with type 1 diabetes and early-to-moderate diabetic kidney disease. METHODS: In a double-blind trial, we randomly assigned participants with type 1 diabetes, a serum urate level of at least 4.5 mg per deciliter, an estimated GFR of 40.0 to 99.9 ml per minute per 1.73 m(2) of body-surface area, and evidence of diabetic kidney disease to receive allopurinol or placebo. The primary outcome was the baseline-adjusted GFR, as measured with iohexol, after 3 years plus a 2-month washout period. Secondary outcomes included the decrease in the iohexol-based GFR per year and the urinary albumin excretion rate after washout. Safety was also assessed. RESULTS: A total of 267 patients were assigned to receive allopurinol and 263 to receive placebo. The mean age was 51.1 years, the mean duration of diabetes 34.6 years, and the mean glycated hemoglobin level 8.2%. The mean baseline iohexol-based GFR was 68.7 ml per minute per 1.73 m(2) in the allopurinol group and 67.3 ml per minute per 1.73 m(2) in the placebo group. During the intervention period, the mean serum urate level decreased from 6.1 to 3.9 mg per deciliter with allopurinol and remained at 6.1 mg per deciliter with placebo. After washout, the between-group difference in the mean iohexol-based GFR was 0.001 ml per minute per 1.73 m(2) (95% confidence interval [CI], −1.9 to 1.9; P= 0.99). The mean decrease in the iohexol-based GFR was −3.0 ml per minute per 1.73 m(2) per year with allopurinol and −2.5 ml per minute per 1.73 m(2) per year with placebo (between-group difference, −0.6 ml per minute per 1.73 m(2) per year; 95% CI, −1.5 to 0.4). The mean urinary albumin excretion rate after washout was 40% (95% CI, 0 to 80) higher with allopurinol than with placebo. The frequency of serious adverse events was similar in the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: We found no evidence of clinically meaningful benefits of serum urate reduction with allopurinol on kidney outcomes among patients with type 1 diabetes and early-to-moderate diabetic kidney disease. (Funded by the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases and others; PERL ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02017171.)

Insulin has been available for the treatment of diabetes for almost a century, and the variety of insulin choices today represents many years of discovery and innovation. Insulin has gone from poorly defined extracts of animal pancreata to pure and precisely controlled formulations that can be prescribed and administered with high accuracy and predictability of action. Modifications of the insulin formulation and of the insulin molecule itself have made it possible to approximate the natural endogenous insulin response. Insulin and insulin formulations had to be designed to produce either a constant low basal level of insulin or the spikes of insulin released in response to meals. We discuss how the biochemical properties of endogenous insulin were exploited to either shorten or extend the time-action profiles of injectable insulins by varying the pharmacokinetics (time for appearance of insulin in the blood after injection) and pharmacodynamics (time-dependent changes in blood sugar after injection). This has resulted in rapid-acting, short-acting, intermediate-acting, and long-acting insulins, as well as mixtures and concentrated formulations. An understanding of how various insulins and formulations were designed to solve the challenges of insulin replacement will assist clinicians in meeting the needs of their individual patients., Graphical Abstract