Short- and long-term effects of real-time continuous glucose monitoring in patients with type 2 diabetes

Robert A Vigersky, Stephanie J Fonda, Mary Chellappa, M Susan Walker, Nicole M Ehrhardt, Robert A Vigersky, Stephanie J Fonda, Mary Chellappa, M Susan Walker, Nicole M Ehrhardt

Abstract

Objective: To determine whether short-time, real-time continuous glucose monitoring (RT-CGM) has long-term salutary glycemic effects in patients with type 2 diabetes who are not on prandial insulin.

Research design and methods: This was a randomized controlled trial of 100 adults with type 2 diabetes who were not on prandial insulin. This study compared the effects of 12 weeks of intermittent RT-CGM with self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) on glycemic control over a 40-week follow-up period. Subjects received diabetes care from their regular provider without therapeutic intervention from the study team.

Results: There was a significant difference in A1C at the end of the 3-month active intervention that was sustained during the follow-up period. The mean, unadjusted A1C decreased by 1.0, 1.2, 0.8, and 0.8% in the RT-CGM group vs. 0.5, 0.5, 0.5, and 0.2% in the SMBG group at 12, 24, 38, and 52 weeks, respectively (P = 0.04). There was a significantly greater decline in A1C over the course of the study for the RT-CGM group than for the SMBG group, after adjusting for covariates (P < 0.0001). The subjects who used RT-CGM per protocol (≥48 days) improved the most (P < 0.0001). The improvement in the RT-CGM group occurred without a greater intensification of medication compared with those in the SMBG group.

Conclusions: Subjects with type 2 diabetes not on prandial insulin who used RT-CGM intermittently for 12 weeks significantly improved glycemic control at 12 weeks and sustained the improvement without RT-CGM during the 40-week follow-up period, compared with those who used only SMBG.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Mean A1C change from baseline by treatment group. Change equals later A1C minus baseline A1C. This figure shows the raw mean changes and SEMs. A separate multilevel model of the actual A1C values, with a transformation of the time variable to reflect the deceleration of change over time (1/time2, with time defined as 1–5), showed that the decline in A1C over the course of the study differed between the groups net of other factors known to cause A1C change: age, sex, diabetes therapy, and initiation of insulin during the study. Specifically, the results of a multilevel model found that the decline for the SMBG group was 0.51% (P = 0.002) and the decline for the RT-CGM group was 1.16% (P < 0.0001). These estimates must be multiplied by 1/time2 to obtain the change in A1C, which occurred at each time point.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Mean A1C change from baseline per subject adherence to the study protocol, within the treatment groups. Change equals later A1C minus baseline A1C. This figure shows the raw mean changes and SEMs. In the RT-CGM group, 16 subjects wore the technology A: The line for the SMBG group is indicated as a reference only; these participants were not included in the multilevel model. B: The line for the RT-CGM group also is indicated as a reference only. Two separate multilevel models of the actual A1C values, with a transformation of the time variable to reflect the deceleration of change over time (1/time2), showed that the decline in A1C over the course of the study differed between the usage groups net of other factors known to cause A1C change: age, sex, diabetes therapy, and initiation of insulin during the study. Specifically, the results of multilevel models found that the decline for the group that took part in RT-CGM for <48 days was 0.76% (P = 0.008), the decline for the group that took part in RT-CGM for ≥48 days was 1.31% (P < 0.0001), the decline for the group that performed SMBG less than one time per day was 0.18% (P < 0.58), and the decline for the group that performed SMBG one or more times per day 0.67% (P < 0.001). These estimates must be multiplied by 1/time2 to obtain the change in A1C that occurred at each time point.

References

    1. National Diabetes Information Clearinghouse. National diabetes statistics [article online], 2011. Available from Accessed 29 May 2011
    1. Boyle JP, Thompson TJ, Gregg EW, Barker LE, Williamson DF. Projection of the year 2050 burden of diabetes in the US adult population: dynamic modeling of incidence, mortality, and prediabetes prevalence. Popul Health Metr 2010;8:29.
    1. Hoerger TJ, Segel JE, Gregg EW, Saaddine JB. Is glycemic control improving in U.S. adults? Diabetes Care 2008;31:81–86
    1. Nathan DM, Buse JB, Davidson MB, et al. ; American Diabetes Association European Association for Study of Diabetes Medical management of hyperglycemia in type 2 diabetes: a consensus algorithm for the initiation and adjustment of therapy: a consensus statement of the American Diabetes Association and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes. Diabetes Care 2009;32:193–203
    1. Rodbard HW, Jellinger PS, Davidson JA, et al. Statement by an American Association of Clinical Endocrinologist/American College of Endocrinology consensus panel on type 2 diabetes mellitus: an algorithm for glycemic control. Endocr Pract 2009;15:540–559
    1. U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs. VA/DoD clinical practice guidelines: management of diabetes mellitus in primary care (2010) [article online], 2010. Available from Accessed 29 May 2011
    1. Tamborlane WV, Beck RW, Bode BW, et al. ; Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation Continuous Glucose Monitoring Study Group Continuous glucose monitoring and intensive treatment of type 1 diabetes. N Engl J Med 2008;359:1464–1476
    1. Beck RW, Hirsch IB, Laffel L, et al. ; Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation Continuous Glucose Monitoring Study Group The effect of continuous glucose monitoring in well-controlled type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Care 2009;32:1378–1383
    1. Deiss D, Bolinder J, Riveline JP, et al. Improved glycemic control in poorly controlled patients with type 1 diabetes using real-time continuous glucose monitoring. Diabetes Care 2006;29:2730–2732
    1. Bailey TS, Zisser HC, Garg SK. Reduction in hemoglobin A1C with real-time continuous glucose monitoring: results from a 12-week observational study. Diabetes Technol Ther 2007;9:203–210
    1. O’Connell MA, Donath S, O’Neal DN, et al. Glycaemic impact of patient-led use of sensor-guided pump therapy in type 1 diabetes: a randomised controlled trial. Diabetologia 2009;52:1250–1257
    1. Battelino T, Phillip M, Bratina N, Nimri R, Oskarsson P, Bolinder J. Effect of continuous glucose monitoring on hypoglycemia in type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Care 2011;34:795–800
    1. Zick R, Petersen B, Richter M, Haug C; SAFIR Study Group Comparison of continuous blood glucose measurement with conventional documentation of hypoglycemia in patients with type 2 diabetes on multiple daily insulin injection therapy. Diabetes Technol Ther 2007;9:483–492
    1. Chico A, Vidal-Ríos P, Subirà M, Novials A. The continuous glucose monitoring system is useful for detecting unrecognized hypoglycemias in patients with type 1 and type 2 diabetes but is not better than frequent capillary glucose measurements for improving metabolic control. Diabetes Care 2003;26:1153–1157
    1. Pickup JC, Freeman SC, Sutton AJ. Glycaemic control in type 1 diabetes during real time continuous glucose monitoring compared with self monitoring of blood glucose: meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials using individual patient data. BMJ 7 July 2011. [Epub ahead of print]
    1. Ehrhardt NM, Chellappa M, Walker MS, Fonda SJ, Vigersky RA. The effect of real-time continuous glucose monitoring on glycemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. J Diabetes Sci Technol 2011;5:668–675
    1. Welch GW, Jacobson AM, Polonsky WH. The Problem Areas in Diabetes Scale: an evaluation of its clinical utility. Diabetes Care 1997;20:760–766
    1. National Diabetes Information Clearinghouse. National diabetes statistics [article online], 2011. Available from Accessed 29 May 2011
    1. Phung OJ, Scholle JM, Talwar M, Coleman CI. Effect of noninsulin antidiabetic drugs added to metformin therapy on glycemic control, weight gain, and hypoglycemia in type 2 diabetes. JAMA 2010;303:1410–1418
    1. Bennett WL, Wilson LM, Bolen S, et al. Oral diabetes medications for adults with type 2 diabetes: an update. In Comparative Effectiveness Review no. 27 Rockville, MD, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), March 2011. Available from Accessed 10 November 2011 (Prepared by Johns Hopkins University Evidence-based Practice Center under contract no. 290-02-0018. AHRQ publ. no. 11-EHC038-EF)
    1. Gross JL, Kramer CK, Leitão CB, et al. ; Diabetes and Endocrinology Meta-analysis Group (DEMA) Effect of antihyperglycemic agents added to metformin and a sulfonylurea on glycemic control and weight gain in type 2 diabetes: a network meta-analysis. Ann Intern Med 2011;154:672–679
    1. Welschen LMC, Bloemendal E, Nijpels G, et al. Self-monitoring of blood glucose in patients with type 2 diabetes who are not using insulin: a systematic review. Diabetes Care 2005;28:1510–1517
    1. Sarol JN, Jr, Nicodemus NA, Jr, Tan KM, Grava MB. Self-monitoring of blood glucose as part of a multi-component therapy among non-insulin requiring type 2 diabetes patients: a meta-analysis (1966-2004). Curr Med Res Opin 2005;21:173–184
    1. Poolsup N, Suksomboon N, Rattanasookchit S. Meta-analysis of the benefits of self-monitoring of blood glucose on glycemic control in type 2 diabetes patients: an update. Diabetes Technol Ther 2009;11:775–784
    1. Jansen JP. Self-monitoring of glucose in type 2 diabetes mellitus: a Bayesian meta-analysis of direct and indirect comparisons. Curr Med Res Opin 2006;22:671–681
    1. Clar C, Barnard K, Cummins E, Royle P, Waugh N; Aberdeen Health Technology Assessment Group Self-monitoring of blood glucose in type 2 diabetes: systematic review. Health Technol Assess 2010;14:1–140
    1. Polonsky WH, Fisher L, Schikman CH, et al. Structured self-monitoring of blood glucose significantly reduces A1C levels in poorly controlled, noninsulin-treated type 2 diabetes: results from the Structured Testing Program Study. Diabetes Care 2011;34:262–267
    1. Franciosi M, Lucisano G, Pellegrini F, et al. ; ROSES Study Group ROSES: role of self-monitoring of blood glucose and intensive education in patients with type 2 diabetes not receiving insulin: a pilot randomized clinical trial. Diabet Med 2011;28:789–796
    1. Durán A, Martín P, Runkle I, et al. Benefits of self-monitoring blood glucose in the management of new-onset type 2 diabetes mellitus: the St Carlos Study, a prospective randomized clinic-based interventional study with parallel groups. J Diabetes 2010;2:203–211
    1. American Diabetes Association Standards of medical care in diabetes: 2011 2011;34Suppl. 1:S11–S61
    1. Handelsman Y, Mechanick JI, Blonde L, et al. ; AACE Task Force for Developing Diabetes Comprehensive Care Plan American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists Medical Guidelines for Clinical Practice for developing a diabetes mellitus comprehensive care plan. Endocr Pract 2011;17(Suppl. 2):1–53
    1. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Type 2 diabetes: national clinical guideline for management in primary and secondary care (update) [article online], 2008. Available from Accessed 2 September 2011

Source: PubMed

3
Suscribir