Accuracy of Continuous Glucose Monitoring During Three Closed-Loop Home Studies Under Free-Living Conditions

Hood Thabit, Lalantha Leelarathna, Malgorzata E Wilinska, Daniella Elleri, Janet M Allen, Alexandra Lubina-Solomon, Emma Walkinshaw, Marietta Stadler, Pratik Choudhary, Julia K Mader, Sibylle Dellweg, Carsten Benesch, Thomas R Pieber, Sabine Arnolds, Simon R Heller, Stephanie A Amiel, David Dunger, Mark L Evans, Roman Hovorka, Hood Thabit, Lalantha Leelarathna, Malgorzata E Wilinska, Daniella Elleri, Janet M Allen, Alexandra Lubina-Solomon, Emma Walkinshaw, Marietta Stadler, Pratik Choudhary, Julia K Mader, Sibylle Dellweg, Carsten Benesch, Thomas R Pieber, Sabine Arnolds, Simon R Heller, Stephanie A Amiel, David Dunger, Mark L Evans, Roman Hovorka

Abstract

Objectives: Closed-loop (CL) systems modulate insulin delivery based on glucose levels measured by a continuous glucose monitor (CGM). Accuracy of the CGM affects CL performance and safety. We evaluated the accuracy of the Freestyle Navigator(®) II CGM (Abbott Diabetes Care, Alameda, CA) during three unsupervised, randomized, open-label, crossover home CL studies.

Materials and methods: Paired CGM and capillary glucose values (10,597 pairs) were collected from 57 participants with type 1 diabetes (41 adults [mean±SD age, 39±12 years; mean±SD hemoglobin A1c, 7.9±0.8%] recruited at five centers and 16 adolescents [mean±SD age, 15.6±3.6 years; mean±SD hemoglobin A1c, 8.1±0.8%] recruited at two centers). Numerical accuracy was assessed by absolute relative difference (ARD) and International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 15197:2013 15/15% limits, and clinical accuracy was assessed by Clarke error grid analysis.

Results: Total duration of sensor use was 2,002 days (48,052 h). Overall sensor accuracy for the capillary glucose range (1.1-27.8 mmol/L) showed mean±SD and median (interquartile range) ARD of 14.2±15.5% and 10.0% (4.5%, 18.4%), respectively. Lowest mean ARD was observed in the hyperglycemic range (9.8±8.8%). Over 95% of pairs were in combined Clarke error grid Zones A and B (A, 80.1%, B, 16.2%). Overall, 70.0% of the sensor readings satisfied ISO criteria. Mean ARD was consistent (12.3%; 95% of the values fall within ±3.7%) and not different between participants (P=0.06) within the euglycemic and hyperglycemic range, when CL is actively modulating insulin delivery.

Conclusions: Consistent accuracy of the CGM within the euglycemic-hyperglycemic range using the Freestyle Navigator II was observed and supports its use in home CL studies. Our results may contribute toward establishing normative CGM performance criteria for unsupervised home use of CL.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01221467 NCT01440140 NCT01666028.

Figures

FIG. 1.
FIG. 1.
Bland–Altman plot of sensor and capillary glucose levels. The solid black line represents the mean difference between the sensor and capillary glucose values; the dashed lines indicate 1.96×SD of the difference. CGM, continuous glucose monitor.
FIG. 2.
FIG. 2.
Clarke error grid of sensor and capillary glucose levels. CGM, continuous glucose monitor.

References

    1. The DCCT Research Group: Epidemiology of severe hypoglycemia in the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial. Am J Med 1991;90:450–459
    1. Hovorka R: Closed-loop insulin delivery: from bench to clinical practice. Nat Rev Endocrinol 2011;7:385–395
    1. Hovorka R, Allen JM, Elleri D, et al. : Manual closed-loop insulin delivery in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes: a phase 2 randomised crossover trial. Lancet 2010;375:743–751
    1. Phillip M, Battelino T, Atlas E, et al. : Nocturnal glucose control with an artificial pancreas at a diabetes camp. N Engl J Med 2013;368:824–833
    1. Kovatchev BP, Renard E, Cobelli C, et al. : Safety of outpatient closed-loop control: first randomized crossover trials of a wearable artificial pancreas. Diabetes Care 2014;37:1789–1796
    1. Matuleviciene V, Joseph JI, Andelin M, et al. : A clinical trial of the accuracy and treatment experience of the Dexcom G4 sensor (Dexcom G4 system) and Enlite sensor (Guardian REAL-Time system) tested simultaneously in ambulatory patients with type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Technol Ther 2014;16:759–767
    1. Kropff J, Bruttomesso D, Doll W, et al. : Accuracy of two continuous glucose monitoring systems: a head-to-head comparison under clinical research centre and daily life conditions. Diabetes Obes Metab 2015;17:343–349
    1. Damiano ER, El-Khatib FH, Zheng H, et al. : A comparative effectiveness analysis of three continuous glucose monitors. Diabetes Care 2013;36:251–259
    1. Freckmann G, Pleus S, Link M, et al. : Performance evaluation of three continuous glucose monitoring systems: comparison of six sensors per subject in parallel. J Diabetes Sci Technol 2013;7:842–853
    1. Thabit H, Lubina-Solomon A, Stadler M, et al. : Home use of closed-loop insulin delivery for overnight glucose control in adults with type 1 diabetes: a 4-week, multicentre, randomised crossover study. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol 2014;2:701–709
    1. Hovorka R, Elleri D, Thabit H, et al. : Overnight closed-loop insulin delivery in young people with type 1 diabetes: a free-living, randomized clinical trial. Diabetes Care 2014;37:1204–1211
    1. Leelarathna L, Dellweg S, Mader JK, et al. : Day and night home closed-loop insulin delivery in adults with type 1 diabetes: three-center randomized crossover study. Diabetes Care 2014;37:1931–1937
    1. Geoffrey M, Brazg R, Richard W: FreeStyle Navigator continuous glucose monitoring system with TRUstart algorithm, a 1-hour warm-up time. J Diabetes Sci Technol 2011;5:99–106
    1. Wilinska ME, Budiman ES, Taub MB, et al. : Overnight closed-loop insulin delivery with model predictive control: assessment of hypoglycemia and hyperglycemia risk using simulation studies. J Diabetes Sci Technol 2009;3:1109–1120
    1. Wilinska ME, Chassin LJ, Acerini CL, et al. : Simulation environment to evaluate closed-loop insulin delivery systems in type 1 diabetes. J Diabetes Sci Technol 2010;4:132–144
    1. International Organization for Standardization: ISO 15197:2013: In Vitro Diagnostic Test Systems—Requirements for Blood-Glucose Monitoring System for Self-Testing in Managing Diabetes Mellitus. Geneva: International Organization for Standardization, 2013
    1. Damiano ER, McKeon K, El-Khatib FH, et al. : A comparative effectiveness analysis of three continuous glucose monitors: the Navigator, G4 Platinum, and Enlite. J Diabetes Sci Technol 2014;8:699–708
    1. Weinstein RL, Schwartz SL, Brazg RL, et al. : Accuracy of the 5-day FreeStyle Navigator continuous glucose monitoring system: comparison with frequent laboratory reference measurements. Diabetes Care 2007;30:1125–1130
    1. Mazze RS, Strock E, Borgman S, et al. : Evaluating the accuracy, reliability, and clinical applicability of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM): is CGM ready for real time? Diabetes Technol Ther 2009;11:11–18
    1. Bailey T, Zisser H, Chang A: New features and performance of a next-generation SEVEN-day continuous glucose monitoring system with short lag time. Diabetes Technol Ther 2009;11:749–755
    1. Bailey TS, Chang A, Christiansen M: Clinical accuracy of a continuous glucose monitoring system with an advanced algorithm. J Diabetes Sci Technol 2015;9:209–214
    1. Clarke WL, Anderson S, Farhy L, et al. : Evaluating the clinical accuracy of two continuous glucose sensors using continuous glucose-error grid analysis. Diabetes Care 2005;28:2412–2417
    1. Leelarathna L, Nodale M, Allen JM, et al. : Evaluating the accuracy and large inaccuracy of two continuous glucose monitoring systems. Diabetes Technol Ther 2013;15:143–149
    1. Christiansen M, Bailey T, Watkins E, et al. : A new-generation continuous glucose monitoring system: improved accuracy and reliability compared with a previous-generation system. Diabetes Technol Ther 2013;15:881–888

Source: PubMed

Sponsor e collaboratori

Condizioni mediche

Interventi farmacologici

3
Sottoscrivi