Glycemic Improvement Using Continuous Glucose Monitoring by Baseline Time in Range: Subgroup Analyses from the DIAMOND Type 1 Diabetes Study

Peter Calhoun, David Price, Roy W Beck, Peter Calhoun, David Price, Roy W Beck

Abstract

The DIAMOND study demonstrated that real-time continuous glucose monitors (rtCGMs) improve glycemia for adults with type 1 diabetes using multiple daily injections. This analysis explores the relationship between baseline time in range (TIR) and improvement in TIR using rtCGMs or self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG). Baseline TIR was divided into three categories: <40% (9.6 h per day), <50% (12 h per day), and <60% (14.4 h per day). Compared with SMBG, use of rtCGMs increased mean TIR by an additional 16 min per day for participants with a baseline TIR <40%, 77 min per day for baseline TIR <50%, and 88 min per day for baseline TIR <60%. A greater percentage of participants increased TIR by >4 h per day using rtCGMs within the three baseline TIR groups. For participants with a baseline TIR <50%, 29% of rtCGM users improved their TIR by >4 h per day compared with no SMBG users (P < 0.001). Similar trends were found for improvement in mean glucose and time spent in hyper- and hypoglycemic ranges.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02282397.

Keywords: Continuous glucose monitoring; Glycemic control; Time in range; Type 1 diabetes.

Conflict of interest statement

PC reports receiving a study grant from Dexcom and that his institution received supplies for research from Dexcom and Abbott Diabetes Care for other studies. DP is an employee of Dexcom. RWB reports receiving a study grant from Dexcom and that his institution received supplies for research from Dexcom and Abbott Diabetes Care for other studies.

Figures

FIG. 1.
FIG. 1.
Individual improvement in TIR based on baseline TIR. rtCGM, real-time continuous glucose monitor; TIR, time in range.

References

    1. Laffel LM, Kanapka LG, Beck RW, et al. : Effect of continuous glucose monitoring on glycemic control in adolescents and young adults with type 1 diabetes: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA 2020;323:2388–2396
    1. Pratley RE, Kanapka LG, Rickels MR, et al. : Effect of continuous glucose monitoring on hypoglycemia in older adults with type 1 diabetes: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA 2020;323:2397–2406
    1. The 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, Riddlesworth T, Ruedy K, et al. : Effect of continuous glucose monitoring on glycemic control in adults with type 1 diabetes using insulin injections: the DIAMOND randomized clinical trial. JAMA 2017;317:371–378
    1. Billings LK, Parkin CG, Price D: Baseline glycated hemoglobin values predict the magnitude of glycemic improvement in patients with type 1 and type 2 diabetes: subgroup analyses from the DIAMOND study program. Diabetes Technol Ther 2018;20:561–565
    1. Lu J, Ma X, Zhou J, et al. : Association of time in range, as assessed by continuous glucose monitoring, with diabetic retinopathy in type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Care 2018;41:2370–2376
    1. Yoo JH, Choi MS, Ahn J, et al. : Association between continuous glucose monitoring-derived time in range, other core metrics, and albuminuria in type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Technol Ther 2020;22:768–776
    1. Lu J, Ma X, Shen Y, et al. : Time in range is associated with carotid intima-media thickness in type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Technol Ther 2020;22:72–78
    1. Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation Continuous Glucose Monitoring Study Group, Fiallo-Scharer R, Cheng J, et al. : Factors predictive of severe hypoglycemia in type 1 diabetes: analysis from the Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation continuous glucose monitoring randomized control trial dataset. Diabetes Care 2011;34:586–590
    1. Battelino T, Danne T, Bergenstal RM, et al. : Clinical targets for continuous glucose monitoring data interpretation: recommendations from the international consensus on time in range. Diabetes Care 2019;42:1593–1603
    1. Welsh JB, Gao P, Derdzinski M, et al. : Accuracy, utilization, and effectiveness comparisons of different continuous glucose monitoring systems. Diabetes Technol Ther 2019;21:128–132
    1. Beck RW, Connor CG, Mullen DM, et al. : The fallacy of average: how using HbA1c alone to assess glycemic control can be misleading. Diabetes Care 2017;40:994–999
    1. Runge AS, Kennedy L, Brown AS, et al. : Does time-in-range matter? Perspectives from people with diabetes on the success of current therapies and the drivers of improved outcomes. Clin Diabetes 2018;36:112–119
    1. Moscardó V, Herrero P, Reddy M, et al. : Assessment of glucose control metrics by discriminant ratio. Diabetes Technol Ther 2020;22:719–726
    1. Beck RW, Bergenstal RM, Riddlesworth TD, et al. : Validation of time in range as an outcome measure for diabetes clinical trials. Diabetes Care 2019;42:400–405

Source: PubMed

スポンサーと協力者

医学的状態

薬物療法

3
購読する