User login
TOPLINE:
Despite diabetes technology, many with type 1 diabetes (T1D) miss glycemic targets and experience severe hypoglycemia and impaired awareness of hypoglycemia (IAH).
METHODOLOGY:
- The clinical management of T1D through technology is now recognized as the standard of care, but its real-world impact on glycemic targets and severe hypoglycemic events and IAH is unclear.
- Researchers assessed the self-reported prevalence of glycemic metrics, severe hypoglycemia, and hypoglycemia awareness according to the use of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) and automated insulin delivery (AID) systems.
- They enrolled 2044 individuals diagnosed with T1D for at least 2 years (mean age, 43.0 years; 72.1% women; 95.4% White) from the T1D Exchange Registry and online communities who filled an online survey.
- Participants were stratified on the basis of the presence or absence of CGM and different insulin delivery methods (multiple daily injections, conventional pumps, or AID systems).
- The primary outcome was the proportion of participants who achieved glycemic targets (self-reported A1c), had severe hypoglycemia (any low glucose incidence in 12 months), and/or IAH (a modified Gold score on a seven-point Likert scale).
TAKEAWAY:
- Most participants (91.7%) used CGM, and 50.8% of CGM users used an AID system.
- Despite advanced interventions, only 59.6% (95% CI, 57.3%-61.8%) of CGM users met the glycemic target (A1c < 7%), while nearly 40% of CGM users and 35.6% of AID users didn’t reach the target.
- At least one event of severe hypoglycemia in the previous 12 months was reported in 10.8% of CGM users and 16.6% of those using an AID system.
- IAH prevalence was seen in 31.1% (95% CI, 29.0%-33.2%) and 30.3% (95% CI, 17.5%-33.3%) of participants using CGM and CGM + AID, respectively.
IN PRACTICE:
“Educational initiatives continue to be important for all individuals with type 1 diabetes, and the development of novel therapeutic options and strategies, including bihormonal AID systems and beta-cell replacement, will be required to enable more of these individuals to meet treatment goals,” the authors wrote.
SOURCE:
The study, published online in Diabetes Care, was led by Jennifer L. Sherr, MD, PhD, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut.
LIMITATIONS:
The survey participants in this study were from the T1D Exchange online community, who tend to be highly involved, have technology experience, and are more likely to achieve glycemic targets. The data reported as part of the survey were based on self-reports by participants and may be subject to recall bias. Notably, severe hypoglycemic events may be overreported by individuals using CGM and AID systems due to sensor alarms.
DISCLOSURES:
The study was funded by Vertex Pharmaceuticals. Several authors disclosed financial relationships, including grants, consulting fees, honoraria, stock ownership, and employment with pharmaceutical and device companies and other entities.
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
TOPLINE:
Despite diabetes technology, many with type 1 diabetes (T1D) miss glycemic targets and experience severe hypoglycemia and impaired awareness of hypoglycemia (IAH).
METHODOLOGY:
- The clinical management of T1D through technology is now recognized as the standard of care, but its real-world impact on glycemic targets and severe hypoglycemic events and IAH is unclear.
- Researchers assessed the self-reported prevalence of glycemic metrics, severe hypoglycemia, and hypoglycemia awareness according to the use of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) and automated insulin delivery (AID) systems.
- They enrolled 2044 individuals diagnosed with T1D for at least 2 years (mean age, 43.0 years; 72.1% women; 95.4% White) from the T1D Exchange Registry and online communities who filled an online survey.
- Participants were stratified on the basis of the presence or absence of CGM and different insulin delivery methods (multiple daily injections, conventional pumps, or AID systems).
- The primary outcome was the proportion of participants who achieved glycemic targets (self-reported A1c), had severe hypoglycemia (any low glucose incidence in 12 months), and/or IAH (a modified Gold score on a seven-point Likert scale).
TAKEAWAY:
- Most participants (91.7%) used CGM, and 50.8% of CGM users used an AID system.
- Despite advanced interventions, only 59.6% (95% CI, 57.3%-61.8%) of CGM users met the glycemic target (A1c < 7%), while nearly 40% of CGM users and 35.6% of AID users didn’t reach the target.
- At least one event of severe hypoglycemia in the previous 12 months was reported in 10.8% of CGM users and 16.6% of those using an AID system.
- IAH prevalence was seen in 31.1% (95% CI, 29.0%-33.2%) and 30.3% (95% CI, 17.5%-33.3%) of participants using CGM and CGM + AID, respectively.
IN PRACTICE:
“Educational initiatives continue to be important for all individuals with type 1 diabetes, and the development of novel therapeutic options and strategies, including bihormonal AID systems and beta-cell replacement, will be required to enable more of these individuals to meet treatment goals,” the authors wrote.
SOURCE:
The study, published online in Diabetes Care, was led by Jennifer L. Sherr, MD, PhD, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut.
LIMITATIONS:
The survey participants in this study were from the T1D Exchange online community, who tend to be highly involved, have technology experience, and are more likely to achieve glycemic targets. The data reported as part of the survey were based on self-reports by participants and may be subject to recall bias. Notably, severe hypoglycemic events may be overreported by individuals using CGM and AID systems due to sensor alarms.
DISCLOSURES:
The study was funded by Vertex Pharmaceuticals. Several authors disclosed financial relationships, including grants, consulting fees, honoraria, stock ownership, and employment with pharmaceutical and device companies and other entities.
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
TOPLINE:
Despite diabetes technology, many with type 1 diabetes (T1D) miss glycemic targets and experience severe hypoglycemia and impaired awareness of hypoglycemia (IAH).
METHODOLOGY:
- The clinical management of T1D through technology is now recognized as the standard of care, but its real-world impact on glycemic targets and severe hypoglycemic events and IAH is unclear.
- Researchers assessed the self-reported prevalence of glycemic metrics, severe hypoglycemia, and hypoglycemia awareness according to the use of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) and automated insulin delivery (AID) systems.
- They enrolled 2044 individuals diagnosed with T1D for at least 2 years (mean age, 43.0 years; 72.1% women; 95.4% White) from the T1D Exchange Registry and online communities who filled an online survey.
- Participants were stratified on the basis of the presence or absence of CGM and different insulin delivery methods (multiple daily injections, conventional pumps, or AID systems).
- The primary outcome was the proportion of participants who achieved glycemic targets (self-reported A1c), had severe hypoglycemia (any low glucose incidence in 12 months), and/or IAH (a modified Gold score on a seven-point Likert scale).
TAKEAWAY:
- Most participants (91.7%) used CGM, and 50.8% of CGM users used an AID system.
- Despite advanced interventions, only 59.6% (95% CI, 57.3%-61.8%) of CGM users met the glycemic target (A1c < 7%), while nearly 40% of CGM users and 35.6% of AID users didn’t reach the target.
- At least one event of severe hypoglycemia in the previous 12 months was reported in 10.8% of CGM users and 16.6% of those using an AID system.
- IAH prevalence was seen in 31.1% (95% CI, 29.0%-33.2%) and 30.3% (95% CI, 17.5%-33.3%) of participants using CGM and CGM + AID, respectively.
IN PRACTICE:
“Educational initiatives continue to be important for all individuals with type 1 diabetes, and the development of novel therapeutic options and strategies, including bihormonal AID systems and beta-cell replacement, will be required to enable more of these individuals to meet treatment goals,” the authors wrote.
SOURCE:
The study, published online in Diabetes Care, was led by Jennifer L. Sherr, MD, PhD, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut.
LIMITATIONS:
The survey participants in this study were from the T1D Exchange online community, who tend to be highly involved, have technology experience, and are more likely to achieve glycemic targets. The data reported as part of the survey were based on self-reports by participants and may be subject to recall bias. Notably, severe hypoglycemic events may be overreported by individuals using CGM and AID systems due to sensor alarms.
DISCLOSURES:
The study was funded by Vertex Pharmaceuticals. Several authors disclosed financial relationships, including grants, consulting fees, honoraria, stock ownership, and employment with pharmaceutical and device companies and other entities.
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.