Improving the clinical value and utility of CGM systems: issues and recommendations: a joint statement of the European Association for the Study of Diabetes and the American Diabetes Association Diabetes Technology Working Group

The first systems for continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) became available over 15 years ago. Many then believed CGM would revolutionize the use of intensive insulin therapy in diabetes; however, progress toward that vision has been gradual. Although increasing, the proportion of individuals using CGM rather than conventional systems for self-monitoring of blood glucose on a daily basis is still low in most parts of the world. Barriers to uptake include cost, measurement reliability (particularly with earlier-generation systems), human factors issues, lack of a standardized format for displaying results, and uncertainty on how best to use CGM data to make therapeutic decisions. This Scientific Statement makes recommendations for systemic improvements in clinical use and regulatory (pre- and postmarketing) handling of CGM devices. The aim is to improve safety and efficacy in order to support the advancement of the technology in achieving its potential to improve quality of life and health outcomes for more people with diabetes

Improving the clinical value and utility of CGM systems: issues and recommendations : a joint statement of the European Association for the Study of Diabetes and the American Diabetes Association Diabetes Technology Working Group

The first systems for continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) became available over 15 years ago. Many then believed CGM would revolutionise the use of intensive insulin therapy in diabetes; however, progress towards that vision has been gradual. Although increasing, the proportion of individuals using CGM rather than conventional systems for self-monitoring of blood glucose on a daily basis is still low in most parts of the world. Barriers to uptake include cost, measurement reliability (particularly with earlier-generation systems), human factors issues, lack of a standardised format for displaying results and uncertainty on how best to use CGM data to make therapeutic decisions. This scientific statement makes recommendations for systemic improvements in clinical use and regulatory (pre- and postmarketing) handling of CGM devices. The aim is to improve safety and efficacy in order to support the advancement of the technology in achieving its potential to improve quality of life and health outcomes for more people with diabetes

Can a Tool That Automates Insulin Titration Be a Key to Diabetes Management?

Abstract Background: Most patients who use insulin do not achieve optimal glycemic control and become susceptible to complications. Numerous clinical trials have shown that frequent insulin dosage titration is imperative to achieve glycemic control. Unfortunately, implementation of such a paradigm is often impractical. We hypothesized that the Diabetes Insulin Guidance System (DIGS?) (Hygieia, Inc., Ann Arbor, MI) software, which automatically advises patients on adjustment of insulin dosage, would provide safe and effective weekly insulin dosage adjustments. Subjects and Methods: In a feasibility study we enrolled patients with type 1 and type 2 diabetes, treated with a variety of insulin regimens and having suboptimal glycemic control. The 12-week intervention period followed a 4-week baseline run-in period. During the intervention, DIGS processed patients' glucose readings and provided insulin dosage adjustments on a weekly basis. If approved by the study team, the adjusted insulin dosage was communicated to the patients. Insulin formulations were not changed during the study. The primary outcome was the fraction of DIGS dosage adjustments approved by the study team, and the secondary outcome was improved glycemic control. Results: Forty-six patients were recruited, and eight withdrew. The DIGS software recommended 1,734 insulin dosage adjustments, of which 1,731 (99.83%) were approved. During the run-in period the weekly average glucose was stable at 174.2±36.7?mg/dL (9.7±2.0?mmol/L). During the following 12 weeks, DIGS dosage adjustments resulted in progressive improvement in average glucose to 163.3±35.1?mg/dL (9.1±1.9?mmol/L) (P<0.03). Mean glycosylated hemoglobin decreased from 8.4±0.8% to 7.9±0.9% (P<0.05). Concomitantly, the frequency of hypoglycemia decreased by 25.2%. Conclusions: The DIGS software provided patients with safe and effective weekly insulin dosage adjustments. Widespread implementation of DIGS may improve the outcome and reduce the cost of implementing effective insulin therapy.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/98442/1/dia%2E2011%2E0303.pd

Low cardiorespiratory fitness in people at risk for type 2 diabetes: early marker for insulin resistance

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Purpose</p> <p>There is a significant association between insulin resistance and low cardiorespiratory fitness in nondiabetic subjects. In a population with risk factors for type 2 diabetes (T2DM), before they are insulin resistant, we investigated low exercise capacity (VO2max) as an early marker of impaired insulin sensitivity in order to determine earlier interventions to prevent development of insulin resistance syndrome (IRS) and T2DM.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Cross-sectional analyses of data on 369 (78 men and 291 women) people at risk for IRS and T2DM, aged 45.6 +/- 10 years (20-65 years) old from the Community Diabetes Prevention Project in Minnesota were carried out. The cardiorespiratory fitness (VO2max) by respiratory gas exchange and bicycle ergometer were measured in our at risk non insulin resistant population and compared with a control group living in the same geographic area. Both groups were equally sedentary, matched for age, gender and BMI.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The most prevalent abnormality in the study population was markedly low VO2max when compared with general work site screening control group, (n = 177; 137F; 40 M, mean age 40 ± 11 years; BMI = 27.8 ± 6.1 kg/m²). Individuals at risk for IRS and T2DM had a VO2max (22 ± 6 ml/kg/min) 15% lower than the control group VO2max (26 ± 9 ml/kg/min) (p < 0.001). It was foun that VO₂max was inversely correlated with HOMA-IR (r = -0.30, p < 0.0001).</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Decreased VO2max is correlated with impaired insulin sensitivity and was the most prevalent abnormality in a population at risk for IRS and T2DM but without overt disease. This raises the possibility that decreased VO2 max is among the earliest indicators of IRS and T2DM therefore, an important risk factor for disease progression.</p

Effects of Exenatide vs. Metformin on endothelial function in obese patients with pre-diabetes: a randomized trial

BACKGROUND: Glucagon like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonist treatment may improve endothelial function via direct and indirect mechanisms. We compared the acute and chronic effects of the GLP-1 receptor agonist exenatide vs. metformin on endothelial function in patients with obesity and pre-diabetes. METHODS: We performed a randomized, open-label, clinical trial in 50 non-diabetic individuals (mean age 58.5 ± 10.0; 38 females) with abdominal obesity and either impaired fasting glucose, elevated HbA1c, or impaired glucose tolerance (IGT) who were randomized to receive 3-months of exenatide or metformin. Microvascular endothelial function, assessed by digital reactive hyperemia (reactive hyperemic index: RHI), C-reactive protein (CRP), circulating oxidized LDL (oxLDL), and vascular cell adhesion molecule-1 (VCAM-1) were measured at baseline and 3-months. Seven subjects with IGT participated in a sub-study comparing the effects of pre-administration of exenatide and metformin on postprandial endothelial function. RESULTS: There were no differences for the change in RHI (Δ exenatide: 0.01 ± 0.68 vs. Δ metformin: -0.17 ± 0.72, P = 0.348), CRP, oxLDL, or VCAM-1 between exenatide and metformin treatment. Triglycerides were reduced more with exenatide compared to metformin (Δ exenatide: -25.5 ± 45.7 mg/dL vs. Δ metformin: -2.9 ± 22.8 mg/dL, P = 0.032). In the sub-study, there was no difference in postprandial RHI between exenatide and metformin. CONCLUSIONS: Three months of exenatide therapy had similar effects on microvascular endothelial function, markers of inflammation, oxidative stress, and vascular activation, as metformin, in patients with obesity and pre-diabetes. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: This study is registered on http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/: NCT0054672

Efficacy and Safety of Taspoglutide Versus Sitagliptin for Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus (T-Emerge 4 Trial)

INTRODUCTION: The efficacy and safety of taspoglutide, a long-acting human glucagon-like peptide-1 analog, were compared with sitagliptin or placebo, as adjunct to metformin, in patients with inadequately controlled type 2 diabetes. METHODS: In this randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, parallel-group trial, patients were randomized to taspoglutide 10 mg once weekly (QW), 20 mg QW, 100 mg sitagliptin once daily (QD), or placebo for 24 weeks, followed by 28-week short-term and 104-week long-term extension periods. The primary endpoint was change in glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA(1c)) after 24 weeks. RESULTS: In this study, 666 patients (baseline HbA(1c), 7.96% [SD, 0.87]; fasting plasma glucose, 9.61 mmol/L [2.56]; body weight, 92.4 kg [19.3]) were randomized to taspoglutide 10 mg QW (n = 190), 20 mg QW (n = 198), 100 mg sitagliptin QD (n = 185), or placebo (n = 93) for 24 weeks. After 24 weeks, least squares mean (SE) HbA(1c) reductions were greater with taspoglutide 10 mg (−1.23% [0.06]) and 20 mg (−1.30% [0.06]) versus sitagliptin (−0.89% [0.06]) or placebo (−0.10% [0.08]). Mean treatment differences with taspoglutide 10 mg and 20 mg were −0.34 (95% confidence intervals [CI]: −0.49, −0.19) and −0.41 (−0.56, −0.26) versus sitagliptin; and −1.13 (−1.31, −0.95) and −1.20 (−1.38, −1.02) versus placebo. Weight loss was greater with taspoglutide 10 mg (−1.8 kg [0.3]) and 20 mg (−2.6 kg [0.3]) than sitagliptin (−0.9 kg [0.3]) or placebo (−0.5 kg [0.4]). Effects on HbA(1c) and weight loss continued through 52 weeks of treatment. No cases of severe hypoglycemia occurred with any active treatment. Gastrointestinal adverse events, and allergic and injection-site reactions were higher in the taspoglutide groups, causing higher discontinuation rates. Anti-taspoglutide antibodies were confirmed in 46% of patients. CONCLUSION: Taspoglutide demonstrated better efficacy on glycemic control and weight loss than sitagliptin, but a high incidence of adverse events led to high discontinuation rates. The safety profile of taspoglutide in this trial was similar to other trials in the clinical program, and led to the discontinuation of dosing

Diabetes Digital App Technology: Benefits, Challenges, and Recommendations. A Consensus Report by the European Association for the Study of Diabetes (EASD) and the American Diabetes Association (ADA) Diabetes Technology Working Group

Digital health technology, especially digital and health applications ("apps"), have been developing rapidly to help people manage their diabetes. Numerous health-related apps provided on smartphones and other wireless devices are available to support people with diabetes who need to adopt either lifestyle interventions or medication adjustments in response to glucose-monitoring data. However, regulations and guidelines have not caught up with the burgeoning field to standardize how mobile health apps are reviewed and monitored for patient safety and clinical validity. The available evidence on the safety and effectiveness of mobile health apps, especially for diabetes, remains limited. The European Association for the Study of Diabetes (EASD) and the American Diabetes Association (ADA) have therefore conducted a joint review of the current landscape of available diabetes digital health technology (only stand-alone diabetes apps, as opposed to those that are integral to a regulated medical device, such as insulin pumps, continuous glucose monitoring systems, and automated insulin delivery systems) and practices of regulatory authorities and organizations. We found that, across the U.S. and Europe, mobile apps intended to manage health and wellness are largely unregulated unless they meet the definition of medical devices for therapeutic and/or diagnostic purposes. International organizations, including the International Medical Device Regulators Forum and the World Health Organization, have made strides in classifying different types of digital health technology and integrating digital health technology into the field of medical devices. As the diabetes digital health field continues to develop and become more fully integrated into everyday life, we wish to ensure that it is based on the best evidence for safety and efficacy. As a result, we bring to light several issues that the diabetes community, including regulatory authorities, policy makers, professional organizations, researchers, people with diabetes, and health care professionals, needs to address to ensure that diabetes health technology can meet its full potential. These issues range from inadequate evidence on app accuracy and clinical validity to lack of training provision, poor interoperability and standardization, and insufficient data security. We conclude with a series of recommended actions to resolve some of these shortcomings

New Insulin Glargine 300 Units/mL Versus Glargine 100 Units/mL in People With Type 1 Diabetes: A Randomized, Phase 3a, Open-Label Clinical Trial (EDITION 4)

OBJECTIVE Insulin therapy in type 1 diabetes still provides suboptimal outcomes. Insulin glargine 300 units/mL (Gla-300), with a flatter pharmacodynamic profile compared with insulin glargine 100 units/mL (Gla-100), is an approach to this problem. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS People with type 1 diabetes, using a mealtime and basal insulin regimen, were randomized open-label to Gla-300 or Gla-100 and to morning or evening injection, continuing the mealtime analog, and followed for 6 months. RESULTS Participants (n = 549) were a mean age of 47 years and had a mean duration of diabetes of 21 years and BMI of 27.6 kg/m2. The change in HbA1c (primary end point; baseline 8.1%) was equivalent in the two treatment groups (difference, 0.04% [95% CI −0.10 to 0.19]) (0.4 mmol/mol [−1.1 to 2.1]), and Gla-300 was thus noninferior. Similar results with wider 95% CIs were found for morning and evening injection times and for prebreakfast self-measured plasma glucose (SMPG) overall. Results were also similar for Gla-300 when morning and evening injection time was compared, including overlapping 8-point SMPG profiles. Hypoglycemia did not differ, except for the first 8 weeks of the study, when nocturnal confirmed or severe hypoglycemia was lower with Gla-300 (rate ratio 0.69 [95% CI 0.53–0.91]). Hypoglycemia with Gla-300 did not differ by time of injection. The basal insulin dose was somewhat higher at 6 months for Gla-300. The adverse event profile did not differ and was independent of the Gla-300 time of injection. Weight gain was lower with Gla-300. CONCLUSIONS In long-duration type 1 diabetes, Gla-300 provides similar glucose control to Gla-100, with a lower risk of hypoglycemia after transfer from other insulins, independent of time of injection, and less weight gain

Management of hyperglycemia in type 2 diabetes: a patient-centered approach: position statement of the American Diabetes Association (ADA) and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes (EASD).

Glycemic management in type 2 diabetes mellitus has become increasingly complex and, to some extent, controversial, with a widening array of pharmacological agents now available (1–5), mounting concerns about their potential adverse effects and new uncertainties regarding the benefits of intensive glycemic control on macrovascular complications (6–9). Many clinicians are therefore perplexed as to the optimal strategies for their patients. As a consequence, the American Diabetes Association (ADA) and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes (EASD) convened a joint task force to examine the evidence and develop recommendations for antihyperglycemic therapy in nonpregnant adults with type 2 diabetes. Several guideline documents have been developed by members of these two organizations (10) and by other societies and federations (2,11–15). However, an update was deemed necessary because of contemporary information on the benefits/risks of glycemic control, recent evidence concerning efficacy and safety of several new drug classes (16,17), the withdrawal/restriction of others, and increasing calls for a move toward more patient-centered care (18,19). This statement has been written incorporating the best available evidence and, where solid support does not exist, using the experience and insight of the writing group, incorporating an extensive review by additional experts (acknowledged below). The document refers to glycemic control; yet this clearly needs to be pursued within a multifactorial risk reduction framework. This stems from the fact that patients with type 2 diabetes are at increased risk of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality; the aggressive management of cardiovascular