Glycemic Outcomes of Use of CLC Versus PLGS in Type 1 Diabetes: A Randomized Controlled Trial
Author(s) -
Sue A. Brown,
Roy W. Beck,
Dan Raghinaru,
Bruce A. Buckingham,
Lori M. Laffel,
R. Paul Wadwa,
Yogish C. Kudva,
Carol J. Levy,
Jordan E. Pinsker,
Eyal Dassau,
Francis J. Doyle,
Louise Ambler-Osborn,
Stacey M. Anderson,
Mei Mei Church,
Laya Ekhlaspour,
Gregory P. Forlenza,
Camilla Levister,
Vinaya Simha,
Marc D. Breton,
Craig Kollman,
John Lum,
Boris Kovatchev,
Emma Emory,
Mary Voelmle,
Katie Conshafter,
Kim Morris,
Mary C. Oliveri,
Linda Gondor-Fredrick,
Harry Mitchell,
Kayla Calvo,
Christian Wakeman,
Elvira Isganaitis,
Emily Flint,
Kenny Kim,
Lindsay Roethke,
Camille André,
Molly Piper,
David W. Lam,
Grenye O’Malley,
Selassie Ogyaadu,
Jessica Lovett,
Vikash Dadlani,
Shelly McCrady-Spitzer,
Corey Reid,
Kanchan Kumari,
G. Todd Alonso,
Robert H. Slover,
Emily Jost,
Laurel H. Messer,
Cari Berget,
Lindsey Towers,
Alex Rossick-Solis,
Tali Jacobson,
Marissa Town,
Ideen Tabatabai,
Jordan Keller,
Evalina Salas,
Samantha Passman,
Tiffany Campos,
Carlos Murphy,
Nandan Patibandla,
Sarah Borgman,
Guillermo Arreza-Rubin,
Thomas L. Eggerman,
Neal Green,
Éric Renard,
Claudio Cobelli,
Yves Reznik,
Robert Janicek,
Deanna Gabrielson,
Steven H. Belle,
Jessica R. Castle,
Jennifer Green,
Laurent Legault,
Steven M. Willi,
Carol Wysham
Publication year - 2020
Publication title -
diabetes care
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 6.636
H-Index - 363
eISSN - 1935-5548
pISSN - 0149-5992
DOI - 10.2337/dc20-0124
Subject(s) - medicine , glycemic , randomized controlled trial , type 2 diabetes , diabetes mellitus , basal (medicine) , type 1 diabetes , trial registration , gastroenterology , surgery , endocrinology
OBJECTIVE Limited information is available about glycemic outcomes with a closed-loop control (CLC) system compared with a predictive low-glucose suspend (PLGS) system. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS After 6 months of use of a CLC system in a randomized trial, 109 participants with type 1 diabetes (age range, 14–72 years; mean HbA1c, 7.1% [54 mmol/mol]) were randomly assigned to CLC (N = 54, Control-IQ) or PLGS (N = 55, Basal-IQ) groups for 3 months. The primary outcome was continuous glucose monitor (CGM)-measured time in range (TIR) for 70–180 mg/dL. Baseline CGM metrics were computed from the last 3 months of the preceding study. RESULTS All 109 participants completed the study. Mean ± SD TIR was 71.1 ± 11.2% at baseline and 67.6 ± 12.6% using intention-to-treat analysis (69.1 ± 12.2% using per-protocol analysis excluding periods of study-wide suspension of device use) over 13 weeks on CLC vs. 70.0 ± 13.6% and 60.4 ± 17.1% on PLGS (difference = 5.9%; 95% CI 3.6%, 8.3%; P < 0.001). Time >180 mg/dL was lower in the CLC group than PLGS group (difference = −6.0%; 95% CI −8.4%, −3.7%; P < 0.001) while time <54 mg/dL was similar (0.04%; 95% CI −0.05%, 0.13%; P = 0.41). HbA1c after 13 weeks was lower on CLC than PLGS (7.2% [55 mmol/mol] vs. 7.5% [56 mmol/mol], difference −0.34% [−3.7 mmol/mol]; 95% CI −0.57% [−6.2 mmol/mol], −0.11% [1.2 mmol/mol]; P = 0.0035). CONCLUSIONS Following 6 months of CLC, switching to PLGS reduced TIR and increased HbA1c toward their pre-CLC values, while hypoglycemia remained similarly reduced with both CLC and PLGS.
Accelerating Research
Robert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom
Address
John Eccles HouseRobert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom