Children and adolescent with suboptimal control of type 1 diabetes improve during the first 2 years on automated insulin delivery system.
database
glycaemic control
insulin pump therapy
research
type 1 diabetes
Journal
Diabetes, obesity & metabolism
ISSN: 1463-1326
Titre abrégé: Diabetes Obes Metab
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100883645
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
30 Sep 2024
30 Sep 2024
Historique:
revised:
18
09
2024
received:
28
06
2024
accepted:
18
09
2024
medline:
30
9
2024
pubmed:
30
9
2024
entrez:
30
9
2024
Statut:
aheadofprint
Résumé
This study investigates the influence of the automated insulin delivery system (AID) on glycaemic control in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes (T1D) who do not reach optimal glycaemic control with traditional treatment options. All the patients aged 7 to 16 years with T1D who initiated the AID system between 24 October 2020 and 5 January 2022 in the Helsinki University Hospital and had haemoglobin A1C (HbA1c) levels above 53 mmol/mol/7.0% (N = 79) were included. Time in tight range (TITR), time in range (TIR), HbA1c, mean sensor glucose (SG) value, time below range (TBR) and SG coefficient of variance (CV) were measured at 0, 3, 12 and 24 months. The changes in the outcome measures between the time points were included in the analyses, and statistically significant level was p-value <0.01. After the initiation of AID, glycaemic control improved, and the effect lasted throughout the study period. Between 0 and 3 months, TITR and TIR increased (mean 11.7% [10.6], mean 18.1% [standard deviation [SD] 13.7], p < 0.001), whereas HbA1c and mean SG values decreased significantly (-8.3 mmol/mol [8.7]/-2.9% [2.9], p < 0.001, -1.8 mmol/L [1.7], p < 0.001). These effects were sustainable and were still visible at 12 and 24 months. Glycaemic control in patients not reaching treatment goals improved significantly after the initiation of the AID system, and the favourable effect lasted throughout the follow-up. AID treatment could be an option for also those paediatric patients with T1D who do not have good skills in diabetes management.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Subventions
Organisme : Helsinki University Hospital, Pediatric Research Center
Informations de copyright
© 2024 The Author(s). Diabetes, Obesity and Metabolism published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Références
Patterson C, Dahlquist G, Gyürüs E, et al. Incidence trends for childhood type 1 diabetes in Europe during 1989–2003 and predicted new cases 2005–20: a multicentre prospective registration study. Lancet. 2009;373:2027‐2033.
Lind M, Pivodic A, Svensson A, et al. HbA1c level as a risk factor for retinopathy and nephropathy in children and adults with type 1 diabetes: Swedish population based cohort study. BMJ. 2019;366:14894.
Arnqvist HJ, Westerlund MC, Fredrikson M, Ludvigsson J, Nordwall M. Impact of HbA1c, followed 32 years from diagnosis of type 1 diabetes, on the development of severe retinopathy and nephropathy: the VISS study (vascular diabetic complications in Southeast Sweden). Diabetes Care. 2022;45:2675‐2682.
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.
Danne T, Nimri R, Battelino T, et al. International consensus on use of continuous glucose monitoring. Diabetes Care. 2017;40:1631‐1640.
Finnish Institute for Health and Welfare. Finnish National Diabetes Register. https://repo.thl.fi/sites/nqrdm/viimeisin/ 2024.
Passanisi S, Piona C, Salzano G, et al. Aiming for the best glycemic control beyond time in range: time in tight range as a new CGM metric in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes using different treatment modalities. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2023;26:161‐166.
Petersson J, Åkesson K, Sundberg F, Särnblad S. Translating glycated hemoglobin A1c into time spent in glucose target range: a multicenter study. Pediatr Diabetes. 2019;20:339‐344.
Eviz E, Killi N, Karakus K, et al. Assessing the feasibility of time in tight range (TITR) targets with advanced hybrid closed loop (AHCL) use in children and adolescents: a single‐centre real‐world study. Diabet Med. 2024;41:e15333.
Ferreira R, Trevisan T, Pasqualotto E, et al. Efficacy of the hybrid closed‐loop insulin delivery system in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes: a meta‐analysis with trial sequential analysis. Arch Endocrinol Metab. 2024;68:e230280.
Abraham M, de Bock M, Smith G, et al. Australian juvenile diabetes research fund closed‐loop research group: effect of a hybrid closed‐loop system on glycemic and psychosocial outcomes in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes a randomized clinical trial. JAMA Pediatr. 2021;175:1227‐1235.
Petrovski G, Al Khalaf F, Campbell J, et al. One‐year experience of hybrid closed‐loop system in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes previously treated with multiple daily injections: drivers to successful outcomes. Acta Diabetol. 2021;58:207‐213.
Varimo T, Pulkkinen MA, Hakonen E, Hero M, Miettinen PJ, Tuomaala AK. First year on commercial hybrid closed‐loop system–experience on 111 children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes. Pediatr Diabetes. 2021;22:909‐915.
Seget S, Chobot A, Tarasiewicz M, et al. Glycemic control in children with type 1 diabetes treated with the advanced hybrid closed loop system 2‐year prospective, observational, two‐center study. Front Endocrinol. 2024;15:1332418.
Ng S, Wright N, Yardley D, et al. Long‐term assessment of the NHS hybrid closed‐loop real‐world study on glycaemic outcomes, time‐in‐range, and quality of life in children and young people with type 1 diabetes. BMC Med. 2024;1:175.
Passanisi S, Salzano G, Bombaci B, et al. Sustained effectiveness of an advanced hybrid closed‐loop system in a cohort of children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes: a 1‐year real‐world study. Diabetes Care. 2024;6:1084‐1091.
Lombardo F, Passanisi S, Alibrandi A, et al. MiniMed 780G six‐month use in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes: clinical targets and predictors of optimal glucose control. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2023;6:404‐413.
Bismuth É, Tubiana‐Rufi N, Rynders CA, et al. Sustained 3‐year improvement of glucose control with hybrid closed loop in children with type 1 diabetes while going through puberty. Diabetes Care. 2024;47:1696‐1703.
Tauschmann M, Thabit H, Bally L, et al. Closed‐loop insulin delivery in suboptimally controlled type 1 diabetes: a multicentre, 12‐week randomised trial. The Lancet. 2018;392:1321‐1329.
Boucsein A, Watson A, Frewen C, et al. Impact of advanced hybrid closed loop on youth with high‐risk type 1 diabetes using multiple daily injections. Diabetes Care. 2023;46:628‐632.
Michaels V, Boucsein A, Watson A, et al. Glucose and psychosocial outcomes 12 months following transition from multiple daily injections to advanced hybrid closed loop in youth with type 1 diabetes and suboptimal Glycemia. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2024;26:40‐48.
Prahalad P, Schwandt A, Besançon S, et al. SWEET study group. Hemoglobin A1c trajectories in the first 18 months after diabetes diagnosis in the SWEET diabetes registry. Pediatr Diabetes. 2022;23:228‐236.
Boughton C, Allen J, Ware J, et al. CLOuD consortium. Closed‐loop therapy and preservation of C‐peptide secretion in type 1 diabetes. N Engl J Med. 2022;387:882‐893.
McVean J, Forlenza GP, Beck RW, et al. Effect of tight glycemic control on pancreatic Beta cell function in newly diagnosed pediatric type 1 diabetes: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2023;329:980‐989.
Ekhlaspour L, Town M, Raghinaru D, et al. & iDCL trial research group. Glycemic outcomes in baseline hemoglobin A1C subgroups in the international diabetes closed‐loop trial. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2022;24:588‐591.
Castañeda J, Mathieu C, Aanstoot H, et al. Predictors of time in target glucose range in real‐world users of the MiniMed 780G system. Diabetes Obes Metab. 2022;11:2212‐2221.
Castañeda J, Arrieta A, van den Heuvel T, Battelino T, Cohen O. Time in tight glucose range in type 1 diabetes: predictive factors and achievable targets in real‐world users of the MiniMed 780G system. Diabetes Care. 2024;5:790‐797.
Arrieta A, Battelino T, Scaramuzza A, et al. Comparison of MiniMed 780G system performance in users aged younger and older than 15 years: evidence from 12 870 real‐world users. Diabetes Obes Metab. 2022;24:1370‐1379.
Messer L, Forlenza G, Sherr J, et al. Optimizing hybrid closed‐loop therapy in adolescents and emerging adults using the MiniMed 670G system. Diabetes Care. 2018;41:789‐796.
Duffus S, Ta'ani Z, Slaughter J, et al. Increased proportion of time in hybrid closed‐loop "auto mode" is associated with improved glycaemic control for adolescent and young patients with adult type 1 diabetes using the MiniMed 670G insulin pump. Diabetes Obes Metab. 2020;22:688‐693.
Cobry E, Bisio A, Wadwa R, Breton M. Improvements in parental sleep, fear of hypoglycemia, and diabetes distress with use of an advanced hybrid closed‐loop system. Diabetes Care. 2022;45:1292‐1295.
Yapanis M, James S, Craig ME, O'Neal D, Ekinci EI. Complications of diabetes and metrics of glycemic management derived from continuous glucose monitoring. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2022;107:e2221‐e2236.
Ware J, Boughton C, Allen J, et al. DAN05 consortium. Cambridge hybrid closed‐loop algorithm in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes: a multicentre 6‐month randomised controlled trial. Lancet digit. Health. 2022;4:e245‐e255.