RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: We have evaluated the performance of the FreeStyle Libre® 3 continuous glucose monitoring system (FSL3) compared to (1) the venous plasma reference for participants aged ≥ 6 years and (2) the fingerstick capillary blood glucose (BG) reference for pediatric participants aged 4 and 5 years. The analytical performance of the third-generation factory-calibrated FSL3 CGM system was compared to the plasma venous blood glucose reference using the YSI 2300 STAT PLUS Glucose and Lactate Analyzer (the YSI reference) and the self-monitoring blood glucose (SMBG) reference for participants aged ≥ 6 years and participants aged 4 and 5 years, respectively. METHODS: A total of 108 participants aged ≥ 4 years with type 1 or type 2 diabetes from four sites in the USA were enrolled in the study. The data of 100 participants were ultimately evaluated. Adult participants (aged ≥ 18 years) participated in three in-clinic sessions, and pediatric participants (aged 4-17 years) participated in up to two in-clinic sessions, all stratified to provide data for days 1, 2, 3, 7, 8, 9, 12, 13 or 14 of sensor wear. Performance evaluation included accuracy measures, such as proportion of CGM values that fell within ± 20% or ± 20 mg/dL (1.1 mmol/L) of the reference glucose values, and difference measures, such as the mean absolute relative difference (MARD) between the CGM and reference values. RESULTS: Data from the 100 study participants were analyzed. The overall MARD was 7.8%, and 93.4% of the CGM values were within ± 20% or ± 20 mg/dL of the YSI reference for participants aged ≥ 6 years, with 6845 CGM-YSI matched pairs. The performance was stable over the 14-day wear period. For participants aged 4-5 years, MARD was 10.0%, and 88.9% of the CGM values were within 20%/20 mg/dL compared to a SMBG reference. No serious adverse events were reported. CONCLUSIONS: The FSL3 CGM system demonstrated accurate performance across the dynamic glycemic range during the 14-day sensor wear period.

RESUMEN

The article published by Kevin Cowart in this issue of the Journal of Diabetes Science and Technology (JDST) is a detailed overview of the clinical trial data and analysis used to demonstrate the safety and effectiveness of the Eversense continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) System for regulatory approval and clinical acceptance. The article describes the published study results for safety, accuracy, reliability, ease of insertion/removal, adverse events, and ease of diabetes patient-use for controlling their glucose levels short and long term. The author nicely compares Eversense CGM System safety and performance with the short-term subcutaneous tissue CGM systems being commercialized by Dexcom, Medtronic Diabetes, and Abbott Diabetes. This comparison may help the clinician define which type of patient with diabetes might benefit the most from the long-term implantable CGM system. The majority of studied patients describe a positive experience managing their diabetes with the Eversense CGM System and request implantation of a new sensor 90 or 180 days later.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Objective: Hypoglycemia has been shown to promote inflammation, a common pathogenic process, in many chronic health conditions including diabetes and cardiovascular disease. The aim of this study was to investigate the association of hypoglycemia, assessed by continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) with major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE) outcomes and all-cause mortality. Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted with 1,520 patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). The severity of hypoglycemia event was assessed by CGM system. Results: Three hundred and forty-seven participants experienced hypoglycemia events (323 with mild hypoglycemia and 24 with severe hypoglycemia). A fraction of 72.62% hypoglycemia was asymptomatic. During a median follow-up of 31 months, 380 participants reached the primary outcome of MACE (61 cardiovascular death, 50 non-fatal myocardial infarction [MI], 116 non-fatal stroke, 153 unstable angina requiring hospitalization), 80 participants died before the end of the study. In multivariate Cox regression models, hypoglycemia was associated with cardiovascular death (HR 2.642[95CI% 1.398-4.994]), non-fatal stroke (HR 1.813 [95CI% 1.110-2.960]) and all-cause mortality (HR 1.960 [95 CI% 1.124- 3.418]) after the full adjustment. Hypoglycemia was not associated with non-fatal MI and unstable angina. The HR of severe hypoglycemia was higher than mild hypoglycemia for cardiovascular death. Patients with symptomatic and asymptomatic hypoglycemia had similar MACE outcomes and all-cause mortality. Conclusions: CGM is effective to detect asymptomatic and nocturnal hypoglycemia. Hypoglycemia is associated with an increased risk of non-fatal stroke, cardiovascular related death, and total mortality. The cardiovascular mortality is dose-dependent on the severity of hypoglycemia.

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: To be able to compare continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) systems, they have to be worn in parallel by the same subjects. This study evaluated the performance and usability of three different CGM systems in direct comparison. METHOD: In this open, prospective study at two sites, 54 patients with diabetes wore three CGM systems each (Dexcom G5™ Mobile CGM system [DG5], Guardian™ Connect system [GC], and a Roche CGM system [RCGM]) in parallel for 6 or 7 days in a mixed inpatient and outpatient setting. Capillary comparison measurements were performed using a self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) system. During study site visits, glucose excursions were induced. Performance of the systems was evaluated by calculating mean absolute relative differences (MARD, calculated as absolute differences for glucose concentrations <100 mg/dL and as relative differences for glucose concentrations ≥100 mg/dL), and mean relative differences (MRD, bias) between CGM and SMBG results. In addition, usability of the systems was assessed. RESULTS: Overall MARD was 10.1 ± 2.1 for DG5, 11.5 ± 4.2 for GC, and 11.9 ± 5.6 for RCGM. Performance improved in all systems after the first day of use. All systems showed >99% of values within zones A and B of the consensus error grid. Overall, all CGM systems showed a small negative bias compared to SMBG. Usability of the systems differed regarding patch adhesion rate, failure rate, and patient rating. Most patients preferred GC, but in general all systems were rated positively. CONCLUSION: All three CGM systems showed similar overall accuracy in this direct comparison, but small differences were observed with regard to specific glucose ranges and usability aspects.

Asunto(s)

Asunto(s)