Dataset Information

Use of Sitagliptin With Closed-Loop Technology to Decrease Postprandial Blood Glucose in Type 1 Diabetes.

ABSTRACT: Postprandial hyperglycemia poses a challenge to closed-loop systems. Dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors, like sitagliptin, reduce postprandial glucose concentrations in patients with type 2 diabetes. The objective of this study was to assess sitagliptin's role in type 1 diabetes (T1DM) as an adjunct therapy in reducing postprandial blood glucose with an insulin-only closed-loop system.This was a randomized, double-blinded, placebo controlled, crossover design trial. The participants were18-35 years old, had T1DM, and an HbA1c of ? 8.5%. A dose determination study included eight subjects with T1DM. There were three study visits. Four hours after receiving study drug (placebo, sitagliptin 50 mg, sitagliptin 100 mg), subjects underwent a mixed meal tolerance test with assessment of hormone concentrations. In a second study, 15 subjects underwent two visits receiving either placebo or 100 mg of sitagliptin plus an insulin only closed-loop system for 25 hours with timed meals. Blood glucose and other hormone concentrations were analyzed using repeated measures ANOVA.For the dose determination study, sitagliptin 100 mg resulted in reduced postprandial blood glucose ( P = .006). For the closed-loop study, glucose concentrations were lower in the treatment group, most prominently during the first two study meals ( P = .03). There was no difference in glucagon concentrations, but insulin concentrations and insulin delivery were lower in the treatment group.Sitagliptin may be considered as an adjunct therapy in a closed-loop setting. Larger studies are needed to determine the role of oral agents like sitagliptin to lower postprandial hyperglycemia with closed loop.

SUBMITTER: Underland LJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5505438 | biostudies-literature | 2017 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Use of Sitagliptin With Closed-Loop Technology to Decrease Postprandial Blood Glucose in Type 1 Diabetes.

Underland Lisa J LJ Ilkowitz Jeniece Trast JT Katikaneni Ranjitha R Dowd Amy A Heptulla Rubina A RA

Journal of diabetes science and technology 20170328 3

<h4>Background</h4>Postprandial hyperglycemia poses a challenge to closed-loop systems. Dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors, like sitagliptin, reduce postprandial glucose concentrations in patients with type 2 diabetes. The objective of this study was to assess sitagliptin's role in type 1 diabetes (T1DM) as an adjunct therapy in reducing postprandial blood glucose with an insulin-only closed-loop system.<h4>Methods</h4>This was a randomized, double-blinded, placebo controlled, crossover d ...[more]

PMID: 28349708

Similar Datasets

Project description:Aims/hypothesisThe aim of this work was to assess the relationship between meal nutrients and postprandial blood glucose response (PGR) in individuals with type 1 diabetes on a hybrid closed-loop system (HCLS).MethodsThe dietary composition of 1264 meals (398 breakfasts, 441 lunches and 425 dinners) was assessed by 7-day food records completed by 25 individuals with type 1 diabetes on HCLSs (12 men/13 women, mean ± SD age 40 ± 12 years, mean ± SD HbA1c 51 ± 10 mmol/mol [6.9 ± 0.2%]). For each meal, PGR (continuous glucose monitoring metrics, glucose incremental AUCs) and insulin doses (pre-meal boluses, post-meal microboluses automatically delivered by the pump and adjustment boluses) over 6 h were evaluated.ResultsBreakfast, lunch and dinner significantly differed with respect to energy and nutrient intake and insulin doses. The blood glucose postprandial profile showed an earlier peak after breakfast and a slow increase until 4 h after lunch and dinner (p < 0.001). Mean ± SD postprandial time in range (TIR) was better at breakfast (79.3 ± 22.2%) than at lunch (71.3 ± 23.9%) or dinner (70.0 ± 25.9%) (p < 0.001). Significant negative predictors of TIR at breakfast were total energy intake, per cent intake of total protein and monounsaturated fatty acids, glycaemic load and absolute amounts of cholesterol, carbohydrates and simple sugars consumed (p < 0.05 for all). No significant predictors were detected for TIR at lunch. For TIR at dinner, a significant positive predictor was the per cent intake of plant proteins, while negative predictors were glycaemic load and intake amounts of simple sugars and carbohydrate (p < 0.05 for all).Conclusions/interpretationThis study shows that nutritional factors other than the amount of carbohydrate significantly influence postprandial blood glucose control. These nutritional determinants vary between breakfast, lunch and dinner, with differing effects on postprandial blood glucose profile and insulin requirements, thus remaining a challenge to HCLSs.

Project description:IntroductionPublished evaluations of sensor glucose monitoring use in insulin treated type 2 diabetes are limited. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of flash glucose-sensing technology as a replacement for self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) over a 12-month period in participants with type 2 diabetes who were on intensive insulin therapy.MethodsAn open-label, randomized, controlled study in adults with type 2 diabetes on intensive insulin therapy from 26 European diabetes centers aimed at assessing flash glucose sensing technology was conducted. Participants (N = 224) were randomized (1:2 respectively) to a control group (n = 75) that used SMBG (FreeStyle Lite™) or to an intervention group (n = 149) which used sensor glucose data (FreeStyle Libre™ Flash Glucose Monitoring System) for self-management over 6 months. All intervention group participants who completed the 6-month treatment phase continued into an additional 6-month open-access phase.ResultsA total of 139 intervention participants completed the 6-month treatment phase and continued into the open-access phase. At 12 months (end of open-access period), time in hypoglycemia [sensor glucose <3.9 mmol/L (70 mg/dL)] was reduced by 50% compared to baseline [-0.70 ± 1.85/24 h (mean ± standard deviation); p = 0.0002]. Nocturnal hypoglycemia [2300 to 0600 hours, <3.9 mmol/L (70 mg/dL)] was reduced by 52%; p = 0.0002. There was no change in time in range [sensor glucose 3.9-10.0 mmol/L (70-180 mg/dL)]. SMBG testing fell from a mean of 3.9 (median 3.9) times/day at baseline to 0.2 (0.0), with an average frequency of sensor scanning of 7.1 (5.7) times/day at 12 months, and mean sensor utilization was 83.6 ± 13.8% (median 88.3%) during the open-access phase. During this 6-month extension period no device-related serious adverse events were reported. Nine participants reported 16 instances of device-related adverse events (e.g. infection, allergy) and 28 participants (20.1%) experienced 134 occurrences of anticipated skin symptoms/sensor-insertion events expected with device use (e.g. erythema, itching and rash).ConclusionThe use of flash glucose-sensing technology for glycemic management in individuals with type 2 diabetes treated by intensive insulin therapy over 12 months was associated with a sustained reduction in hypoglycemia and safely and effectively replaced SMBG.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT02082184.

Project description:BackgroundThe safety and effectiveness of the in-home use of a hybrid closed-loop (HCL) system that automatically increases, decreases, and suspends insulin delivery in response to continuous glucose monitoring were investigated.MethodsAdolescents (n = 30, ages 14-21 years) and adults (n = 94, ages 22-75 years) with type 1 diabetes participated in a multicenter (nine sites in the United States, one site in Israel) pivotal trial. The Medtronic MiniMed® 670G system was used during a 2-week run-in phase without HCL control, or Auto Mode, enabled (Manual Mode) and, thereafter, with Auto Mode enabled during a 3-month study phase. A supervised hotel stay (6 days/5 nights) that included a 24-h frequent blood sample testing with a reference measurement (i-STAT) occurred during the study phase.ResultsAdolescents (mean ± standard deviation [SD] 16.5 ± 2.29 years of age and 7.7 ± 4.15 years of diabetes) used the system for a median 75.8% (interquartile range [IQR] 68.0%-88.4%) of the time (2977 patient-days). Adults (mean ± SD 44.6 ± 12.79 years of age and 26.4 ± 12.43 years of diabetes) used the system for a median 88.0% (IQR 77.6%-92.7%) of the time (9412 patient-days). From baseline run-in to the end of study phase, adolescent and adult HbA1c levels decreased from 7.7% ± 0.8% to 7.1% ± 0.6% (P < 0.001) and from 7.3% ± 0.9% to 6.8% ± 0.6% (P < 0.001, Wilcoxon signed-rank test), respectively. The proportion of overall in-target (71-180 mg/dL) sensor glucose (SG) values increased from 60.4% ± 10.9% to 67.2% ± 8.2% (P < 0.001) in adolescents and from 68.8% ± 11.9% to 73.8% ± 8.4% (P < 0.001) in adults. During the hotel stay, the proportion of in-target i-STAT® blood glucose values was 67.4% ± 27.7% compared to SG values of 72.0% ± 11.6% for adolescents and 74.2% ± 17.5% compared to 76.9% ± 8.3% for adults. There were no severe hypoglycemic or diabetic ketoacidosis events in either cohort.ConclusionsHCL therapy was safe during in-home use by adolescents and adults and the study phase demonstrated increased time in target, and reductions in HbA1c, hyperglycemia and hypoglycemia, compared to baseline.Trial registrationClinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT02463097.

Project description:Closed-loop insulin delivery is a promising option to improve glycaemic control and reduce the risk of hypoglycaemia. We aimed to assess whether overnight home use of automated closed-loop insulin delivery would improve glucose control.We did this open-label, multicentre, randomised controlled, crossover study between Dec 1, 2012, and Dec 23, 2014, recruiting patients from three centres in the UK. Patients aged 18 years or older with type 1 diabetes were randomly assigned to receive 4 weeks of overnight closed-loop insulin delivery (using a model-predictive control algorithm to direct insulin delivery), then 4 weeks of insulin pump therapy (in which participants used real-time display of continuous glucose monitoring independent of their pumps as control), or vice versa. Allocation to initial treatment group was by computer-generated permuted block randomisation. Each treatment period was separated by a 3-4 week washout period. The primary outcome was time spent in the target glucose range of 3·9-8·0 mmol/L between 0000 h and 0700 h. Analyses were by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01440140.We randomly assigned 25 participants to initial treatment in either the closed-loop group or the control group, patients were later crossed over into the other group; one patient from the closed-loop group withdrew consent after randomisation, and data for 24 patients were analysed. Closed loop was used over a median of 8·3 h (IQR 6·0-9·6) on 555 (86%) of 644 nights. The proportion of time when overnight glucose was in target range was significantly higher during the closed-loop period compared to during the control period (mean difference between groups 13·5%, 95% CI 7·3-19·7; p=0·0002). We noted no severe hypoglycaemic episodes during the control period compared with two episodes during the closed-loop period; these episodes were not related to closed-loop algorithm instructions.Unsupervised overnight closed-loop insulin delivery at home is feasible and could improve glucose control in adults with type 1 diabetes.Diabetes UK.

Dataset Information

Use of Sitagliptin With Closed-Loop Technology to Decrease Postprandial Blood Glucose in Type 1 Diabetes.

Publications

Use of Sitagliptin With Closed-Loop Technology to Decrease Postprandial Blood Glucose in Type 1 Diabetes.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets