Dataset Information

Study protocol for optimising glycaemic control in type 1 diabetes treated with multiple daily insulin injections: intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitoring, carbohydrate counting with automated bolus calculation, or both? A randomised controlled trial.

ABSTRACT: INTRODUCTION:There are beneficial effects of advanced carbohydrate counting with an automatic bolus calculator (ABC) and intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitoring (isCGM) in persons with type 1 diabetes. We aim to compare the effects of isCGM, training in carbohydrate counting with ABC and the combination of the two concepts with standard care. METHODS AND ANALYSIS:A multi-centre randomised controlled trial with inclusion criteria: ?18 years, type 1 diabetes ?1 year, injection therapy, HbA1c >53 mmol/mol, whereas daily use of carbohydrate counting and/or CGM/isCGM wear are exclusion criteria. Inclusion was initiated in October 2018 and is ongoing. Eligible persons are randomised into four groups: standard care, ABC, isCGM or ABC+isCGM. Devices used are FreeStyle Libre Flash and smart phone diabetes application mySugr. Participants attend group courses according to treatment allocation with different educational contents. Participants are followed for 26 weeks with clinical visits and telephone consultations. At baseline and at study end, participants wear blinded CGM, have blood samples performed and fill in questionnaires on person-related outcomes, and at baseline also on personality traits and hypoglycaemia awareness. The primary outcome is the difference in time spent in normoglycaemia (4-10 mmol/L) at study end versus baseline between the isCGM group and the standard care group. Secondary outcomes will also be analysed. Results are expected in 2020. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION:Regional Scientific Ethics Committee approval (H-17040573). Results will be sought disseminated at conferences and in high impact journals.Trial registration numberClinicalTrial.gov registry (NCT03682237).

SUBMITTER: Secher AL

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7213884 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Study protocol for optimising glycaemic control in type 1 diabetes treated with multiple daily insulin injections: intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitoring, carbohydrate counting with automated bolus calculation, or both? A randomised controlled trial.

Secher Anna Lilja AL Pedersen-Bjergaard Ulrik U Svendsen Ole Lander OL Gade-Rasmussen Birthe B Almdal Thomas P TP Dørflinger Liv L Vistisen Dorte D Nørgaard Kirsten K

BMJ open 20200427 4

<h4>Introduction</h4>There are beneficial effects of advanced carbohydrate counting with an automatic bolus calculator (ABC) and intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitoring (isCGM) in persons with type 1 diabetes. We aim to compare the effects of isCGM, training in carbohydrate counting with ABC and the combination of the two concepts with standard care.<h4>Methods and analysis</h4>A multi-centre randomised controlled trial with inclusion criteria: ≥18 years, type 1 diabetes ≥1 year, in ...[more]

PMID: 32345699

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundAdvances in diabetes technology have been exponential in the last few decades. With evolution in continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) systems and its progressive automation in control of insulin delivery, these advances have changed type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) management. These novel technologies have the potential to improve glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c), reduce hypoglycaemic events, increase time spent in range and improve quality of life (QoL). Our aim was to evaluate the sustained effects in free-living unsupervised conditions of CGM systems (intermittently scanned and real time) and insulin delivery [from multiple daily injections, via sensor-augmented pump therapy and (predictive) low-glucose insulin suspension to hybrid closed-loop systems] on glucose control and QoL in adults and children with T1DM.MethodsWe performed a systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs), using PubMed and the Cochrane library up to 30 May 2019. Inclusion of RCTs was based on type of intervention (comparing glucose-monitoring devices and insulin-delivery devices), population (nonpregnant adults and children with T1DM), follow-up (outpatient setting for at least 8 weeks) and relevant outcomes [HbA1c, time in range (TIR), time in target, time in hypoglycaemia and QoL]. Exclusion of RCTs was based on intervention (exercise, only overnight use). The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines were used to score the quality of the papers and for the final selection of the articles.ResultsOur search resulted in 214 articles, of which 19 were eligible. Studies on advanced use in adults and children with T1DM reported increased TIR (all 9 studies); decreased time in hypoglycaemia (13 out of 15 studies); lowered HbA1c levels (5 out of 15 studies); improved QoL (10 of 16 studies) and treatment satisfaction (7 studies).ConclusionsRecent technologies have dramatically changed the course of T1DM. They are proving useful in controlling glycaemia in patients with T1DM, without increasing the treatment burden.

Project description:IntroductionThe effects of the GLP-1 analogue liraglutide on time in hypoglycaemia, time in hyperglycaemia, and time in range for type 2 diabetes patients initially treated with multiple daily insulin injections (MDI) were investigated. Variables associated with hypoglycaemia in the current population were also identified.MethodsAnalyses were based on data from a previously performed double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in which 124 MDI-treated patients with type 2 diabetes were randomized to liraglutide or placebo. Masked continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) was performed at baseline and week 24 in 99 participants.ResultsThe mean time in hypoglycaemia was similar for participants receiving liraglutide and those receiving placebo after 24 weeks of treatment. Mean time in target was greater in the liraglutide group than in the placebo group: 430 versus 244 min/24 h (p < 0.001) and 960 versus 695 min/24 h (p < 0.001) for the two glycaemic ranges considered, 4-7 mmol/l and 4-10 mmol/l, respectively. Mean time in hyperglycaemia was lower in the liraglutide group: 457 versus 723 min/24 h (p = 0.001) and 134 versus 264 min/24 h (p = 0.023) for the two cutoffs considered, > 10 mmol/l and > 14 mmol/l, respectively. Lower mean glucose level, lower C-peptide, and higher glucose variability were associated with an increased risk of hypoglycaemia in both treatment groups. Higher proinsulin level was associated with a lower risk of hypoglycaemia in the liraglutide group.ConclusionFor type 2 diabetes patients initially treated with MDI, introducing liraglutide had a beneficial effect on glucose profiles estimated by masked CGM. Mean glucose level, glycaemic variability, C-peptide, and proinsulin level influenced the risk of hypoglycaemia in this population.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov, number (EudraCT nr: 2012-001941-42).FundingNovo Nordisk funded this study. The Diabetes Research Unit, NU-Hospital Group funded the journal's Rapid Service Fee.

Project description:BackgroundIncidence of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is increasing and is associated with adverse perinatal outcomes including macrosomia, pre-eclampsia, and pre-term delivery. Optimum glycaemic control can reduce these adverse perinatal outcomes. Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) informs users about interstitial glucose levels allowing early detection of glycaemic excursions and pharmacological or behavioural intervention. Few adequately powered RCTs to evaluate the impact of using CGM in women with GDM on perinatal outcomes have been undertaken. We aim to establish the feasibility of a multi-site RCT to evaluate the clinical- and cost-effectiveness of an intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitor (isCGM) compared with self-monitored blood glucose (SMBG) in women with GDM for reducing fetal macrosomia and improving maternal and fetal outcomes. We will evaluate recruitment and retention rates, adherence to device requirements, adequacy of data capture and acceptability of trial design and isCGM devices.MethodsOpen-label multicentre randomised controlled feasibility trial.Inclusion criteriapregnant women, singleton pregnancy, recent diagnosis of GDM (within 14 days of commencing medication, up to 34 weeks gestation) prescribed metformin and/or insulin. Women will be consecutively recruited and randomised to isCGM (FreestyleLibre2) or SMBG. At every antenatal visit, glucose measurements will be evaluated. The SMBG group will use blinded isCGM for 14 days at baseline (~ 12-32 weeks) and ~ 34-36 weeks. The primary outcome is the recruitment rate and absolute number of women participating. Clinical assessments of maternal and fetal/infant health will be undertaken at baseline, birth, up to ~ 13 weeks post-natal. Psychological, behavioural and health economic measures will be assessed at baseline and ~ 34-36 weeks gestation. Qualitative interviews will be undertaken with study decliners, participants, and professionals to explore trial acceptability, of using isCGM and SMBG.DiscussionGDM can be associated with adverse pregnancy outcomes. isCGM could offer a timely, easy-to-engage-with intervention, to improve glycaemic control, potentially reducing adverse pregnancy, birth and long-term health outcomes for mother and child. This study will determine the feasibility of conducting a large-scale multisite RCT of isCGM in women with GDM.Trial registrationThis study has been registered with the ISRCTN (reference: ISRCTN42125256 , Date registered: 07/11/2022).

Dataset Information

Study protocol for optimising glycaemic control in type 1 diabetes treated with multiple daily insulin injections: intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitoring, carbohydrate counting with automated bolus calculation, or both? A randomised controlled trial.

Publications

Study protocol for optimising glycaemic control in type 1 diabetes treated with multiple daily insulin injections: intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitoring, carbohydrate counting with automated bolus calculation, or both? A randomised controlled trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets