COVID-19 vaccination in adolescents and young adults with type 1 diabetes: Glycemic control and side effects.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Background
Two vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 are approved by the World Health Organization (WHO) for minors aged 12 years and over. Currently, people with both type 1 diabetes (T1D) and type 2 diabetes (T2D) are prioritized for vaccination.Objective
To evaluate possible glycemic control modification, insulin dose adjustment and adverse effects after COVID-19 vaccination in young T1D individuals, users of different technology levels.Methods
Thirty-nine T1D individuals, who received a whole vaccination cycle of either Moderna or Pfizer- BioNTech vaccines, were enrolled, 24 of whom using advanced hybrid closed loop systems (AHCLs) and 15 using intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitoring (isCGM). Symptoms after each dose and the following variables were considered: time in range 70-180 mg/dl (TIR), time in different glucose ranges, mean glucose levels, coefficient of variation (CV), total daily dose (TDD) and bolus proportion RESULTS: No significant differences in TIR, time in different glucose ranges, mean glucose levels, TDD, bolus proportion, were observed before and after any dose nor before and after the whole vaccination cycle. CV was significantly lower after the whole vaccination cycle (CV pre-vaccination 35.1 ± 6.9% vs. CV post-vaccination 33.5 ± 6.3%; p 0.031) in subjects treated by AHCLs. Side effects after the vaccination were mild and more frequent after the second dose. No severe adverse reactions were reported.Conclusions
COVID-19 vaccination was safe and not associated with significant perturbation of glycemic control in adolescents and young adults with T1D. This information could be of clinical use when counseling families about SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in young people with T1D.
SUBMITTER: Piccini B
PROVIDER: S-EPMC9115347 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:ObjectiveEven under closed-loop (CL) conditions, meal-related blood glucose (BG) excursions frequently exceed target levels as a result of delays in absorption of insulin from the subcutaneous site of infusion. We hypothesized that delaying gastric emptying with preprandial injections of pramlintide would improve postprandial glycemia by allowing a better match between carbohydrate and insulin absorptions.Research design and methodsEight subjects (4 female; age, 15-28 years; A1C, 7.5 ± 0.7%) were studied for 48 h on a CL insulin-delivery system with a proportional integral derivative algorithm with insulin feedback: 24 h on CL control alone (CL) and 24 h on CL control plus 30-μg premeal injections of pramlintide (CLP). Target glucose was set at 120 mg/dL; timing and contents of meals were identical on both study days. No premeal manual boluses were given. Differences in reference BG excursions, defined as the incremental glucose rise from premeal to peak, were compared between conditions for each meal.ResultsCLP was associated with overall delayed time to peak BG (2.5 ± 0.9 vs. 1.5 ± 0.5 h; P < 0.0001) and reduced magnitude of glycemic excursion (88 ± 42 vs. 113 ± 32 mg/dL; P = 0.006) compared with CL alone. Pramlintide effects on glycemic excursions were particularly evident at lunch and dinner, in association with higher premeal insulin concentrations at those mealtimes.ConclusionsPramlintide delayed the time to peak postprandial BG and reduced the magnitude of prandial BG excursions. Beneficial effects of pramlintide on CL may in part be related to higher premeal insulin levels at lunch and dinner compared with breakfast.
| S-EPMC3447854 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceYouth-onset type 2 diabetes is associated with poor glycemic control and early onset of complications. Identification of psychosocial factors associated with poor glycemic control is needed to inform efficacious interventions.ObjectiveTo identify psychosocial factors associated with glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) levels in young adults with youth-onset type 2 diabetes.Design, setting, and participantsFor the iCount cohort study, HbA1c levels were measured twice (at baseline [T1] and at 1 year [T2]) during the last years (2017-2019) of the observational phase of the multicenter Treatment Options for Type 2 Diabetes in Adolescents and Youth (TODAY2) study. Participants were young adults who had been diagnosed with type 2 diabetes during childhood or adolescence. Data were analyzed from December 2021 to September 2023.Main outcomes and measuresGlycemic control was examined categorically (high [≥8.0%] vs low [<8.0%] HbA1c), continuously (HbA1c level), and over time (change in HbA1c: decreased ≥0.5%, remained stable, or increased ≥0.5%). Psychosocial measures included beliefs about medicines, depression and anxiety symptoms, diabetes distress, diabetes self-efficacy, self-management support, and unmet material needs. Multivariable logistic and linear regression models evaluated the association of each psychosocial factor with the probability of T2 HbA1c of 8.0% or greater, T2 HbA1c level, and change in HbA1c.ResultsOf the 411 TODAY2 participants approached, 381 enrolled in the iCount study, and 348 with T1 and T2 HbA1c data comprised the analysis group. The 348 participants had a mean (SD) age of 26.1 (2.5) years and a mean (SD) HbA1c of 9.4% (2.8%). Most participants (229 [65.8%]) were women. In adjusted multivariable regressions, greater beliefs that diabetes medicines are necessary (odds ratio [OR], 1.19 [95% CI, 1.03-1.37]; P = .02), concerns about medicines (OR, 1.20 [95% CI, 1.00-1.45]; P = .049), diabetes distress (OR, 1.08 [95% CI, 1.02-1.15]; P = .006), and high distress (OR, 2.18 [95% CI, 1.15-4.13]; P = .02) increased the odds of high HbA1c at T2. Greater support (OR, 0.67 [95% CI, 0.46-0.97]; P = .04) and diabetes self-efficacy (OR, 0.91 [95% CI, 0.84-0.99]; P = .02) decreased the odds of high HbA1c at T2. Diabetes distress was associated with higher HbA1c level at T2 (coefficient, 0.08 [95% CI, 0.02-0.13]; P = .01). Beliefs that diabetes medicines are necessary (OR, 1.20 [95% CI, 1.03-1.39]; P = .02) and concerns about medicines (OR, 1.22 [95% CI, 1.00-1.47]; P = .048) increased the odds of an HbA1c decrease of at least 0.5% over 1 year.Conclusions and relevanceIn this cohort study of young adults with youth-onset type 2 diabetes, beliefs about medicines, high diabetes distress, low diabetes self-efficacy, and self-management support were associated with high HbA1c over time. Future research should assess whether interventions that address these factors result in improved glycemic control in this at-risk group.
| S-EPMC11002701 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundQualitative studies in type 1 diabetes indicate that visibility of diabetes supplies, self-care, and hypoglycemia symptoms are associated with stigma and suboptimal management. This may be particularly salient in youth who face concurrent challenges such as establishing autonomy and making vocational choices.ObjectiveThe aim of the study was to estimate stigma prevalence in youth (aged 14-24 years) with type 1 diabetes and its associations with glycemic control.MethodsParticipants, recruited largely through social media, were asked to complete a Web-based survey and to send via mail capillary blood samples for glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) measurement. The primary definition of stigma required endorsement of one or more of 3 stigma-specific items of the Barriers to Diabetes Adherence questionnaire. These addressed avoidance of diabetes management with friends present, difficulty telling others about diabetes diagnosis, and embarrassment in performing diabetes care with others present. Poor glycemic control was defined as HbA1c>9% (ie, >75 mmol/mol; measured value when available, else self-report) and/or ≥1 severe hypoglycemic episode in the previous year (reported requiring assistance from someone else during the episode). Stigma prevalence was computed (95% CI), and associations with glycemic control were evaluated (multivariate logistic regression models).ResultsAmong the 380 respondents, stigma prevalence was 65.5% (95% CI 60.7-70.3). Stigma was associated with a 2-fold higher odds of poor glycemic control overall (odds ratio [OR] 2.25, 95% CI 1.33-3.80; adjusted for age, sex, and type of treatment). There were specific associations with both HbA1c>9% (75 mmol/mol; OR 3.05, 95% CI 1.36-6.86) and severe hypoglycemia in the previous year (OR 1.86, 95% CI 1.05-3.31).ConclusionsThere is a high prevalence of stigma in youth with type 1 diabetes that is associated with both elevated HbA1c levels and severe hypoglycemia. Targeted strategies to address stigma are needed.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT02796248; http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02796248 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6yisxeV0B).
| S-EPMC5935805 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceAdolescents and young adults with type 1 diabetes exhibit the worst glycemic control among individuals with type 1 diabetes across the lifespan. Although continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) has been shown to improve glycemic control in adults, its benefit in adolescents and young adults has not been demonstrated.ObjectiveTo determine the effect of CGM on glycemic control in adolescents and young adults with type 1 diabetes.Design, setting, and participantsRandomized clinical trial conducted between January 2018 and May 2019 at 14 endocrinology practices in the US including 153 individuals aged 14 to 24 years with type 1 diabetes and screening hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) of 7.5% to 10.9%.InterventionsParticipants were randomized 1:1 to undergo CGM (CGM group; n = 74) or usual care using a blood glucose meter for glucose monitoring (blood glucose monitoring [BGM] group; n = 79).Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was change in HbA1c from baseline to 26 weeks. There were 20 secondary outcomes, including additional HbA1c outcomes, CGM glucose metrics, and patient-reported outcomes with adjustment for multiple comparisons to control for the false discovery rate.ResultsAmong the 153 participants (mean [SD] age, 17 [3] years; 76 [50%] were female; mean [SD] diabetes duration, 9 [5] years), 142 (93%) completed the study. In the CGM group, 68% of participants used CGM at least 5 days per week in month 6. Mean HbA1c was 8.9% at baseline and 8.5% at 26 weeks in the CGM group and 8.9% at both baseline and 26 weeks in the BGM group (adjusted between-group difference, -0.37% [95% CI, -0.66% to -0.08%]; P = .01). Of 20 prespecified secondary outcomes, there were statistically significant differences in 3 of 7 binary HbA1c outcomes, 8 of 9 CGM metrics, and 1 of 4 patient-reported outcomes. The most commonly reported adverse events in the CGM and BGM groups were severe hypoglycemia (3 participants with an event in the CGM group and 2 in the BGM group), hyperglycemia/ketosis (1 participant with an event in CGM group and 4 in the BGM group), and diabetic ketoacidosis (3 participants with an event in the CGM group and 1 in the BGM group).Conclusions and relevanceAmong adolescents and young adults with type 1 diabetes, continuous glucose monitoring compared with standard blood glucose monitoring resulted in a small but statistically significant improvement in glycemic control over 26 weeks. Further research is needed to understand the clinical importance of the findings.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03263494.
| S-EPMC7298603 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveHealth inequities persist in youth and young adults (YYA) with type 1diabetes in achieving optimal glycemic control. The purpose of this study was to assess the contribution of multiple indicators of social need to these inequities.Research design and methodsTwo hundred and twenty two YYA withtype 1 diabetes enrolled in the SEARCH Food Insecurity Study in South Carolina and Washington between the years 2013 and 2015 were included. Latent class analysis was used to identify socioeconomic profiles based on household income, parental education, health insurance, household food insecurity, and food assistance. Profiles were evaluated in relation to glycemic control using multivariable linear and logistic regression, with HbA1c > 9%(75 mmol/mol) defined as high-risk glycemic control.ResultsTwo profiles were identified: a lower socioeconomic profile included YYA whose parents had lower income and/or education, and were more likely to be uninsured, receive food assistance, and be food insecure. A higher socioeconomic profile included YYA whose circumstances were opposite to those in the lower socioeconomic profile. Those with a lower socioeconomic profile were more likely to have high-risk glycemic control relative to those with a higher socioeconomic profile (OR = 2.24, 95%CI = 1.16-4.33).ConclusionsLower socioeconomic profiles are associated with high-risk glycemic control among YYA with type 1 diabetes. This supports recommendations that care providers of YYA with type 1 diabetes assess individual social needs in tailoring diabetes management plans to the social context of the patient.
| S-EPMC8054269 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceGlycemic control often deteriorates during adolescence and the transition to young adulthood for patients with type 1 diabetes. The inability to manage type 1 diabetes effectively during these years is associated with poor glycemic control and complications from diabetes in adult life.ObjectiveTo determine the effect of daily financial incentives on glucose monitoring adherence and glycemic control in adolescents and young adults with type 1 diabetes.Design, setting, and participantsThe Behavioral Economic Incentives to Improve Glycemic Control Among Adolescents and Young Adults With Type 1 Diabetes (BE IN CONTROL) study was an investigator-blinded, 6-month, 2-arm randomized clinical trial conducted between January 22 and November 2, 2016, with 3-month intervention and follow-up periods. Ninety participants (aged 14-20) with suboptimally controlled type 1 diabetes (hemoglobin A1c [HbA1c] >8.0%) were recruited from the Diabetes Center for Children at the Children's Hospital of Philadelphia.InterventionsAll participants were given daily blood glucose monitoring goals of 4 or more checks per day with 1 or more level within the goal range (70-180 mg/dL) collected with a wireless glucometer. The 3-month intervention consisted of a $60 monthly incentive in a virtual account, from which $2 was subtracted for every day of nonadherence to the monitoring goals. During a 3-month follow-up period, the intervention was discontinued.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was change in HbA1c levels at 3 months. Secondary outcomes included adherence to glucose monitoring and change in HbA1c levels at 6 months. All analyses were by intention to treat.ResultsOf the 181 participants screened, 90 (52 [57.8%] girls) were randomized to the intervention (n = 45) or control (n = 45) arms. The mean (SD) age was 16.3 (1.9) years. The intervention group had significantly greater adherence to glucose monitoring goals in the incentive period (50.0% vs 18.9%; adjusted difference, 27.2%; 95% CI, 9.5% to 45.0%; P = .003) but not in the follow-up period (15.3% vs 8.7%; adjusted difference, 3.9%; 95% CI, -2.0% to 9.9%; P = .20). The change in HbA1c levels from baseline did not differ significantly between groups at 3 months (adjusted difference, -0.08%; 95% CI, -0.69% to 0.54%; P = .80) or 6 months (adjusted difference, 0.03%; 95% CI, -0.55% to 0.60%; P = .93).Conclusions and relevanceAmong adolescents and young adults with type 1 diabetes, daily financial incentives improved glucose monitoring adherence during the incentive period but did not significantly improve glycemic control.Trial registrationclinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT02568501.
| S-EPMC6583649 | biostudies-literature
Project description:AimTo examine the impact of the lockdown caused by the COVID-19 pandemic on both the glycemic control and the daily habits of a group of patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) using flash continuous glucose monitoring devices (flash CGMs).MethodsRetrospective analysis based on all the information gathered in virtual consultations from a cohort of 50 adult patients with T1DM with follow-up at our site. We compared their CGM metrics during lockdown with their own previous data before the pandemic occurred, as well as the potential psychological and therapeutic changes.ResultsWe observed a reduction of average glucose values: 160.26 ± 22.55 mg/dL vs 150 ± 20.96 mg/dL, P = .0009; estimated glycosylated hemoglobin: 7.21 ± 0.78% vs 6.83 ± 0.71%, P = .0005; glucose management indicator 7.15 ± 0.57% vs 6.88 ± 0.49%; P = .0003, and glycemic variability: 40.74 ± 6.66 vs 36.43 ± 6.09 P < .0001. Time in range showed an improvement: 57.46 ± 11.85% vs a 65.76 ± 12.09%, P < .0001, without an increase in percentage of time in hypoglycemia.ConclusionsCOVID-19 lockdown was associated with an improvement in glycemic control in patients with T1DM using CGMs.
| S-EPMC7641317 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Insulin pump therapy may improve metabolic control in young patients with type 1 diabetes, but the association with short-term diabetes complications is unclear.To determine whether rates of severe hypoglycemia and diabetic ketoacidosis are lower with insulin pump therapy compared with insulin injection therapy in children, adolescents, and young adults with type 1 diabetes.Population-based cohort study conducted between January 2011 and December 2015 in 446 diabetes centers participating in the Diabetes Prospective Follow-up Initiative in Germany, Austria, and Luxembourg. Patients with type 1 diabetes younger than 20 years and diabetes duration of more than 1 year were identified. Propensity score matching and inverse probability of treatment weighting analyses with age, sex, diabetes duration, migration background (defined as place of birth outside of Germany or Austria), body mass index, and glycated hemoglobin as covariates were used to account for relevant confounders.Type 1 diabetes treated with insulin pump therapy or with multiple (?4) daily insulin injections.Primary outcomes were rates of severe hypoglycemia and diabetic ketoacidosis during the most recent treatment year. Secondary outcomes included glycated hemoglobin levels, insulin dose, and body mass index.Of 30?579 patients (mean age, 14.1 years [SD, 4.0]; 53% male), 14?119 used pump therapy (median duration, 3.7 years) and 16?460 used insulin injections (median duration, 3.6 years). Patients using pump therapy (n?=?9814) were matched with 9814 patients using injection therapy. Pump therapy, compared with injection therapy, was associated with lower rates of severe hypoglycemia (9.55 vs 13.97 per 100 patient-years; difference, -4.42 [95% CI, -6.15 to -2.69]; P?<?.001) and diabetic ketoacidosis (3.64 vs 4.26 per 100 patient-years; difference, -0.63 [95% CI, -1.24 to -0.02]; P?=?.04). Glycated hemoglobin levels were lower with pump therapy than with injection therapy (8.04% vs 8.22%; difference, -0.18 [95% CI, -0.22 to -0.13], P?<?.001). Total daily insulin doses were lower for pump therapy compared with injection therapy (0.84 U/kg vs 0.98 U/kg; difference, -0.14 [-0.15 to -0.13], P?<?.001). There was no significant difference in body mass index between both treatment regimens. Similar results were obtained after propensity score inverse probability of treatment weighting analyses in the entire cohort.Among young patients with type 1 diabetes, insulin pump therapy, compared with insulin injection therapy, was associated with lower risks of severe hypoglycemia and diabetic ketoacidosis and with better glycemic control during the most recent year of therapy. These findings provide evidence for improved clinical outcomes associated with insulin pump therapy compared with injection therapy in children, adolescents, and young adults with type 1 diabetes.
| S-EPMC5818842 | biostudies-other
Project description:Objective: To assess the efficacy and safety of closed-loop control (CLC) insulin delivery system in adolescents and young adults with type 1 diabetes. Research Design and Methods: Prespecified subanalysis of outcomes in adolescents and young adults aged 14-24 years old with type 1 diabetes in a previously published 6-month multicenter randomized trial. Participants were randomly assigned 2:1 to CLC (Tandem Control-IQ) or sensor augmented pump (SAP, various pumps+Dexcom G6 CGM) and followed for 6 months. Results: Mean age of the 63 participants was 17 years, median type 1 diabetes duration was 7 years, and mean baseline HbA1c was 8.1%. All 63 completed the trial. Time in range (TIR) increased by 13% with CLC versus decreasing by 1% with SAP (adjusted treatment group difference = +13% [+3.1 h/day]; 95% confidence interval [CI] 9-16, P < 0.001), which largely reflected a reduction in time >180 mg/dL (adjusted difference -12% [-2.9 h/day], P < 0.001). Time <70 mg/dL decreased by 1.6% with CLC versus 0.3% with SAP (adjusted difference -0.7% [-10 min/day], 95% CI -1.0% to -0.2%, P = 0.002). CLC use averaged 89% of the time for 6 months. The mean adjusted difference in HbA1c after 6 months was 0.30% in CLC versus SAP (95% CI -0.67 to +0.08, P = 0.13). There was one diabetic ketoacidosis episode in the CLC group. Conclusions: CLC use for 6 months was substantial and associated with improved TIR and reduced hypoglycemia in adolescents and young adults with type 1 diabetes. Thus, CLC has the potential to improve glycemic outcomes in this challenging age group. The clinical trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03563313).
| S-EPMC8080922 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background: Glycemic variability (GV) may attribute to the pathogenesis of diabetic neuropathy. The aim of this cross-sectional study was to investigate the association between GV and distal symmetric polyneuropathy (DSPN) and cardiovascular autonomic neuropathy (CAN) in a Danish population of young adults with type 1 diabetes. Methods: Young adults between 18 and 24 years with type 1 diabetes were included in this cross-sectional study. CAN was assessed by cardiovascular autonomic reflex tests (CARTs) and heart rate variability (HRV). DSPN was assessed by light pressure, pain and vibration perception, electrochemical skin conductance, sural nerve conduction velocity (SNCV), and amplitude potential (SNAP). GV were obtained by continuous glucose monitoring including coefficient of variation (CV), SD, continuous overall net glycemic action (CONGA), and mean amplitude of glucose excursions (MAGE). Results: The study comprised 133 young adults (43.6% males), mean age of 22 years (SD 1.6). Unadjusted, higher CV was associated with a decreased risk of sural nerve conduction (P = 0.03), abnormal SNAP (P = 0.04) and incidents of definite CAN (P = 0.04). Likewise, higher CONGA was associated with increasing incidents of subclinical DSPN (P = 0.03), abnormal SNAP (P = 0.01), and SNCV (P = 0.02). However, both associations were not statistically significant in the fully adjusted model. Higher MAGE was associated with slightly increasing measures of HRV (P = 0.03) but only when fully adjusted. When correcting for multiple tests significance was lost. A significant association was found between HbA1c and measures of both DSPN (P < 0.02) and HRV (P < 0.03) in fully adjusted models. Conclusions: No significant associations between GV and diabetic neuropathy were found after adjusting for risk factors and multiple tests. This suggests that GV may not be a risk factor for diabetic neuropathy in young adults with type 1 diabetes. However, long-term effects of GV excursions may still play a role in the pathogenic mechanisms leading to neuropathy in later life.
| S-EPMC7538646 | biostudies-literature