Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online 2018-11
Study of MiniMed 640G Insulin Pump with SmartGuard in Prevention of Low Glucose Events in Adults with Type 1 Diabetes (SMILE): Design of a Hypoglycemia Prevention Trial with Continuous Glucose Monitoring Data as Outcomes
Sensor-integrated pump systems with low-glucose suspend (also known as threshold suspend) functions have markedly transformed the management of type 1 diabetes, but most studies to date have excluded patients at high risk of hypoglycemia. The SMILE study is investigating the efficacy of the MiniMed™ 640G insulin pump with the SmartGuard™ predictive low-glucose management (PLGM) feature in the prevention of hypoglycemia in adults with type 1 diabetes, who are at high risk of hypoglycemia.
Methods:
SMILE is a prospective, randomized, open-label, controlled trial being undertaken in four European countries and Canada. Following a 2-week run-in phase, eligible participants will be randomized to use either the MiniMed 640G system with continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) and the SmartGuard PLGM feature on continuously for 24 weeks (treatment arm), or the MiniMed 640G without CGM and with blinded continuous glucose measurements between weeks 10–12, 16–18, and 22–24 (control arm). The primary endpoint is the mean number of hypoglycemic events, defined as sensor glucose ≤55 mg/dL (≤3.0 mmol/L) for >20 consecutive minutes. Secondary endpoints include various glycemic indices in the hypoglycemic and hyperglycemic ranges, as well as glycated hemoglobin. Data on patient-reported outcomes such as hypoglycemia awareness and treatment satisfaction will also be collected.
Conclusions:
It is anticipated that the SMILE study will provide important insights into the effectiveness of SmartGuard technology in adult patients with type 1 diabetes.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BergenstalRM, TamborlaneWV, AhmannA, et al.: Effectiveness of sensor-augmented insulin-pump therapy in type 1 diabetes. N Engl J Med, 2010; 363:311–320.
2.
BattelinoT, CongetI, OlsenB, et al.: The use and efficacy of continuous glucose monitoring in type 1 diabetes treated with insulin pump therapy: a randomised controlled trial. Diabetologia, 2012; 55:3155–3162.
3.
CohenO, VigerskyRA, LeeSW, et al.: Automated insulin delivery system nomenclature. Diabetes Technol Ther, 2017; 19:379–380.
4.
BergenstalRM, KlonoffDC, GargSK, et al.: Threshold-based insulin-pump interruption for reduction of hypoglycemia. N Engl J Med, 2013; 369:224–232.
5.
ChoudharyP, ShinJ, WangY, et al.: Insulin pump therapy with automated insulin suspension in response to hypoglycemia: reduction in nocturnal hypoglycemia in those at greatest risk. Diabetes Care, 2011; 34:2023–2025.
6.
LyTT, NicholasJA, RetterathA, et al.: Effect of sensor-augmented insulin pump therapy and automated insulin suspension vs standard insulin pump therapy on hypoglycemia in patients with type 1 diabetes: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA, 2013; 310:1240–1247.
7.
DanneT, NimriR, BattelinoT, et al.: International consensus on use of continuous glucose monitoring. Diabetes Care, 2017; 40:1631–1640.
8.
International Hypoglycaemia Study Group: Glucose concentrations of less than 3.0 mmol/L (54 mg/dL) should be reported in clinical trials: a joint position statement of the American Diabetes Association and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes. Diabetes Care, 2017; 40:155–157.
9.
DanneT, TsioliC, KordonouriO, et al.: The PILGRIM study: in silico modeling of a predictive low glucose management system and feasibility in youth with type 1 diabetes during exercise. Diabetes Technol Ther, 2014; 16:338–347.
10.
BuckinghamB, ChaseHP, DassauE, et al.: Prevention of nocturnal hypoglycemia using predictive alarm algorithms and insulin pump suspension. Diabetes Care, 2010; 33:1013–1017.
11.
ChoudharyP, OlsenBS, CongetI, et al.: Hypoglycemia prevention and user acceptance of an insulin pump system with predictive low glucose management. Diabetes Technol Ther, 2016; 18:288–291.
12.
ZhongA, ChoudharyP, McMahonC, et al.: Effectiveness of automated insulin management features of the MiniMed® 640G sensor-augmented insulin pump. Diabetes Technol Ther, 2016; 18:657–663.
13.
AbrahamMB, NicholasJA, SmithGJ, et al.: Reduction in hypoglycemia with the predictive low-glucose management system: a long-term randomized controlled trial in adolescents with type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Care, 2018; 41:303–310.
14.
LittleSA, LeelarathnaL, WalkinshawE, et al.: Recovery of hypoglycemia awareness in long-standing type 1 diabetes: a multicenter 2 × 2 factorial randomized controlled trial comparing insulin pump with multiple daily injections and continuous with conventional glucose self-monitoring (HypoCOMPaSS). Diabetes Care, 2014; 37:2114–2122.
15.
ReddyM, JugneeN, El LaboudiA, et al.: A randomized controlled pilot study of continuous glucose monitoring and flash glucose monitoring in people with type 1 diabetes and impaired awareness of hypoglycaemia. Diabet Med, 2018; 35:483–490.
16.
van BeersCA, DeVriesJH, KleijerSJ, et al.: Continuous glucose monitoring for patients with type 1 diabetes and impaired awareness of hypoglycaemia (IN CONTROL): a randomised, open-label, crossover trial. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol, 2016; 4:893–902.
17.
HeinemannL, DeissD, HermannsN, et al.: HypoDE: research design and methods of a randomized controlled study evaluating the impact of real-time CGM usage on the frequency of CGM glucose values <55 mg/dl in patients with type 1 diabetes and problematic hypoglycemia treated with multiple daily injections. J Diabetes Sci Technol, 2015; 9:651–662.
18.
ClarkeWL, CoxDJ, Gonder-FrederickLA, et al.: Reduced awareness of hypoglycemia in adults with IDDM. A prospective study of hypoglycemic frequency and associated symptoms. Diabetes Care, 1995; 18:517–522.
19.
GoldAE, MacLeodKM, FrierBM: Frequency of severe hypoglycemia in patients with type I diabetes with impaired awareness of hypoglycemia. Diabetes Care, 1994; 17:697–703.
20.
Workgroup on Hypoglycemia, American Diabetes Association: Defining and reporting hypoglycemia in diabetes: a report from the American Diabetes Association Workgroup on Hypoglycemia. Diabetes Care, 2005; 28:1245–1249.
21.
CoxDJ, IrvineA, Gonder-FrederickL, et al.: Fear of hypoglycemia: quantification, validation, and utilization. Diabetes Care, 1987; 10:617–621.
22.
BradleyC, LewisKS: Measures of psychological well-being and treatment satisfaction developed from the responses of people with tablet-treated diabetes. Diabet Med, 1990; 7:445–451.
23.
BradleyC: Handbook of Psychology and Diabetes: A Guide to Psychological Measurement in Diabetes Research and Practice. Abingdon: Routledge, formerly published by Harwood Academic Publishers, 1994.
24.
BradleyC: Diabetes treatment satisfaction questionnaire. Change version for use alongside status version provides appropriate solution where ceiling effects occur. Diabetes Care, 1999; 22:530–532.
25.
HoworkaK, PumprlaJ, SchluscheC, et al.: Dealing with ceiling baseline treatment satisfaction level in patients with diabetes under flexible, functional insulin treatment: assessment of improvements in treatment satisfaction with a new insulin analogue. Qual Life Res, 2000; 9:915–930.
26.
American Diabetes Association: Glycemic targets: standards of medical care in diabetes—2018. Diabetes Care, 2018; 41(Suppl 1):S55–S64.
27.
SchnellO, BarnardK, BergenstalR, et al.: Role of continuous glucose monitoring in clinical trials: recommendations on reporting. Diabetes Technol Ther, 2017; 19:391–399.
28.
LiG, ShihWJ, XieT, et al.: A sample size adjustment procedure for clinical trials based on conditional power. Biostatistics, 2002; 3:277–287.
29.
ChenYH, DeMetsDL, LanKK: Increasing the sample size when the unblinded interim result is promising. Stat Med, 2004; 23:1023–1038.
30.
MehtaCR, PocockSJ: Adaptive increase in sample size when interim results are promising: a practical guide with examples. Stat Med, 2011; 30:3267–3284.
31.
WhiteIR, ThompsonSG: Adjusting for partially missing baseline measurements in randomized trials. Stat Med, 2005; 24:993–1007.
32.
The Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation Continuous Glucose Monitoring Study Group: Continuous glucose monitoring and intensive treatment of type 1 diabetes. N Engl J Med, 2008; 359:1464–1476.
33.
BarkaiL, VámosiI, LukácsK: Prospective assessment of severe hypoglycaemia in diabetic children and adolescents with impaired and normal awareness of hypoglycaemia. Diabetologia, 1998; 41:898–903.
34.
ter BraakEW, AppelmanAM, van de LaakM, et al.: Clinical characteristics of type 1 diabetic patients with and without severe hypoglycemia. Diabetes Care, 2000; 23:1467–1471.
35.
GeddesJ, SchopmanJE, ZammittNN, et al.: Prevalence of impaired awareness of hypoglycaemia in adults with type 1 diabetes. Diabet Med, 2008; 25:501–504.
36.
FanelliCG, EpifanoL, RambottiAM, et al.: Meticulous prevention of hypoglycemia normalizes the glycemic thresholds and magnitude of most of neuroendocrine responses to, symptoms of, and cognitive function during hypoglycemia in intensively treated patients with short-term IDDM. Diabetes, 1993; 42:1683–1689.
37.
CranstonI, LomasJ, MaranA, et al.: Restoration of hypoglycaemia awareness in patients with long-duration insulin-dependent diabetes. Lancet, 1994; 344:283–287.
38.
SmithCB, ChoudharyP, PernetA, et al.: Hypoglycemia unawareness is associated with reduced adherence to therapeutic decisions in patients with type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Care, 2009; 32:1196–1198.
39.
BattelinoT, LiabatS, VeezeHJ, et al.: Routine use of continuous glucose monitoring in 10 501 people with diabetes mellitus. Diabet Med, 2015; 32:1568–1574.
40.
LevyJC, DaviesMJ, HolmanRR, et al.: Continuous glucose monitoring detected hypoglycaemia in the treating to target in type 2 diabetes trial (4-T). Diabetes Res Clin Pract, 2017; 131:161–168.
41.
PetrieJR, PetersAL, BergenstalRM, et al.: Improving the clinical value and utility of CGM systems: issues and recommendations. A Joint Statement of the European Association for the Study of Diabetes and the American Diabetes Association Diabetes Technology Working Group. Diabetes Care, 2017; 40:1614–1621.
42.
AgiostratidouGJ, AnhaltH, BallD, et al.: Standardizing clinically meaningful outcome measures beyond HbA1c for type 1 diabetes: a consensus report of the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists, the American Association of Diabetes Educators, the American Diabetes Association, the Endocrine Society, JDRF International, The Leona M. and Harry B. Helmsley Charitable Trust, the Pediatric Endocrine Society, and the T1D Exchange. Diabetes Care, 2017; 40:1622–1630.
43.
European Commission: TOPIC: understanding hypoglycaemia: the underlying mechanisms and addressing clinical determinants as well as consequences for people with diabetes by combining databases from clinical trials. December 21,. 2016. http://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/portal/desktop/en/opportunities/h2020/topics/imi2-2016-10-01.html (accessed April3, 2018)
44.
KlonoffDC, BergenstalRM, GargSK, et al.: ASPIRE In-Home: rationale, design, and methods of a study to evaluate the safety and efficacy of automatic insulin suspension for nocturnal hypoglycemia. J Diabetes Sci Technol, 2013; 7:1005–1010.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
