Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

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).

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Foster

, Beck

, Miller

, et al.: State of type 1 diabetes management and outcomes from the T1D Exchange in 2016–2018. Diabetes Technol Ther, 2019; 21:66–72.

American Diabetes Association: 13. Children and adolescents: standards of medical care in diabetes-2020. Diabetes Care, 2020; 43:S163–S182.

Hermann

, Miller

, Hofer

, et al.: The transatlantic HbA1c gap; differences in glycaemic control across the lifespan between people included in the US T1D Exchange Registry and those included in the German/Austrian DPV registry. Diabet Med, 2020; 37:848–855.

Diabetes Control and Complications Trial/Epidemiology of Diabetes Interventions and Complications Study Research Group: intensive diabetes treatment and cardiovascular outcomes in type 1 diabetes: the DCCT/EDIC Study 30-Year Follow-up. Diabetes Care, 2016; 39:686–693.

Diabetes Control and Complications Trial/Epidemiology of Diabetes Interventions and Complications Study Research Group: Mortality in type 1 diabetes in the DCCT/EDIC versus the general population. Diabetes Care, 2016; 39:1378–1383.

Diabetes Control and Complications Trial Research Group; Nathan

, Genuth

, Lachin

, et al.: the effect of intensive treatment of diabetes on the development and progression of long-term complications in insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus. N Engl J Med, 1993; 329:977–986.

Ekhlaspour

, Forlenza

, Chernavvsky

, et al.: Closed loop control in adolescents and children during winter sports: use of the Tandem Control-IQ AP system. Pediatr Diabetes, 2019; 20:759–768.

, Buckingham

, DeSalvo

, et al.: Day-and-night closed-loop control using the unified safety system in adolescents with type 1 diabetes at camp. Diabetes Care, 2016; 39:e106–e107.

, Keenan

, Roy

, Han

, et al.: Automated overnight closed-loop control using a proportional-integral-derivative algorithm with insulin feedback in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes at diabetes camp. Diabetes Technol Ther, 2016; 18:377–384.

10.

Phillip

, Battelino

, Atlas

, et al.: nocturnal glucose control with an artificial pancreas at a diabetes camp. N Engl J Med, 2013; 368:824–833.

11.

Russell

, Hillard

, Balliro

, et al.: Day and night glycaemic control with a bionic pancreas versus conventional insulin pump therapy in preadolescent children with type 1 diabetes: a randomised crossover trial. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol, 2016; 4:233–243.

12.

Duffus

, Ta'ani

, Slaughter

, et al.: Increased proportion of time in hybrid closed-loop “Auto Mode” is associated with improved glycaemic control for adolescent and young patients with adult type 1 diabetes using the MiniMed 670G insulin pump. Diabetes Obes Metab, 2020; 22:688–693.

13.

Berget

, Messer

, Vigers

, et al.: Six months of hybrid closed loop in the real-world: an evaluation of children and young adults using the 670G system. Pediatr Diabetes, 2020; 21:310–318.

14.

Messer

, Berget

, Vigers

, et al.: Real world hybrid closed-loop discontinuation: predictors and perceptions of youth discontinuing the 670G system in the first 6 months. Pediatr Diabetes, 2020; 21:319–327.

15.

Brown

, Kovatchev

, Raghinaru

, et al.: Six-month randomized, multicenter trial of closed-loop control in type 1 diabetes. N Engl J Med, 2019; 381:1707–1717.

16.

Chernavvsky

, DeBoer

, Keith-Hynes

, et al.: Use of an artificial pancreas among adolescents for a missed snack bolus and an underestimated meal bolus. Pediatr Diabetes, 2016; 17:28–35.

17.

Bangor

, Kortum

, Miller

: Determining what individual SUS scores mean: adding an adjective rating scale. J Usab Stud, 2009; 4:114–123.

18.

Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation Continuous Glucose Monitoring Study Group; Tamborlane

, Beck

, Bode

, et al.: Continuous glucose monitoring and intensive treatment of type 1 diabetes. N Engl J Med, 2008; 359:1464–1476.

19.

Sherr

: Closing the loop on managing youth with type 1 diabetes: children are not just small adults. Diabetes Care, 2018; 41:1572–1578.

20.

Tauschmann

, Thabit

, Bally

, et al.: Closed-loop insulin delivery in suboptimally controlled type 1 diabetes: a multicentre, 12-week randomised trial. Lancet, 2018; 392:1321–1329.

21.

Garg

, Weinzimer

, Tamborlane

, et al.: Glucose outcomes with the in-home use of a hybrid closed-loop insulin delivery system in adolescents and adults with type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Technol Ther, 2017; 19:155–163.

22.

Akturk

, Giordano

, Champakanath

, et al.: Long-term real-life glycaemic outcomes with a hybrid closed-loop system compared with sensor-augmented pump therapy in patients with type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Obes Metab, 2020; 22:583–589.

23.

Messer

, Forlenza

, Sherr

, et al.: Optimizing hybrid closed-loop therapy in adolescents and emerging adults using the MiniMed 670G System. Diabetes Care, 2018; 41:789–796.

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.

0.00 MB

0.01 MB

0.02 MB

0.03 MB

0.02 MB

0.01 MB

0.02 MB

0.03 MB

0.02 MB

0.03 MB

Closed-Loop Insulin Therapy Improves Glycemic Control in Adolescents and Young Adults: Outcomes from the International Diabetes Closed-Loop Trial

Abstract

Objective:

Research Design and Methods:

Results:

Conclusions:

Get full access to this article

References

Supplementary Material