The safety and impact of the advanced hybrid closed-loop (AHCL) system on glycemic outcome in 2- to 6-year-old children with type 1 diabetes and the diabetes distress of caregivers were evaluated.
Research Design and Methods:
This was an open-label prospective study (n = 35) with historical controls matched by treatment unit, diabetes duration, age, gender, and baseline treatment modality. The inclusion criteria were (1) type 1 diabetes diagnosis >6 months, (2) total daily dose of insulin ≥8 U/day, (3) HbA1c <10% (85 mmol/mol), and (4) capability to use insulin pump and continuous glucose monitoring. The MiniMed 780G™ AHCL in SmartGuard™ Mode was used for 12 weeks. Parental diabetes distress was evaluated with a validated Problem Areas In Diabetes—Parent, revised (PAID-PR) survey.
Results:
No events of diabetic ketoacidosis or severe hypoglycemia occurred. Between 0 and 12 weeks, HbA1c (mean change = −2.7 mmol/mol [standard deviation 5.7], P = 0.010), mean sensor glucose value (SG) (−0.8 mmol/L [1.0], P < 0.001), and time above range (TAR) (−8.6% [9.5], P < 0.001) decreased and time in range (TIR) (8.3% [9.3], P < 0.001) increased significantly, whereas no significant change in time below range (TBR) was observed. At the same time, PAID-PR score decreased from 37.5 (18.2) to 27.5 (14.8) (P = 0.006).
Conclusions:
MiniMed 780G™ AHCL is a safe system and 12-week use was associated with improvements in glycemic control in 2- to 6-year-old children with type 1 diabetes. In addition, AHCL is associated with a reduction in parental diabetes distress after 12-week use. ClinicalTrials.gov registration number: NCT04949022
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
NicolajsenT, SamuelssonA, HanasR. Insulin doses before and one year after pump start: Children have a reversed dawn phenomenon. J Diabetes Sci Technol, 2012; 6(3):589–594; doi: 10.1177/193229681200600314
2.
DovcK, BoughtonC, TauschmannM, et al.Young children have higher variability of insulin requirements: Observations during hybrid closed-loop insulin delivery. Diabetes Care, 2019; 42(7):1344–1347; doi: 10.2337/dc18-2625
3.
KarakuşKE, Yeşiltepe MutluG, GökçeT, et al.Insulin requirements for basal and auto-correction insulin delivery in advanced hybrid closed-loop system: 4193 Days' real-world data of children in two different age groups. J Diabetes Sci Technol, 2022; In Press; doi: 10.1177/19322968221106194
4.
SundbergF, BarnardK, CatoA, et al.ISPAD Guidelines. Managing diabetes in preschool children. Pediatr Diabetes, 2017; 18(7):499–517; doi: 10.1111/pedi.12554
5.
AnderzénJ, HermannJM, SamuelssonU, et al.International benchmarking in type 1 diabetes: Large difference in childhood HbA1c between eight high-income countries but similar rise during adolescence—A quality registry study. Pediatr Diabetes, 2020; 21(4):621–627; doi: 10.1111/pedi.13014
6.
KimbellB, LawtonJ, BoughtonC, et al.Parents' experiences of caring for a young child with type 1 diabetes: A systematic review and synthesis of qualitative evidence. BMC Pediatr, 2021; 4;21(1):160; doi: 10.1186/s12887-021-02569-4
7.
IversenAS, GraueM, HaugstvedtA, et al.Being mothers and fathers of a child with type 1 diabetes aged 1 to 7 years: A phenomenological study of parents' experiences. Int J Qual Stud Health Well-being, 2018; 13(1):1487758; doi: 10.1080/17482631.2018.1487758
8.
Van NameMA, HilliardME, BoyleCT, et al.Nighttime is the worst time: Parental fear of hypoglycemia in young children with type 1 diabetes. Pediatr Diabetes, 2018; 19(1):114–120; doi: 10.1111/pedi.12525
9.
SundbergF, ForsanderG. Detection and treatment efficacy of hypoglycemic events in the everyday life of children younger than 7 yr. Pediatr Diabetes, 2014; 15(1):34–40; doi: 10.1111/pedi.12057
10.
SvenssonM, ErikssonJW, DahlquistG. Early glycemic control, age at onset, and development of microvascular complications in childhood-onset type 1 diabetes: A population-based study in northern Sweden. Diabetes Care, 2004; 27(4):955–962; doi: 10.2337/diacare.27.4.955
11.
MaurasN, BuckinghamB, WhiteNH, et al.Impact of type 1 diabetes in the developing brain in children: A longitudinal study. Diabetes Care, 2021; 44(4):983–992; doi: 10.2337/dc20-2125
12.
VarimoT, PulkkinenMA, HakonenE, et al.First year on commercial hybrid closed-loop system—Experience on 111 children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes. Pediatr Diabetes, 2021; 22(6):909–915; doi: 10.1111/pedi.13235
13.
PetrovskiG, Al KhalafF, CampbellJ, et al.One-year experience of hybrid closed-loop system in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes previously treated with multiple daily injections: Drivers to successful outcomes. Acta Diabetol, 2021; 58(2):207–213; doi: 10.1007/s00592-020-01607-4
14.
AbrahamMB, de BockM, SmithGJ, et al.Effect of a hybrid closed-loop system on glycemic and psychosocial outcomes in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes: A randomized clinical trial. JAMA Pediatr, 2021; 175(12):1227–1235; doi: 10.1001/jamapediatrics.2021.3965
15.
BretonM, KanapkaL, BeckR, et al.A randomized trial of closed-loop control in children with type 1 diabetes. N Engl J Med, 2020; 383(9):836–845; doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa2004736
16.
WareJ, AllenJM, BoughtonCK, et al.Randomized trial of closed-loop control in very young children with type 1 diabetes. N Engl J Med, 2022, 386(3):209–219; doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa2111673
17.
von dem BergeT, RemusK, BiesterS, et al.In-home use of a hybrid closed loop achieves time-in-range targets in preschoolers and school children: Results from a randomized, controlled, crossover trial. Diabetes Obes Metab, 2022; 24(7): 1319–1327; doi: 10.1111/dom.14706
18.
EkhlaspourL, SchoelwerMJ, ForlenzaGP, et al.Safety and performance of the Tandem t: Slim X2 with Control-IQ automated insulin delivery system in toddlers and preschoolers. Diabetes Technol Ther, 2021; 23(5):384–391; doi: 10.1089/dia.2020.0507
19.
SalehiP, RobertsAJ, KimGJ. Efficacy and safety of real-life usage of MiniMed 670G automode in children with type 1 diabetes less than 7 years old. Diabetes Technol Ther, 2019; 21(8):448–451; doi: 10.1089/dia.2019.0123
20.
ForlenzaGP, EkhlaspourL, DiMeglioLA, et al.Glycemic outcomes of children 2–6 years of age with type 1 diabetes during the pediatric MiniMed™ 670G system trial. Pediatr Diabetes, 2022; 23(3):324–329; doi: 10.1111/pedi.13312
21.
SherrJL, BodeBW, ForlenzaGP, et al.Safety and glycemic outcomes with a tubeless automated insulin delivery system in very young children with type 1 diabetes: A single-arm multicenter clinical trial. Diabetes Care, 2022; 45(8):1907–1910; doi: 10.2337/dc21-2359
22.
ArrietaA, BattelinoT, ScaramuzzaAE, et al.Comparison of MiniMed 780G system performance in users aged younger and older than 15 years: Evidence from 12 870 real-world users. Diabetes Obes Metab, 2022; 24(7):1370–1379; doi: 10.1111/dom.14714
23.
CollynsOJ, MeierRA, BettsZL, et al.Improved glycemic outcomes with Medtronic MiConiMed Advanced Hybrid Closed-Loop Delivery: Results from a randomized crossover trial comparing automated insulin delivery with predictive low glucose suspend in people with type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Care, 2021; 44(4):969–975; doi: 10.2337/dc20-2250
24.
WheelerBJ, CollynsOJ, MeierRA, et al.Improved technology satisfaction and sleep quality with Medtronic MiniMed® Advanced Hybrid Closed-Loop delivery compared to predictive low glucose suspend in people with type 1 diabetes in a randomized crossover trial. Acta Diabetol, 2022; 59(1):31–37; doi: 10.1007/s00592-021-01789-5
25.
TorneseG, BuzzurroF, CarlettiC, et al.Six-month effectiveness of advanced vs. standard hybrid closed-loop system in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes mellitus. Front Endocrinol (Lausanne), 2021; 12:766314; doi: 10.3389/fendo.2021.766314
26.
Medtronic Minimed 780g™ System User Guide.
27.
BattelinoT, DanneT, BergenstalRM, et al.Clinical targets for continuous glucose monitoring data interpretation: Recommendations from the international consensus on time in range. Diabetes Care, 2019; 42 (8):1593–1603; doi: 10.2337/dci19-0028
28.
MarkowitzJT, VolkeningLK, ButlerDA, et al.Re-examining a measure of diabetes-related burden in parents of young people with type 1 diabetes: The Problem Areas in Diabetes Survey—Parent Revised version (PAID-PR). Diabet Med, 2012; 29(4):526–530; doi: 10.1111/j.1464-5491.2011.03434.x
29.
Diabetes Control and Complications Trial Research Group. 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; 30;329(14):977–986; doi: 10.1056/NEJM199309303291401
30.
SamuelssonU, AnderzenJ, ÅkessonK, et al.The importance of low HbA1c during childhood on glycaemic control in adulthood and the risk of late complications. Acta Paediatr, 2021; 110(4):1264–1272; doi: 10.1111/apa.15591
31.
BeckRW, ConnorCG, MullenDM, et al.The fallacy of average: How using HbA1c alone to assess glycemic control can be misleading. Diabetes Care, 2017; 40(8):994–999; doi: 10.2337/dc17-0636
32.
YapanisM, JamesS, CraigME, et al.Complications of diabetes and metrics of glycaemic management derived from continuous glucose monitoring, J Clin Endocrinol Metab, 2022; 17;107(6):e2221–e2236; doi: 10.1210/clinem/dgac034
33.
KlonoffDC, WangJ, RodbardD, et al.A glycemia risk index (GRI) of hypoglycemia and hyperglycemia for continuous glucose monitoring validated by clinician ratings. J Diabetes Sci Technol, 2022;19322968221085273; In Press; doi: 10.1177/19322968221085273
34.
FergusonSC, BlaneA, WardlawJ, et al.Influence of an early-onset age of type 1 diabetes on cerebral structure and cognitive function. Diabetes Care, 2005; 28(6):1431–1437; doi: 10.2337/diacare.28.6.1431
35.
MusenG, LyooIK, SparksCR, et al.Effects of type 1 diabetes on gray matter density as measured by voxel-based morphometry. Diabetes, 2006; 55(2):326–333; doi: 10.2337/diabetes.55.02.06.db05-0520
36.
WangY, XingL, YuH, et al.Prevalence of dental caries in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes: A systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Oral Health, 2019; 19(1):213; doi: 10.1186/s12903-019-0903-5
37.
CommissariatPV, HarringtonKR, WhitehouseAL, et al.“I'm essentially his pancreas”: Parent perceptions of diabetes burden and opportunities to reduce burden in the care of children <8 years old with type 1 diabetes. Pediatr Diabetes, 2020; 21(2):377–383; doi: 10.1111/pedi.12956
38.
KimbellB, RankinD, HartRI, et al.Parents' experiences of using a hybrid closed-loop system (CamAPS FX) to care for a very young child with type 1 diabetes: Qualitative study. Diabetes Res Clin Pract, 2022; 187:109877.
39.
MusolinoG, DovcK, BoughtonCK, et al.& Kidsap Consortium. Reduced burden of diabetes and improved quality of life: Experiences from unrestricted day-and-night hybrid closed-loop use in very young children with type 1 diabetes. Pediatr Diabetes, 2019; 20(6):794–799; doi: 10.1111/pedi.12872
40.
VigerskyRA, VeladoK, ZhongA, et al.The effectiveness of virtual training on the MiniMed™ 670G system in people with type 1 diabetes during the COVID-19 pandemic. Diabetes Technol Ther, 2021; 23(2):104–109; doi: 10.1089/dia.2020.0234
41.
GhadessiM, TangR, ZhouJ, et al.A roadmap to using historical controls in clinical trials–by Drug Information Association Adaptive Design Scientific Working Group (DIA-ADSWG). Orphanet J Rare Dis, 2020; 15(1):69; doi: 10.1186/s13023-020-1332-x
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.
