Comparison of MiniMed 780G system performance in users aged younger and older than 15 years: Evidence from 12 870 real-world users

Current state of the art and future directions for implantable sensors in medical technology: Clinical needs and engineering challenges

Implantable sensors have revolutionized the way we monitor biophysical and biochemical parameters by enabling real-time closed-loop intervention or therapy. These technologies align with the new era of healthcare known as healthcare 5.0, which encompasses smart disease control and detection, virtual care, intelligent health management, smart monitoring, and decision-making. This review explores the diverse biomedical applications of implantable temperature, mechanical, electrophysiological, optical, and electrochemical sensors. We delve into the engineering principles that serve as the foundation for their development. We also address the challenges faced by researchers and designers in bridging the gap between implantable sensor research and their clinical adoption by emphasizing the importance of careful consideration of clinical requirements and engineering challenges. We highlight the need for future research to explore issues such as long-term performance, biocompatibility, and power sources, as well as the potential for implantable sensors to transform healthcare across multiple disciplines. It is evident that implantable sensors have immense potential in the field of medical technology. However, the gap between research and clinical adoption remains wide, and there are still major obstacles to overcome before they can become a widely adopted part of medical practice.

MiniMed 780G Advanced Hybrid Closed-Loop System Outcomes According to Pubertal Status: Awesome Study Group Real-Life Experience

Background and Aims: Achieving good glycemic control is a major challenge for adolescents with type 1 diabetes (TID). The introduction of the MiniMed 780G system, an advanced hybrid closed-loop (AHCL) that enables an automatic correction of insulin, gave hope for improved glycemic outcomes in adolescents. We assessed specific characteristics associated with glycemic measures in youth with T1D switching to Minimed 780G. Methods: This retrospective observational real-life multicenter study from the AWeSoMe Group assessed continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) metrics of 22 patients (59% females, median age 13.9 interquartile range [IQR 11,18] years), from a high socioeconomic background. CGM metrics were recorded for 2-week periods before AHCL, after 1, 3, 6 months, and at the end of follow-up (median 10.9 [IQR 5.4, 17.4] months). Delta-variables (Δ) were calculated as the difference between the end of follow-up and baseline. Results: Time in range (TIR)70-180mg/dL increased from 65% [52, 72] to 75% [63, 80], P = 0.008, from baseline to end of follow-up. Time above range>180mg/dL decreased from 28% [20, 46] to 22% [14, 35], P = 0.047. Advanced pubertal stage was correlated with less improvement in ΔTAR>180mg/dL, r = 0.47, P = 0.05, and less CGM usage r = -0.57, P = 0.05. A longer disease duration was associated with less improvement in ΔTAR180-250mg/dL, r = 0.48, P = 0.05. Lower pump site change frequency was associated with higher glucose management indicator, r = 0.5, P = 0.03, and lower TIR70-180mg/dL r = -0.52, P = 0.08. Conclusion: The use of AHCL enabled improvements in TIR70-180mg/dL in youth with T1D. More advanced pubertal stages, longer disease duration, and less compliance were associated with less improvement, stressing the need for continuous support, and re-education in this age group.

Glycemic Outcomes During Early Use of the MiniMed™ 780G Advanced Hybrid Closed-Loop System with Guardian™ 4 Sensor

Background: Safety and significant improvement in overall glycated hemoglobin (A1C) and percentage of time spent in (TIR), below (TBR), and above (TAR) glucose range were demonstrated in the pivotal trial of adolescents and adults using the MiniMed™ advanced hybrid closed-loop (AHCL) system with the adjunctive, calibration-required Guardian™ Sensor 3. The present study evaluated early outcomes of continued access study (CAS) participants who transitioned from the pivotal trial investigational system to the approved MiniMed™ 780G system with the non-adjunctive, calibration-free Guardian™ 4 Sensor (MM780G+G4S). Study data were presented alongside those of real-world MM780G+G4S users from Europe, the Middle East, and Africa. Methods: The CAS participants (N = 109, aged 7-17 years and N = 67, aged >17 years) used the MM780G+G4S for 3 months and data of real-world MM780G+G4S system users (N = 10,204 aged ≤15 years and N = 26,099 aged >15 years) were uploaded from September 22, 2021 to December 02, 2022. At least 10 days of real-world continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) data were required for analyses. Glycemic metrics, delivered insulin and system use/interactions underwent descriptive analyses. Results: Time in AHCL and CGM use were >90% for all groups. AHCL exits averaged 0.1/day and there were few blood glucose measurements (BGMs) (0.8/day-1.0/day). Adults in both cohorts met most consensus recommendations for glycemic targets. Pediatric groups met recommendations for %TIR and %TBR, although not those for mean glucose variability and %TAR, possibly due to low use of recommended glucose target (100 mg/dL) and active insulin time (2 h) settings (28.4% in the CAS cohort and 9.4% in the real-world cohort). The CAS pediatric and adult A1C were 7.2% ± 0.7% and 6.8% ± 0.7%, respectively, and there were no serious adverse events. Conclusions: Early clinical use of the MM780G+G4S was safe and involved minimal BGMs and AHCL exits. Consistent with real-world pediatric and adult use, outcomes were associated with achievement of recommended glycemic targets. Clinical Trial Registration number: NCT03959423.

A systematic review on the impact of commercially available hybrid closed loop systems on psychological outcomes in youths with type 1 diabetes and their parents

AIM

To systematically assess the impact of commercially available hybrid closed loop (HCL) systems on psychological outcomes in youths with type 1 diabetes and their parents.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review including studies published in the last 10 years. PICOS framework was used in the selection process, and evidence was assessed using the GRADE system.

RESULTS

A total of 215 studies were identified after duplicate removal, and 31 studies were included in this systematic review: 20 on first-generation HCL and 11 on second-generation HCL systems. According to studies with moderate- to high-level quality of evidence, HCL systems led to better, or in some studies, unchanged psychological outcomes such as distress and burden related to diabetes management, fear of hypoglycemia, quality of life, satisfaction; instead, quality of sleep was perceived as improved, although results were not confirmed in studies using actigraphy. From semi-structured interviews, answers were more homogeneous, and participants reported a positive experience and attitude towards HCL technology, which was felt to be easy to use and apt to achieve glycemic targets.

CONCLUSIONS

Evidence confirms the importance of evaluating the psychosocial needs of youths with diabetes and their families when starting HCL systems and during follow-up, and to set realistic expectations of what can be achieved along with awareness of the limitations of the systems, and educate and motivate families to overcome barriers.

Socioeconomic status and diabetes technology use in youth with type 1 diabetes: a comparison of two funding models

Background

Technology use, including continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) and insulin pump therapy, is associated with improved outcomes in youth with type 1 diabetes (T1D). In 2017 CGM was universally funded for youth with T1D in Australia. In contrast, pump access is primarily accessed through private health insurance, self-funding or philanthropy. The study aim was to investigate the use of diabetes technology across different socioeconomic groups in Australian youth with T1D, in the setting of two contrasting funding models.

Methods

A cross-sectional evaluation of 4957 youth with T1D aged <18 years in the national registry was performed to determine technology use. The Index of Relative Socio-Economic Disadvantage (IRSD) derived from Australian census data is an area-based measure of socioeconomic status (SES). Lower quintiles represent greater disadvantage. IRSD based on most recent postcode of residence was used as a marker of SES. A multivariable generalised linear model adjusting for age, diabetes duration, sex, remoteness classification, and location within Australia was used to determine the association between SES and device use.

Results

CGM use was lower in IRSD quintile 1 in comparison to quintiles 2 to 5 (p<0.001) where uptake across the quintiles was similar. A higher percentage of pump use was observed in the least disadvantaged IRSD quintiles. Compared to the most disadvantaged quintile 1, pump use progressively increased by 16% (95% CI: 4% to 31%) in quintile 2, 19% (6% to 33%) in quintile 3, 35% (21% to 50%) in quintile 4 and 51% (36% to 67%) in the least disadvantaged quintile 5.

Conclusion

In this large national dataset, use of diabetes technologies was found to differ across socioeconomic groups. For nationally subsidised CGM, use was similar across socioeconomic groups with the exception of the most disadvantaged quintile, an important finding requiring further investigation into barriers to CGM use within a nationally subsidised model. User pays funding models for pump therapy result in lower use with socioeconomic disadvantage, highlighting inequities in this funding approach. For the full benefits of diabetes technology to be realised, equitable access to pump therapy needs to be a health policy priority.

Impact on glucometric variables and quality of life of the advanced hybrid closed-loop system in pediatric and adolescent type 1 diabetes

BACKGROUND

In recent years, technological advances in the field of diabetes have revolutionized the management, prognosis, and quality of life of diabetes patients and their environment. The aim of our study was to evaluate the impact of implementing the MiniMed 780G closed-loop system in a pediatric and adolescent population previously treated with a continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion pump and intermittent glucose monitoring.

METHODS

Data were collected from 28 patients with type 1 diabetes aged 6 to 17 years, with a follow-up of 6 months. We included both glucometric and quality of life variables, as well as quality of life in primary caregivers. Metabolic control variables were assessed at baseline (before system change) and at different cutoff points after initiation of the closed-loop system (48 hours, 7 days, 14 days, 21 days, 1 month, 3 months, 6 months).

RESULTS

Time in range 70-180 mg/dL increased from 59.44% at baseline to 74.29% in the first 48 hours after automation of the new system, and this improvement was maintained at the other cutoff points, as was time in hyperglycemia 180-250 mg/dL (24.44% at baseline to 18.96% at 48 hours) and >250 mg/dL (11.71% at baseline to 3.82% at 48 hours).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study showed an improvement in time in range and in all time spent in hyperglycemia from the first 48 hours after the automation of the system, which was maintained at 6 months.

The changing landscape of automated insulin delivery in the management of type 1 diabetes

Automated insulin delivery systems, also known as closed-loop or 'artificial pancreas' systems, are transforming the management of type 1 diabetes. These systems consist of an algorithm which responds to real-time glucose sensor levels by automatically modulating insulin delivery through an insulin pump. We review the rapidly changing landscape of automated insulin-delivery systems over recent decades, from initial prototypes to the different hybrid closed-loop systems commercially available today. We discuss the growing body of clinical trials and real-world evidence demonstrating their glycaemic and psychosocial benefits. We also address future directions in automated insulin delivery such as dual-hormone systems and adjunct therapy as well as the challenges around ensuring equitable access to closed-loop technology.

Real-World Evidence of the Cambridge Hybrid Closed-Loop App With a Novel Real-Time Continuous Glucose Monitoring System

We evaluated the performance of the interoperable Cambridge hybrid closed-loop app with FreeStyle Libre 3 glucose sensor, and YpsoPump insulin pump in a real-world setting. Data from 100 users (63 adults [mean ± SD age 41.9 ± 14.0 years], 15 children [8.6 ± 5.2 years)] and 22 users of unreported age) for a period of 28 days were analyzed. Time in range (3.91- 10.0mmol/L) was 72.6 ± 11.1% overall. Time below range (<3.9mmol/L) was 3.1% (1.4-5.1) (median [interquartile range]). Auto-mode was active for 95.8% (91.8-97.9) of time. This real-world analysis suggests that the performance of Cambridge hybrid closed-loop app with this glucose sensor is comparable to other commercially available hybrid closed-loop systems.

Real-World Performance of First- Versus Second-Generation Automated Insulin Delivery Systems on a Pediatric Population With Type 1 Diabetes: A One-Year Observational Study

BACKGROUND

The aim of this single-center observational study was to assess the real-world performance of first- and second-generation automated insulin delivery (AID) systems in a cohort of children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes over a one-year follow-up.

METHODS

Demographic, anamnestic, and clinical data of the study cohort were collected at the start of automatic mode. Data on continuous glucose monitoring metrics, system settings, insulin requirements, and anthropometric parameters at three different time points (start period, six months, 12 months) were retrospectively gathered and statistically analyzed.

RESULTS

Fifty-four individuals (55.6% of females) aged 7 to 18 years switching to AID therapy were included in the analysis. Two weeks after starting automatic mode, subjects using advanced hybrid closed-loop (AHCL) showed a better response than hybrid closed-loop (HCL) users in terms of time in range (P = .016), time above range 180 to 250 mg/dl (P = .022), sensor mean glucose (P = .047), and glycemia risk index (P = .012). After 12 months, AHCL group maintained better mean sensor glucose (P = .021) and glucose management indicator (P = .027). Noteworthy, both HCL and AHCL users achieved the recommended clinical targets over the entire study period. The second-generation AID system registered longer time spent with automatic mode activated and fewer shifts to manual mode at every time point (P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Both systems showed sustained and successful glycemic outcomes in the first year of use. However, AHCL users achieved tighter glycemic targets, without an increase of hypoglycemia risk. Improved usability of the device may also have contributed to optimal glycemic outcomes by ensuring better continuity of the automatic mode activation.

Real-World Evidence Analysis of a Hybrid Closed-Loop System

BACKGROUND

We analyzed real-world evidence to assess the performance of the mylife CamAPS FX hybrid closed-loop system.

METHODS

Users from 15 countries across different age groups who used the system between May 9, 2022, and December 3, 2022, and who had ≥30 days of continuous glucose monitor data, and ≥30% of closed-loop usage were included in the current analysis (N = 1805).

RESULTS

Time in range (3.9-10 mmol/L) was 72.6 ± 11.5% (mean ± SD) for all users and increased by age from 66.9 ± 11.7% for users ≤6 years old to 81.8 ± 8.7% for users ≥65 years. Time spent in hypoglycemia (<3.9 mmol/L) was 2.3% [1.3, 3.6] (median [interquartile range]). Mean glucose and glucose management indicator were 8.4 ± 1.1 mmol/L and 6.9%, respectively. Time using closed-loop was high at 94.7% [90.0, 96.9].

CONCLUSIONS

Glycemic outcomes from the present real-world evidence are comparable to results obtained from previous randomized controlled studies and confirm the efficacy of this hybrid closed-loop system in real-world settings.

The significance of coefficient of variation as a measure of hypoglycaemia risk and glycaemic control in real world users of the automated insulin delivery MiniMed 780G system

AIM

Use of the MiniMed 780G system (MM780G) can result in a reduction in mean and standard deviation (SD) of sensor glucose (SG) values. We assessed the significance of the coefficient of variation (CV) as a measure of hypoglycaemia risk and glycaemic control.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Data from 10 404 MM780G users were analysed using multivariable logistic regression to assess the contribution of CV to (a) hypoglycaemia risk, measured as not reaching target <1% for time below range (TBR), and (b) achieving targets of time-in-range (TIR) >70% and glucose management indicator <7%. CV was compared with SD and low blood glucose index. To assess the relevance of CV <36% as a therapeutic threshold, we identified the CV cut-off point that optimally discriminated users at risk of hypoglycaemia.

RESULTS

The contribution of CV was the smallest in terms of risk of hypoglycaemia (vs. low blood glucose index and SD) and TIR and glucose management indicator targets (vs. SD). In all cases the models with SD showed the best fit. A CV <43.4% (95% CI: 42.9-43.9) was the optimal cut-off point with a correct classification rate of 87.2% (vs. 72.9% for CV <36%).

CONCLUSION

For MM780G users, CV is a poor marker for hypoglycaemia risk and glycaemic control. We recommend using, for the former, TBR and whether the TBR target is met (and not using CV <36% as a therapeutic threshold for hypoglycaemia); for the latter, TIR, time above range, whether targets are met and a discrete description of mean SG and SD of SG values.

One-year follow-up of advance hybrid closed-loop system in adults with type 1 diabetes previously naive to diabetes technology: The effect of switching to a calibration-free sensor

The aim of this study was to observe the one-year clinical outcomes of people with type 1 diabetes (T1D) who switched from Multiple Daile Injection + Blood Glucose Meter to an advanced hybrid closed-loop (AHCL) system (Medtronic MiniMedTM 780G system (MM 780G). Additionally, the effect of changing at month 6 to a calibration free sensor (GuardianTM 4 Sensor (G4S) was evaluated. 18 participants (10 men, age 40.9±7.6 years) completed 1 year of MM 780G use. Time in range (70-180 mg/dL) (TIR) remained stable and ranged from 83.2% in month 9 to 84.8% in month 3. There was no difference between TIR at 3 months before switching vs 3 months after switching to G4S (p=0.614). AHCL system in adults significantly improves glycemic outcomes. This improved glycemic control was maintained over the 12 months. Switching to a calibration free sensor (G4S) did not affect outcomes but required less patient involvement.

Glycemic Control by Treatment Modalities: National Registry-Based Population Data in Children and Adolescents with Type 1 Diabetes

INTRODUCTION

The aim of the study was to assess the differences in key parameters of type 1 diabetes (T1D) control associated with treatment and monitoring modalities including newly introduced hybrid closed-loop (HCL) algorithm in children and adolescents with T1D (CwD) using the data from the population-wide pediatric diabetes registry ČENDA.

METHODS

CwD younger than 19 years with T1D duration >1 year were included and divided according to the treatment modality and type of CGM used: multiple daily injection (MDI), insulin pump without (CSII) and with HCL function, intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitoring (isCGM), real-time CGM (rtCGM), and intermittent or no CGM (noCGM). HbA1c, times in glycemic ranges, and glucose risk index (GRI) were compared between the groups.

RESULTS

Data of a total of 3,251 children (mean age 13.4 ± 3.8 years) were analyzed. 2,187 (67.3%) were treated with MDI, 1,064 (32.7%) with insulin pump, 585/1,064 (55%) with HCL. The HCL users achieved the highest median TIR 75.4% (IQR 6.3) and lowest GRI 29.1 (7.8), both p < 0.001 compared to other groups, followed by MDI rtCGM and CSII groups with TIR 68.8% (IQR 9.0) and 69.0% (7.5), GRI 38.8 (12.5) and 40.1 (8.5), respectively (nonsignificant to each other). These three groups did not significantly differ in their HbA1c medians (51.8 [IQR 4.5], 50.7 [4.5], and 52.7 [5.7] mmol/mol, respectively). NoCGM groups had the highest HbA1c and GRI and lowest TIR regardless of the treatment modality.

CONCLUSION

This population-based study shows that the HCL technology is superior to other treatment modalities in CGM-derived parameters and should be considered as a treatment of choice in all CwD fulfilling the indication criteria.

Insight into continuous glucose monitoring: from medical basics to commercialized devices

According to the latest statistics, more than 537 million people around the world struggle with diabetes and its adverse consequences. As well as acute risks of hypo- or hyper- glycemia, long-term vascular complications may occur, including coronary heart disease or stroke, as well as diabetic nephropathy leading to end-stage disease, neuropathy or retinopathy. Therefore, there is an urgent need to improve diabetes management to reduce the risk of complications but also to improve patient's quality life. The impact of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) is well recognized, in this regard. The current review aims at introducing the basic principles of glucose sensing, including electrochemical and optical detection, summarizing CGM technology, its requirements, advantages, and disadvantages. The role of CGM systems in the clinical diagnostics/personal testing, difficulties in their utilization, and recommendations are also discussed. In the end, challenges and prospects in future CGM systems are discussed and non-invasive, wearable glucose biosensors are introduced. Though the scope of this review is CGMs and provides information about medical issues and analytical principles, consideration of broader use will be critical in future if the right systems are to be selected for effective diabetes management.

Type 1 diabetes mellitus - Population characterization and metabolic control outcomes in a Portuguese patient sample

AIMS

To characterize a cohort of T1D patients and to compare diabetes control between patients using different regimen of insulin therapy and glucose monitoring.

METHODS

Were included all T1D patients followed at the Pediatric Endocrinology Unit, between April 1st and June 30th, 2021. Several clinical and demographic variables were analyzed.

RESULTS

Our sample included 208 patients, 56.7 % males, mean age of 12.7 ± 4.6 years. The median HbA1c was 7.3 %. Most patients, 78.8% were treated with continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) and 81.3 % used continuous glucose monitoring (CGM). CSII had a lower HbAc compared with multiple daily injections (MDI) users (7.1vs 8.1 %, p < 0.01). In the CSII group, those who used CGM had a lower HbAc (7.1 vs 7.5 %,p = 0.02). Analyzing the data of the ambulatory glucose report, the CSII users had a lower glucose management indicator, (7.2 % vs 7.6 %, p < 0.01), more time in range (58.0 % vs 52.4 %;p < 0.01) and less time above range > 250 mg/dL (12.4 % vs 20.5 %;p < 0.01) than MDI users.

CONCLUSIONS

The median HbA1c was 7.3% very close to the recommended target. In Portugal, pediatric patients can access a CSII provided by the national health service and a CGM system due to an elevated reimbursement of their cost. This healthy policy allows us to achieve better goals without the risk of hypoglycemia.

Automated Insulin Delivery (AID) Systems: Use and Efficacy in Children and Adults with Type 1 Diabetes and Other Forms of Diabetes in Europe in Early 2023

Type 1 diabetes (T1D) patients' lifestyle and prognosis has remarkably changed over the years, especially after the introduction of insulin pumps, in particular advanced hybrid closed loop systems (AHCL). Emerging data in literature continuously confirm the improvement of glycemic control thanks to the technological evolution taking place in this disease. As stated in previous literature, T1D patients are seen to be more satisfied thanks to the use of these devices that ameliorate not only their health but their daily life routine as well. Limited findings regarding the use of new devices in different age groups and types of patients is their major limit. This review aims to highlight the main characteristics of each Automated Insulin Delivery (AID) system available for patients affected by Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus. Our main goal was to particularly focus on these systems' efficacy and use in different age groups and populations (i.e., children, pregnant women). Recent studies are emerging that demonstrate their efficacy and safety in younger patients and other forms of diabetes.

Simplified Meal Announcement Versus Precise Carbohydrate Counting in Adolescents With Type 1 Diabetes Using the MiniMed 780G Advanced Hybrid Closed Loop System: A Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Glucose Control

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to compare glucose control in adolescents with type 1 diabetes (T1D) using the MiniMed 780G system who used simplified meal announcement with those who used precise carbohydrate counting.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

This randomized controlled trial included 34 participants (age 12-18 years) with T1D who were on multiple daily injections or insulin pump and were scheduled to start using the MiniMed 780G system at Sidra Medicine in Qatar. After a 7-day run-in period, participants were randomly assigned to the fix group (simplified meal announcement by preset of three personalized fixed carbohydrate amounts) or the flex group (precise carbohydrate counting) and followed for 12 weeks. Between-group difference in time in range (TIR) was the primary end point. Secondary end points included HbA1c and other glycometrics.

RESULTS

During the 12-week study phase, TIR was 73.5 ± 6.7% in the fix and 80.3 ± 7.4% in the flex group, with a between-group difference of 6.8% in favor of flex (P = 0.043). Time >250 mg/dL was better in the flex group (P = 0.012), whereas HbA1c (P = 0.168), time below range (P = 0.283), and time between 180 and 250 mg/dL (P = 0.114) did not differ.

CONCLUSIONS

Adolescents using the MiniMed 780G system with a preset of three personalized fixed carbohydrate amounts can reach international targets of glycemic control. Therefore, it may be a valuable alternative to precise carbohydrate counting in users who are challenged by precise carbohydrate counting. Because carbohydrate counting further improves outcomes, these skills remain important for MiniMed 780G users.

Adolescents with type 1 diabetes vs. hybrid closed loop systems: a case series of patients' behaviour that challenges the algorithm

OBJECTIVES

Hybrid closed loop systems (HCL) improve the management of type 1 diabetes (T1DM). T1DM adolescent patients represent a risk category also if they are in an automated insulin infusion delivery therapy.

CASE PRESENTATION

We describe a series of four cases in which adolescent patients have adopted incorrect behaviours in the managing of HCL systems, challenging the algorithm skills. Two patients performed fabricated sensor calibrations. The other two did not perform pre-prandial insulin boluses correctly. Despite these behaviours, the algorithm corrected the glucose values in three out of four patients. Only in one case, where fabricated calibrations were too frequent, the automatic system failed to restore the glycemic balance.

CONCLUSIONS

Fabricated calibrations seem to be more important than uncorrected insulin boluses to challenge the HCL systems.

Safety, metabolic and psychological outcomes of Medtronic MiniMed 670G in children, adolescents and young adults: a systematic review

Hybrid closed loop (HCL) systems are the combination of a pump for insulin delivery and a glucose sensor for continuous glucose monitoring. These systems are managed by an algorithm, which delivers insulin on the basis of the interstitial glucose levels. The MiniMed™ 670G system was the first HCL system available for clinical purpose. In this paper, we reviewed the literature about metabolic and psychological outcomes in children, adolescents and young adults with type 1 diabetes treated with MiniMed™ 670G. Only 30 papers responded to the inclusion criteria and thus were considered. All the papers show that the system is safe and effective in managing glucose control. Metabolic outcomes are available up to 12 months of follow-up; longer study period are lacking. This HCL system may improve HbA1c up to 7.1% and time in range up to 73%. The time spent in hypoglycaemia is almost neglectable. Better improvement in blood glucose control is observed in patients with higher HbA1c at HCL system start and larger daily use of auto-mode functionality.     Conclusion: The Medtronic MiniMed™ 670G is safe and well accepted, without any increase in the burden for patients. Some papers report an improvement in the psychological outcomes, but other papers do not confirm this finding. So far, it significantly improves the management of diabetes mellitus in children, adolescents and young adults. Proper training and support by the diabetes team are mandatory. Studies for a period longer than 1 year would be appreciated to better understand the potentiality of this system. What is Known: • The Medtronic MiniMed^TM 670G is a hybrid closed loop system which combines a continuous glucose monitoring sensor with an insulin pump. • It has been the first hybrid closed loop system available for clinical purpose. Adequate training and patients support play a key role in diabetes management. What is New: • The Medtronic MiniMed^TM 670G may improve HbA1c and CGM metrics up to 1-year of follow-up, but the improvement appears lower than advanced hybrid closed loop systems. This system is effective to prevent hypoglycaemia. • The psychosocial effects remain less understood in terms of improvement of psychosocial outcomes. The system has been considered to provide flexibility and independence by the patients and their caregivers. The workload required to use this system is perceived as a burden by the patients who decrease the use of auto-mode functionality over time.

Real-world performance of the MiniMed 780G advanced hybrid closed loop system in Latin America: Substantial improvement in glycaemic control with each technology iteration of the MiniMed automated insulin delivery system

AIM

We studied real-world performance of MiniMed (MM) 780G system users from Argentina, Brazil, Colombia and Chile (geographical analysis), and the effect of each technology iteration of the MM system on glycaemic control (technology iteration analysis).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

CareLink data from August 2020 to September 2022 were extracted. Endpoints included continuous glucose monitoring metrics. For the geographical analysis, aggregated endpoints for MM780G system users were calculated. For the technology iteration analysis, MM780G system user outcomes were compared with outcomes when the same individuals were still using the MM640G or MM670G system.

RESULTS

On average, 1025 MM780G system users from the geographical analysis were followed for 136 (SD 135) days, spent 91.5 (14.3)% in advanced hybrid closed loop, showed a glucose management indicator (GMI) of 6.7 (0.3)%, a time in range between 70 and 180 mg/dl (TIR) of 76.5 (9.0)%, and a time below range 70 mg/dl (TBR) of 2.7 (2.1)%. The percentage of users reaching targets of GMI <7%, TIR >70% and TBR <4% was 80.8%, 78.1% and 80.1%, respectively. The technology iteration analysis on users transitioning from MM640G to MM780G system (N = 381) showed 0.4% decrease in GMI (7.1% to 6.7%, p < .0001), 10.7% increase in TIR (65.9% to 76.6%, p < .0001), while TBR remained. The percentage of insulin delivered automatically increased as well (47.5%-57.7%, p < .0001). Users transitioning from MM670G system (N = 78) showed a similar but less pronounced pattern.

CONCLUSIONS

Real-world Latin American MM780G users on average showed good glucose control, achieving international targets. Glycaemic control increased with every technology iteration of the MM system, providing more automation each time.

One-year real-world performance of the DBLG1 closed-loop system: Data from 3706 adult users with type 1 diabetes in Germany

AIM

The Diabeloop Generation 1 (DBLG1) system is an interoperable hybrid closed-loop solution that was commercialized in Germany in March 2021. We report the longitudinal glycaemic outcomes among the first 3706 users in a real-world setting.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective data collection of all consenting adult patients with type 1 diabetes who were equipped in Germany with the DBLG1 system before 30 April 2022, and with a minimum 14 days of closed-loop usage.

RESULTS

In total, 3706 users (41% women, age 45.1 ± 14.5 years) met the inclusion criteria, reaching a mean follow-up of 131.0 ± 85.1 days, an overall 485 600 days of continuous glucose monitoring data, and a median time spent in closed-loop of 95.0% (IQR 89.1-97.4). The median percentage time in range (70-180 mg/dl) was 72.1% (IQR 65.0-78.9); the time below 70 mg/dl was 0.9% (0.5-1.7), the time below 54 mg/dl was 0.1% (0.1-0.3), and the median Glucose Management Index was 7.0% (6.8-7.3). Exploratory analysis of a subset of 2460 patients in whom baseline glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) was available [7.4% (IQR 6.9-8.0)] showed that the achieved mean time in range was influenced by baseline HbA1c, ranging from 65.8 ± 9.9% (A1c ≥8.5%) to 81.3 ± 6.8% (A1c <6.5%).

CONCLUSION

This large real-world analysis confirms the relevance of the DBLG1 automated insulin delivery solution for the achievement of standards of care in adult patients with type 1 diabetes.

MiniMed 780G™ in 2- to 6-Year-Old Children: Safety and Clinical Outcomes After the First 12 Weeks

Objective: 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.

One-year follow-up comparison of two hybrid closed-loop systems in Italian children and adults with type 1 diabetes

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Tandem Control-IQ and MiniMed 780G are the main Advanced Hybrid Closed Loop (AHCL) systems currently available in pediatric and adult patients with Type 1 Diabetes (T1D). The aim of our study was to evaluate glycemic control after 1-year of follow-up extending our previous study of 1-month comparison between the two systems.

METHODS

We retrospectively compared clinical and continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) data from the patients included in the previous study which have completed 1-year observation period. The study population consisted of 74 patients, 42 Minimed 780G users and 32 Tandem Control-IQ users. Linear mixed models with random intercept were performed to study the variations over time and the interaction between time and system; Mann-Whitney or T-test were used to compare systems at 1-year.

RESULTS

Both systems have been shown to be effective in maintaining the glycemic improvement achieved one month after starting AHCL. Significant changes over time were observed for TIR, TAR, TAR>250mg/dl, average glucose levels and SD (p<0.001). At 1-year follow-up Minimed 780G obtained better improvement in TIR (p<0.001), TAR (p=0.002), TAR>250mg/dl (p=0.001), average glucose levels (p<0.001). The comparison of the glycemic parameters at 1-year showed a significant superiority of Minimed 780G in terms of TIR (71% vs 68%; p=0.001), TAR (p=0.001), TAR>250 (p=0.009), average glucose levels(p=0.001) and SD (p=0.031).

CONCLUSIONS

The use of AHCL systems led to a significant improvement of glycemic control at 1-month, which is maintained at 1-year follow-up. MiniMed is more effective than Tandem in reaching the International recommended glycemic targets. Continuous training and education in the use of technology is essential to get the best out of the most advanced technological tools.

Closed-loop insulin delivery: update on the state of the field and emerging technologies

INTRODUCTION

Over the last five years, closed-loop insulin delivery systems have transitioned from research-only to real-life use. A number of systems have been commercialized and are increasingly used in clinical practice. Given the rapidity of new developments in the field, understanding the capabilities and key similarities and differences of current systems can be challenging. This review aims to provide an update on the state of the field of closed-loop insulin delivery systems, including emerging technologies.

AREAS COVERED

We summarize key clinical safety and efficacy evidence of commercial and emerging insulin-only hybrid closed-loop systems for type 1 diabetes. A literature search was conducted and clinical trials using closed-loop systems during free-living conditions were identified to report on safety and efficacy data. We comment on emerging technologies and adjuncts for closed-loop systems, as well as non-technological priorities in closed-loop insulin delivery.

EXPERT OPINION

Commercial hybrid closed-loop insulin delivery systems are efficacious, consistently improving glycemic control when compared to standard therapy. Challenges remain in widespread adoption due to clinical inertia and the lack of resources to embrace technological developments by health care professionals.

Predictors of time in target glucose range in real-world users of the MiniMed 780G system

AIM

Automated insulin delivery systems have improved glycaemic control in people with type 1 diabetes mellitus. The analysis investigated predictors of improved sensor glucose time-in-range (TIR; 70-180 mg/dl) based on real-world use of the MiniMed 780G advanced hybrid closed-loop (AHCL) system.

METHODS

Data uploaded by MiniMed 780G system users from August 2020-July 2021 were analysed using univariate and multivariable models to identify baseline, demographic and system use characteristics associated with TIR after AHCL initiation (post-AHCL). System settings associated with improved TIR post-AHCL were identified and their impact on time below range (TBR, <70 mg/dl) post-AHCL was explored.

RESULTS

In total, 12 870 users were included, of which 2977 had baseline sensor glucose data. Baseline TIR and time in AHCL (defined as the percentage of time the system was in Auto-mode) were positively associated with TIR post-AHCL with larger values predicting greater mean TIR post-AHCL. Characteristics inversely associated with TIR post-AHCL included the percentage of daily basal insulin dose, daily autocorrection dose, number of daily AHCL exits triggered by the system and number of daily alarms, wherein larger values of these characteristics predicted lower mean TIR post-AHCL. System settings that predicted the largest mean TIR post-AHCL were active insulin time of 2 h and glucose target of 100 mg/dl. Active insulin time was not associated with TBR post-AHCL.

CONCLUSION

Modifiable factors, including optimized pump settings, can allow users to achieve glycaemic targets with >80% TIR. The findings from this analysis will potentially guide the optimal use of the MiniMed 780G system and facilitate meaningful improvements in safe glycaemic control.

Advanced hybrid closed loop therapy versus conventional treatment in adults with type 1 diabetes (ADAPT): a randomised controlled study

BACKGROUND

Adults with type 1 diabetes who are treated with multiple daily injections of insulin plus intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitoring (isCGM) can have suboptimal glucose control. We aimed to assess the efficacy of an advanced hybrid closed loop (AHCL) system compared with such therapy in this population.

METHODS

The Advanced Hybrid Closed Loop Study in Adult Population with Type 1 Diabetes (ADAPT) trial is a prospective, multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled trial that involved 14 centres in three European countries (France, Germany, and the UK). We enrolled patients who were at least 18 years of age, had a type 1 diabetes duration of at least 2 years, HbA_1c of at least 8% (64 mmol/mol), and were using multiple daily injections of insulin plus isCGM (cohort A) or real time continuous glucose monitoring (cohort B) for at least 3 months. Here, only results for cohort A are reported. Participants were randomly allocated 1:1 to AHCL therapy or continuation of multiple daily injections of insulin plus continuous glucose monitoring for 6 months with an investigator-blinded block randomisation procedure. Participants and treating clinicians could not be masked to the arm assignment. The primary endpoint was the between-group difference in mean HbA_1c change from baseline to 6 months in the intention-to-treat population using AHCL therapy and those using multiple daily injections of insulin plus isCGM. The primary endpoint was analysed using a repeated measures random-effects model with the study arm and period as factors. Safety endpoints included the number of device deficiencies, severe hypoglycaemic events, diabetic ketoacidosis, and serious adverse events. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04235504.

FINDINGS

Between July 13, 2020, and March 12, 2021, 105 people were screened and 82 randomly assigned to treatment (41 in each arm). At 6 months, mean HbA_1c had decreased by 1·54% (SD 0·73), from 9·00% to 7·32% in the AHCL group and 0·20% (0·80) in the multiple daily injections of insulin plus isCGM from 9·07% to 8·91% (model-based difference -1·42%, 95% CI -1·74 to -1·10; p<0·0001). No diabetic ketoacidosis, severe hypoglycaemia, or serious adverse events related to study devices occurred in either group; two severe hypoglycaemic events occurred in the run-in phase. 15 device-related non-serious adverse events occurred in the AHCL group, compared with three in the multiple daily injections of insulin plus isCGM group. Two serious adverse events occurred (one in each group), these were breast cancer (in one patient in the AHCL group) and intravitreous haemorrhage (in one patient in the multiple daily injections of insulin plus isCGM group).

INTERPRETATION

In people with type 1 diabetes using multiple daily injections of insulin plus isCGM and with HbA_1c of at least 8%, the use of AHCL confers benefits in terms of glycaemic control beyond those that can be achieved with multiple daily injections of insulin plus isCGM. These data support wider access to AHCL in people with type 1 diabetes not at target glucose levels.

FUNDING

Medtronic International Trading Sàrl.

Body mass index, basal insulin and glycemic control in children with type 1 diabetes treated with the advanced hybrid closed loop system remain stable - 1-year prospective, observational, two-center study

BACKGROUND

Information on the influence of insulin treatment using advanced hybrid closed loop systems (AHCL) on body weight of young patients with type 1 diabetes (T1D) is scarce. The aim of this study was to observe whether there were any changes in body mass index (BMI) of children and adolescents with T1D treated using the Medtronic Minimed 780G AHCL after 1 year of follow up and to analyze potential associations between these changes and the insulin doses.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

For 50 children and adolescents (age 5.4-16.8 years, 24 (48%) boys, T1D for 3.9 ± 2.56 years) using an AHCL system anthropometric and AHCL data were collected prospectively. BMI Z-scores and two-week AHCL records obtained after AHCL enrollment were compared with data after 6 months and also 1 year after starting AHCL.

RESULTS

The BMI Z-score of the patients at 1 year follow-up did not change from time of AHCL initiation (0.51 ± 2.79 vs 0.57 ± 2.85, p>0.05). There was a slight increase in total daily insulin per kg of body weight (0.67 ± 0.21 U/kg vs 0.80 ± 0.21 U/kg, p <0.001), but the percent of basal insulin was unchanged (34.88 ± 6.91% vs 35.08 ± 6.30%, p>0.05). We observed also no change (AHCL start vs after 1 year) in glycemic control parameters: average sensor glucose (131.36± 11.04 mg/dL vs 132.45 ± 13.42 mg/dL, p>0.05), coefficient of variation (34.99± 5.17% vs 34.06 ± 5.38%, p>0.05), glucose management indicator (6.45 ± 0.26% vs 6.48 ± 0.32%, p>0.05), and time spent in the range of 70-180 mg/dL (79.28 ± 8.12% vs 80.40 ± 8.25%, p>0.05).

CONCLUSION

During the 1 year of follow-up the BMI of children and adolescents with T1D treated with an AHCL system remained stable. Although there was a slight increase in the total daily insulin dose, the percent of basal insulin was unchanged. The patients maintained recommended glycemic control.