Continuous glucose monitoring detected hypoglycaemia in the Treating to Target in Type 2 Diabetes Trial (4-T)

Blood glucose monitoring devices for type 1 diabetes: a journey from the food and drug administration approval to market availability

Blood glucose monitoring constitutes a pivotal element in the clinical management of Type 1 diabetes (T1D), a globally escalating metabolic disorder. Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) devices have demonstrated efficacy in optimizing glycemic control, mitigating adverse health outcomes, and augmenting the overall quality of life for individuals afflicted with T1D. Recent progress in the field encompasses the refinement of electrochemical sensors, which enhances the effectiveness of blood glucose monitoring. This progress empowers patients to assume greater control over their health, alleviating the burdens associated with their condition, and contributing to the overall alleviation of the healthcare system. The introduction of novel medical devices, whether derived from existing prototypes or originating as innovative creations, necessitates adherence to a rigorous approval process regulated by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Diverse device classifications, stratified by their associated risks, dictate distinct approval pathways, each characterized by varying timelines. This review underscores recent advancements in blood glucose monitoring devices primarily based on electrochemical sensors and elucidates their regulatory journey towards FDA approval. The advent of innovative, non-invasive blood glucose monitoring devices holds promise for maintaining stringent glycemic control, thereby preventing T1D-associated comorbidities, and extending the life expectancy of affected individuals.

Pharmacist-led intervention aimed at deprescribing and appropriate use of cardiometabolic medication among people with type 2 diabetes

BACKGROUND

Potential overtreatment with cardiometabolic medication (i.e., glucose lowering medication, antihypertensives and statins) has been observed in 10-40% of older people with type 2 diabetes (T2D).

OBJECTIVE

The potential effects of a pharmacist-led clinical medication review targeted at T2D patients who were at high risk of hypoglycaemia will be investigated.

METHODS

A quasi-experimental study was conducted in 14 Dutch community pharmacies. Patients with a high risk of hypoglycaemia were identified using a previously developed algorithm. Pharmacists confirmed eligibility and selected patients for the intervention. Remaining eligible patients were included as controls receiving usual care. The primary outcome was the proportion of intervention patients for whom an action on deprescribing or appropriate use of cardiometabolic medication was implemented. After three months, changes in cardiometabolic medication were compared between the intervention and control group using a Fischer exact test.

RESULTS

In total 90 intervention patients and 107 control patients were included. Intervention patients had an average age of 70, used on average 10 medications, five of which were cardiometabolic medication. For half of the intervention patients an action on deprescribing cardiometabolic medication was implemented (n = 25) and/or an advice about appropriate use of cardiometabolic medication was given (n = 22). In 48% of intervention patients at least one cardiometabolic medication (e.g. insulin, sulfonylurea, diuretic, beta-blocker, statin) was either stopped or reduced in dose compared to 31% of control patients (p = 0.018).

CONCLUSIONS

A pharmacist-led tailored clinical medication review has the potential to increase deprescribing and improve appropriate use of cardiometabolic medication in half of T2D patients at high risk of hypoglycaemia.

Continuous glucose monitoring-based time-in-range using insulin glargine 300 units/ml versus insulin degludec 100 units/ml in type 1 diabetes: The head-to-head randomized controlled InRange trial

AIM

To use continuous glucose monitoring (CGM)-based time-in-range (TIR) as a primary efficacy endpoint to compare the second-generation basal insulin (BI) analogues insulin glargine 300 U/ml (Gla-300) and insulin degludec 100 U/ml (IDeg-100) in adults with type 1 diabetes (T1D).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

InRange was a 12-week, multicentre, randomized, active-controlled, parallel-group, open-label study comparing glucose TIR and variability between Gla-300 and IDeg-100 using blinded 20-day CGM profiles. The inclusion criteria consisted of adults with T1D treated with multiple daily injections, using BI once daily and rapid-acting insulin analogues for at least 1 year, with an HbA1c of 7% or higher and of 10% or less at screening.

RESULTS

Overall, 343 participants were randomized: 172 received Gla-300 and 171 IDeg-100. Non-inferiority (10% relative margin) of Gla-300 versus IDeg-100 was shown for the primary endpoint (percentage TIR ≥ 70 to ≤ 180 mg/dl): least squares (LS) mean (95% confidence interval) 52.74% (51.06%, 54.42%) for Gla-300 and 55.09% (53.34%, 56.84%) for IDeg-100; LS mean difference (non-inferiority): 3.16% (0.88%, 5.44%) (non-inferiority P = .0067). Non-inferiority was shown on glucose total coefficient of variation (main secondary endpoint): LS mean 39.91% (39.20%, 40.61%) and 41.22% (40.49%, 41.95%), respectively; LS mean difference (non-inferiority) -5.44% (-6.50%, -4.38%) (non-inferiority P < .0001). Superiority of Gla-300 over IDeg-100 was not shown on TIR. Occurrences of self-measured and CGM-derived hypoglycaemia were comparable between treatment groups. Safety profiles were consistent with known profiles, with no unexpected findings.

CONCLUSIONS

Using clinically relevant CGM metrics, InRange shows that Gla-300 is non-inferior to IDeg-100 in people with T1D, with comparable hypoglycaemia and safety profiles.

Hypo-METRICS: Hypoglycaemia-MEasurement, ThResholds and ImpaCtS-A multi-country clinical study to define the optimal threshold and duration of sensor-detected hypoglycaemia that impact the experience of hypoglycaemia, quality of life and health economic outcomes: The study protocol

INTRODUCTION

Hypoglycaemia is a significant burden to people living with diabetes and an impediment to achieving optimal glycaemic outcomes. The use of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) has improved the capacity to assess duration and level of hypoglycaemia. The personal impact of sensor-detected hypoglycaemia (SDH) is unclear. Hypo-METRICS is an observational study designed to define the threshold and duration of sensor glucose that provides the optimal sensitivity and specificity for events that people living with diabetes experience as hypoglycaemia.

METHODS

We will recruit 600 participants: 350 with insulin-treated type 2 diabetes, 200 with type 1 diabetes and awareness of hypoglycaemia and 50 with type 1 diabetes and impaired awareness of hypoglycaemia who have recent experience of hypoglycaemia. Participants will wear a blinded CGM device and an actigraphy monitor to differentiate awake and sleep times for 10 weeks. Participants will be asked to complete three short surveys each day using a bespoke mobile phone app, a technique known as ecological momentary assessment. Participants will also record all episodes of self-detected hypoglycaemia on the mobile app. We will use particle Markov chain Monte Carlo optimization to identify the optimal threshold and duration of SDH that have optimum sensitivity and specificity for detecting patient-reported hypoglycaemia. Key secondary objectives include measuring the impact of symptomatic and asymptomatic SDH on daily functioning and health economic outcomes.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The protocol was approved by local ethical boards in all participating centres. Study results will be shared with participants, in peer-reviewed journal publications and conference presentations.

Variation in hypoglycemia ascertainment and report in type 2 diabetes observational studies: a meta-epidemiological study

INTRODUCTION

Observational studies constitute an important evidence base for hypoglycemia in diabetes management. This requires consistent and reliable ascertainment and reporting methodology, particularly in studies of type 2 diabetes where hypoglycemia risk is heterogeneous. Therefore, we aimed to examine the definitions of hypoglycemia used by observational studies of patients with type 2 diabetes.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

We conducted a meta-epidemiological review of observational studies reporting on hypoglycemia or evaluating glucose-lowering medications in adults with type 2 diabetes. MEDLINE and Google Scholar were searched from January 1970 to May 2018. The definitions of non-severe, severe and nocturnal hypoglycemia were examined.

RESULTS

We reviewed 243 studies: 47.7% reported on non-severe hypoglycemia, 77.8% on severe hypoglycemia and 16.9% on nocturnal hypoglycemia; 5.8% did not specify. Among 116 studies reporting non-severe hypoglycemia, 18.1% provided no definition, 23.3% used glucose values, 38.8% relied on patient-reported symptoms, 17.2% accepted either glucose values or patient-reported symptoms and 2.6% relied on International Classification of Disease (ICD) codes. Among 189 studies reporting severe hypoglycemia, 11.1% provided no definition, 53.4% required symptoms needing assistance, 3.7% relied on glucose values, 14.8% relied on ICD codes, 2.6% relied on ICD codes or glucose values and 15.9% required both symptoms needing assistance and glucose values. Overall, 38.2% of non-severe and 67.7% of severe hypoglycemia definitions were consistent with the International Hypoglycemia Study Group.

CONCLUSIONS

The marked heterogeneity in how hypoglycemia is defined in observational studies may contribute to the inadequate understanding and correction of hypoglycemia risk factors among patients with type 2 diabetes.

Hypoglycaemia and its management in primary care setting

Hypoglycaemia is common in patients with type 1 diabetes and type 2 diabetes and constitutes a major limiting factor in achieving glycaemic control among people with diabetes. While hypoglycaemia is defined as a blood glucose level under 70 mg/dL (3.9 mmol/L), symptoms may occur at higher blood glucose levels in individuals with poor glycaemic control. Severe hypoglycaemia is defined as an episode requiring the assistance of another person to actively administer carbohydrate, glucagon, or take other corrective actions to assure neurologic recovery. Hypoglycaemia is the most important safety outcome in clinical studies of glucose lowering agents. The American Diabetes Association Standards of Medical Care recommends that a management protocol for hypoglycaemia should be designed and implemented by every hospital, along with a clear prevention and treatment plan. A tailored approach, using clinical and pathophysiologic disease stratification, can help individualize glycaemic goals and promote new therapies to improve quality of life of patients. Data from recent large clinical trials reported low risk of hypoglycaemic events with the use of newer anti-diabetic drugs. Increased hypoglycaemia risk is observed with the use of insulin and/or sulphonylureas. Vulnerable patients with T2D at dual risk of severe hypoglycaemia and cardiovascular outcomes show features of "frailty." Many of such patients may be better treated by the use of GLP-1 receptor agonists or SGLT2 inhibitors rather than insulin. Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) should be considered for all individuals with increased risk for hypoglycaemia, impaired hypoglycaemia awareness, frequent nocturnal hypoglycaemia and with history of severe hypoglycaemia. Patients with impaired awareness of hypoglycaemia benefit from real-time CGM. The diabetes educator is an invaluable resource and can devote the time needed to thoroughly educate the individual to reduce the risk of hypoglycaemia and integrate the information within the entire construct of diabetes self-management. Conversations about hypoglycaemia facilitated by a healthcare professional may reduce the burden and fear of hypoglycaemia among patients with diabetes and their family members. Optimizing insulin doses and carbohydrate intake, in addition to a short warm up before or after the physical activity sessions may help avoiding hypoglycaemia. Several therapeutic considerations are important to reduce hypoglycaemia risk during pregnancy including administration of rapid-acting insulin analogues rather than human insulin, pre-conception initiation of insulin analogues, and immediate postpartum insulin dose reduction.

International consensus on the diagnosis and management of dumping syndrome

Dumping syndrome is a common but underdiagnosed complication of gastric and oesophageal surgery. We initiated a Delphi consensus process with international multidisciplinary experts. We defined the scope, proposed statements and searched electronic databases to survey the literature. Eighteen experts participated in the literature summary and voting process evaluating 62 statements. We evaluated the quality of evidence using grading of recommendations assessment, development and evaluation (GRADE) criteria. Consensus (defined as >80% agreement) was reached for 33 of 62 statements, including the definition and symptom profile of dumping syndrome and its effect on quality of life. The panel agreed on the pathophysiological relevance of rapid passage of nutrients to the small bowel, on the role of decreased gastric volume capacity and release of glucagon-like peptide 1. Symptom recognition is crucial, and the modified oral glucose tolerance test, but not gastric emptying testing, is useful for diagnosis. An increase in haematocrit >3% or in pulse rate >10 bpm 30 min after the start of the glucose intake are diagnostic of early dumping syndrome, and a nadir hypoglycaemia level <50 mg/dl is diagnostic of late dumping syndrome. Dietary adjustment is the agreed first treatment step; acarbose is effective for late dumping syndrome symptoms and somatostatin analogues are preferred for patients who do not respond to diet adjustments and acarbose.

Switching to Once-Daily Insulin Degludec/Insulin Aspart from Basal Insulin Improves Postprandial Glycemia in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

To explore the efficacy and safety of switching from once-daily basal insulin therapy to once-daily pre-meal injection insulin degludec/insulin aspart (IDegAsp) with respect to the glycemic control of participants with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM).

METHODS

In this multicenter, open-label, prospective, randomized, parallel-group comparison trial, participants on basal insulin therapy were switched to IDegAsp (IDegAsp group; n=30) or continued basal insulin (Basal group; n=29). The primary endpoint was the superiority of IDegAsp in causing changes in the daily blood glucose profile, especially post-prandial blood glucose concentration after 12 weeks.

RESULTS

Blood glucose concentrations after dinner and before bedtime were lower in the IDegAsp group, and the improvement in blood glucose before bedtime was significantly greater in the IDegAsp group than in the Basal group at 12 weeks (-1.7±3.0 mmol/L vs. 0.3±2.1 mmol/L, P<0.05). Intriguingly, glycemic control after breakfast was not improved by IDegAsp injection before breakfast, in contrast to the favorable effect of injection before dinner on blood glucose after dinner. Glycosylated hemoglobin significantly decreased only in the IDegAsp group (58 to 55 mmol/mol, P<0.05). Changes in daily insulin dose, body mass, and recorded adverse effects, including hypoglycemia, were comparable between groups.

CONCLUSION

IDegAsp was more effective than basal insulin at reducing blood glucose after dinner and before bedtime, but did not increase the incidence of hypoglycemia. Switching from basal insulin to IDegAsp does not increase the burden on the patient and positively impacts glycemic control in patients with T2DM.

Continuous Glucose Monitoring Versus Self-monitoring of Blood Glucose in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: A Systematic Review with Meta-analysis

Every eleventh adult has diabetes, and every third has prediabetes. Over 95% of diabetics are of type 2. It is well established that diabetes doubles the risk of heart disease and stroke apart from increasing the risk of microvascular complications. Hence, strict glycemic control is necessary. However, it increases the risk of hypoglycemia, especially in patients with longstanding diabetes. Continuous glucose monitors (CGM) use a sensor to continuously measure the glucose levels in the interstitial fluid every 10 seconds and gives out mean values every five minutes. CGMs are emerging tools in the management of type 2 diabetes. The prime objective of this review is to find out if there is enough supporting evidence, suggesting that continuous glucose monitoring is more effective than self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) in type 2 diabetes. We conducted a systematic literature search in Medline (PubMed) looking for any studies addressing our objective. It is observed that there is a varying level of evidence supporting that employing a CGM can reduce glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c), hypoglycemic events, and increase patient satisfaction. However, some studies reported no significant benefits. This systematic review with meta-analysis concludes that the use of CGM in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is beneficial, as it significantly reduces HbA1c compared to the usual method of SMBG. The pooled mean difference in HbA1c was -0.25 (-0.45, -0.06) and statistically significant (at p = 0.01) when comparing CGM to SMBG.

Hypoglycemia in People with Type 2 Diabetes and CKD

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Among people with diabetes mellitus, CKD may promote hypoglycemia through altered clearance of glucose-lowering medications, decreased kidney gluconeogenesis, and blunted counter-regulatory response. We conducted a prospective observational study of hypoglycemia among 105 individuals with type 2 diabetes treated with insulin or a sulfonylurea using continuous glucose monitors.

DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS & MEASUREMENTS

We enrolled 81 participants with CKD, defined as eGFR<60 ml/min per 1.73 m², and 24 control participants with eGFR≥60 ml/min per 1.73 m² frequency-matched on age, duration of diabetes, hemoglobin A1c, and glucose-lowering medications. Each participant wore a continuous glucose monitor for two 6-day periods. We examined rates of sustained level 1 hypoglycemia (<70 mg/dl) and level 2 hypoglycemia (<54 mg/dl) among participants with CKD. We then tested differences compared with control participants as well as a second control population (n=73) using Poisson and linear regression, adjusting for age, sex, and race.

RESULTS

Over 890 total days of continuous glucose monitoring, participants with CKD were observed to have 255 episodes of level 1 hypoglycemia, of which 68 episodes reached level 2 hypoglycemia. Median rate of hypoglycemic episodes was 5.3 (interquartile range, 0.0-11.7) per 30 days and mean time spent in hypoglycemia was 28 (SD 37) minutes per day. Hemoglobin A1c and the glucose management indicator were the main clinical correlates of time in hypoglycemia (adjusted differences 6 [95% confidence interval, 2 to 10] and 13 [95% confidence interval, 7 to 20] fewer minutes per day per 1% higher hemoglobin A1c or glucose management indicator, respectively). Compared with control populations, participants with CKD were not observed to have significant differences in time in hypoglycemia (adjusted differences 4 [95% confidence interval, -12 to 20] and -12 [95% confidence interval, -29 to 5] minutes per day).

CONCLUSIONS

Among people with type 2 diabetes and moderate to severe CKD, hypoglycemia was common, particularly with tighter glycemic control, but not significantly different from groups with similar clinical characteristics and preserved eGFR.

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

BACKGROUND

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.

Hypoglycemia Among Patients with Type 2 Diabetes: Epidemiology, Risk Factors, and Prevention Strategies

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Hypoglycemia is the most common and often treatment-limiting serious adverse effect of diabetes therapy. Despite being potentially preventable, hypoglycemia in type 2 diabetes incurs substantial personal and societal burden. We review the epidemiology of hypoglycemia in type 2 diabetes, discuss key risk factors, and introduce potential prevention strategies.

RECENT FINDINGS

Reported rates of hypoglycemia in type 2 diabetes vary widely as there is marked heterogeneity in how hypoglycemia is defined, measured, and reported. In randomized controlled trials, rates of severe hypoglycemia ranged from 0.7 to 12 per 100 person-years. In observational studies, hospitalizations or emergency department visits for hypoglycemia were experienced by 0.2 (patients treated without insulin or sulfonylurea) to 2.0 (insulin or sulfonylurea users) per 100 person-years. Patient-reported hypoglycemia is much more common. Over the course of 6 months, 1-4% non-insulin users reported need for medical attention for hypoglycemia; 1-17%, need for any assistance; and 46-58%, any hypoglycemia symptoms. Similarly, over a 12-month period, 4-17% of insulin-treated patients reported needing assistance and 37-64% experienced any hypoglycemic symptoms. Hypoglycemia is most common among older patients with multiple or advanced comorbidities, patients with long diabetes duration, or patients with a prior history of hypoglycemia. Insulin and sulfonylurea use, food insecurity, and fasting also increase hypoglycemia risk. Clinical decision support tools may help identify at-risk patients. Prospective trials of efforts to reduce hypoglycemia risk are needed, and there is emerging evidence supporting multidisciplinary interventions including treatment de-intensification, use of diabetes technologies, diabetes self-management, and social support. Hypoglycemia among patients with type 2 diabetes is common. Patient-centered multidisciplinary care may help proactively identify at-risk patients and address the multiplicity of factors contributing to hypoglycemia occurrence.

Comparison of Glycemic Variability in Chinese T2DM Patients Treated with Exenatide or Insulin Glargine: A Randomized Controlled Trial

INTRODUCTION

Increasing the frequency of blood glucose monitoring aids the evaluation of glycemic variability and blood glucose control by antidiabetic drugs. It remains unclear, however, whether GLP-1 receptor agonists or basal insulin has a better effect on glycemic variability in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) patients who are inadequately controlled by metformin. We used a continuous glucose monitoring system (CGMS) to compare patients on a GLP-1 receptor agonist with patients on basal insulin in terms of glycemic variability.

METHODS

This prospective randomized study assigned T2DM patients treated with metformin (N = 39) to either exenatide treatment or insulin glargine treatment for 16 weeks. Glycemic variability was assessed using a CGMS; hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), β-cell function, weight, body mass index (BMI), and waist circumference were also evaluated.

RESULTS

Mean blood glucose level, continuous overlapping net glycemic action, mean amplitude of glycemic excursions, percentage of the time that the blood glucose value was > 10.0 mmol/L, and highest blood glucose level (P  < 0.01-0.05) significantly decreased in both groups. Standard deviation of the mean glucose value, largest amplitude of glycemic excursions, and waist circumference significantly decreased for those treated with exenatide (P  < 0.05), while no changes were observed with insulin glargine treatment. Percentage of the time that the blood glucose value was > 7.8 mmol/L decreased after insulin glargine use (P  < 0.05) but not with the exenatide intervention. Similar decreases in fasting blood glucose and HbA1c and increases in the 1/homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance, disposition index 30, and disposition index 120 were observed in both groups (P  < 0.01-0.05). Reductions in weight and BMI were greater with exenatide than with insulin glargine treatment (P  < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

In overweight and obese patients with T2DM inadequately controlled by metformin, exenatide and insulin glargine have similar efficacies in terms of glycemic variability, HbA1c alleviation, and β-cell function, but exenatide has a greater effect on body weight and BMI.

Nocturnal Hypoglycemia in Type 2 Diabetes

Background and aims: It is known that the majority of critical unacknowledged hypoglycemia has an increased incidence in patients with type 1 diabetes (T1DM) with a long evolution. The aim of this research is to evaluate the variability of glucose level and hypoglycemic events in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2DM) having pharmacological interventions with hypoglycemic risk. These events are sometimes asymptomatic also in T2DM: frequently in elderly, patients with autonomic neuropathy, or having a long evolution of disease.

Material and method: This analysis includes 72 patients with T2DM, with a relative good metabolic control, and possible glucose fluctuations. Glucose variability was appreciated using continuous glucose monitoring systems (CGMS) used for more than 72 hours in hospital or ambulatory setting.

Results: The incidence, duration and severity of hypoglycemia are not correlated with HbA1c value, age, disease duration or treatment. Approximately a quarter of patients had nocturnal hypoglycemia and in 37,5% of events hypoglycemia was prolonged, more 45 minutes. Clinical manifestations in diurnal hypoglycemia were presents in only 40% of the recorded events.

Conclusions: The study suggested that CGMS is beneficial for patients with type 2 diabetes, with hypoglycemic risk and complications, to adjusted medication, education and prevention the cardiovascular events.

Effect of Insulin Analogs on Frequency of Non-Severe Hypoglycemia in Patients with Type 1 Diabetes Prone to Severe Hypoglycemia: Much Higher Rates Detected by Continuous Glucose Monitoring than by Self-Monitoring of Blood Glucose-The HypoAna Trial

BACKGROUND

Hypoglycemia is an increasingly important endpoint in clinical diabetes trials. The assessment of hypoglycemia should therefore be as complete as possible. Blinded continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) provides an improved opportunity to capture asymptomatic and nocturnal events. Here we report results from the HypoAna trial comparing all-analog-insulin therapy (aspart/detemir) with all-human-insulin therapy (neutral protamine Hagedorn/regular) on non-severe hypoglycemia (symptomatic and asymptomatic hypoglycemia) as assessed by blinded CGM and compared with data obtained by self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) in patients with type 1 diabetes and recurrent severe hypoglycemia.

METHODS

Fifty-three patients completed a substudy of 4 × 3 days of blinded CGM. CGM traces were reviewed for hypoglycemic events lasting 15 min or longer.

RESULTS

At the threshold ≤3.9 mmol/L, the per-protocol analysis demonstrated a 40% rate reduction (95% confidence interval [CI] 20%-60%; P = 0.002) in nocturnal non-severe hypoglycemia during analog treatment, mainly due to a 40% rate reduction (95% CI 0%-70%; P = 0.03) of nocturnal asymptomatic hypoglycemia. Similar nonsignificant trends were seen at the glucose threshold ≤3.0 mmol/L. Overall CGM-detected that nocturnal asymptomatic hypoglycemia ≤3.9 mmol/L was ∼17 times more frequent than SMBG-detected episodes (52 vs. 3 events/patient-year). This translates into a time needed to treat one patient with insulin analogs to prevent one episode that is 34 times shorter using CGM data than SMBG data (1.4 vs. 47 weeks).

CONCLUSIONS

Capturing hypoglycemic events by the conventional method of SMBG in patients with impaired awareness reveals only a limited number of events. Blinded CGM can provide more complete data, particularly in terms of asymptomatic and nocturnal events.