Is there an optimal strategy for real-time continuous glucose monitoring in pediatrics? A 12-month French multi-center, prospective, controlled randomized trial (Start-In!)

Evidence from clinical trials on high-risk medical devices in children: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

Meeting increased regulatory requirements for clinical evaluation of medical devices marketed in Europe in accordance with the Medical Device Regulation (EU 2017/745) is challenging, particularly for high-risk devices used in children.

METHODS

Within the CORE-MD project, we performed a scoping review on evidence from clinical trials investigating high-risk paediatric medical devices used in paediatric cardiology, diabetology, orthopaedics and surgery, in patients aged 0-21 years. We searched Medline and Embase from 1st January 2017 to 9th November 2022.

RESULTS

From 1692 records screened, 99 trials were included. Most were multicentre studies performed in North America and Europe that mainly had evaluated medical devices from the specialty of diabetology. Most had enrolled adolescents and 39% of trials included both children and adults. Randomized controlled trials accounted for 38% of the sample. Other frequently used designs were before-after studies (21%) and crossover trials (20%). Included trials were mainly small, with a sample size <100 participants in 64% of the studies. Most frequently assessed outcomes were efficacy and effectiveness as well as safety.

CONCLUSION

Within the assessed sample, clinical trials on high-risk medical devices in children were of various designs, often lacked a concurrent control group, and recruited few infants and young children.

IMPACT

In the assessed sample, clinical trials on high-risk medical devices in children were mainly small, with variable study designs (often without concurrent control), and they mostly enrolled adolescents. We provide a systematic summary of methodologies applied in clinical trials of medical devices in the paediatric population, reflecting obstacles in this research area that make it challenging to conduct adequately powered randomized controlled trials. In view of changing European regulations and related concerns about shortages of high-risk medical devices for children, our findings may assist competent authorities in setting realistic requirements for the evidence level to support device conformity certification.

Utility and precision evidence of technology in the treatment of type 1 diabetes: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

The greatest change in the treatment of people living with type 1 diabetes in the last decade has been the explosion of technology assisting in all aspects of diabetes therapy, from glucose monitoring to insulin delivery and decision making. As such, the aim of our systematic review was to assess the utility of these technologies as well as identify any precision medicine-directed findings to personalize care.

METHODS

Screening of 835 peer-reviewed articles was followed by systematic review of 70 of them (focusing on randomized trials and extension studies with ≥50 participants from the past 10 years).

RESULTS

We find that novel technologies, ranging from continuous glucose monitoring systems, insulin pumps and decision support tools to the most advanced hybrid closed loop systems, improve important measures like HbA1c, time in range, and glycemic variability, while reducing hypoglycemia risk. Several studies included person-reported outcomes, allowing assessment of the burden or benefit of the technology in the lives of those with type 1 diabetes, demonstrating positive results or, at a minimum, no increase in self-care burden compared with standard care. Important limitations of the trials to date are their small size, the scarcity of pre-planned or powered analyses in sub-populations such as children, racial/ethnic minorities, people with advanced complications, and variations in baseline glycemic levels. In addition, confounders including education with device initiation, concomitant behavioral modifications, and frequent contact with the healthcare team are rarely described in enough detail to assess their impact.

CONCLUSIONS

Our review highlights the potential of technology in the treatment of people living with type 1 diabetes and provides suggestions for optimization of outcomes and areas of further study for precision medicine-directed technology use in type 1 diabetes.

Effects of flash glucose monitoring on glycemic control in participants with diabetes mellitus: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

With the introduction of flash glucose monitoring (FGM) into the international market in 2014, academics worldwide are exploring whether this device improves glycemic control in participants with diabetes mellitus.

OBJECTIVE

A study was conducted in which participants were evaluated to determine the effect of FGM on glycemic control.

METHODS

From inception to April 9, 2022, we searched the Cochrane Library, PubMed, SinoMed, Embase, Web of Science, MEDLINE, CNKI, Wan Fang Data, and VIP databases to collect randomized controlled trials (RCTs) related to the effect of FGM on glycemic control in participants with diabetes mellitus. Outcomes included glycated hemoglobin, the occurrence of hypoglycemic events, fasting plasma glucose (FPG), and 2-h postprandial glucose (2hPG) levels. The statistical analysis was performed using R 4.1.3 software.

RESULTS

We included 19 studies involving 2013 participants, all of which were RCTs. Meta-analysis results revealed that compared to self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG), FGM significantly reduced glycated hemoglobin levels in participants with type 2 diabetes mellitus [mean difference = -0.74 [95 % CI-1.16, -0.32], P < 0.01] and type 1 diabetes mellitus combined with type 2 diabetes mellitus [mean difference = -1.14 [95 % CI-3.14, 0.87], P < 0.01], with a greater effect in participants aged ≤65 years with type 2 diabetes mellitus (mean difference = -1.38 [95 % CI-2.05, -0.72], P < 0.01). However, there was no effect of FGM on the improvement of glycated hemoglobin levels in patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus [P = 0.45]. Furthermore, fasting plasma glucose levels and 2-h postprandial glucose levels were significantly lower in FGM than SMBG, and the number of hypoglycemic events was also significantly lower.

CONCLUSION

Comparing SMBG with FGM indicated that FGM improves fasting plasma glucose levels, 2-h postprandial glucose levels, and glycated hemoglobin levels, and it reduces the number of hypoglycemic events.

Technological Ecological Momentary Assessment Tools to Study Type 1 Diabetes in Youth: Viewpoint of Methodologies

Type 1 diabetes (T1D) is one of the most common chronic childhood diseases, and its prevalence is rapidly increasing. The management of glucose in T1D is challenging, as youth must consider a myriad of factors when making diabetes care decisions. This task often leads to significant hyperglycemia, hypoglycemia, and glucose variability throughout the day, which have been associated with short- and long-term medical complications. At present, most of what is known about each of these complications and the health behaviors that may lead to them have been uncovered in the clinical setting or in laboratory-based research. However, the tools often used in these settings are limited in their ability to capture the dynamic behaviors, feelings, and physiological changes associated with T1D that fluctuate from moment to moment throughout the day. A better understanding of T1D in daily life could potentially aid in the development of interventions to improve diabetes care and mitigate the negative medical consequences associated with it. Therefore, there is a need to measure repeated, real-time, and real-world features of this disease in youth. This approach is known as ecological momentary assessment (EMA), and it has considerable advantages to in-lab research. Thus, this viewpoint aims to describe EMA tools that have been used to collect data in the daily lives of youth with T1D and discuss studies that explored the nuances of T1D in daily life using these methods. This viewpoint focuses on the following EMA methods: continuous glucose monitoring, actigraphy, ambulatory blood pressure monitoring, personal digital assistants, smartphones, and phone-based systems. The viewpoint also discusses the benefits of using EMA methods to collect important data that might not otherwise be collected in the laboratory and the limitations of each tool, future directions of the field, and possible clinical implications for their use.

Effects of real-time continuous glucose monitoring in type 1 diabetes: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

AIMS

Self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) represented a major breakthrough in the treatment of type 1 diabetes. The aim of the present meta-analysis is to assess the effect of continues glucose monitoring (CGM) and flash glucose monitoring (FGM), on glycemic control in type 1 diabetes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The present analysis includes randomized clinical trials comparing CGM or FGM with SMBG, with a duration of at least 12 weeks, identified in Medline or clinicaltrials.gov. The principal endpoint was HbA1c at the end of the trial. A secondary endpoint was severe hypoglycemia. Mean and 95% confidence intervals for HbA1c and Mantel-Haenzel odds ratio [MH-OR] for severe hypoglycemia were calculated, using random effect models. A sensitivity analysis was performed using fixed effect models. In addition, the following secondary endpoints were explored, using the same methods: time in range, health-related quality of life, and treatment satisfaction. Separate analyses were performed for trials comparing CGM with SMBG, and those comparing CGM + CSII and SMBG + MDI and CGM-regulated insulin infusion system (CRIS) and CSII + SMBG.

RESULTS

CGM was associated with a significantly lower HbA1c at endpoint in comparison with SMBG (- 0.24 [- 0.34, - 0.13]%); CGM was associated with a significantly lower risk of severe hypoglycemia than SMBG. Treatment satisfaction and quality of life were not measured, or not reported, in the majority of studies. FGM showed a significant reduction in the incidence of mild hypoglycemia and an increased treatment satisfaction, but no significant results are shown in HbA1c. CGM + CSII in comparison with SMBG + MDI was associated with a significant reduction in HbA1c. Only two trials with a duration of at least 12 weeks compared a CRIS with SMBG + CSII; HbA1c between the two treatment arms was not statistically significant (difference in means: - 0.23 [- 0.91; 0.46]%; p = 0.52).

CONCLUSION

GCM compared to SMBG has showed a reduction in HbA1c and severe hypoglycemia in patient with type 1 diabetes. The comparison between CGM + CSII and SMBG + MDI showed a large reduction in HbA1c; it is conceivable that the effects of CSII + CGM on glycemic control additives. The only comparison available between FGM and SMBG was conducted in patients in good control.

Time in range centered diabetes care

Optimal glycemic control remains challenging and elusive for many people with diabetes. With the comprehensive clinical evidence on safety and efficiency in large populations, and with broader reimbursement, the adoption of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) is rapidly increasing. Standardized visual reporting and interpretation of CGM data and clear and understandable clinical targets will help professionals and individuals with diabetes use diabetes technology more efficiently, and finally improve long-term outcomes with less everyday disease burden. For the majority of people with type 1 or type 2 diabetes, time in range (between 70 and 180 mg/dL, or 3.9 and 10 mmol/L) target of more than 70% is recommended, with each incremental increase of 5% towards this target being clinically meaningful. At the same time, the goal is to minimize glycemic excursions: a recommended target for a time below range (< 70 mg/dL or < 3.9 mmol/L) is less than 4%, and time above range (> 180 mg/dL or 10 mmol/L) less than 25%, with less stringent goals for older individuals or those at increased risk. These targets should be individualized: the personal use of CGM with the standardized data presentation provides all necessary means to accurately tailor diabetes management to the needs of each individual with diabetes.

Continuous Glucose Monitoring for Glycemic Control in Children and Adolescents Diagnosed with Diabetes Type 1: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Aim The aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the impact of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) systems on short- and long-term glycemic control in children and adolescents diagnosed with diabetes type 1.

Methods The review was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42019135152). We partly updated a formerly published systematic review and searched several databases (Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL, and Clinicaltrials.gov) in May 2019. Summary measures were estimated as relative risks (RR) and standardized mean differences (SMD). The primary endpoint of our analysis was frequency of hypoglycemic events. Quality of evidence was evaluated using the GRADE approach.

Results Eleven studies with a total number of 818 patients were included in our review. Meta-analyses indicated a potential benefit of CGM systems regarding the relative risk of a severe hypoglycemic event (RR 0.78; 95% CI 0.29 to 2.04) and mean level of HbA1c at end of study (SMD -0.23; 95% CI -0.46 to 0.00). Certainty of evidence for effect estimates of these meta-analyses was low due to risk of selection bias and imprecision of the included studies. Qualitative analyses of the secondary outcomes of user satisfaction and long-term development of blood glucose supported these findings.

Conclusion CGM systems may improve glycemic control in children and adolescents diagnosed with diabetes type 1, but the imprecision of effects is still a problem. Only a few studies examined and reported data for pediatric populations in sufficient detail. Further research is needed to clarify advantages and disadvantages of CGM systems in children and adolescents.

Has subsidized continuous glucose monitoring improved outcomes in pediatric diabetes?

INTRODUCTION

In 2017, the Australian Federal Government fully subsidized continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) devices for patients under 21 years of age with T1D with the aim of reducing rates of severe hypoglycaemia (SH) and improving metabolic control. The aim of this study was to reports on metabolic outcomes in youth from a single tertiary centre.

METHODS

The study design was observational. Data were obtained on youth who commenced CGM between May 2017 and December 2019.

RESULTS

Three hundred and forty one youth who commenced CGM and had clinical outcome data for a minimum of 4 months. 301, 261, 216, 172, and 125 had outcome data out to 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24 months, respectively. Cessation occurred between 27.9% and 32.8% of patients 12 to 24 months after CGM commencement. HbA1c did not change in patients who continued to use CGM. In the 12 months prior to starting CGM the rate of severe hypoglycaemia events were 5.0 per 100 patient years. The rates of severe hypoglycaemia in those continuing to use CGM at 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24 months, were 5.2, 5.1, 1.6, 6.1, 2.4, and 0 per 100 patient years, respectively.

DISCUSSION

Our experience of patients either ceasing or underusing CGM is less than reported in other cohorts but is nonetheless still high. There may have been a reduction in rates of severe hypoglycaemia over the 24 months follow up period; however, the absolute numbers of events were so low as to preclude meaningful statistical analysis.

How to collect non-medical data in a pediatric trial: diaries or interviews

BACKGROUND

Non-medical data, such as the amount of time that patients and caregivers spend managing their condition, may be relevant when assessing therapeutic strategies. For chronic pediatric conditions, the time that patients and caregivers spend in seeking and providing care (which are the indirect costs in an economic evaluation) can be significantly different depending on the treatment arm. To explore methods for collecting information on the care burden for caregivers and patients, we investigated whether a patient diary provided additional information compared to retrospective investigator-led interviews and whether a diary that was completed intermittently produced more or less information than a diary completed continually. The main objective of this study was to identify which type of data collection was most effective for measuring the time spent by caregivers and for estimating indirect treatment costs over 9 months.

METHODS

Start-In! is a randomized controlled trial comparing the efficacy of three strategies of real-time continuous glucose monitoring for 12 months in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes. We designed an ancillary study to assess methods of collecting information on the time spent by patients and caregivers in managing their condition (indirect costs). Data were entered retrospectively in case report forms (CRFs) by investigators during quarterly follow-up visits, which were supplemented with diaries completed prospectively by children or caregivers either continuously or intermittently. Data about absences from school and work as well as the time that caregivers spent on diabetes care were collected and the three collection methods were compared.

RESULTS

At the end of the 9-month study, 42% of the study participants failed to return their diary. For the diaries that were received, less than 10% of expected data were collected versus 82% during investigators'interviews. Based on all the information collected, we calculated that over 9 months, caregivers lost on average 3.9 days of working time (€786) and 4 days of personal time, i.e. the equivalent of €526, and spent around 15 min of time on care per day, i.e. the equivalent of €1700.

CONCLUSIONS

The CRFs completed by investigators during quarterly visits cannot be replaced by a diary. Completing the diaries appeared to represent an important additional burden to children and their caregivers, and the diaries provided little additional information compared to investigators' entries in the CRF.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00949221. Registered on 30 July 2009. Registry name: Study of Insulin Therapy Augmented by Real Time Sensor in Type 1 Children and Adolescents (START-IN!).