Efficacy of insulin dosing algorithms for high-fat high-protein mixed meals to control postprandial glycemic excursions in people living with type 1 diabetes: A systematic review and meta-analysis

A randomised controlled trial of additional bolus insulin using an insulin-to-protein ratio compared with insulin-to-carbohdrate ratio alone in people with type 1 diabetes following a carbohydrate-restricted diet

AIMS

Postprandial hyperglycemia can be problematic for people with type 1 diabetes (T1DM) following carbohydrate-restricted diets. Bolus insulin calculated for meal protein plus carbohydrate may help. This study evaluated the effect of additional bolus insulin using an insulin-to-protein ratio (IPR) on glycaemic control.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Participants with T1DM aged ≥18-years were randomly allocated (1:1) to either carbohydrate and protein-based, or carbohydrate-based insulin dosing alone for 12 weeks while following a carbohydrate-restricted diet (50-100 g/day). Measurement of HbA1c and continuous glucose monitoring occurred at baseline and 12 weeks, with assessment of participant experience at 12 weeks.

RESULTS

Thirty-four participants were randomised, 22 female, mean(SD): age 39.2 years (12.6) years; diabetes duration 20.6 years (12.9); HbA1c 7.3 % (0.8), 56.7 mmol/mol (9.2). Seven in each group used insulin pump therapy. HbA1c reduced at 12 weeks with no difference between treatments: mean (SD) control 7.2 % (1.0), 55.7 mmol/mol (10.6); intervention 6.9 % (0.7), 52.3 mmol/mol (7.2) (p = 0.65). Using additional protein-based insulin dosing compared with carbohydrate alone, there was no difference in glycaemic variability, time spent in euglycemic range (TIR), or below range. Participants using IPR reported more control of their diabetes, but varying levels of distress.

CONCLUSIONS

Additional bolus insulin using an IPR did not improve glycaemic control or TIR in patients with well controlled T1DM following a carbohydrate-restricted diet. Importantly, the use of the IPR does not increase the risk of hypoglycemia and may be preferred.

Postprandial Glucose Control With Different Hybrid Closed-Loop Systems According to Type of Meal in Adults With Type 1 Diabetes

BACKGROUND

Hybrid Closed-Loop Systems (HCLs) may not perform optimally on postprandial glucose control. We evaluated how first-generation and advanced HCLs manage meals varying in carbohydrates, fat, and protein.

METHOD

According to a cross-sectional design, seven-day food records and HCLs reports from 120 adults with type 1 diabetes (MiniMed670G: n = 40, MiniMed780G: n = 49, Control-IQ [C-IQ]: n = 31) were analyzed. Breakfasts (n = 570), lunches (n = 658), and dinners (n = 619) were divided according to the median of their carbohydrate (g)/fat (g) plus protein (g) ratio (C/FP). After breakfast (4-hour), lunch (6-hour), and dinner (6-hour), continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) metrics and early and late glucose incremental area under the curves (iAUCs) and delivered insulin doses were evaluated. The association of C/FP and HCLs with postprandial glucose and insulin patterns was analyzed by univariate analysis of variance (ANOVA) with a two-factor design.

RESULTS

Postprandial glucose time-in-range 70 to 180 mg/dL was optimal after breakfast (78.3 ± 26.9%), lunch (72.7 ± 26.1%), and dinner (70.8 ± 27.3%), with no significant differences between HCLs. Independent of C/FP, late glucose-iAUC after lunch was significantly lower in C-IQ users than 670G and 780G (P < .05), with no significant differences at breakfast and dinner. Postprandial insulin pattern (Ins3-6h minus Ins0-3h) differed by type of HCLs at lunch (P = .026) and dinner (P < .001), being the early insulin dose (Ins0-3h) higher than the late dose (Ins3-6h) in 670G and 780G users with an opposite pattern in C-IQ users.

CONCLUSIONS

Independent of different proportions of dietary carbohydrates, fat, and protein, postprandial glucose response was similar in users of different HCLs, although obtained through different automatic insulin delivery patterns.

Exploring Technology's Influence on Health Behaviours and Well-being in Type 1 Diabetes: a Review

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Maintaining positive health behaviours promotes better health outcomes for people with type 1 diabetes (T1D). However, implementing these behaviours may also lead to additional management burdens and challenges. Diabetes technologies, including continuous glucose monitoring systems, automated insulin delivery systems, and digital platforms, are being rapidly developed and widely used to reduce these burdens. Our aim was to review recent evidence to explore the influence of these technologies on health behaviours and well-being among adults with T1D and discuss future directions.

RECENT FINDINGS

Current evidence, albeit limited, suggests that technologies applied in diabetes self-management education and support (DSME/S), nutrition, physical activity (PA), and psychosocial care areas improved glucose outcomes. They may also increase flexibility in insulin adjustment and eating behaviours, reduce carb counting burden, increase confidence in PA, and reduce mental burden. Technologies have the potential to promote health behaviours changes and well-being for people with T1D. More confirmative studies on their effectiveness and safety are needed to ensure optimal integration in standard care practices.

9. Pharmacologic Approaches to Glycemic Treatment: Standards of Care in Diabetes-2024

The American Diabetes Association (ADA) "Standards of Care in Diabetes" includes the ADA's current clinical practice recommendations and is intended to provide the components of diabetes care, general treatment goals and guidelines, and tools to evaluate quality of care. Members of the ADA Professional Practice Committee, an interprofessional expert committee, are responsible for updating the Standards of Care annually, or more frequently as warranted. For a detailed description of ADA standards, statements, and reports, as well as the evidence-grading system for ADA's clinical practice recommendations and a full list of Professional Practice Committee members, please refer to Introduction and Methodology. Readers who wish to comment on the Standards of Care are invited to do so at professional.diabetes.org/SOC.

5. Facilitating Positive Health Behaviors and Well-being to Improve Health Outcomes: Standards of Care in Diabetes-2024

The American Diabetes Association (ADA) "Standards of Care in Diabetes" includes the ADA's current clinical practice recommendations and is intended to provide the components of diabetes care, general treatment goals and guidelines, and tools to evaluate quality of care. Members of the ADA Professional Practice Committee, an interprofessional expert committee, are responsible for updating the Standards of Care annually, or more frequently as warranted. For a detailed description of ADA standards, statements, and reports, as well as the evidence-grading system for ADA's clinical practice recommendations and a full list of Professional Practice Committee members, please refer to Introduction and Methodology. Readers who wish to comment on the Standards of Care are invited to do so at professional.diabetes.org/SOC.

A Nutritional Approach to Optimizing Pump Therapy in Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus

Achieving optimal glucose control in individuals with type 1 diabetes (T1DM) continues to pose a significant challenge. While continuous insulin infusion systems have shown promise as an alternative to conventional insulin therapy, there remains a crucial need for greater awareness regarding the necessary adaptations for various special circumstances. Nutritional choices play an essential role in the efficacy of diabetes management and overall health status for patients with T1DM. Factors such as effective carbohydrate counting, assessment of the macronutrient composition of meals, and comprehending the concept of the glycemic index of foods are paramount in making informed pre-meal adjustments when utilizing insulin pumps. Furthermore, the ability to handle such situations as physical exercise, illness, pregnancy, and lactation by making appropriate adjustments in nutrition and pump settings should be cultivated within the patient-practitioner relationship. This review aims to provide healthcare practitioners with practical guidance on optimizing care for individuals living with T1DM. It includes recommendations on carbohydrate counting, managing mixed meals and the glycemic index, addressing exercise-related challenges, coping with illness, and managing nutritional needs during pregnancy and lactation. Additionally, considerations relating to closed-loop systems with regard to nutrition are addressed. By implementing these strategies, healthcare providers can better equip themselves to support individuals with T1DM in achieving improved diabetes management and enhanced quality of life.