Nonadjunctive Use of Continuous Glucose Monitors for Insulin Dosing: Is It Safe?

Assessing the Reproducibility of Research Based on the Food and Drug Administration Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience Data

OBJECTIVE

This article aims to assess the reproducibility of Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience (MAUDE) data-driven studies by analyzing the data queries used in their research processes.

METHODS

Studies using MAUDE data were sourced from PubMed by searching for "MAUDE" or "Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience" in titles or abstracts. We manually chose articles with executable queries. The reproducibility of each query was assessed by replicating it in the MAUDE Application Programming Interface. The reproducibility of a query is determined by a reproducibility coefficient that ranges from 0.95 to 1.05. This coefficient is calculated by comparing the number of medical device reports (MDRs) returned by the reproduced queries to the number of reported MDRs in the original studies. We also computed the reproducibility ratio, which is the fraction of reproducible queries in subgroups divided by the query complexity, the device category, and the presence of a data processing flow.

RESULTS

As of August 8, 2022, we identified 523 articles from which 336 contained queries, and 60 of these were executable. Among these, 14 queries were reproducible. Queries using a single field like product code, product class, or brand name showed higher reproducibility (50%, 33.3%, 31.3%) compared with other fields (8.3%, P = 0.037). Single-category device queries exhibited a higher reproducibility ratio than multicategory ones, but without statistical significance (27.1% versus 8.3%, P = 0.321). Studies including a data processing flow had a higher reproducibility ratio than those without, although this difference was not statistically significant (42.9% versus 17.4%, P = 0.107).

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings indicate that the reproducibility of queries in MAUDE data-driven studies is limited. Enhancing this requires the development of more effective MAUDE data query strategies and improved application programming interfaces.

Continuous Glucose Deviation Interval and Variability Analysis (CG-DIVA): A Novel Approach for the Statistical Accuracy Assessment of Continuous Glucose Monitoring Systems

BACKGROUND

The accuracy of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) systems is crucial for the management of glucose levels in individuals with diabetes mellitus. However, the discussion of CGM accuracy is challenged by an abundance of parameters and assessment methods. The aim of this article is to introduce the Continuous Glucose Deviation Interval and Variability Analysis (CG-DIVA), a new approach for a comprehensive characterization of CGM point accuracy which is based on the U.S. Food and Drug Administration requirements for "integrated" CGM systems.

METHODS

The statistical concept of tolerance intervals and data from two approved CGM systems was used to illustrate the CG-DIVA.

RESULTS

The CG-DIVA characterizes the expected range of deviations of the CGM system from a comparison method in different glucose concentration ranges and the variability of accuracy within and between sensors. The results of the CG-DIVA are visualized in an intuitive and straightforward graphical presentation. Compared with conventional accuracy characterizations, the CG-DIVA infers the expected accuracy of a CGM system and highlights important differences between CGM systems. Furthermore, it provides information on the incidence of large errors which are of particular clinical relevance. A software implementation of the CG-DIVA is freely available (https://github.com/IfDTUlm/CGM_Performance_Assessment).

CONCLUSIONS

We argue that the CG-DIVA can simplify the discussion and comparison of CGM accuracy and could replace the high number of conventional approaches. Future adaptations of the approach could thus become a putative standard for the accuracy characterization of CGM systems and serve as the basis for the definition of future CGM performance requirements.

Laboratory Protocol and Pilot Results for Dynamic Interference Testing of Continuous Glucose Monitoring Sensors

BACKGROUND

Testing the potential influence of interfering substances on the measurement performance of needle sensors for continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) is a challenging task. For proper function, the sensors need an almost stable fluidic environment. Previously published in vitro interference experiments were measuring under static concentration conditons. Our experimental setup allows for interference testing with dynamic changes of the interferent concentrations.

METHODS

We designed a macrofluidic test stand that is fueled by several high-pressure liquid chromatography (HPLC) pumps generating programmable glucose and/or interferent gradients in phosphate-buffered saline (PBS). After optimizing experimental parameters (channel dimensions, temperature, flow rates, gradient slopes, buffer, pH etc.), we validated the setup using Dexcom G6 (G6) and Freestyle Libre 2 (L2) sensors with/without interferents, and using YSI 2300 Stat plus as the reference glucose device at room temperature.

RESULTS

Both sensors tracked the programmed glucose changes. After calibration, G6 results closely matched glucose reference readings, while L2 routinely showed ~50% to 60% lower readings, most likely because of the factory-based calibration and temperature compensation. Gradients of maltose, acetaminophen, and xylose were employed to further validate the setup. As expected, both sensors were not affected by maltose. We confirmed previous findings regarding susceptibility of G6 readings to acetaminophen and L2 readings to xylose. Signals from both sensors are influenced by temperature in a linear fashion.

CONCLUSIONS

Our experimental in vitro setup and protocol may provide a useful method to dynamically test CGM sensors for interfering substances. This may help to improve the accuracy of future CGM sensor generations.

Current Technologies for Managing Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus and Their Impact on Quality of Life-A Narrative Review

Type 1 diabetes mellitus is a chronic autoimmune disease that affects millions of people and generates high healthcare costs due to frequent complications when inappropriately managed. Our paper aimed to review the latest technologies used in T1DM management for better glycemic control and their impact on daily life for people with diabetes. Continuous glucose monitoring systems provide a better understanding of daily glycemic variations for children and adults and can be easily used. These systems diminish diabetes distress and improve diabetes control by decreasing hypoglycemia. Continuous subcutaneous insulin infusions have proven their benefits in selected patients. There is a tendency to use more complex systems, such as hybrid closed-loop systems that can modulate insulin infusion based on glycemic readings and artificial intelligence-based algorithms. It can help people manage the burdens associated with T1DM management, such as fear of hypoglycemia, exercising, and long-term complications. The future is promising and aims to develop more complex ways of automated control of glycemic levels to diminish the distress of individuals living with diabetes.

Analysis of "Multicenter Evaluation Study Comparing a New Factory-Calibrated Real-Time Continuous Glucose Monitoring System to Existing Flash Glucose Monitoring System"

In an article in the Journal of Diabetes Science and Technology, Ji et al. report on the accuracy of a new factory calibrated continuous glucose monitoring system, the AiDEX CGM (Microtech Medical Company, Ltd., Hangzhou, China). This is the first report from a new manufacturer of a highly accurate factory calibrated CGM. The authors report that the accuracy of the AiDEX CGM is comparable to previous results from Abbott Diabetes Care and Dexcom. However, the study protocol was significantly different from previous studies. This study is the first of numerous studies likely from other manufacturers of CGM technology. It raises the question of how to evaluate sensor performance in the coming era of mass adoption of CGM and increased use of automated insulin delivery systems.

Discordance between postprandial plasma glucose measurement and continuous glucose monitoring

BACKGROUND

There has been growing interest in studying postprandial glucose responses using continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) in nondiabetic individuals. Accurate measurement of glucose responses to meals can facilitate applications such as precision nutrition and early detection of diabetes.

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to quantify the discordance between simultaneous postprandial glucose measurements made using plasma and CGM.

METHODS

We studied 10 nondiabetic older adults who randomly consumed 9 predefined meals of varying macronutrient compositions. Glucose was measured for 8 h after the meal by the CGM, blood samples for plasma collection were taken regularly, and plasma glucose was quantified using gold-standard laboratory measurement and a fingerstick blood glucose meter. The primary outcome measured was the mean absolute relative difference (MARD) of CGM and fingerstick measurements relative to the gold standard. Secondary outcomes were Bland-Altman statistics, Clarke Error Grid, and time in range metrics. Additional subgroup analyses were performed by stratifying the postprandial glucose measurements based on the macronutrient composition of the meals.

RESULTS

When compared against the gold-standard postprandial glucose measurements, the fingerstick meter was more accurate (MARD: 8.0%; 95% CI: 7.6%, 8.6%) than the CGM (MARD: 13.7%; 95% CI: 13.1%, 14.3%; P < 0.0001). After the meals, Bland-Altman analysis demonstrated that the CGM underestimated the 8-h gold-standard glucose rise by 12.8 mg/dL on average (P < 0.0001), whereas the fingerstick meter did so by 5.5 mg/dL on average (P < 0.0001). The CGM underestimated the time spent in the 70-180 mg/dL range (P = 0.002) and overestimated the time spent <70 mg/dL (P < 0.0001) compared with the other 2 methods.

CONCLUSIONS

We discovered discordance between gold standard, fingerstick, and CGM in measuring plasma glucose concentrations after a meal. Consequently, emerging applications of CGM in healthy individuals, such as precision nutrition and diabetes onset prediction, may need to account for these discordances.This trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT04928872.

Differences in Glucose Readings Between Right Arm and Left Arm Using a Continuous Glucose Monitor

OBJECTIVE

Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) devices are used for evaluating real-time glucose levels to optimize diabetes management. There is limited information, however, on whether readings differ when a device is placed on the right versus the left arm. This study evaluated the mean difference in glucose levels between the right and left arm and the effect of unilateral arm exercise on this difference. The effect of an intermittent fasting diet on body fat percentage was also evaluated.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

In a prospective trial, 46 adult volunteers self-selected into the intermittent fasting (IF; N = 23) or free-living (FL; N = 23) diet group and were randomized into a unilateral arm exercise group. Volunteers had CGM sensors placed simultaneously on both arms for 12-14 days.

RESULTS

The mean glucose level in the right arm was significantly higher than the left arm by 3.7 mg/dL (P < .001), and this result was unaffected by diet or arm exercise. Glucose levels were in euglycemic range for 75.2% of the time in the right arm and 67.5% in the left arm (P < .001). The change from baseline in body fat percentage between the IF and FL diet groups was not significant.

CONCLUSIONS

Measured glucose level and time in euglycemic range differ per placement of the CGM device, and the implications of this difference should be considered in clinical practice and research.

Comparative Accuracy Analysis of a Real-time and an Intermittent-Scanning Continuous Glucose Monitoring System

BACKGROUND

Currently, two different types of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) systems are available: real time (rt) CGM systems that continuously provide glucose values and intermittent-scanning (is) CGM systems. This study compared accuracy of an rtCGM and an isCGM system when worn in parallel.

METHODS

Dexcom G5 Mobile (DG5) and FreeStyle Libre (FL) were worn in parallel by 27 subjects for 14 days including two clinic sessions with induced glucose excursions. The percentage of CGM values within ±20% or ±20 mg/dL of the laboratory comparison method results (YSI 2300 STAT Plus, YSI Inc., Yellow Springs, OH, United States; glucose oxidase based) or blood glucose meter values and mean absolute relative difference (MARD) were calculated. Consensus error grid and continuous glucose error grid analyses were performed to assess clinical accuracy.

RESULTS

Both systems displayed clinically accurate readings. Compared to laboratory comparison method results during clinic sessions, DG5 had 91.5% of values within ±20%/20 mg/dL and a MARD of 9.5%; FL had 82.5% of scanned values within ±20%/20 mg/dL and an MARD of 13.6%. Both systems showed a lower level of performance during the home phase and when using the blood glucose meter as reference.

CONCLUSION

The two systems tested in this study represent two different principles of CGM. DG5 generally provided higher accordance with laboratory comparison method results than FL.

Performance and Usability of Three Systems for Continuous Glucose Monitoring in Direct Comparison

BACKGROUND

To be able to compare continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) systems, they have to be worn in parallel by the same subjects. This study evaluated the performance and usability of three different CGM systems in direct comparison.

METHOD

In this open, prospective study at two sites, 54 patients with diabetes wore three CGM systems each (Dexcom G5™ Mobile CGM system [DG5], Guardian™ Connect system [GC], and a Roche CGM system [RCGM]) in parallel for 6 or 7 days in a mixed inpatient and outpatient setting. Capillary comparison measurements were performed using a self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) system. During study site visits, glucose excursions were induced. Performance of the systems was evaluated by calculating mean absolute relative differences (MARD, calculated as absolute differences for glucose concentrations <100 mg/dL and as relative differences for glucose concentrations ≥100 mg/dL), and mean relative differences (MRD, bias) between CGM and SMBG results. In addition, usability of the systems was assessed.

RESULTS

Overall MARD was 10.1 ± 2.1 for DG5, 11.5 ± 4.2 for GC, and 11.9 ± 5.6 for RCGM. Performance improved in all systems after the first day of use. All systems showed >99% of values within zones A and B of the consensus error grid. Overall, all CGM systems showed a small negative bias compared to SMBG. Usability of the systems differed regarding patch adhesion rate, failure rate, and patient rating. Most patients preferred GC, but in general all systems were rated positively.

CONCLUSION

All three CGM systems showed similar overall accuracy in this direct comparison, but small differences were observed with regard to specific glucose ranges and usability aspects.

The Effect of Reduced Self-Monitored Blood Glucose Testing After Adoption of Continuous Glucose Monitoring on Hemoglobin A1c and Time in Range

The effectiveness of real-time continuous glucose monitoring (rtCGM) in adults with diabetes treated with insulin injections was evaluated in the 24-week DIAMOND clinical trial comparing rtCGM users to a control group using self-monitored blood glucose (SMBG) testing ( Clinicaltrials.gov : NCT02282397). All participants were instructed to use SMBG results for diabetes management decisions; however, SMBG testing frequency varied within the rtCGM group. This brief report evaluated how SMBG frequency changes in the rtCGM group were correlated with glycemic outcomes in the same trial. Baseline and end-of-study hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) levels, percentages of CGM values in the 70-180 mg/dL target range (time in range [TIR]), mean of daily differences (MODD), and glycemic coefficients of variation (CVs) were compared. The rtCGM group analyzed included 175 participants-99 with type 1 diabetes (T1D) and 76 with type 2 diabetes (T2D). When comparing participants whose SMBG testing frequency decreased by >1/day versus ≤1/day, mean change in HbA1c was similar (-0.9 ± 0.7 percentage points in both groups, P = 0.59), as was change in TIR (+3.9 ± 14.3 vs. +5.7 ± 13.7 percentage points, respectively, P = 0.39). Likewise, when comparing participants in the highest and lowest quartiles of SMBG frequency reduction (≥2.2 vs. ≤0.4 fewer tests/day, respectively), changes in HbA1c (-0.8 ± 0.6 vs. -0.9 ± 0.6 percentage points, respectively, P = 0.52) and TIR (+4.8 ± 13.2 vs. +5.6 ± 12.7 percentage points, respectively, P = 0.98) were similar. The mean (standard deviation [SD]) change in MODD was -8.3 mg/dL (14.8) and -5.5 mg/dL (14.7) for participants who reduced their SMBG frequency by >1 test/day and ≤1 test/day, respectively; the mean (SD) change in CV was -3.6% (5.0) and -1.6% (5.1) for participants who reduced their SMBG frequency by >1 test/day and ≤1 test/day, respectively. These findings suggest that individuals who decrease the frequency of SMBG testing can effectively base some of their diabetes-related treatment decisions on glucose concentrations, trend information, and alarms provided by their rtCGM systems.

Gastric Emptying Impacts the Timing of Meal Glucose Peak in Subjects With Uncomplicated Type 1 Diabetes

CONTEXT

Diabetes mellitus is associated with gastrointestinal (GI) motility dysfunction, ranging from delayed to accelerated gastric emptying (GE).

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate GE in patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) without chronic complications and to investigate its relation with postprandial glucose and GI hormone responses.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional study.

SETTING/PARTICIPANTS

Forty-two patients with T1DM free of chronic complications referred to Federico II University and 31 healthy controls similar for age, sex, and body mass index.

INTERVENTIONS/MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

GE was assessed by using the 13C-octanoate breath test with a standardized solid meal. During the meal, plasma glucose, ghrelin, and glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP-1) responses were assessed, and GI symptoms were evaluated by a specific questionnaire.

RESULTS

Patients with T1DM showed a significantly slower GE half-emptying time (GE t1/2) (113 ± 34 minutes) than did controls (89 ± 17 minutes; P < 0.001). Thirty-six percent of T1DM showed a delayed GE (t1/2 > 120 minutes), whereas all controls showed a normal GE. When patients with T1DM were stratified according to GE t1/2, postmeal glucose response was significantly different between those with delayed and those with normal GE (P = 0.013). In particular, patients with T1DM and delayed GE showed a significantly longer mean time to peak glucose than did patients with normal GE (P = 0.004). In addition, GE t1/2 was an independent predictor of the time to peak glucose (β = 0.329; P = 0.025). GLP-1 and ghrelin responses to the test meal, as well as the prevalence of GI symptoms, were similar between patients with T1DM and controls and between patients with T1DM with normal GE and those with delayed GE.

CONCLUSIONS

Delayed GE time is associated with a longer time to peak glucose. GE evaluation could be useful for individualizing the timing of preprandial insulin bolus in patients with T1DM.

Flash forward: a review of flash glucose monitoring

The FreeStyle Libre flash glucose monitor became available on prescription (subject to local health authority approval) in all four nations of the UK from November 2017, a watershed moment in the history of diabetes care. Calibration free, the FreeStyle Libre is a disc worn on the arm for 14 days which is designed largely to replace the recommended 4-10 painful finger-stick blood glucose tests required each day for the self-management of diabetes. This review discusses clinical data from randomized and observational studies, considers device accuracy metrics and deliberates its popularity and the potential challenges that this new device brings to diabetes care in the UK. In randomized trials, FreeStyle Libre use is associated with a reduction in hypoglycaemia and, in observational studies, improvements in HbA_1c levels. User satisfaction is high and adverse events are low. Accuracy of the FreeStyle Libre is comparable to currently available real-time continuous glucose monitors in adults, children and during pregnancy; the cost of the FreeStyle Libre is lower. Glucose data can be visualized in multiple devices and platforms, and summarized in an ambulatory glucose profile to aid pattern recognition and insulin dose adjustment. There is a need for appropriate education, of both users and healthcare professionals, to harness the full benefits. Further randomized studies to assess the long-term impact on HbA_1c , particularly in those with high baseline HbA_1c and in specific age groups, such as adolescents and young adults, are warranted. The potential impact on complications, is yet to be realized.

Commentary Regarding Shapiro, "Nonadjunctive Use of Continuous Glucose Monitors for Insulin Dosing: Is It Safe?"

The FDA recently expanded the approved use of Dexcom's G5 Mobile continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) system to allow for diabetes treatment decisions. This decision is expected to reduce the burden of SMBG testing and increase the adoption and persistent use of CGM. The safety of nonadjunctive CGM use was questioned because of sporadic large discrepancies between CGM and SMBG values. These data were viewed in the context of complaints found in the FDA MAUDE database and social media postings. This commentary provides additional perspective on the inferences that can be drawn from these reports and the risk of nonadjunctive use of CGM data.