A New Analysis Tool for Continuous Glucose Monitor Data

The metabolic and circadian signatures of gestational diabetes in the postpartum period characterised using multiple wearable devices

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS

Gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) affects 14% of all pregnancies worldwide and is associated with cardiometabolic risk. We aimed to exploit high-resolution wearable device time-series data to create a fine-grained physiological characterisation of the postpartum GDM state in free-living conditions, including clinical variables, daily glucose dynamics, food and drink consumption, physical activity, sleep patterns and heart rate.

METHODS

In a prospective observational study, we employed continuous glucose monitors (CGMs), a smartphone food diary, triaxial accelerometers and heart rate and heart rate variability monitors over a 2 week period to compare women who had GDM in the previous pregnancy (GDM group) and women who had a pregnancy with normal glucose metabolism (non-GDM group) at 1-2 months after delivery (baseline) and 6 months later (follow-up). We integrated CGM data with ingestion events recorded with the smartphone app MyFoodRepo to quantify the rapidity of returning to preprandial glucose levels after meal consumption. We inferred the properties of the underlying 24 h rhythm in the baseline glucose. Aggregating the baseline and follow-up data in a linear mixed model, we quantified the relationships between glycaemic variables and wearable device-derived markers of circadian timing.

RESULTS

Compared with the non-GDM group (n=15), the GDM group (n=22, including five with prediabetes defined based on fasting plasma glucose [5.6-6.9 mmol/l (100-125 mg/dl)] and/or HbA1c [39-47 mmol/mol (5.7-6.4%)]) had a higher BMI, HbA1c and mean amplitude of glycaemic excursion at baseline (all p≤0.05). Integrating CGM data and ingestion events showed that the GDM group had a slower postprandial glucose decrease (p=0.01) despite having a lower proportion of carbohydrate intake, similar mean glucose levels and a reduced amplitude of the underlying glucose 24 h rhythm (p=0.005). Differences in CGM-derived variables persisted when the five women with prediabetes were removed from the comparison. Longitudinal analysis from baseline to follow-up showed a significant increase in fasting plasma glucose across both groups. The CGM-derived metrics showed no differences from baseline to follow-up. Late circadian timing (i.e. sleep midpoint, eating midpoint and peak time of heart rate) was correlated with higher fasting plasma glucose and reduced amplitudes of the underlying glucose 24 h rhythm (all p≤0.05).

CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION

We reveal GDM-related postpartum differences in glucose variability and 24 h rhythms, even among women clinically considered to be normoglycaemic. Our results provide a rationale for future interventions aimed at improving glucose variability and encouraging earlier daily behavioural patterns to mitigate the long-term cardiometabolic risk of GDM.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov no. NCT04642534.

Comparison of Computational Statistical Packages for the Analysis of Continuous Glucose Monitoring Data with a Reference Software, "Ambulatory Glucose Profile," in Type 1 Diabetes

Objective: To compare the accuracy of commonly used continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) analysis programs with ambulatory glucose profile (AGP) and Dexcom Clarity (DC) in analyzing CGM metrics in patients with type 1 diabetes (T1D). Research Methods: CGM data up to 90 days from 152 adults using the same CGM and automated insulin delivery system with T1D were collected. Six of the 19 CGM analysis programs (CDGA, cgmanalysis, Glyculator, iglu, EasyGV, and GLU) were selected to compare with AGP and DC. Metrics were compared etween all tools with two one-sided t-tests equivalence testing. For the equivalence test, the acceptable range of deviation was set as ±2 mg/dL for mean glucose, ±2% for time in range (TIR), ±1% for time above range (TAR), time above range level 1 (TAR1), time above range level 2 (TAR2), and coefficient of variation (CV). Results: All packages were compared with each other for all CGM metrics, and most of them had statistically significant differences for at least some metrics. All tools were equivalent to AGP for mean glucose, TIR, TAR, TAR1, and TAR2 within ±2 mg/dL, ±2%, ±1%, ±1% and 1%, respectively. CDGA, Glyculator, cgmanalysis, and iglu were not equivalent to AGP for CV within ±1%. All tools were equivalent to DC for mean glucose, TIR, and TAR2 within ±2 mg/dL, ±2%, and ±1%, respectively. Glyculator was not equivalent for TAR1, TAR, and CV. CGDA, cgmanalysis, and iglu were not equivalent to DC for TAR1 and TAR. EasyGV and GLU were not equivalent for TAR within ±1%. Conclusions: CGM analysis programs reported CGM metrics statistically differently, but these differences may not be applicable in clinical practice. The equivalence test also confirmed that the differences are negligible for TIR and mean glucose, while they can be important for hyperglycemic ranges and CV. A standardization for CGM data handling and analysis is necessary for clinical studies reporting CGM-generated outcomes.

Time-Restricted Eating in Adults With Metabolic Syndrome : A Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Time-restricted eating (TRE), limiting daily dietary intake to a consistent 8 to 10 hours without mandating calorie reduction, may provide cardiometabolic benefits.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the effects of TRE as a lifestyle intervention combined with current standard-of-care treatments on cardiometabolic health in adults with metabolic syndrome.

DESIGN

Randomized controlled trial. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04057339).

SETTING

Clinical research institute.

PARTICIPANTS

Adults with metabolic syndrome including elevated fasting glucose or hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c; pharmacotherapy allowed).

INTERVENTION

Participants were randomly assigned to standard-of-care (SOC) nutritional counseling alone (SOC group) or combined with a personalized 8- to 10-hour TRE intervention (≥4-hour reduction in eating window) (TRE group) for 3 months. Timing of dietary intake was tracked in real time using the myCircadianClock smartphone application.

MEASUREMENTS

Primary outcomes were HbA1c, fasting glucose, fasting insulin, homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance, and glycemic assessments from continuous glucose monitors.

RESULTS

108 participants from the TIMET study completed the intervention (89% of those randomly assigned; 56 women, mean baseline age, 59 years; body mass index of 31.22 kg/m2; eating window of 14.19 hours). Compared with SOC, TRE improved HbA1c by -0.10% (95% CI, -0.19% to -0.003%). Statistical outcomes were adjusted for age. There were no major adverse events.

LIMITATION

Short duration, self-reported diet, potential for multiple elements affecting outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Personalized 8- to 10-hour TRE is an effective practical lifestyle intervention that modestly improves glycemic regulation and may have broader benefits for cardiometabolic health in adults with metabolic syndrome on top of SOC pharmacotherapy and nutritional counseling.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

National Institutes of Health.

Innovative solution or cause for concern? The use of continuous glucose monitors in people not living with diabetes: A narrative review

AIMS

Continuous glucose monitors (CGMs) have expanded their scope beyond indicated uses for diabetes management and are gaining traction among people not living with diabetes (PNLD). CGMs track in time glucose levels and are proposed as tools for the early detection of abnormal glucose and a potential solution for its normalisation through behavioural change, particularly, diet personalisation and motivation of physical activity. This becomes relevance given the growing incidence of metabolic conditions, such as type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Clinical guidelines, however, do not recommend CGMs in contexts outside type 1 diabetes (T1DM) or insulin-treated T2DM. Therefore, there is a visible disconnect between the indicated and real-world usage of these medical devices. While the commercial market for CGMs in PNLD is expanding rapidly, a comprehensive and evidence-based evaluation of the devices' utility in this population has not been done. Therefore, this review aims to formulate a working model for CGM utility in PNLD as proposed by the 'health and wellness' market that advertises and distributes it to these individuals.

METHODS

We aim to critically analyse the available research addressing components of the working model, that is (1) detection of abnormal glucose; (2) behavioural change, and (3) metabolic health improvement.

RESULTS

We find a lack of consistent and high-quality evidence to support the utility of CGMs for these purposes. We identify significantly under-reserved areas including clinical benchmarks and scoring procedures for CGM measures, device acceptability, and potential adverse effects of CGMs on eating habits in PNLD. We also raise concerns about the robustness of available CGM research.

CONCLUSION

In the face of these research gaps, we urge for the commercial claims suggesting the utility of the device in PNLD to be labelled as misleading. We argue that there is a regulatory inadequacy that fuels 'off-label' CGM distribution and calls for the strengthening of post-market clinical follow-up oversight for CGMs. We hope this will help to avert the continued misinformation risk to PNLD and 'off-label' exacerbation of health disparities.

AGATA: A Toolbox for Automated Glucose Data Analysis

BACKGROUND

Analyzing continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) data is a mandatory step for multiple purposes spanning from reporting clinical trial outcomes to developing new algorithms for diabetes management. This task is repetitive, and scientists struggle in computing literature glucose control metrics and waste time in reproducing possibly complex plots and reports. For this reason, to provide the diabetes technology community a unified tool, here we present Automated Glucose dATa Analysis (AGATA), an automated glucose data analysis toolbox developed in MATLAB/Octave.

METHODS

Automated Glucose dATa Analysis is an open-source software program to visualize and preprocess CGM data, compute glucose control metrics, detect adverse events, evaluate the effectiveness of users' prediction algorithms, and compare study arms. Automated Glucose dATa Analysis can be used as a standalone computer application accessible through a dedicated graphical user interface, particularly suitable for clinicians, or by integrating its functionalities in user-defined MATLAB/Octave scripts, which fits the need of researchers and developers. To demonstrate its features, we used AGATA to analyze CGM data of two subjects extracted from a publicly available data set of individuals with type one diabetes. Finally, AGATA's features are compared against those of 12 noncommercial software programs for CGM data analysis.

RESULTS

Using AGATA, we easily preprocessed, analyzed, and visualized CGM data in a handy way, in compliance with the requirements and the standards defined in the literature. Compared to the other considered software programs, AGATA offers more functionalities and capabilities.

CONCLUSION

Automated Glucose dATa Analysis is easy to use and reduces the burden of CGM data analysis. It is freely available in GitHub at https://github.com/gcappon/agata.

Glycemic variability assessed using continuous glucose monitoring in individuals without diabetes and associations with cardiometabolic risk markers: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) provides data on short-term glycemic variability (GV). GV is associated with adverse outcomes in individuals with diabetes. Whether GV is associated with cardiometabolic risk in individuals without diabetes is unclear. We systematically reviewed the literature to assess whether GV is associated with cardiometabolic risk markers or outcomes in individuals without diabetes.

METHODS

Searches were performed in PubMed/Medline, Embase and Cochrane from inception through April 2022. Two researchers were involved in study selection, data extraction and quality assessment. Studies evaluating GV using CGM for ≥24 h were included. Studies in populations with acute and/or critical illness were excluded. Both narrative synthesis and meta-analyzes were performed, depending on outcome.

RESULTS

Seventy-one studies were included; the majority were cross-sectional. Multiple measures of GV are higher in individuals with compared to without prediabetes and GV appears to be inversely associated with beta cell function. In contrast, GV is not clearly associated with insulin sensitivity, fatty liver disease, adiposity, blood lipids, blood pressure or oxidative stress. However, GV may be positively associated with the degree of atherosclerosis and cardiovascular events in individuals with coronary disease.

CONCLUSION

GV is elevated in prediabetes, potentially related to beta cell dysfunction, but less clearly associated with obesity or traditional risk factors. GV is associated with coronary atherosclerosis development and may predict cardiovascular events and type 2 diabetes. Prospective studies are warranted, investigating the predictive power of GV in relation to incident disease. GV may be an important risk measure also in individuals without diabetes.

Statistical Packages and Algorithms for the Analysis of Continuous Glucose Monitoring Data: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) measures glucose levels every 1 to 15 minutes and is widely used in clinical and research contexts. Statistical packages and algorithms reduce the time-consuming and error-prone process of manually calculating CGM metrics and contribute to standardizing CGM metrics defined by international consensus. The aim of this systematic review is to summarize existing data on (1) statistical packages for retrospective CGM data analysis and (2) statistical algorithms for retrospective CGM analysis not available in these statistical packages.

METHODS

A systematic literature search in PubMed and EMBASE was conducted on September 19, 2023. We also searched Google Scholar and Google Search until October 12, 2023 as sources of gray literature and performed reference checks of the included literature. Articles in English and Danish were included. This systematic review is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42022378163).

RESULTS

A total of 8731 references were screened and 46 references were included. We identified 23 statistical packages for the analysis of CGM data. The statistical packages could calculate many metrics of the 2022 CGM consensus and non-consensus CGM metrics, and 22/23 (96%) statistical packages were freely available. Also, 23 statistical algorithms were identified. The statistical algorithms could be divided into three groups based on content: (1) CGM data reduction (eg, clustering of CGM data), (2) composite CGM outcomes, and (3) other CGM metrics.

CONCLUSION

This systematic review provides detailed tabular and textual up-to-date descriptions of the contents of statistical packages and statistical algorithms for retrospective analysis of CGM data.

Continuous glucose monitoring in patients with post-bariatric hypoglycaemia reduces hypoglycaemia and glycaemic variability

AIM

To determine whether continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) can reduce hypoglycaemia in patients with post-bariatric hypoglycaemia (PBH).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In an open-label, nonrandomized, pre-post design with sequential assignment, CGM data were collected in 22 individuals with PBH in two sequential phases: (i) masked (no access to sensor glucose or alarms); and (ii) unmasked (access to sensor glucose and alarms for low or rapidly declining sensor glucose). Twelve participants wore the Dexcom G4 device for a total of 28 days, while 10 wore the Dexcom G6 device for a total of 20 days.

RESULTS

Participants with PBH spent a lower percentage of time in hypoglycaemia over 24 hours with unmasked versus masked CGM (<3.3 mM/L, or <60 mg/dL: median [median absolute deviation {MAD}] 0.7 [0.8]% vs. 1.4 [1.7]%, P = 0.03; <3.9 mM/L, or <70 mg/dL: median [MAD] 2.9 [2.5]% vs. 4.7 [4.8]%; P = 0.04), with similar trends overnight. Sensor glucose data from the unmasked phase showed a greater percentage of time spent between 3.9 and 10 mM/L (70-180 mg/dL) (median [MAD] 94.8 [3.9]% vs. 90.8 [5.2]%; P = 0.004) and lower glycaemic variability over 24 hours (median [MAD] mean amplitude of glycaemic excursion 4.1 [0.98] vs. 4.4 [0.99] mM/L; P = 0.04). During the day, participants also spent a greater percentage of time in normoglycaemia with unmasked CGM (median [MAD] 94.2 [4.8]% vs. 90.9 [6.2]%; P = 0.005), largely due to a reduction in hyperglycaemia (>10 mM/L, or 180 mg/dL: median [MAD] 1.9 [2.2]% vs. 3.9 [3.6]%; P = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

Real-time CGM data and alarms are associated with reductions in low sensor glucose, elevated sensor glucose, and glycaemic variability. This suggests CGM allows patients to detect hyperglycaemic peaks and imminent hypoglycaemia, allowing dietary modification and self-treatment to reduce hypoglycaemia. The use of CGM devices may improve safety in PBH, particularly for patients with hypoglycaemia unawareness.

Development and Validation of an Electronic Health Record-Based Risk Assessment Tool for Hypoglycemia in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus

BACKGROUND

The recent availability of high-quality data from clinical trials, together with machine learning (ML) techniques, presents exciting opportunities for developing prediction models for clinical outcomes.

METHODS

As a proof-of-concept, we translated a hypoglycemia risk model derived from the Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes (ACCORD) study into the HypoHazardScore, a risk assessment tool applicable to electronic health record (EHR) data. To assess its performance, we conducted a 16-week clinical study at the University of Minnesota where participants (N = 40) with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) had hypoglycemia assessed prospectively by continuous glucose monitoring (CGM).

RESULTS

The HypoHazardScore combines 16 risk factors commonly found within the EHR. The HypoHazardScore successfully predicted (area under the curve [AUC] = 0.723) whether participants experienced least one CGM-assessed hypoglycemic event (glucose <54 mg/dL for ≥15 minutes from two CGMs) while significantly correlating with frequency of CGM-assessed hypoglycemic events (r = 0.38) and percent time experiencing CGM-assessed hypoglycemia (r = 0.39). Compared to participants with a low HypoHazardScore (N = 19, score <4, median score of 4), participants with a high HypoHazardScore (N = 21, score ≥4) had more frequent CGM-assessed hypoglycemic events (high: 1.6 ± 2.2 events/week; low: 0.3 ± 0.5 events/week) and experienced more CGM-assessed hypoglycemia (high: 1.4% ± 2.0%; low: 0.2% ± 0.4% time) during the 16-week follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

We demonstrated that a hypoglycemia risk model can be successfully adapted from the ACCORD data to the EHR, with validation by a prospective study using CGM-assessed hypoglycemia. The HypoHazardScore represents a significant advancement toward implementing an EHR-based decision support system that can help reduce hypoglycemia in patients with T2DM.

Software Packages and Tools for the Analysis of Continuous Glucose Monitoring Data

The advancement of technology in the field of glycemic control has led to the widespread use of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM), which can be nowadays obtained from wearable devices equipped with a minimally invasive sensor, that is, transcutaneous needle type or implantable, and a transmitter that sends information to a receiver or smart device for data storage and display. This work aims to review the currently available software packages and tools for the analysis of CGM data. Based on the purposes of this work, 12 software packages have been identified from the literature, published until December 2021, namely: GlyCulator, EasyGV (Easy Glycemic Variability), CGM-GUIDE^© (Continuous Glucose Monitoring Graphical User Interface for Diabetes Evaluation), GVAP (Glycemic Variability Analyzer Program), Tidepool, CGManalyzer, cgmanalysis, GLU, CGMStatsAnalyser, iglu, rGV, and cgmquantify. Comparison of available software packages and tools has been done in terms of main characteristics (i.e., publication year, presence of a graphical user interface, availability, open-source code, number of citations, programming language, supported devices, supported data format and organization of the data structure, documentation, presence of a toy example, video tutorial, data upload and download, measurement-units conversion), preprocessing procedures, data display options, and computed metrics; also, each of the computed metrics has been analyzed in terms of its adherence to the American Diabetes Association (ADA) 2017 international consensus on CGM data analysis and the ADA 2019 international consensus on time in range. Eventually, the agreement between metrics computed by different software and tools has been investigated. Based on such comparison, usability and complexity of data management, as well as the possibility to perform customized or patients-group analyses, have been discussed by highlighting limitations and strengths, also in relation to possible different user categories (i.e., patients, clinicians, researchers). The information provided could be useful to researchers interested in working in the diabetic research field as to clinicians and endocrinologists who need tools capable of handling CGM data effectively.