Use of Flash Continuous Glucose Monitoring Is Associated With A1C Reduction in People With Type 2 Diabetes Treated With Basal Insulin or Noninsulin Therapy

Reduced Rate of Hospitalizations for Acute Diabetes Events Before and After FreeStyle Libre® System Initiation in Some People With Type 2 Diabetes on Insulin-Secretagogue Oral Drug Therapy Without Insulin in France

Objective: Glycemic management in people with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) on insulin-secretagogue regimens without insulin is of importance, as this group still represents a significant proportion of patients. Risks for acute diabetes events (ADEs), including diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) or hypoglycemia, using insulin-secretagogue drugs are well established. Few studies have suggested that continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) could be useful for monitoring glucose dynamics associated with the use of such therapies. To document this point an exploratory analysis was conducted in a group of individuals with noninsulin treated T2DM in France who are managed with oral insulin-secretagogues and initiating the FreeStyle Libre® system (FSL). Methods: A retrospective study of the French national SNDS reimbursement claims database (≈66 million French people) was conducted to identify people with T2DM on oral insulin-secretagogues and receiving a first reimbursement of FSL between August 1, 2017 and December 31, 2018. The analysis included data for the 12 months before and up to 24 months after FSL initiation. Hospitalizations for diabetes-related acute events were identified using ICD-10 codes as main or related diagnosis, for: hypoglycemic events; DKA events; comas; and hyperglycemia-related admissions. Results: A total of 1272 people with T2DM on insulin-secretagogues without insulin initiated FSL during the selection period. Of these, 7.15% had at least one hospitalization for any ADE in the year before FSL initiation, compared with 2.52% at 12 months and 2.83% at 24 months following FSL initiation. Reductions in ADEs were driven by -73% fewer admissions for ADEs related to diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) or other hyperglycemia-related events. These patterns of reduced ADEs persisted after 2 years. Conclusions: This study suggests the value of the FSL system in reducing ADEs in some people with T2DM in France being treated with insulin-secretagogues without insulin. Characteristics of these patients remain to be documented.

Increase Access, Reduce Disparities: Recommendations for Modifying Medicaid CGM Coverage Eligibility Criteria

Numerous studies have demonstrated the clinical value of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) in type 1 diabetes (T1D) and type 2 diabetes (T2D) populations. However, the eligibility criteria for CGM coverage required by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) ignore the conclusive evidence that supports CGM use in various diabetes populations that are currently deemed ineligible. In an earlier article, we discussed the limitations and inconsistencies of the agency's CGM eligibility criteria relative to current scientific evidence and proposed practice solutions to address this issue and improve the safety and care of Medicare beneficiaries with diabetes. Although Medicaid is administered through CMS, there is no consistent Medicaid policy for CGM coverage in the United States. This article presents a rationale for modifying and standardizing Medicaid CGM coverage eligibility across the United States.

Continuous glucose monitoring for the routine care of type 2 diabetes mellitus

Although continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) devices are now considered the standard of care for people with type 1 diabetes mellitus, the uptake among people with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) has been slower and is focused on those receiving intensive insulin therapy. However, increasing evidence now supports the inclusion of CGM in the routine care of people with T2DM who are on basal insulin-only regimens or are managed with other medications. Expanding CGM to these groups could minimize hypoglycaemia while allowing efficient adaptation and escalation of therapies. Increasing evidence from randomized controlled trials and observational studies indicates that CGM is of clinical value in people with T2DM on non-intensive treatment regimens. If further studies confirm this finding, CGM could soon become a part of routine care for T2DM. In this Perspective we explore the potential benefits of widening the application of CGM in T2DM, along with the challenges that must be overcome for the evidence-based benefits of this technology to be delivered for all people with T2DM.

Transforming diabetes care with continuous glucose monitoring: Rationale for expanded eligibility criteria

ABSTRACT

Randomized trials and large retrospective database studies have shown that individuals treated with noninsulin therapies experience the same glycemic benefits from continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) use as those treated with more intensive treatment regimens. However, many policy makers and payers are reluctant to provide CGM coverage for these patients. Although the recent American Diabetes Association guidelines have taken an important first step in recommending that CGM should be offered to all adults treated with basal insulin who are capable of using it, clinicians should consider the acute and long-term consequences of persistent hyperglycemia in all of their patients with diabetes. This article describes how the use of the FreeStyle Libre 2 CGM System (Abbott Diabetes Care, Alameda, CA) improved glycemic outcomes and facilitates personalized diabetes care in two type 2 diabetes patients treated with noninsulin therapies.

The use of technology in type 2 diabetes and prediabetes: a narrative review

The increasing incidence of type 2 diabetes, which represents 90% of diabetes cases globally, is a major public health concern. Improved glucose management reduces the risk of vascular complications and mortality; however, only a small proportion of the type 2 diabetes population have blood glucose levels within the recommended treatment targets. In recent years, diabetes technologies have revolutionised the care of people with type 1 diabetes, and it is becoming increasingly evident that people with type 2 diabetes can also benefit from these advances. In this review, we describe the current knowledge regarding the role of technologies for people living with type 2 diabetes and the evidence supporting their use in clinical practice. We conclude that continuous glucose monitoring systems deliver glycaemic benefits for individuals with type 2 diabetes, whether treated with insulin or non-insulin therapy; further data are required to evaluate the role of these systems in those with prediabetes (defined as impaired glucose tolerance and/or impaired fasting glucose and/or HbA1c levels between 39 mmol/mol [5.7%] and 47 mmol/mol [6.4%]). The use of insulin pumps seems to be safe and effective in people with type 2 diabetes, especially in those with an HbA1c significantly above target. Initial results from studies exploring the impact of closed-loop systems in type 2 diabetes are promising. We discuss directions for future research to fully understand the potential benefits of integrating evidence-based technology into care for people living with type 2 diabetes and prediabetes.

Initiating GLP-1 Therapy in Combination with FreeStyle Libre Provides Greater Benefit Compared with GLP-1 Therapy Alone

Background and Aim: Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RA) therapy provides glycemic benefits to individuals with type 2 diabetes (T2D). However, the effects of GLP-1 RA therapy in combination with FreeStyle Libre systems (FSL) are unknown. This study aimed to compare changes in hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) between people acquiring GLP-1 with FSL (GLP-1+FSL) versus GLP-1 without FSL (GLP-1). Methods: This real-world study used Optum's de-identified Market Clarity Data, a linked electronic health records (EHR)-claims database, and included adults with T2D and HbA1c ≥8% who acquired their first GLP-1 RA medication between 2018 and 2022. GLP-1+FSL subjects acquired their first FSL within ±30 days of their first GLP-1 acquisition. Cohorts were matched 1:5 on baseline insulin therapy, age, sex, baseline HbA1c, and GLP-1 type. Paired changes in HbA1c were compared between unmatched and matched groups at 6 months. Results: The study included 24,724 adults in the unmatched cohort (GLP-1+FSL, n = 478; GLP-1, n = 24,246). The matched cohort included 478 GLP-1+FSL users and 2,390 GLP-1 users: mean age 53.5 ± 11.8 and 53.5 ± 11.3 years, HbA1c 10.25 ± 1.68% and 10.22 ± 1.69%, respectively. HbA1c reduction was greater in the GLP-1+FSL group compared with the GLP-1 group in the unmatched cohort (-2.43% vs. -1.73%, difference 0.70%, P < 0.001, respectively) and in the matched cohort (-2.43% vs. -2.06%, difference 0.37%, P < 0.001). GLP-1+FSL vs. GLP-1 treatment was associated with greater HbA1c reduction in the intensive insulin (-2.32% vs. -1.50%), nonintensive insulin (-2.50% vs. -1.74%), and noninsulin group (-2.46% vs. -1.78%), as well as in patients using semaglutide (-2.73% vs. -1.92%) and dulaglutide (-2.45% vs. -1.71%) GLP-1 RA, all P < 0.001. Conclusions: Adults with suboptimally controlled T2D, initiating GLP-1 RA with FreeStyle Libre, had greater improvement in HbA1c compared with those treated with GLP-1 RA only. These results suggest an additional glycemic benefit of FSL when used with a GLP-1 RA in T2D treatment.

Type 2 diabetes in latin America: recommendations on the flash glucose monitoring system

OBJECTIVE

To establish recommendations through the consensus of a Latin American experts panel on the use of the flash glucose monitoring system (fCGM) in people living with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) regarding the benefits and challenges of using the fCGM.

METHODS

An executive committee of experts was created, comprised by a panel of fifteen physicians, including endocrinologists and internal medicine physicians, with expertise in management of adult patients with T2DM. The experts were from various countries: Colombia, Chile, Peru, Mexico, Argentina, and Brazil. The modified Delphi method was used, considering a consensus level of at least 80% of the participants. A seventeen-item instrument was developed to establish recommendations on the use of fCGM in patients with T2DM in Latin American.

RESULTS

The number of glucose scans recommended per day with the fCGM for patients managed with oral antidiabetic drugs or basal insulin was a median of 6 scans per day, and for those managed with multiple insulin doses, a median of 10 scans per day was recommended. Additionally, a holistic and individualized management approach was recommended, taking into account new treatment directions and identifying patients who would benefit from the use of the fCGM.

CONCLUSION

Continuous use of the fCGM is recommended for people living with T2DM, regardless of their type of treatment. These metrics must be evaluated individually for each patient profile.

Prioritizing Patient Experiences in the Management of Diabetes and Its Complications: An Endocrine Society Position Statement

Diabetes can be an arduous journey both for people with diabetes (PWD) and their caregivers. While the journey of every person with diabetes is unique, common themes emerge in managing this disease. To date, the experiences of PWD have not been fully considered to successfully implement the recommended standards of diabetes care in practice. It is critical for health-care providers (HCPs) to recognize perspectives of PWD to achieve optimal health outcomes. Further, existing tools are available to facilitate patient-centered care but are often underused. This statement summarizes findings from multistakeholder expert roundtable discussions hosted by the Endocrine Society that aimed to identify existing gaps in the management of diabetes and its complications and to identify tools needed to empower HCPs and PWD to address their many challenges. The roundtables included delegates from professional societies, governmental organizations, patient advocacy organizations, and social enterprises committed to making life better for PWD. Each section begins with a clinical scenario that serves as a framework to achieve desired health outcomes and includes a discussion of resources for HCPs to deliver patient-centered care in clinical practice. As diabetes management evolves, achieving this goal will also require the development of new tools to help guide HCPs in supporting PWD, as well as concrete strategies for the efficient uptake of these tools in clinical practice to minimize provider burden. Importantly, coordination among various stakeholders including PWD, HCPs, caregivers, policymakers, and payers is critical at all stages of the patient journey.

Continuous Glucose Monitoring Systems in Noninsulin-Treated People with Type 2 Diabetes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Introduction: Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) has shown favorable outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) who are on insulin therapy. However, the efficacy of CGM in managing glucose levels in noninsulin-treated people with T2D remains controversial. Methods: PubMed, Cochrane, and Embase were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing CGM to self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) in people with T2D not using insulin. We computed weighted mean differences (WMDs) and standard mean differences (SMD) for continuous outcomes, with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Heterogeneity was assessed using I2 statistics. Statistical analyses were performed using R version 4.2.3. Results: We included six RCTs comprising 407 noninsulin-treated people with T2D of whom 228 were randomized to CGM. Diabetes duration ranged from 5.4 to 13.9 years. The mean age was 57.9 years and the mean body mass index was 30.8 kg/m2. Four trials used real-time CGM (rt-CGM) and two intermittent scanning CGM (is-CGM). Compared with SMBG, CGM significantly reduced the glycated hemoglobin level (WMD -0.31%; 95% CI -0.42 to -0.21; I2 = 0%), glucose level (WMD -11.16 mg/dL; 95% CI -19.94 to -2.39; I2 = 0%), time in hypoglycemia level 2 (WMD -0.28%; 95% CI -0.52 to -0.03; I2 = 91%), glucose time >180 mg/dL (WMD -7.75%; 95% CI -12.04 to -3.45; I2 = 0%), and the standard deviation of glucose variation (WMD -4.00 mg/dL; 95% CI -6.86 to -1.14; I2 = 0%). CGM also increased time in range (WMD 8.63%; 95% CI 4.54-12.71; I2 = 0%) and treatment satisfaction (SMD 0.79; 95% CI 0.54-1.05; I2 = 0%). Conclusion: In this meta-analysis, rt-CGM and is-CGM were associated with improvement in glycemic control in people with T2D not using insulin when compared to SMBG.

Continuous Glucose Monitoring and Reduced Diabetes-Related Hospitalizations in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes and CKD

Key Points

Patients with diabetes and CKD have a heightened risk of glycemic variability, which can lead to severe hypoglycemic or hyperglycemic events, potentially resulting in hospitalization. This study describes the results of a retrospective claims analysis of people with insulin-requiring type 2 diabetes and stage 3–5 CKD who initiated continuous glucose monitoring. Continuous glucose monitoring could help patients with type 2 diabetes and CKD control their glucose and avoid potentially dangerous glycemic events.

Background

There is a heightened risk of glycemic variability in patients with diabetes and CKD. This glycemic variability could lead to hypoglycemic or hyperglycemic crises. We hypothesized that initiation of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM), which provides a glucose measurement every 1–5 minutes, could reduce the incidence of hospitalizations for patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) and CKD.

Methods

A retrospective analysis of US administrative claims data from the Optum Clinformatics database was conducted. People with T2D, using insulin, not receiving dialysis, and living with stage 3–5 CKD who initiated CGM between January 1, 2016, and March 31, 2022, were identified. National Drug Codes and Healthcare Common Coding Procedure System codes were used to identify CGM device use, and International Classification of Diseases 10th revision codes were used to identify CKD diagnosis and categorize health care encounters. Rates of diabetes-related hospitalizations were obtained, and multivariable logistic regression analyses revealed predictors of hypoglycemic and hyperglycemic encounters.

Results

A total of 8,959 insulin-using patients with T2D and CKD were identified. Most were White (72.3%), had Medicare insurance coverage (82.2%), were using intensive insulin (91.3%), and had stage 3 CKD (86.0%). After CGM initiation, rates of hospitalizations for hyperglycemia or hypoglycemia decreased by 18.2% and 17.0%, respectively (P < 0.0001 for both). The proportion hospitalized with at least one hypoglycemic or hyperglycemic event also significantly decreased after CGM initiation. Significant predictors of both hypoglycemic and hyperglycemic encounters included a previous encounter of that type, age 30–59 years and depression (for hypoglycemia), and age 30–49 years and neuropathy (for hyperglycemia). Use of CGM or glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists was significantly protective against hypoglycemic encounters.

Conclusions

Initiation of CGM was associated with significant reductions in diabetes-related hospitalizations among insulin-using individuals with T2D and moderate-to-severe CKD. CGM could help patients with T2D and CKD control their glucose and avoid potentially dangerous glycemic events.

A Podcast on the Use of CGM in Optimizing Type 2 Diabetes Management with Non-intensive Insulin Treatment in the Primary Care Setting

INTRODUCTION

Type 2 diabetes is a widespread health concern with significant implications for patient well-being. Poor glycaemic control can lead to long-term complications, hypoglycaemia and glycaemic variability, highlighting the importance of setting treatment goals. This podcast, "The use of CGM in optimizing type 2 diabetes management with non-intensive insulin treatment in the primary care setting", introduces non-intensive insulin treatment and continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) as crucial tools in achieving these goals.

OBJECTIVES AND RATIONALE

The advantages of CGM over blood glucose monitoring (BGM) are explored, emphasizing its real-time glucose data provision and how it empowers patients to make informed treatment decisions. Drawing on randomized controlled trials (RCTs), the compelling evidence of CGM's effectiveness in patients with type 2 diabetes on basal insulin treatment are discussed. Additionally, the real-world evidence, comparing outcomes between insulin-treated and non-insulin-treated patients are also addressed. The podcast examines the link between glycaemic control and acute complications requiring hospitalizations and how CGM contributes to a better quality of life for patients with type 2 diabetes. Empowering patients is central to this podcast, with a focus on education, engagement and strategies for integrating CGM data into treatment plans. The pivotal role of healthcare providers in supporting patients on non-intensive insulin treatment and CGM in the primary care setting is addressed. Addressing challenges and barriers in CGM adoption, including cost considerations, technology accessibility and patient concerns, is vital to its widespread use. There is also a consideration of the cost-effectiveness of CGM in type 2 diabetes management. The podcast provides insights into when to consider CGM, including intermittent use and data integration with other health technologies. It emphasizes the potential for improved patient outcomes and a reduced burden of type 2 diabetes. Practical tips for interpreting the Ambulatory Glucose Profile (AGP) report are shared, benefitting primary care healthcare professionals new to CGM.

CONCLUSION

The podcast "The use of CGM in optimizing type 2 diabetes management with non-intensive insulin treatment in the primary care setting" highlights the transformative potential of CGM in type 2 diabetes care. It encourages patients and healthcare providers to consider CGM as an integral part of treatment plans, ultimately improving the lives of those living with type 2 diabetes. Podcast Video (MP4 261831 KB).

Effectiveness and Safety of the Intermittently Scanned Continuous Glucose Monitoring System FreeStyle Libre 2 in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Treated with Basal Insulin or Oral Antidiabetic Drugs: An Observational, Retrospective Real-World Study

Intermittently Scanned Continuous Glucose Monitoring (isCGM) devices are increasingly being used in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) on insulin therapy for their benefits regarding disease management. Evidence of isCGM use in patients with T2DM on basal or non-insulin therapy is lacking. This study aimed at assessing the efficacy and safety of isCGM in this population. This was an observational, retrospective, real-world study enrolling patients with T2DM who were starting the use of isCGM. Data from medical records (i.e., demographics, clinical characteristics, laboratory assessments, and isCGM metrics) were collected over three time periods (baseline, 3 and 6 months). The endpoints were glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) changes and changes in isCGM metrics as defined by the International Consensus from baseline to 3 months and 6 months. Overall, 132 patients were included (69.5% male; mean age 68.2 ± 11.0 years; mean disease duration 19.0 ± 9.4 years; 79.7% on basal insulin ±non-insulin therapy; mean baseline HbA1c 8.1% ± 1.3%). The estimated mean change in HbA1c was statistically significant at three (-0.4 ± 1.0%; p = 0.003) and six months (-0.6 ± 1.3%; p < 0.0001). In conclusion, isCGM proved to be effective and safe in improving glycaemic control in patients with T2DM on basal insulin or non-insulin therapy.

7. Diabetes Technology: 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.

Effects of continuous glucose monitoring on glycaemic control in type 2 diabetes: A systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

AIMS

The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) versus self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) in maintaining glycaemic control among people with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42023387583). PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE and OVID databases were searched from 1 January 2000 until 31 December 2022 for randomized controlled trials comparing CGM with SMBG in glycaemic control among the outpatients with T2DM. The primary endpoint was glycated haemoglobin, while the secondary endpoints included time in range, time below range and time above range. Both traditional and network meta-analyses were conducted to explore the efficacy of CGM on glycaemic control in T2DM.

RESULTS

Eleven high-quality studies, involving 1425 individuals with T2DM, were identified. Traditional meta-analysis revealed that CGM exhibited a significantly decreased [mean difference (MD): -0.31, 95% confidence interval (CI) (-0.45, -0.18)], time above range [MD: -9.06%, 95% CI (-16.00, -2.11)], time below range [MD: -0.30%, 95% CI (-0.49, -0.12)] and a significantly increased time in range [MD: 8.49%, 95% CI (3.96, 13.02)] compared with SMBG. The network meta-analysis showed that real-time CGM can improve the glycaemic control of patients with T2DM to the most extent.

CONCLUSIONS

CGM could provide T2DM with greater benefits in glycaemic management compared with SMBG, particularly in patients using real-time CGM. These findings provide an updated perspective on previous research and offer guidance for CGM use in T2DM.

Partnering for Better Health: Using Continuous Glucose Monitoring and Clinical Pharmacist Collaboration to Improve Glycemic Control in Underserved Patients With Type 2 Diabetes

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to examine the effect of initiating use of a continuous glucose monitor (CGM) in patients being treated for type 2 diabetes mellitus, specifically those who face barriers to obtaining this device because of its cost.

METHODS

This retrospective medical record review compared diabetes control of patients before and after use of a CGM device within a single primary care office. Patient medical records were reviewed 18 months after initial CGM was provided, and only those who received a CGM directly from the clinic were included in the review. Statistical analysis comparing the difference in mean baseline glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) level with the first HbA1c level after CGM placement was completed using the paired t test for the primary outcome.

FINDINGS

A total of 41 patients who obtained at least 1 CGM reader and a minimum of a 30-day supply of sensors from the clinic were included in the review. The primary outcome resulted in a significant reduction in the mean (SD) first HbA1c level after CGM placements of -1.9% (2.5%) (P < .001) with a total of 10 and 22 patients with an HbA1c level <7% and 8%, respectively. This mean (SD) reduction in HbA1c level was also seen in both insulin-treated patients (-1.8% [2.8%], n = 30) and non-insulin-treated patients (-2% [2.8%], n=11). The largest reduction in the first HbA1c level after CGM placement was seen in those patients provided a CGM along with collaborative care with a clinical pharmacist. These patients saw a mean (SD) decrease of -2.5% [2.7%] (n = 26) in their HbA1c level with a mean (SD) decrease of -0.8% (1.6%) (n = 15) for those not comanaged by the clinical pharmacist.

IMPLICATIONS

The results of this study suggest that the use of CGM in the underserved population can lead to a significant improvement in glycemic control in patients with diabetes, regardless of treatment therapies used. Involving a multidisciplinary team in diabetes management, including clinical pharmacists, may further improve outcomes. Access to these devices in the underserved population may be crucial in reducing the risk of developing complications related to uncontrolled diabetes.

Blood glucose monitoring devices: current considerations

Measuring blood glucose concentrations via capillary (fingerprick) blood glucose monitoring or continuous (interstitial) glucose monitoring is an important aspect of management for many people with diabetes. Blood glucose monitoring informs patient self-management strategies, which can improve the patient's engagement in their own care and reduce barriers to achieving recommended blood glucose targets. Blood glucose monitoring also informs clinician-guided management plans. Compared to capillary blood glucose monitoring, continuous glucose monitoring in people using insulin significantly improves glycaemic metrics and is associated with improved patient-reported outcomes. Even with good glycaemic metrics, patients using continuous glucose monitoring should still have access to capillary blood glucose monitoring for correlation of hypoglycaemic readings when accuracy may be compromised or if there is a malfunction with the continuous blood glucose monitor.

Coverage for Continuous Glucose Monitoring for Individuals with Type 2 Diabetes Treated with Nonintensive Therapies: An Evidence-Based Approach to Policymaking

Numerous studies have demonstrated the clinical benefits of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) in individuals with type 1 diabetes (T1D) and type 2 diabetes (T2D) who are treated with intensive insulin regimens. Based on this evidence, CGM is now a standard of care for individuals within these diabetes populations and widely covered by commercial and public insurers. Moreover, recent clinical guidelines from the American Diabetes Association and American Association of Clinical Endocrinology now endorse CGM use in individuals treated with nonintensive insulin regimens. However, despite increasing evidence supporting CGM use for individuals treated with less-intensive insulin therapy or noninsulin medications, insurance coverage is limited or nonexistent. This narrative review reports key findings from recent randomized, observational, and retrospective studies investigating use of CGM in T2D individuals treated with basal insulin only and/or noninsulin therapies and presents an evidence-based rationale for expanding access to CGM within this population.

Beyond A1C: exploring continuous glucose monitoring metrics in managing diabetes

Hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) has long been considered a cornerstone of diabetes mellitus (DM) management, as both an indicator of average glycemia and a predictor of long-term complications among people with DM. However, HbA1c is subject to non-glycemic influences which confound interpretation and as a measure of average glycemia does not provide information regarding glucose trends or about the occurrence of hypoglycemia and/or hyperglycemia episodes. As such, solitary use of HbA1c, without accompanying glucose data, does not confer actionable information that can be harnessed to guide targeted therapy in many patients with DM. While conventional capillary blood glucose monitoring (BGM) sheds light on momentary glucose levels, in practical use the inherent infrequency of measurement precludes elucidation of glycemic trends or reliable detection of hypoglycemia or hyperglycemia episodes. In contrast, continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) data reveal glucose trends and potentially undetected hypo- and hyperglycemia patterns that can occur between discrete BGM measurements. The use of CGM has grown significantly over the past decades as an ever-expanding body of literature demonstrates a multitude of clinical benefits for people with DM. Continually improving CGM accuracy and ease of use have further fueled the widespread adoption of CGM. Furthermore, percent time in range correlates well with HbA1c, is accepted as a validated indicator of glycemia, and is associated with the risk of several DM complications. We explore the benefits and limitations of CGM use, the use of CGM in clinical practice, and the application of CGM to advanced diabetes technologies.

Expanding the Role of Continuous Glucose Monitoring in Modern Diabetes Care Beyond Type 1 Disease

Application of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) has moved diabetes care from a reactive to a proactive process, in which a person with diabetes can prevent episodes of hypoglycemia or hyperglycemia, rather than taking action only once low and high glucose are detected. Consequently, CGM devices are now seen as the standard of care for people with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM). Evidence now supports the use of CGM in people with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) on any treatment regimen, not just for those on insulin therapy. Expanding the application of CGM to include all people with T1DM or T2DM can support effective intensification of therapies to reduce glucose exposure and lower the risk of complications and hospital admissions, which are associated with high healthcare costs. All of this can be achieved while minimizing the risk of hypoglycemia and improving quality of life for people with diabetes. Wider application of CGM can also bring considerable benefits for women with diabetes during pregnancy and their children, as well as providing support for acute care of hospital inpatients who experience the adverse effects of hyperglycemia following admission and surgical procedures, as a consequence of treatment-related insulin resistance or reduced insulin secretion. By tailoring the application of CGM for daily or intermittent use, depending on the patient profile and their needs, one can ensure the cost-effectiveness of CGM in each setting. In this article we discuss the evidence-based benefits of expanding the use of CGM technology to include all people with diabetes, along with a diverse population of people with non-diabetic glycemic dysregulation.

Use of Flash Glucose Monitoring and Glycemic Control in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Not Treated with an Intensive Insulin Regimen: 1-Year Real-Life Retrospective Cohort Study

INTRODUCTION

Estimation of laboratory-derived glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) cannot be individually used to monitor clinically significant trends in glucose variability. Hence, clinicians advise use of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) devices such as the Freestyle Libre™ flash glucose monitoring system (FLASH) to optimize glycemic control by estimating glucose monitoring index (GMI) values, which convert mean glucose into an estimate of simultaneously measured laboratory HbA1c. This study aimed to investigate the sustainability of intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitoring (isCGM) in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) not on intensive insulin regimen, and correlations between GMI values obtained from isCGM and laboratory-derived HbA1c values.

METHODS

A retrospective review of 93 patients with T2DM not on intensive insulin regimen, using FLASH device, was conducted at a major tertiary hospital in Saudi Arabia, over 1 year of continuous device use. To determine the sustainability of isCGM, various glycemic markers such as average glucose and time in range were evaluated. Paired t test or Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used to assess differences in markers of glycemic control, and Pearson's correlation was used to determine correlations between HbA1c and GMI values.

RESULTS

Descriptive analysis shows the mean HbA1c value significantly decreased following continued use of isCGM. Pre-isCGM mean HbA1c value of 8.3% improved to 8.1% (p < 0.001) and 7.9% (p < 0.001) in the first 90 and last 90 days of device use, respectively. For both 90-day time periods, correlation analysis revealed a statistically significant positive correlation and linear regression between laboratory-derived HbA1c and GMI values (first 90 days r = 0.7999, p < 0.001; last 90 days r = 0.6651, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Continuous use of isCGM demonstrated reductions in HbA1c levels for patients with T2DM not on an intensive insulin regimen. The GMI values showed high levels of agreement with measured HbA1c, indicating their accuracy in glucose management.

Emerging Diabetes Technologies: Continuous Glucose Monitors/Artificial Pancreases

Over the past decade there have been many advances in diabetes technologies, such as continuous glucose monitors (CGM s), insulin-delivery devices, and hybrid closed loop systems . Now most CGMs (Medtronic-Guardian, Dexcom-G6, and Abbott-Libre-2) have MARD values of < 10%, in contrast to two decades ago when the MARD used to be > 20%. In addition, the majority of the new CGMs do not require calibrations, and the latest CGMs last for 10-14 days. An implantable 6-months CGM by Eversense-3 is now approved in the USA and Europe. Recently, the FDA approved Libre 3 which provides real-time glucose values every minute. Even though it is approved as an iCGM it is not interoperable with automatic-insulin-delivery (AID) systems. The newer CGMs that are likely to be launched in the next few months in the USA include the 10-11 days Dexcom G7 (60% smaller than the existing G6), and the 7-days Medtronic Guardian 4. Most of the newer CGM have several features like automatic initialization, easy insertion, predictive alarms, and alerts. It has also been noticed that an arm insertion site might have better accuracy than abdomen or other sites, like the buttock for kids. Lag time between YSI and different sensors have been reported differently, sometimes it is down to 2-3 min; however, in many instances, it is still 15-20 min, especially when the rate of change of glucose is > 2 mg/min. We believe that in the next decade there will be a significant increase in the number of people who use CGM for their day-to-day diabetes care.

[It's a new world: Improvement of diabetes therapy through digital and technical innovations]

Medical progress is increasingly characterized by digital and technical solutions that improve and facilitate treatment of our patients. Especially diabetes therapy is an ideal field for digital and technical solutions. The complexity of insulin therapy with the need to take multiple variables into account is a brilliant example for the use of digital support processes. This article gives an overview of the current state of telemedicine during corona pandemic and diabetes Apps to improve mental health and self support in people with diabetes as well as to simplify documentation. In the field of technical solutions at first continuous glucose monitoring and smart pen technology will be presented with their potential to increase time in range, reduce the frequency of hypoglycemia and improve glycemic management. As next topic automated insulin delivery as current gold standard and possibilities to further improve glycemic control in future. Last wearables in the diabetes field to improve diabetes therapy as well as the management of diabetes complications. All these aspects show the importance of technical and digital supported therapies for treatment and glycemic management in people with diabetes in Germany.

Glycemic Outcomes and Feature Set Engagement Among Real-Time Continuous Glucose Monitoring Users With Type 1 or Non-Insulin-Treated Type 2 Diabetes: Retrospective Analysis of Real-World Data

BACKGROUND

The benefits of real-time continuous glucose monitoring (RT-CGM) are well established for patients with type 1 diabetes (T1D) and patients with insulin-treated type 2 diabetes (T2D). However, the usage and effectiveness of RT-CGM in the context of non-insulin-treated T2D has not been well studied.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to assess glycemic metrics and rates of RT-CGM feature utilization in users with T1D and non-insulin-treated T2D.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed data from 33,685 US-based users of an RT-CGM system (Dexcom G6; Dexcom, Inc) who self-identified as having either T1D (n=26,706) or T2D and not using insulin (n=6979). Data included glucose concentrations, alarm settings, feature usage, and event logs.

RESULTS

The T1D cohort had lower proportions of glucose values in the 70 mg/dl to 180 mg/dl range than the T2D cohort (52.1% vs 70.8%, respectively), with more values indicating hypoglycemia or hyperglycemia and higher glycemic variability. Discretionary alarms were enabled by a large majority in both cohorts. The data sharing feature was used by 38.7% (10,327/26,706) of those with T1D and 10.4% (727/6979) of those with T2D, and the mean number of followers was higher in the T1D cohort. Large proportions of patients with T1D or T2D enabled and customized their glucose alerts. Retrospective analysis features were used by the majority in both cohorts (T1D: 15,783/26,706, 59.1%; T2D: 3751/6979, 53.8%).

CONCLUSIONS

Similar to patients with T1D, patients with non-insulin-treated T2D used RT-CGM system features, suggesting beneficial, routine engagement with data by patients and others involved in their care. Motivated patients with diabetes could benefit from RT-CGM coverage.

7. Diabetes Technology: Standards of Care in Diabetes-2023

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, a multidisciplinary 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.

Continuous glucose monitoring for children with hypoglycaemia: Evidence in 2023

In 2023, childhood hypoglycaemia remains a major public health problem and significant risk factor for consequent adverse neurodevelopment. Irrespective of the underlying cause, key elements of clinical management include the detection, prediction and prevention of episodes of hypoglycaemia. These tasks are increasingly served by Continuous Glucose Monitoring (CGM) devices that measure subcutaneous glucose at near-continuous frequency. While the use of CGM in type 1 diabetes is well established, the evidence for widespread use in rare hypoglycaemia disorders is less than convincing. However, in the few years since our last review there have been multiple developments and increased user feedback, requiring a review of clinical application. Despite advances in device technology, point accuracy of CGM remains low for children with non-diabetes hypoglycaemia. Simple provision of CGM devices has not replicated the efficacy seen in those with diabetes and is yet to show benefit. Machine learning techniques for hypoglycaemia prevention have so far failed to demonstrate sufficient prediction accuracy for real world use even in those with diabetes. Furthermore, access to CGM globally is restricted by costs kept high by the commercially-driven speed of technical innovation. Nonetheless, the ability of CGM to digitally phenotype disease groups has led to a better understanding of natural history of disease, facilitated diagnoses and informed changes in clinical management. Large CGM datasets have prompted re-evaluation of hypoglycaemia incidence and facilitated improved trial design. Importantly, an individualised approach and focus on the behavioural determinants of hypoglycaemia has led to real world reduction in hypoglycaemia. In this state of the art review, we critically analyse the updated evidence for use of CGM in non-diabetic childhood hypoglycaemia disorders since 2020 and provide suggestions for qualified use.

Important Decrease in Hospitalizations for Acute Diabetes Events Following FreeStyle Libre System Initiation in People with Type 2 Diabetes on Basal Insulin Therapy in France

Aims/Hypothesis: Initiation of insulin therapy in people with type 2 diabetes (T2DM) may be necessary to achieve glycemic targets but is associated with acute diabetes events (ADEs), including severe hypoglycemia (SH) or diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA). We assessed the impact of initiating FreeStyle Libre^® system (FSL) on hospitalizations for ADEs in people with T2DM on basal insulin only regimen±noninsulin antidiabetic drugs. Materials and Methods: A retrospective study of the French national Système National des Données de Santé reimbursement claims database (≈66 million French people) identified people with T2DM on basal insulin therapy receiving a first reimbursement of FSL between August 1, 2017 and December 31, 2018. Claims data for the 12 months before, and up to 24 months after FSL initiation, were analyzed. Hospitalizations for ADEs were identified, using ICD-10 codes as main or related diagnosis, for: SH events; DKA events; comas; and hyperglycemia-related admissions. Results: A total of 5933 people with T2DM on basal insulin therapy initiated FSL during the selection period. Of the patients, 78.9% were on basal insulin and other hypoglycemic agents. Among the 5933 patients identified, 2.01% had at least one hospitalization for any ADE in the year before FSL initiation, compared to 0.75% (1 year) and 0.60% (2 years). Reductions in ADEs were driven by 75% fewer DKA admissions, with a 44% reduction in SH admissions. These patterns of reduced ADEs persisted after 2 years, with a further 43% reduction in DKA rates. Conclusions/Interpretation: This study emphasizes the value of the FSL system in reducing ADEs in people with T2DM in France not on intensive insulin therapy and initially treated with basal-only insulin therapy.

Continuous glucose monitoring and metrics for clinical trials: an international consensus statement

Randomised controlled trials and other prospective clinical studies for novel medical interventions in people with diabetes have traditionally reported HbA1c as the measure of average blood glucose levels for the 3 months preceding the HbA1c test date. The use of this measure highlights the long-established correlation between HbA1c and relative risk of diabetes complications; the change in the measure, before and after the therapeutic intervention, is used by regulators for the approval of medications for diabetes. However, with the increasing use of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) in clinical practice, prospective clinical studies are also increasingly using CGM devices to collect data and evaluate glucose profiles among study participants, complementing HbA1c findings, and further assess the effects of therapeutic interventions on HbA1c. Data is collected by CGM devices at 1-5 min intervals, which obtains data on glycaemic excursions and periods of asymptomatic hypoglycaemia or hyperglycaemia (ie, details of glycaemic control that are not provided by HbA1c concentrations alone that are measured continuously and can be analysed in daily, weekly, or monthly timeframes). These CGM-derived metrics are the subject of standardised, internationally agreed reporting formats and should, therefore, be considered for use in all clinical studies in diabetes. The purpose of this consensus statement is to recommend the ways CGM data might be used in prospective clinical studies, either as a specified study endpoint or as supportive complementary glucose metrics, to provide clinical information that can be considered by investigators, regulators, companies, clinicians, and individuals with diabetes who are stakeholders in trial outcomes. In this consensus statement, we provide recommendations on how to optimise CGM-derived glucose data collection in clinical studies, including the specific glucose metrics and specific glucose metrics that should be evaluated. These recommendations have been endorsed by the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists, the American Diabetes Association, the Association of Diabetes Care and Education Specialists, DiabetesIndia, the European Association for the Study of Diabetes, the International Society for Pediatric and Adolescent Diabetes, the Japanese Diabetes Society, and the Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation. A standardised approach to CGM data collection and reporting in clinical trials will encourage the use of these metrics and enhance the interpretability of CGM data, which could provide useful information other than HbA1c for informing therapeutic and treatment decisions, particularly related to hypoglycaemia, postprandial hyperglycaemia, and glucose variability.

Reduced Rate of Acute Diabetes Events with Flash Glucose Monitoring Is Sustained for 2 Years After Initiation: Extended Outcomes from the RELIEF Study

Background: The RELIEF study has previously shown a fall in the rate of acute diabetes events (ADEs) in people living with type 1 diabetes (PwDT1) or people living with type 2 diabetes (PwDT2) in the 12 months after initiation of flash glucose monitoring (FLASH) in France. The 2-year follow-up has provided new insights on the frequency of ADEs, including severe hypoglycemia and diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA), during use of FLASH. Methods: The RELIEF study included 31,446 PwDT1 and 41,027 PwDT2 with a first delivery of FreeStyle Libre (FSL) between August 1 and December 31, 2017. Hospitalizations for DKA, severe hypoglycemia, diabetes-related coma, and hyperglycemia were recorded for the 12 months before and 24 months after FSL initiation. Persistence of the FSL system use was estimated through a Kaplan-Meier survival curve. Change in usual blood glucose monitoring was estimated through acquisition of blood glucose test strips. Results: In the 2 years after FSL initiation, hospitalizations for ADEs were reduced by 49% and by 48% in PwDT1 or PwDT2, respectively, driven by reductions in DKA. After 2 years, 88% of patients persisted with the system and estimated mean consumption of blood glucose test strips had fallen after 2 years by -82% and by -84% in type 1 diabetes mellitus and type 2 diabetes mellitus, respectively. Conclusion: Use of FSL consistently reduces the rates of hospitalization for ADEs, mainly DKA, 2 years after initiation, confirming this is not a transitory effect. Use of FSL also results in a clear and progressive drop in use of blood glucose test strips over the 2-year period.

Diabetes Technology Meeting 2021

Diabetes Technology Society hosted its annual Diabetes Technology Meeting on November 4 to November 6, 2021. This meeting brought together speakers to discuss various developments within the field of diabetes technology. Meeting topics included blood glucose monitoring, continuous glucose monitoring, novel sensors, direct-to-consumer telehealth, metrics for glycemia, software for diabetes, regulation of diabetes technology, diabetes data science, artificial pancreas, novel insulins, insulin delivery, skin trauma, metabesity, precision diabetes, diversity in diabetes technology, use of diabetes technology in pregnancy, and green diabetes. A live demonstration on a mobile app to monitor diabetic foot wounds was presented.

Association Between Real-Time Continuous Glucose Monitor Use and Diabetes-Related Medical Costs for Patients with Type 2 Diabetes

Little is known about the impact of real-time continuous glucose monitoring (rtCGM) on diabetes-related medical costs within the type 2 diabetes (T2D) population. A retrospective analysis of administrative claims data from the Optum Research Database was conducted. Changes in diabetes-related health care resource utilization costs were expressed as per-patient-per-month (PPPM) costs. A total of 571 T2D patients (90% insulin treated) met study inclusion criteria. Average PPPM for diabetes-related medical costs decreased by -$424 (95% confidence interval [CI] -$816 to -$31, P = 0.035) after initiating rtCGM. These reductions were driven, in part, by reductions in diabetes-related inpatient medical costs: -$358 (95% CI -$706 to -$10, P = 0.044). Inpatient hospital admissions were reduced on average -0.006 PPPM (P = 0.057) and total hospital days were reduced an average of -0.042 PPPM (P = 0.139). These findings provide real-world evidence that rtCGM use was associated with diabetes-related health care resource utilization cost reductions in patients with T2D.

Reductions in HbA1c with Flash Glucose Monitoring Are Sustained for up to 24 Months: A Meta-Analysis of 75 Real-World Observational Studies

INTRODUCTION

Real-world evidence (RWE) confirms that reductions in HbA1c for children and adults with type 1 diabetes (T1DM) and adults with type 2 diabetes (T2DM) are associated with use of the FreeStyle Libre system. This current meta-analysis aims to investigate whether HbA1c benefits are sustained over 24 months and to identify patterns of change in HbA1c for users of the FreeStyle Libre system for people living with T1DM or T2DM.

METHODS

A bibliographic search up to December 2020 identified 75 studies reporting data on change in lab HbA1c in 30,478 participants with type 1 (n = 28,063; 62 trials) or type 2 diabetes (n = 2415; 13 trials) using the FreeStyle Libre system, including observations on children, adolescents and adults. Meta-analysis was performed using a random effects model.

RESULTS

Reductions in HbA1c at 3-4 months were similar for adults with T1DM (- 0.53%, 95% CI - 0.69 to - 0.38) or with T2DM (- 0.45%, 95% CI - 0.57 to - 0.33), continuing through 4.5-7.5 months in T1DM (- 0.42%, 95% CI - 0.58 to - 0.27) and in T2DM (- 0.59%, 95% CI - 0.80 to - 0.39). Meta-regression analysis shows that higher starting HbA1c is correlated with greater reductions in HbA1c in T1DM and in T2DM. These patterns of change in HbA1c were sustained for 24 months in T1DM and for at least 12 months in T2DM.

CONCLUSIONS

Meta-analysis of RWE confirms that using the FreeStyle Libre system is associated with significant reductions in HbA1c for adults with T1DM or with T2DM. Reductions are greater for people with higher baseline HbA1c and are sustained for 24 and 12 months in T1DM and TD2M respectively.

How use of continuous glucose monitoring can address therapeutic inertia in primary care

A significant proportion of individuals with diabetes have suboptimal glycemic management. Studies have shown that persistent hyperglycemia significantly increases the risks for both acute and long-term microvascular and macrovascular complications of diabetes. A key contributor to suboptimal glycemic management is therapeutic inertia in which clinicians delay intensifying therapy when patients are not meeting their glycemic goals. During the past five years, an increasing number of individuals with type 1 diabetes (T1D) and insulin-treated type 2 diabetes (T2D) have adopted use of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) for daily measurement of glucose levels. As demonstrated in numerous clinical trials and real-world observational studies, use of CGM improves glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) and reduces the occurrence and severity of hypoglycemia. However, for primary care clinicians who are unfamiliar with using CGM, integrating this technology into clinical practice can be daunting. In this article, we discuss the benefits and rationale for using CGM compared with traditional blood glucose monitoring (BGM), review the evidence supporting the clinical value of CGM in patients with T1D and T2D, and describe how use of CGM in primary care can facilitate appropriate and more timely therapy adjustments.

A guide for the use of LibreView digital diabetes platform in clinical practice: Expert paper of the Italian Working Group on Diabetes and Technology

Wider access to continuous glucose monitoring systems, including flash glucose monitoring, has enabled people with diabetes to achieve lower HbA1c levels and reduce the amount of time they spend in hypoglycaemia or hyperglycaemia, and has improved their quality of life. An International Consensus Panel proposed different target glucose ranges and recommendations according to different ages and situations (adults, young people and children with type 1 or type 2 diabetes, as well as elderly people who are at higher risk of hypoglycaemia, and women with diabetes during pregnancy). In this expert opinion, we interpret the international recommendations in the context of established clinical practice for diabetes care, and propose three different step-by-step algorithms to help the healthcare professionals use the most innovative glucose metrics, including time in glucose ranges, glucose management indicator, coefficient of variation, and ambulatory glucose profile. In detail, we focus on glucose metrics as measured by the FreeStyle Libre system and as visualized on the LibreView digital diabetes platform to support appropriate interpretation of flash glucose monitoring data. This is specifically structured for healthcare professionals and general practitioners who may have a low level of confidence with diabetes technology, with the aim of optimizing diabetes management, ensuring effective use of healthcare resources and to maximise outcomes for people with diabetes.

Ambulatory Glucose Profile (AGP) Report in Daily Care of Patients with Diabetes: Practical Tips and Recommendations

The ambulatory glucose profile (AGP) is now established as the standardised, practical one-page report for graphically presenting a summary of glycaemic control status in patients with diabetes who use continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) systems as part of their daily diabetes care. The AGP report provides both a visual and a statistical summary of the glucose metrics that, as agreed in the 2019 international consensus for assessing glycaemic control, should be analysed in all people with diabetes who are using CGM systems. The AGP report can be analysed in a systematic fashion to understand current glycaemic control and to monitor, in real time, the impact of adjustments to therapy in both type 1 diabetes and type 2 diabetes. Here we provide a practical guide to the glycaemic measures that are summarised in the AGP Report and illustrate the essential components of an AGP review in a series of hypothetical, real-world, patient-centred case studies (see Supplementary Materials).

Expert Roundtable on Continuous Glucose Monitoring

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to define expert opinion on Continuous Glucose Monitoring (CGM) in persons with type 2 diabetes mellitus (PWDM2), including its advantages, barriers, and best clinical practices for initiation, patient-clinician communication, and data management.

METHODS

A series of virtual discussions was held to recommend improvements to clinical practice and design clinical tools for primary care clinicians. Participants included endocrinologists, primary care physicians, physician assistants (PAs), advanced practice nurses (APNs), and diabetes care and education specialists.

RESULTS

The expert panels recommended CGM as a supplement to blood glucose monitoring (BGM) and hemoglobin A1c for managing persons with diabetes (PWD). CGM can help predict potential pitfalls in glycemic management--including hypo and hyperglycemic excursions--which directly influence lifestyle changes, medication initiation, and dosing decisions. A toolkit was designed with practical guidance on integration of CGM into clinical practice, interpretation of results, clinical guidelines, a patient action plan, and other useful management tools.

CONCLUSION

This review summarizes findings from a roundtable discussion with endocrinology and primary care clinicians, a discussion of the advantages and challenges with CGM, and clinical approaches to improving care of persons with diabetes. CGM offers more detailed tracking of glucose than BGM or A1c and it can detect asymptomatic hypoglycemia. Specialized education of providers, cost to patient and providers, and data management remain barriers to widespread adoption of CGM for PWD.

Continuous glucose monitoring in primary care - are we there?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

In this review, we examine the expanding role of continuous glucose monitoring in glycaemic management in primary care.

RECENT FINDINGS

Improving technology and decreasing cost have increased the uptake of use of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) for glycaemic management in primary care, wherein most diabetes is managed. Optimized use of this technology, however, will require a convergence of several factors. Availability of devices for people with diabetes, availability of data at the time of clinical interactions, and expertise in interpretation of CGM and ambulatory glucose profile (AGP) data, as well as optimization of therapies, will be required. Significant progress has been made in all three areas in recent years, yet creating systems of support for widespread use of CGM in primary care remains an area of active investigation.

SUMMARY

There has been significant uptake in the use of CGM in the management of diabetes in primary care. Optimized use, however, requires both access to CGM data and the expertise to use the data. Although promising strategies have emerged, the task of generalizing these strategies to the broad population of primary care in America is ongoing. CGM technology holds significant potential for improving glycaemic management in primary care, yet important work remains to leverage the full potential of this promising technology.

Use of Retrospective Continuous Glucose Monitoring Data Is Underrated and Underused

Access to real-time glucose data in real time allows users to make informed decisions about their insulin dosages, appropriate carbohydrate intake, exercise, and other health behaviors. Programmable alarms and alerts warn users about current and/or impending acute glycemic events. However, the value and utility of retrospective data analysis for clinical decision-making have gone mostly unrecognized. This article presents a series of patient case examples that illustrate how our use of retrospective data enables us to identify and effectively address patterns of problematic glycemia.

Flash glucose monitoring in type 2 diabetes managed with basal insulin in the USA: a retrospective real-world chart review study and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Evidence supporting use of continuous glucose monitoring in type 2 diabetes treated with basal insulin is unclear. This real-world study aimed to assess the impact on glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) of flash glucose monitoring use in adults with type 2 diabetes managed with basal insulin.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

Medical records were reviewed for adult individuals with type 2 diabetes using basal insulin for ≥1 year with or without additional antihyperglycemic medication, HbA1c 8.0%-12.0% prior to FreeStyle Libre Flash Glucose Monitoring use for ≥90 days and an HbA1c measurement recorded between 90 and 194 days after device use. Exclusion criteria included utilization of bolus insulin. Meta-analysis data are from the current study (USA) and a similar Canadian cohort.

RESULTS

Medical record analysis (n=100) from 8 USA study sites showed significant HbA1c decrease of 1.4%±1.3%, from 9.4%±1.0% at baseline to 8.0%±1.2% after device use, p<0.0001 (mean±SD).Meta-analysis of medical records from USA and Canada sites (n=191) showed HbA1c significantly decreased by 1.1%±0.14% (mean±SE), from baseline 9.2%±1.0% to 8.1%±1.1%, p≤0.0001, with moderate to high heterogeneity between sites (Q=43.9, I²=74.9, p<0.0001) explained by differences in baseline HbA1c between sites.The HbA1c improvement in both groups was observed by age group, body mass index, duration of insulin use and sex at birth.

CONCLUSIONS

In a real-world retrospective USA study and a meta-analysis of a larger USA and Canada cohort, HbA1c significantly reduced in basal insulin-treated type 2 diabetes, without bolus insulin initiation and following the commencement of flash glucose monitoring technology.

Remote Pharmacist-Assisted Flash Continuous Glucose Monitoring Improves Glycemic Outcomes in Patients With Poorly Controlled Diabetes: A Retrospective Case Series

This article reports on a retrospective case series evaluating glycemic outcomes using a flash continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) system in pharmacist-managed diabetes cases. The flash CGM system was used during initial assessment of patients' diabetes control and then continued throughout the intervention to ensure the safety and efficacy of the glycemic interventions. The Cloud-based CGM software was used to monitor patients remotely and assess their glycemic metrics. Action plans were created to address areas of most pressing concern, ensuring reduction or elimination of hypoglycemia, correction of hyperglycemia, and minimization of glycemic variability. In these complex cases, use of the flash CGM system in conjunction with lifestyle and medication interventions safely and effectively improved diabetes management and achieved targeted glucose outcomes.

7. Diabetes Technology: Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes-2022

The American Diabetes Association (ADA) "Standards of Medical 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, a multidisciplinary expert committee (https://doi.org/10.2337/dc22-SPPC), 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, please refer to the Standards of Care Introduction (https://doi.org/10.2337/dc22-SINT). Readers who wish to comment on the Standards of Care are invited to do so at professional.diabetes.org/SOC.

Real-World Studies Support Use of Continuous Glucose Monitoring in Type 1 and Type 2 Diabetes Independently of Treatment Regimen

Numerous randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have demonstrated the glycemic benefits of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) in management of type 1 diabetes (T1D) and type 2 diabetes. Although RCTs remain the gold standard clinical study design, findings from these trials do not necessarily reflect the effectiveness of CGM or reveal the feasibility and wider applications for use in broader real-life settings. This review evaluates recent real-world evidence (RWE) demonstrating the value of CGM to improve clinical outcomes, such as avoidance of severe hypoglycemic and hyperglycemic crises, and improved measures of psychological health and quality of life. Additionally, this review considers recent RWE for the role of CGM to enhance health care resource utilization, including prediction of T1D and applications in gestational diabetes, chronic kidney disease, and monitoring during surgery.

Landscape of Continuous Glucose Monitoring (CGM) and Integrated CGM: Accuracy Considerations

Continuous glucose monitoring devices have significantly improved in many respects compared with earlier versions. As sensor accuracy improved, U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved a nonadjunctive indication for use that no longer required confirmatory blood glucose monitoring. This article discusses the performance characteristics and regulatory classifications for the current systems that are relevant to informed clinical decision-making.

Health Care Disparities in Use of Continuous Glucose Monitoring

Numerous studies have demonstrated that use of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) improves glycemic control and reduces diabetes-related hospitalizations and emergency room service utilization in individuals with diabetes who are treated with intensive insulin regimens. Recent studies have revealed disparities in use of CGM within racially and ethnically diverse and lower socioeconomic populations, leading to underutilization of CGM in these populations. This article reviews the scope and impact of these disparities on utilization of CGM and explores the factors that may be contributing to this issue.

Just Because You Can, Doesn't Mean You Should … Now. A Practical Approach to Counseling Persons with Diabetes on Use of Optional CGM Alarms

Advances in glucose monitoring technologies have led to the development of different types of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) platforms: traditional CGM and flash CGM. Both platforms provide critical glucose data that enable persons with diabetes (PwDs) to make more informed decisions in their self-management. Until recently, a key advantage of traditional CGM over flash CGM was the availability of automatic alarms that warn users about current or impending hypoglycemia and hyperglycemia. However, with the introduction of the FreeStyle Libre 2 (FSL2) system (Abbott Diabetes Care, Alameda, CA), PwD can now utilize flash CGM with the option to set low and high glycemic thresholds and receive alarms when these thresholds are crossed. In addition, having the option to use or not use the alarms may attract previous traditional CGM users who grew fatigued by constant alarms. However, despite the additional layer of safety that alarms provide, many PwD are reluctant to switch from self-monitoring of blood glucose to CGM due to concerns about how alarms could impact the quality of their daily lives. This reluctance is heightened by their perceptions that use of alarms is mandatory. Because the functionality of the FSL2 alarms differs from current traditional CGM devices, it is important that clinicians become familiar with these differences. Moreover, clinicians will be challenged to help PwD overcome their concerns about the use of alarms. This article presents a comprehensive description of the FSL2 alarms function and provides guidance to clinicians when counseling PwDs about the strengths, limitations, and various ways that the FSL2 alarms can be used in daily diabetes self-management.

Evolving Use of Continuous Glucose Monitoring Beyond Intensive Insulin Treatment

Numerous studies have demonstrated the clinical benefits of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) use in individuals with type 1 diabetes and type 2 diabetes (T2D) who are treated with intensive insulin therapy. A growing body of evidence suggests that CGM use may also confer similar glycemic benefits in T2D individuals who are treated with less-intensive therapies. Investigators are also exploring the potential use of CGM as an aid in weight management. This article reviews the continuing evolution of CGM, focusing on how CGM may be used to improve glycemic control and promote adoption of desired health behaviors within broader T2D and prediabetes populations.