Literature DB >> 19279304

Validation of continuous glucose monitoring in children and adolescents with cystic fibrosis: a prospective cohort study.

Stephen M P O'Riordan1, Peter Hindmarsh, Nathan R Hill, David R Matthews, Sherly George, Peter Greally, Gerard Canny, Dubhfeasa Slattery, Nuala Murphy, Edna Roche, Colm Costigan, Hilary Hoey.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To validate continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) in children and adolescents with cystic fibrosis. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Paired oral glucose tolerance tests (OGTTs) and CGM monitoring was undertaken in 102 children and adolescents with cystic fibrosis (age 9.5-19.0 years) at baseline (CGM1) and after 12 months (CGM2). CGM validity was assessed by reliability, reproducibility, and repeatability.
RESULTS: CGM was reliable with a Bland-Altman agreement between CGM and OGTT of 0.81 mmol/l (95% CI for bias +/- 2.90 mmol/l) and good correlation between the two (r = 0.74-0.9; P < 0.01). CGM was reproducible with no significant differences in the coefficient of variation of the CGM assessment between visits and repeatable with a mean difference between CGM1 and CGM2 of 0.09 mmol/l (95% CI for difference +/- 0.46 mmol/l) and a discriminant ratio of 13.0 and 15.1, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: In this cohort of children and adolescents with cystic fibrosis, CGM performed on two occasions over a 12-month period was reliable, reproducible, and repeatable.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19279304      PMCID: PMC2681016          DOI: 10.2337/dc08-1925

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Diabetes Care        ISSN: 0149-5992            Impact factor:   19.112


Little is known about the evolution of diabetes and pancreatic disorders in adults with cystic fibrosis (CF) and less in children and adolescents with cystic fibrosis. Patients with CF-related diabetes have a sixfold increase in morbidity and mortality (1). The diagnosis of CF-related diabetes is usually asymptomatic, lying dormant for 2–6 years before diagnosis (1–3). Identification of disordered glucose metabolism before major β-cell loss may be beneficial, since early insulin therapy improves lung function and reduces the number of acute respiratory infections (4,5). Standard methods of glycemic assessment, random or fasting glucose concentrations, and/or oral glucose tolerance tests (OGTTs) underdiagnose CF-related diabetes (6). Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) in the normal glucose tolerance (NGT) and impaired glucose tolerance (IGT) stages may allow earlier diagnosis of CF-related diabetes (7), but before this methodology can be applied to children and adolescents with CF, validation is required. Consequently, we have assessed CGM in terms of reliability, repeatability, and reproducibility in 102 children and adolescents with CF on two occasions over 24 months.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

A prospective multicenter cohort study of 102 genetically confirmed children and adolescents with CF (48 males, 54 females) aged 9.5–19.0 years was conducted over 24 months. All children underwent “paired testing,” with OGTT and CGM and the initial OGTT used to classify children and adolescents with CF into three groups: NGT, IGT, or CF-related diabetes based on World Health Organization criteria (8). CGM (Medtronic Minimed CGM Gold; Medtronic Diabetes, Watford, U.K.) was recorded at the start of the study (CGM1 visit 1) and after a minimum of 12 months (CGM2 visit 2). Blood glucose concentration was measured using a YSI compatible CX7 Delta Analyzer. After the OGTT was complete, the CGM device remained in situ in the home environment for 72 h on all patients. Patients entered a minimum of four self-monitored blood glucose samples (One Touch Ultra meter; LifeScan, Milpitas, CA) for daily CGM calibration. Ethical approval was obtained from the ethics committees of the three participating hospitals. The study protocol wascarried out in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki.

Statistical analysis

All data were extracted from the Medtronic Mini Med Solutions CGM sensor, MMT-730 version 3.0c (3.0.128). Mean and SD of the interstitial glucose concentrations for all CGM recordings were derived. Analysis was performed in SPSS version 15. Validity of CGM in children and adolescents with CF was assessed by determination of reliability, reproducibility, and repeatability. Reliability was assessed by Bland-Altman analysis of agreement (9,10) along with Pearson's correlation coefficient. Reproducibility tested the null hypothesis that the mean difference between the coefficients of variation (CVs) of observations was zero using a paired Student's t test. Repeatability was derived from Bland-Altman analysis and calculation of a discriminant ratio (DR) (11). Data are expressed as mean values with 95% CIs where appropriate. Significance was set at the 5% level.

RESULTS

A total of 104 out of 160 children and adolescents with CF (aged 9.5–19.0 years) were studied. A total of 102 valid CGM results were obtained at CGM1 and 92 at CGM2. The average number of valid CGM sensor readings used was 710 (range 499–1,410). Mean interstitial CGM glucose for all children and adolescents with CF was 6.7 ± 2.3 mmol/l (means ± SD) on CGM1 and 7.0 ± 2.6 mmol/l CGM2. Mean interstitial CGM glucose for NGT, IGT, and CF-related diabetes is shown in Table 1. All values were significantly higher than in normal healthy nondiabetic subjects (mean 5.1 ± 0.7 mmol/l, P < 0.0001).
Table 1

Validity of CGM at visit 1 (CGM1) and visit 2 (CGM2) in 102 children and adolescents with cystic fibrosis (n = 102)

NGT*
IGT*
CFRD*
Control subjects
CGM1CGM2CGM1CGM2CGM1CGM2CGM
Interstitial glucose (mmol/l)6.25 ± 1.846.35 ± 1.856.97 ± 2.656.56 ± 2.607.97 ± 3.298.03 ± 3.435.10 ± 0.71
CV (%)23.225.525.028.537.632.315.3
DR10.19.110.37.610.919.9NA

Data are mean ± SD, percent, and DR. Validity is based on reliability, reproducibility, and repeatability measures.

*The baseline glucose tolerance category is based on standard oral glucose tolerance testing 2-h glucose concentrations: NGT <7.8, IGT 7.8–11, and CFRD >11.1 (8). Normal healthy control subject data shown to be significantly different from all children and adolescents with CF;

†P < 0.001.

Validity of CGM at visit 1 (CGM1) and visit 2 (CGM2) in 102 children and adolescents with cystic fibrosis (n = 102) Data are mean ± SD, percent, and DR. Validity is based on reliability, reproducibility, and repeatability measures. *The baseline glucose tolerance category is based on standard oral glucose tolerance testing 2-h glucose concentrations: NGT <7.8, IGT 7.8–11, and CFRD >11.1 (8). Normal healthy control subject data shown to be significantly different from all children and adolescents with CF; †P < 0.001.

Validitation of CGM in CF

Reliability.

Bland and Altman analysis revealed a mean difference between CGM glucose and OGTT glucose of 0.81 ± 1.47 mmol/l with a 95% CI of the bias ± 2.90 mmol/l. A significant correlation was found between glucose measured by CGM and the blood glucose at five time points in a standard OGTT (r = 0.74–0.91, P < 0.01).

Reproducibility.

Reproducibility was assessed by comparing CVs at five different time points of OGTT and within the subgroups (Table 1). There were no significant differences in the CVs of the CGM assessment between visits, irrespective of glucose tolerance category.

Repeatability.

The mean difference between CGM1 and CGM2 interstitial glucose concentrations was 0.09 ± 2.38 mmol/l with 95% CI for the difference of ± 0.46 mmol/l. The DRs (the variability of an individual to the variability of the group) for CGM1 and CGM2 were 13.0 and 15.1, respectively. Subgroup DRs are shown in Table 1 and indicate that CGM has the ability to identify subjects with high variability, such as CF-related diabetes, within this cohort of children and adolescents with CF.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates that CGM is a valid method for assessing glycemia in children and adolescents with CF, extending similar observations in adults with CF (7). The validation of CGM in children and adolescents with CF is essential before other prospective research can be undertaken with CGM in children andadolescents with cystic fibrosis and is warrantedbecause of the higher glucose concentrations observed in these patients compared with the general population. As expected, there was a linear correlation between five-point OGTT plasma blood glucose and the corresponding CGM glucose readings (r = 0.74–0.91). Rather than use correlation or Clarke error grid analysis, which both describe association, we used Bland-Altman analysis of agreement (9,10). The mean difference between the two methods was 0.81 mmol/l with a 95% CI ± 2.90 mmol/l, which is a reasonably acceptable bias for clinical practice. CGM was reproducible in children with CF with varying degrees of glucose intolerance, since there were no significant differences in the CVs of the CGM assessment between visits, irrespective of diagnosis. Finally, we have demonstrated that CGM was repeatable as the mean difference between CGM1, and CGM2 was 0.09 mmol/l. Further, all DRs were >1, indicating that CGM has the ability to discriminate between different subjects and allow comparison between subjects. In conclusion, CGM is a valid measure of glycemia in children and adolescents with CF. These observations suggest that CGM is not influenced by the CF chloride channel defect and has become a useful tool for the assessment of glycemia in children and adolescents with CF.
  10 in total

1.  Clinical improvement in cystic fibrosis with early insulin treatment.

Authors:  L Dobson; A T Hattersley; S Tiley; S Elworthy; P J Oades; C D Sheldon
Journal:  Arch Dis Child       Date:  2002-11       Impact factor: 3.791

2.  Validation of interstitial fluid continuous glucose monitoring in cystic fibrosis.

Authors:  Lee Dobson; Christopher D Sheldon; Andrew T Hattersley
Journal:  Diabetes Care       Date:  2003-06       Impact factor: 19.112

3.  Discrimination, adjusted correlation, and equivalence of imprecise tests: application to glucose tolerance.

Authors:  J Levy; R Morris; M Hammersley; R Turner
Journal:  Am J Physiol       Date:  1999-02

4.  Regression analysis.

Authors:  J M Bland; D J Altman
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1986-04-19       Impact factor: 79.321

5.  Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement.

Authors:  J M Bland; D G Altman
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1986-02-08       Impact factor: 79.321

6.  Diabetes mellitus associated with cystic fibrosis.

Authors:  S M Finkelstein; C L Wielinski; G R Elliott; W J Warwick; J Barbosa; S C Wu; D J Klein
Journal:  J Pediatr       Date:  1988-03       Impact factor: 4.406

Review 7.  Diagnosis, screening, and management of cystic fibrosis-related diabetes.

Authors:  Antoinette Moran
Journal:  Curr Diab Rep       Date:  2002-04       Impact factor: 4.810

8.  Conventional measures underestimate glycaemia in cystic fibrosis patients.

Authors:  L Dobson; C D Sheldon; A T Hattersley
Journal:  Diabet Med       Date:  2004-07       Impact factor: 4.359

9.  Influence of the development of diabetes mellitus on clinical status in patients with cystic fibrosis.

Authors:  S Lanng; B Thorsteinsson; J Nerup; C Koch
Journal:  Eur J Pediatr       Date:  1992-09       Impact factor: 3.183

10.  Diabetes mellitus in cystic fibrosis: effect of insulin therapy on lung function and infections.

Authors:  S Lanng; B Thorsteinsson; J Nerup; C Koch
Journal:  Acta Paediatr       Date:  1994-08       Impact factor: 2.299

  10 in total
  18 in total

1.  Highlights of the North American Cystic Fibrosis Conference 2009.

Authors:  Andrew M Jones; Jennifer Helm; Ruth Richmond; Emily Mason-Smith; Amanda Brennan
Journal:  J R Soc Med       Date:  2010-07       Impact factor: 5.344

2.  Analysis: accuracy performance of the Medtronic NexSensor for 6 days in an inpatient setting using abdomen and buttocks insertion sites.

Authors:  Mariela Glandt; Itamar Raz
Journal:  J Diabetes Sci Technol       Date:  2011-03-01

3.  Normal reference range for mean tissue glucose and glycemic variability derived from continuous glucose monitoring for subjects without diabetes in different ethnic groups.

Authors:  Nathan R Hill; Nick S Oliver; Pratik Choudhary; Jonathan C Levy; Peter Hindmarsh; David R Matthews
Journal:  Diabetes Technol Ther       Date:  2011-06-29       Impact factor: 6.118

4.  Continuous Glucose Monitoring and HbA1c in Cystic Fibrosis: Clinical Correlations and Implications for CFRD Diagnosis.

Authors:  Kevin J Scully; Jordan S Sherwood; Kimberly Martin; Melanie Ruazol; Peter Marchetti; Mary Larkin; Hui Zheng; Gregory S Sawicki; Ahmet Uluer; Isabel Neuringer; Lael M Yonker; Leonard Sicilian; Deborah J Wexler; Melissa S Putman
Journal:  J Clin Endocrinol Metab       Date:  2022-03-24       Impact factor: 5.958

5.  The effect of elexacaftor/tezacaftor/ivacaftor (ETI) on glycemia in adults with cystic fibrosis.

Authors:  Kevin J Scully; Peter Marchetti; Gregory S Sawicki; Ahmet Uluer; Manuela Cernadas; Rebecca E Cagnina; John C Kennedy; Melissa S Putman
Journal:  J Cyst Fibros       Date:  2021-09-14       Impact factor: 5.482

6.  Prospectively evaluating maternal and fetal outcomes in the era of CFTR modulators: the MAYFLOWERS observational clinical trial study design.

Authors:  Raksha Jain; Amalia Magaret; Phuong T Vu; Jill M VanDalfsen; Ashley Keller; Alexandra Wilson; Melissa S Putman; Nicole Mayer-Hamblett; Charles R Esther; Jennifer L Taylor-Cousar
Journal:  BMJ Open Respir Res       Date:  2022-06

7.  The Effect of Control IQ Hybrid Closed Loop Technology on Glycemic Control in Adolescents and Adults with Cystic Fibrosis-Related Diabetes.

Authors:  Kevin J Scully; Gurunanthan Palani; Hui Zheng; Amir Moheet; Melissa S Putman
Journal:  Diabetes Technol Ther       Date:  2022-05-12       Impact factor: 7.337

Review 8.  Continuous glucose monitoring in children and adolescents.

Authors:  Robert Henry Slover
Journal:  Curr Diab Rep       Date:  2012-10       Impact factor: 4.810

Review 9.  Low glycaemic index dietary interventions in youth with cystic fibrosis: a systematic review and discussion of the clinical implications.

Authors:  Ben W R Balzer; Christie L Graham; Maria E Craig; Hiran Selvadurai; Kim C Donaghue; Jennie C Brand-Miller; Kate S Steinbeck
Journal:  Nutrients       Date:  2012-04-18       Impact factor: 5.717

10.  Real-time continuous glucose monitoring in critically ill patients: a prospective randomized trial.

Authors:  Ulrike Holzinger; Joanna Warszawska; Reinhard Kitzberger; Marlene Wewalka; Wolfgang Miehsler; Harald Herkner; Christian Madl
Journal:  Diabetes Care       Date:  2009-12-10       Impact factor: 19.112

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.