Literature DB >> 31096765

Simple Post-Processing of Continuous Glucose Monitoring Measurements Improves Endpoints in Clinical Trials.

Morten Hasselstrøm Jensen1,2, Claus Dethlefsen3, Ole Hejlesen2, Peter Vestergaard1,4,5.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) is a powerful tool to be considered both in clinical practice and clinical trials. However, CGM has been criticized for being inaccurate for many reasons including a physiological delay. This study sought to investigate the current delay issue and propose a simple post-processing procedure.
METHOD: More than a million hours of the Dexcom G4 CGM from 472 subjects investigated in a state-of-the-art clinical trial were analyzed by time shifting the CGM measurements and comparing them to plasma glucose (PG) measurements. The resultant CGM measurements were then assessed in relation to real-world clinical research endpoints.
RESULTS: A CGM time shift of -9 minutes was optimal and reduced mean absolute relative difference (MARD) statistically significantly with 1.0% point. The MARD reduction resulted in better clinical research endpoints of hypoglycemia and postprandial glucose increments.
CONCLUSIONS: The delay in CGM is still an issue. The delay in this study was identified to be 9 minutes compared to PG. With a simple post-processing approach of time shifting the CGM measurements with -9 minutes, it was possible to obtain a statistically significantly lower MARD and subsequently obtain clinical research endpoints of improved validity.

Entities:  

Keywords:  clinical trials; continuous glucose monitoring; delay; diabetes; endpoints; hypoglycemia

Year:  2019        PMID: 31096765      PMCID: PMC7645147          DOI: 10.1177/1932296819848721

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Diabetes Sci Technol        ISSN: 1932-2968


  20 in total

1.  Use of subcutaneous interstitial fluid glucose to estimate blood glucose: revisiting delay and sensor offset.

Authors:  Kerstin Rebrin; Norman F Sheppard; Garry M Steil
Journal:  J Diabetes Sci Technol       Date:  2010-09-01

2.  Time lag of glucose from intravascular to interstitial compartment in type 1 diabetes.

Authors:  Ananda Basu; Simmi Dube; Sona Veettil; Michael Slama; Yogish C Kudva; Thomas Peyser; Rickey E Carter; Claudio Cobelli; Rita Basu
Journal:  J Diabetes Sci Technol       Date:  2014-10-10

3.  Rate-of-Change Dependence of the Performance of Two CGM Systems During Induced Glucose Swings.

Authors:  Stefan Pleus; Michael Schoemaker; Karin Morgenstern; Günther Schmelzeisen-Redeker; Cornelia Haug; Manuela Link; Eva Zschornack; Guido Freckmann
Journal:  J Diabetes Sci Technol       Date:  2015-04-07

4.  FreeStyle Libre and Dexcom G4 Platinum sensors: Accuracy comparisons during two weeks of home use and use during experimentally induced glucose excursions.

Authors:  F Boscari; S Galasso; A Facchinetti; M C Marescotti; V Vallone; A M L Amato; A Avogaro; D Bruttomesso
Journal:  Nutr Metab Cardiovasc Dis       Date:  2017-11-11       Impact factor: 4.222

Review 5.  Continuous Glucose Monitoring: A Review of Recent Studies Demonstrating Improved Glycemic Outcomes.

Authors:  David Rodbard
Journal:  Diabetes Technol Ther       Date:  2017-06       Impact factor: 6.118

6.  Fast-Acting Insulin Aspart Improves Glycemic Control in Basal-Bolus Treatment for Type 1 Diabetes: Results of a 26-Week Multicenter, Active-Controlled, Treat-to-Target, Randomized, Parallel-Group Trial (onset 1).

Authors:  David Russell-Jones; Bruce W Bode; Christophe De Block; Edward Franek; Simon R Heller; Chantal Mathieu; Athena Philis-Tsimikas; Ludger Rose; Vincent C Woo; Anne Birk Østerskov; Tina Graungaard; Richard M Bergenstal
Journal:  Diabetes Care       Date:  2017-03-29       Impact factor: 19.112

7.  The accuracy of the GlucoWatch G2 biographer in children with type 1 diabetes: results of the diabetes research in children network (DirecNet) accuracy study.

Authors: 
Journal:  Diabetes Technol Ther       Date:  2003       Impact factor: 6.118

Review 8.  Improving the Clinical Value and Utility of CGM Systems: Issues and Recommendations: A Joint Statement of the European Association for the Study of Diabetes and the American Diabetes Association Diabetes Technology Working Group.

Authors:  John R Petrie; Anne L Peters; Richard M Bergenstal; Reinhard W Holl; G Alexander Fleming; Lutz Heinemann
Journal:  Diabetes Care       Date:  2017-10-25       Impact factor: 19.112

Review 9.  Self-measurement of Blood Glucose and Continuous Glucose Monitoring - Is There Only One Future?

Authors:  Lutz Heinemann; Andreas Stuhr; Adam Brown; Guido Freckmann; Marc D Breton; Steven Russell; Lutz Heinemann
Journal:  Eur Endocrinol       Date:  2018-09-10

Review 10.  International Consensus on Use of Continuous Glucose Monitoring.

Authors:  Thomas Danne; Revital Nimri; Tadej Battelino; Richard M Bergenstal; Kelly L Close; J Hans DeVries; Satish Garg; Lutz Heinemann; Irl Hirsch; Stephanie A Amiel; Roy Beck; Emanuele Bosi; Bruce Buckingham; Claudio Cobelli; Eyal Dassau; Francis J Doyle; Simon Heller; Roman Hovorka; Weiping Jia; Tim Jones; Olga Kordonouri; Boris Kovatchev; Aaron Kowalski; Lori Laffel; David Maahs; Helen R Murphy; Kirsten Nørgaard; Christopher G Parkin; Eric Renard; Banshi Saboo; Mauro Scharf; William V Tamborlane; Stuart A Weinzimer; Moshe Phillip
Journal:  Diabetes Care       Date:  2017-12       Impact factor: 19.112

View more
  2 in total

1.  Analysis of "Simple Post-Processing of Continuous Glucose Monitoring Measurements Improves Endpoints in Clinical Trials".

Authors:  Günther Schmelzeisen-Redeker
Journal:  J Diabetes Sci Technol       Date:  2019-06-13

2.  Use of Personal Continuous Glucose Monitoring Device Is Associated With Reduced Risk of Hypoglycemia in a 16-Week Clinical Trial of People With Type 1 Diabetes Using Continuous Subcutaneous Insulin Infusion.

Authors:  Morten Hasselstrøm Jensen; Peter Vestergaard; Irl B Hirsch; Ole Hejlesen
Journal:  J Diabetes Sci Technol       Date:  2020-09-18
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.