Richard M Bergenstal1, Revital Nimri2, Roy W Beck3, Amy Criego4, Lori Laffel5, Desmond Schatz6, Tadej Battelino7, Thomas Danne8, Stuart A Weinzimer9, Judy Sibayan3, Mary L Johnson4, Ryan J Bailey3, Peter Calhoun3, Anders Carlson4, Elvira Isganaitis5, Rachel Bello2, Anastasia Albanese-O'Neill6, Klemen Dovc7, Torben Biester8, Kate Weyman9, Korey Hood10, Moshe Phillip2. 1. International Diabetes Center, HealthPartners Institute, Minneapolis, MN, USA. Electronic address: richard.bergenstal@parknicollet.com. 2. Schneider Children's Medical Center, Petah Tikva, Israel. 3. Jaeb Center for Health Research Foundation, Tampa, FL, USA. 4. International Diabetes Center, HealthPartners Institute, Minneapolis, MN, USA. 5. Joslin Diabetes Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA. 6. Department of Pediatrics, University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville, FL, USA. 7. University Medical Center Ljubljana, University Children's Hospital, and Faculty of Medicine, University of Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia. 8. Auf der Bult Centre for Children and Adolescents, Diabetology, Endocrinology and General Paediatrics, Hannover, Germany. 9. Department of Pediatrics, Yale University, New Haven, CT, USA. 10. Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford Diabetes Research Center, Palo Alto, CA, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Management of type 1 diabetes is challenging. We compared outcomes using a commercially available hybrid closed-loop system versus a new investigational system with features potentially useful for adolescents and young adults with type 1 diabetes. METHODS: In this multinational, randomised, crossover trial (Fuzzy Logic Automated Insulin Regulation [FLAIR]), individuals aged 14-29 years old, with a clinical diagnosis of type 1 diabetes with a duration of at least 1 year, using either an insulin pump or multiple daily insulin injections, and glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) levels of 7·0-11·0% (53-97 mmol/mol) were recruited from seven academic-based endocrinology practices, four in the USA, and one each in Germany, Israel, and Slovenia. After a run-in period to teach participants how to use the study pump and continuous glucose monitor, participants were randomly assigned (1:1) using a computer-generated sequence, with a permuted block design (block sizes of two and four), stratified by baseline HbA1c and use of a personal MiniMed 670G system (Medtronic) at enrolment, to either use of a MiniMed 670G hybrid closed-loop system (670G) or the investigational advanced hybrid closed-loop system (Medtronic) for the first 12-week period, and then participants were crossed over with no washout period, to the other group for use for another 12 weeks. Masking was not possible due to the nature of the systems used. The coprimary outcomes, measured with continuous glucose monitoring, were proportion of time that glucose levels were above 180 mg/dL (>10·0 mmol/L) during 0600 h to 2359 h (ie, daytime), tested for superiority, and proportion of time that glucose levels were below 54 mg/dL (<3·0 mmol/L) calculated over a full 24-h period, tested for non-inferiority (non-inferiority margin 2%). Analysis was by intention to treat. Safety was assessed in all participants randomly assigned to treatment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03040414, and is now complete. FINDINGS: Between June 3 and Aug 22, 2019, 113 individuals were enrolled into the trial. Mean age was 19 years (SD 4) and 70 (62%) of 113 participants were female. Mean proportion of time with daytime glucose levels above 180 mg/dL (>10·0 mmol/L) was 42% (SD 13) at baseline, 37% (9) during use of the 670G system, and 34% (9) during use of the advanced hybrid closed-loop system (mean difference [advanced hybrid closed-loop system minus 670G system] -3·00% [95% CI -3·97 to -2·04]; p<0·0001). Mean 24-h proportion of time with glucose levels below 54 mg/dL (<3·0 mmol/L) was 0·46% (SD 0·42) at baseline, 0·50% (0·35) during use of the 670G system, and 0·46% (0·33) during use of the advanced hybrid closed-loop system (mean difference [advanced hybrid closed-loop system minus 670G system] -0·06% [95% CI -0·11 to -0·02]; p<0·0001 for non-inferiority). One severe hypoglycaemic event occurred in the advanced hybrid closed-loop system group, determined to be unrelated to study treatment, and none occurred in the 670G group. INTERPRETATION: Hyperglycaemia was reduced without increasing hypoglycaemia in adolescents and young adults with type 1 diabetes using the investigational advanced hybrid closed-loop system compared with the commercially available MiniMed 670G system. Testing an advanced hybrid closed-loop system in populations that are underserved due to socioeconomic factors and testing during pregnancy and in individuals with impaired awareness of hypoglycaemia would advance the effective use of this technology FUNDING: National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases.
BACKGROUND: Management of type 1 diabetes is challenging. We compared outcomes using a commercially available hybrid closed-loop system versus a new investigational system with features potentially useful for adolescents and young adults with type 1 diabetes. METHODS: In this multinational, randomised, crossover trial (Fuzzy Logic Automated Insulin Regulation [FLAIR]), individuals aged 14-29 years old, with a clinical diagnosis of type 1 diabetes with a duration of at least 1 year, using either an insulin pump or multiple daily insulin injections, and glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) levels of 7·0-11·0% (53-97 mmol/mol) were recruited from seven academic-based endocrinology practices, four in the USA, and one each in Germany, Israel, and Slovenia. After a run-in period to teach participants how to use the study pump and continuous glucose monitor, participants were randomly assigned (1:1) using a computer-generated sequence, with a permuted block design (block sizes of two and four), stratified by baseline HbA1c and use of a personal MiniMed 670G system (Medtronic) at enrolment, to either use of a MiniMed 670G hybrid closed-loop system (670G) or the investigational advanced hybrid closed-loop system (Medtronic) for the first 12-week period, and then participants were crossed over with no washout period, to the other group for use for another 12 weeks. Masking was not possible due to the nature of the systems used. The coprimary outcomes, measured with continuous glucose monitoring, were proportion of time that glucose levels were above 180 mg/dL (>10·0 mmol/L) during 0600 h to 2359 h (ie, daytime), tested for superiority, and proportion of time that glucose levels were below 54 mg/dL (<3·0 mmol/L) calculated over a full 24-h period, tested for non-inferiority (non-inferiority margin 2%). Analysis was by intention to treat. Safety was assessed in all participants randomly assigned to treatment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03040414, and is now complete. FINDINGS: Between June 3 and Aug 22, 2019, 113 individuals were enrolled into the trial. Mean age was 19 years (SD 4) and 70 (62%) of 113 participants were female. Mean proportion of time with daytime glucose levels above 180 mg/dL (>10·0 mmol/L) was 42% (SD 13) at baseline, 37% (9) during use of the 670G system, and 34% (9) during use of the advanced hybrid closed-loop system (mean difference [advanced hybrid closed-loop system minus 670G system] -3·00% [95% CI -3·97 to -2·04]; p<0·0001). Mean 24-h proportion of time with glucose levels below 54 mg/dL (<3·0 mmol/L) was 0·46% (SD 0·42) at baseline, 0·50% (0·35) during use of the 670G system, and 0·46% (0·33) during use of the advanced hybrid closed-loop system (mean difference [advanced hybrid closed-loop system minus 670G system] -0·06% [95% CI -0·11 to -0·02]; p<0·0001 for non-inferiority). One severe hypoglycaemic event occurred in the advanced hybrid closed-loop system group, determined to be unrelated to study treatment, and none occurred in the 670G group. INTERPRETATION: Hyperglycaemia was reduced without increasing hypoglycaemia in adolescents and young adults with type 1 diabetes using the investigational advanced hybrid closed-loop system compared with the commercially available MiniMed 670G system. Testing an advanced hybrid closed-loop system in populations that are underserved due to socioeconomic factors and testing during pregnancy and in individuals with impaired awareness of hypoglycaemia would advance the effective use of this technology FUNDING: National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases.
Authors: Sue A Brown; Boris P Kovatchev; Dan Raghinaru; John W Lum; Bruce A Buckingham; Yogish C Kudva; Lori M Laffel; Carol J Levy; Jordan E Pinsker; R Paul Wadwa; Eyal Dassau; Francis J Doyle; Stacey M Anderson; Mei Mei Church; Vikash Dadlani; Laya Ekhlaspour; Gregory P Forlenza; Elvira Isganaitis; David W Lam; Craig Kollman; Roy W Beck Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2019-10-16 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Sara H Duffus; Zain Al Ta'ani; James C Slaughter; Kevin D Niswender; Justin M Gregory Journal: Diabetes Obes Metab Date: 2019-12-09 Impact factor: 6.577
Authors: Olivia J Collyns; Renee A Meier; Zara L Betts; Denis S H Chan; Chris Frampton; Carla M Frewen; Niranjala M Hewapathirana; Shirley D Jones; Anirban Roy; Benyamin Grosman; Natalie Kurtz; John Shin; Robert A Vigersky; Benjamin J Wheeler; Martin I de Bock Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2021-02-12 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: Roy W Beck; Richard M Bergenstal; Tonya D Riddlesworth; Craig Kollman; Zhaomian Li; Adam S Brown; Kelly L Close Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2018-10-23 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: Marc D Breton; Lauren G Kanapka; Roy W Beck; Laya Ekhlaspour; Gregory P Forlenza; Eda Cengiz; Melissa Schoelwer; Katrina J Ruedy; Emily Jost; Lori Carria; Emma Emory; Liana J Hsu; Mary Oliveri; Craig C Kollman; Betsy B Dokken; Stuart A Weinzimer; Mark D DeBoer; Bruce A Buckingham; Daniel Cherñavvsky; R Paul Wadwa Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2020-08-27 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Martin Tauschmann; Hood Thabit; Lia Bally; Janet M Allen; Sara Hartnell; Malgorzata E Wilinska; Yue Ruan; Judy Sibayan; Craig Kollman; Peiyao Cheng; Roy W Beck; Carlo L Acerini; Mark L Evans; David B Dunger; Daniela Elleri; Fiona Campbell; Richard M Bergenstal; Amy Criego; Viral N Shah; Lalantha Leelarathna; Roman Hovorka Journal: Lancet Date: 2018-10-03 Impact factor: 202.731
Authors: Tadej Battelino; Thomas Danne; Richard M Bergenstal; Stephanie A Amiel; Roy Beck; Torben Biester; Emanuele Bosi; Bruce A Buckingham; William T Cefalu; Kelly L Close; Claudio Cobelli; Eyal Dassau; J Hans DeVries; Kim C Donaghue; Klemen Dovc; Francis J Doyle; Satish Garg; George Grunberger; Simon Heller; Lutz Heinemann; Irl B Hirsch; Roman Hovorka; Weiping Jia; Olga Kordonouri; Boris Kovatchev; Aaron Kowalski; Lori Laffel; Brian Levine; Alexander Mayorov; Chantal Mathieu; Helen R Murphy; Revital Nimri; Kirsten Nørgaard; Christopher G Parkin; Eric Renard; David Rodbard; Banshi Saboo; Desmond Schatz; Keaton Stoner; Tatsuiko Urakami; Stuart A Weinzimer; Moshe Phillip Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2019-06-08 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: Eleonora M Aiello; Sunil Deshpande; Basak Ozaslan; Kelilah L Wolkowicz; Eyal Dassau; Jordan E Pinsker; Francis J Doyle Journal: Curr Opin Biomed Eng Date: 2021-06-18
Authors: Korey K Hood; Lori M Laffel; Thomas Danne; Revital Nimri; Stuart A Weinzimer; Judy Sibayan; Ryan J Bailey; Desmond Schatz; Natasa Bratina; Rachel Bello; Alina Punel; Peter Calhoun; Roy W Beck; Richard M Bergenstal; Moshe Phillip Journal: Diabetes Technol Ther Date: 2021-10-26 Impact factor: 6.118