Glycemic Outcomes of Use of CLC Versus PLGS in Type 1 Diabetes: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

Like Comment
Limited information is available about glycemic outcomes with a closed-loop control (CLC) system compared with a predictive low-glucose suspend (PLGS) system.After 6 months of use of a CLC system in a randomized trial, 109 participants with type 1 diabetes (age range, 14-72 years; mean HbA1c, 7.1% [54 mmol/mol]) were randomly assigned to CLC (N = 54, Control-IQ) or PLGS (N = 55, Basal-IQ) groups for 3 months. The primary outcome was continuous glucose monitor (CGM)-measured time in range (TIR) for 70-180 mg/dL. Baseline CGM metrics were computed from the last 3 months of the preceding study.All 109 participants completed the study. Mean ± SD TIR was 71.1 ± 11.2% at baseline and 67.6 ± 12.6% using intention-to-treat analysis (69.1 ± 12.2% using per-protocol analysis excluding periods of study-wide suspension of device use) over 13 weeks on CLC versus 70.0 ± 13.6% and 60.4 ± 17.1% on PLGS (difference = 5.9%; 95% CI: 3.6, 8.3%; P < 0.001). Time >180 mg/dL was lower in the CLC group than PLGS group (difference = -6.0%; 95% CI: -8.4, -3.7%; P < 0.001) while time <54 mg/dL was similar (0.04%; 95% CI: -0.05, 0.13%; P = 0.41). HbA1c after 13 weeks was lower on CLC than PLGS (7.2% [55 mmol/mol] versus 7.5% [56 mmol/mol], difference -0.34% [-3.7 mmol/mol]; 95% CI: -0.57 [-6.2 mmol/mol], -0.11% [1.2 mmol/mol]; P = 0.0035).Following 6 months of CLC, switching to PLGS reduced TIR and increased HbA1c toward their pre-CLC values, while hypoglycemia remained similarly reduced with both CLC and PLGS.


Click here to read the full article @ Diabetes care
Go to the profile of ClinOwl

ClinOwl

The wider, wiser view for healthcare professionals. ClinOwl signposts the latest clinical content from over 100 leading medical journals.
1805 Contributions
1 Followers
0 Following

No comments yet.