Improvements in sensor accuracy, greater convenience and ease of use, and expanding reimbursement have led to growing adoption of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM). However, successful utilization of CGM technology in routine clinical practice remains relatively low. This may be due in part to the lack of clear and agreed-upon glycemic targets that both diabetes teams and people with diabetes can work toward. Although unified recommendations for use of key CGM metrics have been established in three separate peer-reviewed articles, formal adoption by diabetes professional organizations and guidance in the practical application of these metrics in clinical practice have been lacking. In February 2019, the Advanced Technologies & Treatments for Diabetes (ATTD) Congress convened an international panel of physicians, researchers, and individuals with diabetes who are expert in CGM technologies to address this issue. This article summarizes the ATTD consensus recommendations for relevant aspects of CGM data utilization and reporting among the various diabetes populations.

Patients at a diabetes camp who were treated with an artificial-pancreas system had less nocturnal hypoglycemia and tighter glucose control than when they were treated with a sensor-augmented insulin pump. (Funded by Sanofi and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01238406.).

more than 1) occurred in 533 (16.0%) patients; 207 (6.2%) were venous (3.2% PE and 3.9% DVT) and 365 (11.1%) were arterial (1.6% ischemic stroke, 8.9% MI, and 1.0% systemic thromboembolism; Table 1). Following multivariable adjustment, age, sex, Hispanic ethnicity, coronary artery disease, prior MI, and higher D-dimer levels at hospital presentation were associated with a thrombotic event (Table 2). All-cause mortality was 24.5% and was higher in those with thrombotic events (43.2% vs 21.0%; P < .001) (Table 1). After multivariable adjustment, a thrombotic event was independently associated with mortality (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.82; 95% CI, 1.54-2.15; P < .001). Both venous (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.37; 95% CI, 1.02-1.86; P = .04) and arterial (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.99; 95% CI, 1.65-2.40; P < .001) thrombosis were associated with mortality (P = .25 for interaction). Among 829 ICU patients, 29.4% had a thrombotic event (13.6% venous and 18.6% arterial). Among 2505 non-ICU patients, 11.5% had a thrombotic event (3.6% venous and 8.4% arterial). Discussion | In patients with COVID-19 hospitalized in a large New York City health system, a thrombotic event occurred in 16.0%. D-dimer level at presentation was independently associated with thrombotic events, consistent with an early coagulopathy. Prior studies varied regarding the precise incidence of thrombosis; however, all suggested a heightened risk in patients with COVID-19. 3,4 This analysis found variation by clinical setting and type of thrombosis event. While thrombosis is observed in other acute infections 5 (eg, 5.9% prevalence during the 2009 influenza pandemic), 6 the thrombotic risk appears higher in COVID-19. Thrombosis in patients with COVID-19 may be due to a cytokine storm, hypoxic injury, endothelial dysfunction, hypercoagulability, and/or increased platelet activity. This study has several limitations. A diagnosis of thrombosis may be underestimated because imaging studies were limited due to concerns of transmitting infection or competing risk of death. Type of MI was not confirmed with cardiac catheterization. Clinical practice changed over the study period, with increased awareness of thrombotic events and use of anticoagulation, which may affect the incidence of thrombosis.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

We evaluated the safety and efficacy of day-and-night fully closed-loop insulin therapy using faster (Faster-CL) compared with standard insulin aspart (Standard-CL) in young adults with type 1 diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODSIn a double-blind, randomized, crossover trial, 20 participants with type 1 diabetes on insulin pump therapy (11 females, aged 21.3 6 2.3 years, HbA 1c 7.5 6 0.5% [58.5 6 5.5 mmol/mol]) underwent two 27-h inpatient periods with unannounced afternoon moderate-vigorous exercise and unannounced/uncovered meals. We compared Faster-CL and Standard-CL in random order. During both interventions, the fuzzy-logic control algorithm DreaMed GlucoSitter was used. Glucose sensor data were analyzed by intention-to-treat principle with the difference (between Faster-CL and Standard-CL) in proportion of time in range 70-180 mg/dL (TIR) over 27 h as the primary end point. RESULTSThe proportion of TIR was similar for both arms: 53.3% (83% overnight) in Faster-CL and 57.9% (88% overnight) in Standard-CL (P 5 0.170). The proportion of time in hypoglycemia <70 mg/dL was 0.0% for both groups. Baseline-adjusted interstitial prandial glucose increments 1 h after meals were greater in Faster-CL compared with Standard-CL (P 5 0.017). The gaps between measured plasma insulin and estimated insulin-on-board levels at the beginning, at the end, and 2 h after the exercise were smaller in the Standard-CL group (P 5 0.029, P 5 0.003, and P 5 0.004, respectively). No severe adverse events occurred. CONCLUSIONSFully closed-loop insulin delivery using either faster or standard insulin aspart was safe and efficient in achieving near-normal glucose concentrations outside postprandial periods. The closed-loop algorithm was better adjusted to the standard insulin aspart.

Insulin degludec (IDeg) is a basal insulin with an ultra-long pharmacokinetic profile in adults that at steady-state produces remarkably flat and stable insulin levels; however, no studies have yet reported on the pharmacokinetic properties of IDeg in subjects younger than 18 years of age. This was a single-centre, randomised, single-dose, double-blind, two-period crossover trial conducted in children (6-11 years), adolescents (12-17 years), and adults (18-65 years) with type 1 diabetes. Subjects received a single subcutaneous dose of 0.4 U/kg IDeg or insulin glargine (IGlar), respectively, on two separate dosing visits, with pharmacokinetic blood sampling up to 72-h postdose. A total of 37 subjects (12 children, 13 adolescents, and 12 adults) completed the trial. Total exposure of IDeg after a single dose (AUCIDeg ,0-∞, SD ) was higher in children compared to adults [estimated ratio children/adults 1.48 (95% confidence interval, CI: 0.98; 2.24)] and in adolescents compared to adults [estimated ratio adolescents/adults 1.33 (95% CI: 1.08; 1.64)]; however, the difference was only statistically significant for the latter comparison. No statistically significant difference in maximum concentration of IDeg (Cmax, IDeg , SD ) was observed. Estimated ratios for Cmax, IDeg , SD were (children/adults) 1.20 (95% CI: 0.90; 1.60) and (adolescents/adults) 1.23 (95% CI: 1.00; 1.51). Simulated mean steady state pharmacokinetic profiles supported a flat and stable IDeg exposure across a 24-h dosing interval. IDeg was detectable in serum for at least 72 h (end of blood sampling period) in all subjects following single dose. In conclusion, the ultra-long pharmacokinetic properties of IDeg observed in adults are preserved in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes.