Browsing by Author "Hood, Korey K."

Now showing 1 - 7 of 7
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Cambridge hybrid closed-loop algorithm in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes: a multicentre 6-month randomised controlled trial.
    (Elsevier, 2022-04) Ware, Julia; Boughton, Charlotte K.; Allen, Janet M.; Wilinska, Malgorzata E.; Tauschmann, Martin; Denvir, Louise; Thankamony, Ajay; Campbell, Fiona M.; Wadwa, R. Paul; Buckingham, Bruce A.; Davis, Nikki; DiMeglio, Linda A.; Mauras, Nelly; Besser, Rachel E. J.; Ghatak, Atrayee; Weinzimer, Stuart A.; Hood, Korey K.; Fox, D. Steven; Kanapka, Lauren; Kollman, Craig; Sibayan, Judy; Beck, Roy W.; Hovorka, Roman; Pediatrics, School of Medicine
    Background Closed-loop insulin delivery systems have the potential to address suboptimal glucose control in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes. We compared safety and efficacy of the Cambridge hybrid closed-loop algorithm with usual care over 6 months in this population. Methods In a multicentre, multinational, parallel randomised controlled trial, participants aged 6–18 years using insulin pump therapy were recruited at seven UK and five US paediatric diabetes centres. Key inclusion criteria were diagnosis of type 1 diabetes for at least 12 months, insulin pump therapy for at least 3 months, and screening HbA1c levels between 53 and 86 mmol/mol (7·0–10·0%). Using block randomisation and central randomisation software, we randomly assigned participants to either closed-loop insulin delivery (closed-loop group) or to usual care with insulin pump therapy (control group) for 6 months. Randomisation was stratified at each centre by local baseline HbA1c. The Cambridge closed-loop algorithm running on a smartphone was used with either (1) a modified Medtronic 640G pump, Medtronic Guardian 3 sensor, and Medtronic prototype phone enclosure (FlorenceM configuration), or (2) a Sooil Dana RS pump and Dexcom G6 sensor (CamAPS FX configuration). The primary endpoint was change in HbA1c at 6 months combining data from both configurations. The primary analysis was done in all randomised patients (intention to treat). Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02925299. Findings Of 147 people initially screened, 133 participants (mean age 13·0 years [SD 2·8]; 57% female, 43% male) were randomly assigned to either the closed-loop group (n=65) or the control group (n=68). Mean baseline HbA1c was 8·2% (SD 0·7) in the closed-loop group and 8·3% (0·7) in the control group. At 6 months, HbA1c was lower in the closed-loop group than in the control group (between-group difference −3·5 mmol/mol (95% CI −6·5 to −0·5 [–0·32 percentage points, −0·59 to −0·04]; p=0·023). Closed-loop usage was low with FlorenceM due to failing phone enclosures (median 40% [IQR 26–53]), but consistently high with CamAPS FX (93% [88–96]), impacting efficacy. A total of 155 adverse events occurred after randomisation (67 in the closed-loop group, 88 in the control group), including seven severe hypoglycaemia events (four in the closed-loop group, three in the control group), two diabetic ketoacidosis events (both in the closed-loop group), and two non-treatment-related serious adverse events. There were 23 reportable hyperglycaemia events (11 in the closed-loop group, 12 in the control group), which did not meet criteria for diabetic ketoacidosis. Interpretation The Cambridge hybrid closed-loop algorithm had an acceptable safety profile, and improved glycaemic control in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes. To ensure optimal efficacy of the closed-loop system, usage needs to be consistently high, as demonstrated with CamAPS FX.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Cost-Effectiveness of Closed-Loop Automated Insulin Delivery Using the Cambridge Hybrid Algorithm in Children and Adolescents with Type 1 Diabetes: Results from a Multicenter 6-Month Randomized Trial
    (Sage, 2024-03-17) Fox, D. Steven; Ware, Julia; Boughton, Charlotte K.; Allen, Janet M.; Wilinska, Malgorzata E.; Tauschmann, Martin; Denvir, Louise; Thankamony, Ajay; Campbell, Fiona; Wadwa, R. Paul; Buckingham, Bruce A.; Davis, Nikki; DiMeglio, Linda A.; Mauras, Nelly; Besser, Rachel E. J.; Ghatak, Atrayee; Weinzimer, Stuart A.; Kanapka, Lauren; Kollman, Craig; Sibayan, Judy; Beck, Roy W.; Hood, Korey K.; Hovorka, Roman; DAN05 Consortium; Pediatrics, School of Medicine
    Background/objective: The main objective of this study is to evaluate the incremental cost-effectiveness (ICER) of the Cambridge hybrid closed-loop automated insulin delivery (AID) algorithm versus usual care for children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes (T1D). Methods: This multicenter, binational, parallel-controlled trial randomized 133 insulin pump using participants aged 6 to 18 years to either AID (n = 65) or usual care (n = 68) for 6 months. Both within-trial and lifetime cost-effectiveness were analyzed. Analysis focused on the treatment subgroup (n = 21) who received the much more reliable CamAPS FX hardware iteration and their contemporaneous control group (n = 24). Lifetime complications and costs were simulated via an updated Sheffield T1D policy model. Results: Within-trial, both groups had indistinguishable and statistically unchanged health-related quality of life, and statistically similar hypoglycemia, severe hypoglycemia, and diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) event rates. Total health care utilization was higher in the treatment group. Both the overall treatment group and CamAPS FX subgroup exhibited improved HbA1C (-0.32%, 95% CI: -0.59 to -0.04; P = .02, and -1.05%, 95% CI: -1.43 to -0.67; P < .001, respectively). Modeling projected increased expected lifespan of 5.36 years and discounted quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) of 1.16 (U.K. tariffs) and 1.52 (U.S. tariffs) in the CamAPS FX subgroup. Estimated ICERs for the subgroup were £19 324/QALY (United Kingdom) and -$3917/QALY (United States). For subgroup patients already using continuous glucose monitors (CGM), ICERs were £10 096/QALY (United Kingdom) and -$33 616/QALY (United States). Probabilistic sensitivity analysis generated mean ICERs of £19 342/QALY (95% CI: £15 903/QALY to £22 929/QALY) (United Kingdom) and -$28 283/QALY (95% CI: -$59 607/QALY to $1858/QALY) (United States). Conclusions: For children and adolescents with T1D on insulin pump therapy, AID using the Cambridge algorithm appears cost-effective below a £20 000/QALY threshold (United Kingdom) and cost saving (United States).
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    A Lesson From 2020: Public Health Matters for Both COVID-19 and Diabetes
    (ADA, 2021-01) Riddle, Matthew C.; Bakris, George; Blonde, Lawrence; Boulton, Andrew J. M.; D'Alessio, David; DiMeglio, Linda A.; Gonder-Frederick, Linda; Hood, Korey K.; Hu, Frank B.; Kahn, Steven E.; Kaul, Sanjay; Leiter, Lawrence A.; Moses, Robert G.; Rich, Stephen S.; Rosenstock, Julio; Wylie-Rosett, Judith; Pediatrics, School of Medicine
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Lived experience of CamAPS FX closed loop system in youth with type 1 diabetes and their parents
    (Wiley, 2022) Hood, Korey K.; Garcia-Willingham, Natasha; Hanes, Sarah; Tanenbaum, Molly L.; Ware, Julia; Boughton, Charlotte K.; Allen, Janet M.; Wilinska, Malgorzata E.; Tauschmann, Martin; Denvir, Louise; Thankamony, Ajay; Campbell, Fiona; Wadwa, R. Paul; Buckingham, Bruce A.; Davis, Nikki; DiMeglio, Linda A.; Mauras, Nelly; Besser, Rachel E. J.; Ghatak, Atrayee; Weinzimer, Stuart A.; Fox, D. Steven; Kanapka, Lauren; Kollman, Craig; Sibayan, Judy; Beck, Roy W.; Hovorka, Roman; DAN05 Consortium
    Aim: To examine changes in the lived experience of type 1 diabetes after use of hybrid closed loop (CL), including the CamAPS FX CL system. Materials and methods: The primary study was conducted as an open-label, single-period, randomized, parallel design contrasting CL versus insulin pump (with or without continuous glucose monitoring). Participants were asked to complete patient-reported outcomes before starting CL and 3 and 6 months later. Surveys assessed diabetes distress, hypoglycaemia concerns and quality of life. Qualitative focus group data were collected at the completion of the study. Results: In this sample of 98 youth (age range 6-18, mean age 12.7 ± 2.8 years) and their parents, CL use was not associated with psychosocial benefits overall. However, the subgroup (n = 12) using the CamAPS FX system showed modest improvements in quality of life and parent distress, reinforced by both survey (p < .05) and focus group responses. There were no negative effects of CL use reported by study participants. Conclusions: Closed loop use via the CamAPS FX system was associated with modest improvements in aspects of the lived experience of managing type 1 diabetes in youth and their families. Further refinements of the system may optimize the user experience.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Optimizing the use of continuous glucose monitoring in young children with type 1 diabetes with an adaptive study design and multiple randomizations
    (Elsevier, 2019) Berget, Cari; Driscoll, Kimberly A.; Lagges, Ann; Lange, Samantha; DiMeglio, Linda A.; Hannon, Tamara S.; Woerner, Stephanie E.; Iturralde, Esti; Barley, Regan C.; Hanes, Sarah; Hood, Korey K.; Buckingham, Bruce B.; Psychiatry, School of Medicine
    Parents of young children with type 1 diabetes (T1D) experience unique, developmental challenges in managing their child's T1D, resulting in psychosocial distress. Only a small portion of young children reach glucose goals and adherence to diabetes devices that help improve T1D management have historically been low in this population. The purpose of this study is to test four interventions that couple developmentally tailored behavioral supports with education to optimize use of diabetes devices, improve glucose control, and reduce psychosocial distress for parents of young children with T1D. The study team designed four behavioral interventions, two aimed at improving glucose control and two aimed at optimizing use of diabetes devices. The goal of this paper is to describe the behavioral interventions developed for this study, including the results of a pilot test, and describe the methods and analysis plan to test this intervention strategy with ninety participants in a large-scale, randomized trial using a sequential multiple assignment randomization trial (SMART) design. A SMART design will permit a clinically relevant evaluation of the intervention strategy, as it allows multiple randomizations based on individualized assessments throughout the study instead of a fixed intervention dose seen in most traditional randomized controlled trials.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Putting Continuous Glucose Monitoring to Work for People With Type 1 Diabetes
    (ADA, 2020-01) Hood, Korey K.; DiMeglio, Linda A.; Riddle, Matthew C.; Pediatrics, School of Medicine
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Second international consensus report on gaps and opportunities for the clinical translation of precision diabetes medicine
    (Springer Nature, 2023) Tobias, Deirdre K.; Merino, Jordi; Ahmad, Abrar; Aiken, Catherine; Benham, Jamie L.; Bodhini, Dhanasekaran; Clark, Amy L.; Colclough, Kevin; Corcoy, Rosa; Cromer, Sara J.; Duan, Daisy; Felton, Jamie L.; Francis, Ellen C.; Gillard, Pieter; Gingras, Véronique; Gaillard, Romy; Haider, Eram; Hughes, Alice; Ikle, Jennifer M.; Jacobsen, Laura M.; Kahkoska, Anna R.; Kettunen, Jarno L. T.; Kreienkamp, Raymond J.; Lim, Lee-Ling; Männistö, Jonna M. E.; Massey, Robert; Mclennan, Niamh-Maire; Miller, Rachel G.; Morieri, Mario Luca; Most, Jasper; Naylor, Rochelle N.; Ozkan, Bige; Patel, Kashyap Amratlal; Pilla, Scott J.; Prystupa, Katsiaryna; Raghavan, Sridharan; Rooney, Mary R.; Schön, Martin; Semnani-Azad, Zhila; Sevilla-Gonzalez, Magdalena; Svalastoga, Pernille; Takele, Wubet Worku; Tam, Claudia Ha-Ting; Thuesen, Anne Cathrine B.; Tosur, Mustafa; Wallace, Amelia S.; Wang, Caroline C.; Wong, Jessie J.; Yamamoto, Jennifer M.; Young, Katherine; Amouyal, Chloé; Andersen, Mette K.; Bonham, Maxine P.; Chen, Mingling; Cheng, Feifei; Chikowore, Tinashe; Chivers, Sian C.; Clemmensen, Christoffer; Dabelea, Dana; Dawed, Adem Y.; Deutsch, Aaron J.; Dickens, Laura T.; DiMeglio, Linda A.; Dudenhöffer-Pfeifer, Monika; Evans-Molina, Carmella; Fernández-Balsells, María Mercè; Fitipaldi, Hugo; Fitzpatrick, Stephanie L.; Gitelman, Stephen E.; Goodarzi, Mark O.; Grieger, Jessica A.; Guasch-Ferré, Marta; Habibi, Nahal; Hansen, Torben; Huang, Chuiguo; Harris-Kawano, Arianna; Ismail, Heba M.; Hoag, Benjamin; Johnson, Randi K.; Jones, Angus G.; Koivula, Robert W.; Leong, Aaron; Leung, Gloria K. W.; Libman, Ingrid M.; Liu, Kai; Long, S. Alice; Lowe, William L., Jr.; Morton, Robert W.; Motala, Ayesha A.; Onengut-Gumuscu, Suna; Pankow, James S.; Pathirana, Maleesa; Pazmino, Sofia; Perez, Dianna; Petrie, John R.; Powe, Camille E.; Quinteros, Alejandra; Jain, Rashmi; Ray, Debashree; Ried-Larsen, Mathias; Saeed, Zeb; Santhakumar, Vanessa; Kanbour, Sarah; Sarkar, Sudipa; Monaco, Gabriela S. F.; Scholtens, Denise M.; Selvin, Elizabeth; Sheu, Wayne Huey-Herng; Speake, Cate; Stanislawski, Maggie A.; Steenackers, Nele; Steck, Andrea K.; Stefan, Norbert; Støy, Julie; Taylor, Rachael; Tye, Sok Cin; Ukke, Gebresilasea Gendisha; Urazbayeva, Marzhan; Van der Schueren, Bart; Vatier, Camille; Wentworth, John M.; Hannah, Wesley; White, Sara L.; Yu, Gechang; Zhang, Yingchai; Zhou, Shao J.; Beltrand, Jacques; Polak, Michel; Aukrust, Ingvild; de Franco, Elisa; Flanagan, Sarah E.; Maloney, Kristin A.; McGovern, Andrew; Molnes, Janne; Nakabuye, Mariam; Njølstad, Pål Rasmus; Pomares-Millan, Hugo; Provenzano, Michele; Saint-Martin, Cécile; Zhang, Cuilin; Zhu, Yeyi; Auh, Sungyoung; de Souza, Russell; Fawcett, Andrea J.; Gruber, Chandra; Mekonnen, Eskedar Getie; Mixter, Emily; Sherifali, Diana; Eckel, Robert H.; Nolan, John J.; Philipson, Louis H.; Brown, Rebecca J.; Billings, Liana K.; Boyle, Kristen; Costacou, Tina; Dennis, John M.; Florez, Jose C.; Gloyn, Anna L.; Gomez, Maria F.; Gottlieb, Peter A.; Greeley, Siri Atma W.; Griffin, Kurt; Hattersley, Andrew T.; Hirsch, Irl B.; Hivert, Marie-France; Hood, Korey K.; Josefson, Jami L.; Kwak, Soo Heon; Laffel, Lori M.; Lim, Siew S.; Loos, Ruth J. F.; Ma, Ronald C. W.; Mathieu, Chantal; Mathioudakis, Nestoras; Meigs, James B.; Misra, Shivani; Mohan, Viswanathan; Murphy, Rinki; Oram, Richard; Owen, Katharine R.; Ozanne, Susan E.; Pearson, Ewan R.; Perng, Wei; Pollin, Toni I.; Pop-Busui, Rodica; Pratley, Richard E.; Redman, Leanne M.; Redondo, Maria J.; Reynolds, Rebecca M.; Semple, Robert K.; Sherr, Jennifer L.; Sims, Emily K.; Sweeting, Arianne; Tuomi, Tiinamaija; Udler, Miriam S.; Vesco, Kimberly K.; Vilsbøll, Tina; Wagner, Robert; Rich, Stephen S.; Franks, Paul W.; Pediatrics, School of Medicine
    Precision medicine is part of the logical evolution of contemporary evidence-based medicine that seeks to reduce errors and optimize outcomes when making medical decisions and health recommendations. Diabetes affects hundreds of millions of people worldwide, many of whom will develop life-threatening complications and die prematurely. Precision medicine can potentially address this enormous problem by accounting for heterogeneity in the etiology, clinical presentation and pathogenesis of common forms of diabetes and risks of complications. This second international consensus report on precision diabetes medicine summarizes the findings from a systematic evidence review across the key pillars of precision medicine (prevention, diagnosis, treatment, prognosis) in four recognized forms of diabetes (monogenic, gestational, type 1, type 2). These reviews address key questions about the translation of precision medicine research into practice. Although not complete, owing to the vast literature on this topic, they revealed opportunities for the immediate or near-term clinical implementation of precision diabetes medicine; furthermore, we expose important gaps in knowledge, focusing on the need to obtain new clinically relevant evidence. Gaps include the need for common standards for clinical readiness, including consideration of cost-effectiveness, health equity, predictive accuracy, liability and accessibility. Key milestones are outlined for the broad clinical implementation of precision diabetes medicine.