Browsing by Subject "Automated insulin delivery"

Now showing 1 - 4 of 4
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Changes in Basal and Bolus Insulin Requirements with Tirzepatide as an Adjunctive Therapy in Adults with Type 1 Diabetes Using Tandem Control-IQ
    (Springer, 2024) Karakus, Kagan E.; Klein, Matthew P.; Akturk, Halis K.; Shah, Viral N.; Medicine, School of Medicine
    Introduction: This study was aimed at investigating changes in insulin requirements and glycemic outcomes in adults with type 1 diabetes (T1D) using Control IQ (Tandem Diabetes) automated insulin delivery system (AID) over 8 months of tirzepatide treatment. Methods: In this single-center, observational study, we collected demographic, A1c, weight, sensor glucose, and insulin dose data for adults with T1D who were using AID and initiated tirzepatide adjunct therapy for clinical indications (n = 11, median age 37, 64% female and mean body mass index of 39.6 kg/m2). Data were compared from baseline and over 8 months. Results: Within 2 months of tirzepatide treatment, there were significant reductions in total daily insulin [median (IQR) 73.9 (47.6-95.8) to 51.7 (46.7-66.8) units/day, p < 0.001], basal insulin [47 (28.2-51.8) to 32.4 (25.5-46.3) units/day, p < 0.001], and bolus insulin [31.4 (19.9-38.3) to 17.9 (14.9-22.2) units/day, p < 0.001] requirements. Insulin dose reduction from 2 to 8 months was modest. The frequency of user-initiated boluses did not differ throughout the study. Despite reductions in total insulin requirement, time in range (70-180 mg/dl) increased by 7%, A1c reduced by 0.5%, weight reduced by 9%, without increase in time below 70 mg/dl. Conclusions: This pilot study provides clinical guidance on insulin titration for adults with T1D who may initiate tirzepatide therapy. Based on the findings of this study, we recommend reducing 25% of total daily insulin dose at tirzepatide initiation in adults with T1D using AID with baseline A1c of less than 7.5%. Higher doses of tirzepatide were associated with greater weight loss, however, the reduction in insulin requirement was minimal.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Consensus Report on Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonists as Adjunctive Treatment for Individuals With Type 1 Diabetes Using an Automated Insulin Delivery System
    (Sage, 2024-11-08) Shah, Viral N.; Peters, Anne L.; Umpierrez, Guillermo E.; Sherr, Jennifer L.; Akturk, Halis Kaan; Aleppo, Grazia; Bally, Lia; Cengiz, Eda; Cinar, Ali; Dungan, Kathleen; Fabris, Chiara; Jacobs, Peter G.; Lal, Rayhan A.; Mader, Julia K.; Masharani, Umesh; Prahalad, Priya; Schmidt, Signe; Zijlstra, Eric; Ho, Cindy N.; Ayers, Alessandra T.; Tian, Tiffany; Aaron, Rachel E.; Klonoff, David C.; Medicine, School of Medicine
    With increasing prevalence of obesity and cardiovascular diseases, there is a growing interest in the use of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) as an adjunct therapy in type 1 diabetes (T1D). The GLP-1RAs are currently not approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of T1D in the absence of randomized controlled trials documenting efficacy and safety of these agents in this population. The Diabetes Technology Society convened a series of three consensus meetings of clinicians and researchers with expertise in diabetes technology, GLP-1RA therapy, and T1D management. The project was aimed at synthesizing current literature and providing conclusions on the use of GLP-1RA therapy as an adjunct to automated insulin delivery (AID) systems in adults with T1D. The expert panel members met virtually three times on January 17, 2024, and April 24, 2024, and August 14, 2024, to discuss topics ranging from physiology and outcomes of GLP-1RAs in T1D to limitations of current sensors, algorithms, and insulin for AID systems. The panelists also identified research gaps and future directions for research. The panelists voted to in favor of 31 recommendations. This report presents the consensus opinions of the participants that, in adults with T1D using AID systems, GLP-1RAs have the potential to (1) provide effective adjunct therapy and (2) improve glycemic and metabolic outcomes without increasing the risk of severe hypoglycemia or diabetic ketoacidosis.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Glycemic outcomes of children 2–6 years of age with type 1 diabetes during the pediatric MiniMed™ 670G system trial
    (Wiley, 2022) Forlenza, Gregory P.; Ekhlaspour, Laya; DiMeglio, Linda A.; Fox, Larry A.; Rodriguez, Henry; Shulman, Dorothy I.; Kaiserman, Kevin B.; Liljenquist, David R.; Shin, John; Lee, Scott W.; Buckingham, Bruce A.; Pediatrics, School of Medicine
    Background: Highly variable insulin sensitivity, susceptibility to hypoglycemia and inability to effectively communicate hypoglycemic symptoms pose significant challenges for young children with type 1 diabetes (T1D). Herein, outcomes during clinical MiniMed™ 670G system use were evaluated in children aged 2-6 years with T1D. Methods: Participants (N = 46, aged 4.6 ± 1.4 years) at seven investigational centers used the MiniMed™ 670G system in Manual Mode during a two-week run-in period followed by Auto Mode during a three-month study phase. Safety events, mean A1C, sensor glucose (SG), and percentage of time spent in (TIR, 70-180 mg/dl), below (TBR, <70 mg/dl) and above (TAR, >180 mg/dl) range were assessed for the run-in and study phase and compared using a paired t-test or Wilcoxon signed-rank test. Results: From run-in to end of study (median 87.1% time in auto mode), mean A1C and SG changed from 8.0 ± 0.9% to 7.5 ± 0.6% (p < 0.001) and from 173 ± 24 to 161 ± 16 mg/dl (p < 0.001), respectively. Overall TIR increased from 55.7 ± 13.4% to 63.8 ± 9.4% (p < 0.001), while TBR and TAR decreased from 3.3 ± 2.5% to 3.2 ± 1.6% (p = 0.996) and 41.0 ± 14.7% to 33.0 ± 9.9% (p < 0.001), respectively. Overnight TBR remained unchanged and TAR was further improved 12:00 am-6:00 am. Throughout the study phase, there were no episodes of severe hypoglycemia or diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) and no serious adverse device-related events. Conclusions: At-home MiniMed™ 670G Auto Mode use by young children safely improved glycemic outcomes compared to two-week open-loop Manual Mode use. The improvements are similar to those observed in older children, adolescents and adults with T1D using the same system for the same duration of time.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Navigating Automated Insulin Delivery for Type 1 Diabetes Management During Pregnancy
    (Sage, 2025-04-17) Scifres, Christina M.; Cleary, Erin M.; Sheerer, Madilyn; Bowdler, Marissa; Shah, Viral N.; Obstetrics and Gynecology, School of Medicine
    Achieving pregnancy-specific glucose targets is difficult in pregnant individuals with type 1 diabetes (T1D), and the rates of complications for mothers and their infants remain high. Currently marketed automated insulin delivery (AID) systems are hybrid closed-loop (HCL) systems in which basal insulin delivery (with or without automated correction boluses) is driven by algorithms, and users are required to initiate meal boluses. For non-pregnant people with T1D, HCL therapy has established benefits for glycemic outcomes and quality of life. While none of the currently available HCL systems were designed for pregnancy-specific glucose targets and outcomes, preliminary data suggest that the use of HCL systems may result in improved glycemia during pregnancy. There is an accumulating body of literature examining HCL systems in pregnancy, although there are still limited data regarding the impact of HCL systems on perinatal outcomes. Many individuals conceive while using clinically available HCL systems and may be hesitant to discontinue use during pregnancy, and clinicians may consider HCL therapy for pregnant individuals who are struggling to meet recommended glycemic levels during pregnancy. We therefore offer guidance on how to counsel patients on the risks and benefits of HCL therapy in pregnancy, how to identify appropriate candidates for HCL therapy in pregnancy, and how to manage commercially available HCL systems off-label throughout gestation.