Prakt. Lékáren. 2018; 14(4e): e10-e17 | DOI: 10.36290/lek.2018.050

Glycemic sensors in treatment of diabetes

Jan Šoupal
3. interní klinika VFN a 1. LF UK v Praze

Successful treatment of Type 1 diabetes (T1D) requires precise insulin dosing and reliable ways of glycemia monitoring. Self-monitoring of bloodglucose (SMBG), Flash glucose monitoring (FGM) and continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) can be used for day-to-day monitoring. The basis of CGM and FGM is glycemic sensor inserted into the subcutaneous tissue. CGM automatically informs the patient about glucose development atapproximately five-minute intervals. With FGM, the patient is informed only after placing the receiver in close proximity to the sensor. The accuracyof both CGM and FGM measurements has improved significantly and has been comparable in recent years to the accuracy of high qualityglucometers. Improved sensor quality makes CGM and FGM independent of glucometers, and means CGM accuracy is no longer an obstacle toconstructing a closed loop system. So far, the major obstacle to the widespread use of CGM and FGM is the higher cost. The following text providesan overview of the findings on CGM and FGM in patients with T1D, both of which can be expected to be widely adopted in the near future.

Keywords: Type 1 diabetes, continuous glucose monitoring, flash glucose monitoring, glucometers, glycemic sensors

Published: December 15, 2018  Show citation

ACS AIP APA ASA Harvard Chicago Chicago Notes IEEE ISO690 MLA NLM Turabian Vancouver
Šoupal J. Glycemic sensors in treatment of diabetes. Praktické lékárenství. 2018;14(E-verze 4/18):e10-17. doi: 10.36290/lek.2018.050.
Download citation

References

  1. Inzucchi SE, Bergenstal RM, Buse JB et al. Management of Hyperglycemia in Type 2 Diabetes, 2015: A Patient-Centered Approach: Update to a Position Statement of the American Diabetes Association and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2015 Jan; 38(1):140-149. Go to original source...
  2. Miller KM, Foster NC, Beck RW, Bergenstal RM, DuBose SN, DiMeglio LA, Maahs DM, Tamborlane WV; T1D Exchange Clinic Network. Current state of type 1 diabetes treatment in the U. S.: updated data from the T1D Exchange clinic registry. Diabetes Care. 2015 Jun; 38(6): 971-978. Go to original source...
  3. Battelino T, Conget I, Olsen B, Schütz-Fuhrmann I, Hommel E, Hoogma R, Schierloh U, Sulli N, Bolinder J; SWITCH Study Group. The use and efficacy of continuous glucose monitoring in type 1 diabetes treated with insulin pump therapy: a randomised controlled trial. Diabetologia. 2012 Dec; 55(12): 3155-3162. Go to original source...
  4. Lind M, Polonsky W, Hirsch IB, Heise T, Bolinder J, Dahlqvist S, Schwarz E, Ólafsdóttir AF, Frid A, Wedel H, Ahlén E, Nyström T, Hellman J. Continuous Glucose Monitoring vs Conventional Therapy for Glycemic Control in Adults With Type 1 Diabetes Treated With Multiple Daily Insulin Injections: The GOLD Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA. 2017 Jan 24; 317(4): 379-387. Go to original source...
  5. Beck RW, Riddlesworth T, Ruedy K, Ahmann A, Bergenstal R, Haller S, Kollman C, Kruger D, McGill JB, Polonsky W, Toschi E, Wolpert H, Price D; DIAMOND Study Group. Effect of Continuous Glucose Monitoring on Glycemic Control in Adults With Type 1 Diabetes Using Insulin Injections: The DIAMOND Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA. 2017 Jan 24; 317(4): 371-378. Go to original source...
  6. Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation Continuous Glucose Monitoring Study Group. Effectiveness of continuous glucose monitoring in a clinical care environment: evidence from the Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation continuous glucose monitoring (JDRF-CGM) trial. Diabetes Care, 2010, 33, 17-22. Go to original source...
  7. Bergenstal RM, Tamborlane WV, Ahmann A, Buse JB, Dailey G, Davis SN, Joyce C, Peoples T, Perkins BA, Welsh JB, Willi SM, Wood MA; STAR 3 Study Group. Effectiveness of sensor-augmented insulin-pump therapy in type 1 diabetes. N Engl J Med. 2010 Jul 22; 363(4): 311-320. Go to original source...
  8. van Beers CA, DeVries JH, Kleijer SJ, Smits MM, Geelhoed-Duijvestijn PH, Kramer MH, Diamant M, Snoek FJ, Serné EH. Continuous glucose monitoring for patients with type 1 diabetes and impaired awareness of hypoglycaemia (IN CONTROL): a randomised, open-label, crossover trial. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2016 Nov; 4(11): 893-902. Go to original source...
  9. El-Laboudi AH, Godsland IF, Johnston DG, Oliver NS. Measures of Glycemic Variability in Type 1 Diabetes and the Effect of Real-Time Continuous Glucose Monitoring. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2016 Dec; 18(12): 806-812. Go to original source...
  10. Garg SK, Schwartz S, Edelman SV. Improved glucose excursions using an implantable real-time continuous glucose sensor in adults with type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2004 Mar; 27(3): 734-738. Go to original source...
  11. Nalysnyk L, Hernandez-Medina M, Krishnarajah G. Glycaemic variability and complications in patients with diabetes mellitus: evidence from a systematic review of the literature. Diabetes Obes Metab 2010;12: 288-298. Go to original source...
  12. Bragd J, Adamson U, Backlund LB, Lins PE, Moberg E, Oskarsson P. Can glycaemic variability, as calculated from blood glucose self-monitoring, predict the development of complications in type 1 diabetes over a decade? Diabetes Metab 2008; 34: 612-616. Go to original source...
  13. Šoupal J, Škrha J Jr, Fajmon M, Horová E, Mráz M, Škrha J, Prázný M. Glycemic variability is higher in type 1 diabetes patients with microvascular complications irrespective of glycemic control. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2014 Apr; 16(4): 198-203. Go to original source...
  14. Kropff J, Choudhary P, Neupane S, Barnard K, Bain SC, Kapitza C, Forst T, Link M, Dehennis A, DeVries JH. Accuracy and Longevity of an Implantable Continuous Glucose Sensor in the PRECISE Study: A 180-Day, Prospective, Multicenter, Pivotal Trial. Diabetes Care. 2017 Jan; 40(1): 63-68. Go to original source...
  15. Bolinder J, Antuna R, Geelhoed-Duijvestijn P, Kröger J, Weitgasser R. Novel glucose-sensing technology and hypoglycaemia in type 1 diabetes: a multicentre, non-masked, randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2016 Nov 5; 388(10057): 2254-2263. Go to original source...
  16. Miller KM, Beck RW, Bergenstal RM, Goland RS, Haller MJ, McGill JB, Rodriguez H, Simmons JH, Hirsch IB; T1D Exchange Clinic Network. Evidence of a strong association between frequency of self-monitoring of blood glucose and hemoglobin A1c levels in T1D exchange clinic registry participants. Diabetes Care. 2013 Jul;36(7): 2009-2014. Go to original source...
  17. Rodbard D. Continuous Glucose Monitoring: A Review of Successes, Challenges, and Opportunities. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2016 Feb;18 Suppl 2: S23-213 Go to original source...
  18. Bailey T, Bode BW, Christiansen MP, Klaff LJ, Alva S. The Performance and Usability of a Factory-Calibrated Flash Glucose Monitoring System. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2015 Nov; 17(11): 787-794. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  19. Rodbard D. Continuous Glucose Monitoring: A Review of Recent Studies Demonstrating Improved Glycemic Outcomes. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2017 Jun; 19(S3): S25-S37. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  20. Prázný, M. Selfmonitoring glykemie a přesnost glukometrů. Interní Med, 2013, 15, 206-209.
  21. Reddy M, Jugnee N, El Laboudi A, Spanudakis E, Anantharaja S, Oliver N. A randomized controlled pilot study of continuous glucose monitoring and flash glucose monitoring in people with Type 1 diabetes and impaired awareness of hypoglycaemia. Diabet Med. 2017 Dec 12. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  22. Garg SK, Weinzimer SA, Tamborlane WV, Buckingham BA, Bode BW, Bailey TS, Brazg RL, Ilany J, Slover RH, Anderson SM, Bergenstal RM, Grosman B, Roy A, Cordero TL, Shin J, Lee SW, Kaufman FR. Glucose Outcomes with the In-Home Use of a Hybrid Closed-Loop Insulin Delivery System in Adolescents and Adults with Type 1 Diabetes. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2017 Mar; 19(3): 155-163. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  23. Šoupal J, Petruželková L, Flekač M, Pelcl T, Matoulek M, Daňková M, Škrha J, Svačina Š, Prázný M. Comparison of Different Treatment Modalities for Type 1 Diabetes, Including Sensor-Augmented Insulin Regimens, in 52 Weeks of Follow-Up: A COMISAIR Study. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2016 Sep;18(9): 532-538. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  24. Billings LK, Doshi A, Gouet D, et al. Efficacy and Safety of Insulin Degludec/Liraglutide (IDegLira) vs Basal-bolus Therapy in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes (T2D): DUAL VII Trial (NCT02420262). Oral presentation 136-OR, presented at the 77th Annual Scientific Sessions of the American Diabetes Association (ADA), San Diego, USA. 10 June 2017.
  25. Rosenstock J, Guerci B, Hanefeld M, Gentile S, Aronson R, Tinahones FJ, Roy-Duval C, Souhami E, Wardecki M, Ye J, Perfetti R, Heller S; GetGoal Duo-2. Trial Investigators. Prandial Options to Advance Basal Insulin Glargine Therapy: Testing Lixisenatide Plus Basal Insulin Versus Insulin Glulisine Either as Basal-Plus or Basal-Bolus in Type 2 Diabetes: The GetGoal Duo-2 Trial. Diabetes Care. 2016 Aug; 39(8): 1318-1328. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  26. Leinung M, Nardacci E, Patel N, Bettadahalli S, Paika K, Thompson S. Benefits of short-term professional continuous glucose monitoring in clinical practice. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2013 Sep; 15(9): 744-747. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  27. Sierra JA, Shah M, Gill MS, Flores Z, Chawla H, Kaufman FR, Vigersky R. Clinical and economic benefits of professional CGM among people with type 2 diabetes in the United States: analysis of claims and lab data. J Med Econ. 2018 Mar; 21(3): 225-230. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...




Pharmacy for Practice

Madam, Sir,
please be aware that the website on which you intend to enter, not the general public because it contains technical information about medicines, including advertisements relating to medicinal products. This information and communication professionals are solely under §2 of the Act n.40/1995 Coll. Is active persons authorized to prescribe or supply (hereinafter expert).
Take note that if you are not an expert, you run the risk of danger to their health or the health of other persons, if you the obtained information improperly understood or interpreted, and especially advertising which may be part of this site, or whether you used it for self-diagnosis or medical treatment, whether in relation to each other in person or in relation to others.

I declare:

  1. that I have met the above instruction
  2. I'm an expert within the meaning of the Act n.40/1995 Coll. the regulation of advertising, as amended, and I am aware of the risks that would be a person other than the expert input to these sites exhibited


No

Yes

If your statement is not true, please be aware
that brings the risk of danger to their health or the health of others.