Medizinische Universität Graz Austria/Österreich - Forschungsportal - Medical University of Graz
Gewählte Publikation:
SHR Neuro Krebs Kardio Lipid Stoffw Microb
Dovc, K; Bergford, S; Fröhlich-Reiterer, E; Zaharieva, DP; Potocnik, N; Müller, A; Lenarcic, Z; Calhoun, P; Fritsch, M; Sourij, H; Bratina, N; Kollman, C; Battelino, T.
A Comparison of Faster Insulin Aspart with Standard Insulin Aspart Using Hybrid Automated Insulin Delivery System in Active Children and Adolescents with Type 1 Diabetes: A Randomized Double-Blind Crossover Trial.
Diabetes Technol Ther. 2023; 25(9): 612-621.
Doi: 10.1089/dia.2023.0178
[OPEN ACCESS]
Web of Science
PubMed
FullText
FullText_MUG
- Co-Autor*innen der Med Uni Graz
- Fritsch Maria
- Fröhlich-Reiterer Elke
- Müller Alexander
- Sourij Harald
- Altmetrics:
- Dimensions Citations:
- Plum Analytics:
- Scite (citation analytics):
- Abstract:
- Objective: To evaluate the use of faster acting (FIA) and standard insulin aspart (SIA) with hybrid automated insulin delivery (AID) in active youth with type 1 diabetes. Research Design and Methods: In this double-blind multinational randomized crossover trial, 30 children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes (16 females; aged 15.0 ± 1.7 years; baseline HbA1c 7.5% ± 0.9% [58 ± 9.8 mmol/mol]) underwent two unrestricted 4-week periods using hybrid AID with either FIA or SIA in random order. During both interventions, participants were using the hybrid AID (investigational version of MiniMed™ 780G; Medtronic). Participants were encouraged to exercise as frequently as possible, capturing physical activity with an activity monitor. The primary outcome was the percentage of sensor glucose time above range (180 mg/dL [10.0 mmol/L]) measured by continuous glucose monitoring. Results: In an intention-to-treat analysis, mean time above range was 31% ± 15% at baseline, 19% ± 6% during FIA use, and 20% ± 6% during SIA use with no difference between treatments: mean difference = -0.9%; 95% CI: -2.4% to 0.6%; P = 0.23. Similarly, there was no difference in mean time in range (TIR) (78% and 77%) or median time below range (2.5% and 2.8%). Glycemic outcomes during exercise or postprandial periods were comparable for the two treatment arms. No severe hypoglycemia or diabetic ketoacidosis events occurred. Conclusions: FIA was not superior to SIA with hybrid AID system use in physically active children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes. Nonetheless, both insulin formulations enabled high overall TIR and low time above and below ranges, even during and after documented exercise. Trial Registration Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT04853030.
- Find related publications in this database (using NLM MeSH Indexing)
- Female - administration & dosage
- Adolescent - administration & dosage
- Humans - administration & dosage
- Child - administration & dosage
- Insulin Aspart - therapeutic use
- Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1 - drug therapy
- Insulin - therapeutic use
- Hypoglycemic Agents - therapeutic use
- Cross-Over Studies - administration & dosage
- Blood Glucose Self-Monitoring - administration & dosage
- Blood Glucose - administration & dosage
- Insulin, Regular, Human - administration & dosage
- Double-Blind Method - administration & dosage
- Find related publications in this database (Keywords)
- Exercise
- Faster acting insulin
- Children
- Adolescents
- Automated insulin delivery
- Type 1 diabetes