Thomas Danne

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.

Measurement of glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) has been the traditional method for assessing glycemic control. However, it does not reflect intra- and interday glycemic excursions that may lead to acute events (such as hypoglycemia) or postprandial hyperglycemia, which have been linked to both microvascular and macrovascular complications. Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM), either from real-time use (rtCGM) or intermittently viewed (iCGM), addresses many of the limitations inherent in HbA1c testing and self-monitoring of blood glucose. Although both provide the means to move beyond the HbA1c measurement as the sole marker of glycemic control, standardized metrics for analyzing CGM data are lacking. Moreover, clear criteria for matching people with diabetes to the most appropriate glucose monitoring methodologies, as well as standardized advice about how best to use the new information they provide, have yet to be established. In February 2017, 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 these issues. This article summarizes the ATTD consensus recommendations and represents the current understanding of how CGM results can affect outcomes.

BACKGROUND: In most patients with type 1 diabetes, adequate glycemic control is not achieved with insulin therapy alone. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of sotagliflozin, an oral inhibitor of sodium-glucose cotransporters 1 and 2, in combination with insulin treatment in patients with type 1 diabetes. METHODS: In this phase 3, double-blind trial, which was conducted at 133 centers worldwide, we randomly assigned 1402 patients with type 1 diabetes who were receiving treatment with any insulin therapy (pump or injections) to receive sotagliflozin (400 mg per day) or placebo for 24 weeks. The primary end point was a glycated hemoglobin level lower than 7.0% at week 24, with no episodes of severe hypoglycemia or diabetic ketoacidosis after randomization. Secondary end points included the change from baseline in glycated hemoglobin level, weight, systolic blood pressure, and mean daily bolus dose of insulin. RESULTS: A significantly larger proportion of patients in the sotagliflozin group than in the placebo group achieved the primary end point (200 of 699 patients [28.6%] vs. 107 of 703 [15.2%], P<0.001). The least-squares mean change from baseline was significantly greater in the sotagliflozin group than in the placebo group for glycated hemoglobin (difference, -0.46 percentage points), weight (-2.98 kg), systolic blood pressure (-3.5 mm Hg), and mean daily bolus dose of insulin (-2.8 units per day) (P≤0.002 for all comparisons). The rate of severe hypoglycemia was similar in the sotagliflozin group and the placebo group (3.0% [21 patients] and 2.4% [17], respectively). The rate of documented hypoglycemia with a blood glucose level of 55 mg per deciliter (3.1 mmol per liter) or below was significantly lower in the sotagliflozin group than in the placebo group. The rate of diabetic ketoacidosis was higher in the sotagliflozin group than in the placebo group (3.0% [21 patients] and 0.6% [4], respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with type 1 diabetes who were receiving insulin, the proportion of patients who achieved a glycated hemoglobin level lower than 7.0% with no severe hypoglycemia or diabetic ketoacidosis was larger in the group that received sotagliflozin than in the placebo group. However, the rate of diabetic ketoacidosis was higher in the sotagliflozin group. (Funded by Lexicon Pharmaceuticals; inTandem3 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02531035 .).

Sodium-glucose cotransporter (SGLT) inhibitors are new oral antidiabetes medications shown to effectively reduce glycated hemoglobin (A1C) and glycemic variability, blood pressure, and body weight without intrinsic properties to cause hypoglycemia in people with type 1 diabetes. However, recent studies, particularly in individuals with type 1 diabetes, have demonstrated increases in the absolute risk of diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA). Some cases presented with near-normal blood glucose levels or mild hyperglycemia, complicating the recognition/diagnosis of DKA and potentially delaying treatment. Several SGLT inhibitors are currently under review by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and European regulatory agencies as adjuncts to insulin therapy in people with type 1 diabetes. Strategies must be developed and disseminated to the medical community to mitigate the associated DKA risk. This Consensus Report reviews current data regarding SGLT inhibitor use and provides recommendations to enhance the safety of SGLT inhibitors in people with type 1 diabetes.