Background Closed-loop insulin delivery systems are expected to become a standard treatment for patients with type 1 diabetes. We aimed to assess whether the Diabeloop Generation 1 (DBLG1) hybrid closed-loop artificial pancreas system improved glucose control compared with sensor-assisted pump therapy.Methods In this multicentre, open-label, randomised, crossover trial, we recruited adults (aged ≥18 years) with at least a 2 year history of type 1 diabetes, who had been treated with external insulin pump therapy for at least 6 months, had glycated haemoglobin (HbA 1c ) of 10% or less (86 mmol/mol), and preserved hypoglycaemia awareness. After a 2-week run-in period, patients were randomly assigned (1:1) with a web-based system in randomly permuted blocks of two, to receive insulin via the hybrid closed-loop system (DBLG1; using a machine-learning-based algorithm) or sensor-assisted pump therapy over 12 weeks of free living, followed by an 8-week washout period and then the other intervention for 12 weeks. The primary outcome was the proportion of time that the sensor glucose concentration was within the target range (3•9-10•0 mmol/L) during the 12 week study period. Efficacy analyses were done in the modified intention-totreat population, which included all randomly assigned patients who completed both 12 week treatment periods. Safety analyses were done in all patients who were exposed to either of the two treatments at least once during the study. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02987556.

OBJECTIVEThe benefits of real-time continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) have been demonstrated in patients with type 1 diabetes. Our aim was to compare the effect of two modes of use of CGM, patient led or physician driven, for 1 year in subjects with poorly controlled type 1 diabetes.RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODSPatients with type 1 diabetes aged 8–60 years with HbA1c ≥8% were randomly assigned to three groups (1:1:1). Outcomes for glucose control were assessed at 1 year for two modes of CGM (group 1: patient led; group 2: physician driven) versus conventional self-monitoring of blood glucose (group 3: control).RESULTSA total of 257 subjects with type 1 diabetes underwent screening. Of these, 197 were randomized, with 178 patients completing the study (age: 36 ± 14 years; HbA1c: 8.9 ± 0.9%). HbA1c improved similarly in both CGM groups and was reduced compared with the control group (group 1 vs. group 3: −0.52%, P = 0.0006; group 2 vs. group 3: −0.47%, P = 0.0008; groups 1 + 2 vs. group 3: −0.50%, P < 0.0001). The incidence of hypoglycemia was similar in the three groups. Patient SF-36 questionnaire physical health score improved in both experimental CGM groups (P = 0.004). Sensor consumption was 34% lower in group 2 than in group 1 (median [Q1–Q3] consumption: group 1: 3.42/month [2.20–3.91] vs. group 2: 2.25/month [1.27–2.99], P = 0.001).CONCLUSIONSBoth patient-led and physician-driven CGM provide similar long-term improvement in glucose control in patients with poorly controlled type 1 diabetes, but the physician-driven CGM mode used fewer sensors.

Exposure to HPV vaccines was not associated with an increased risk of ADs within the time period studied. Results were robust to case definitions and time windows of exposure. Continued active surveillance is needed to confirm this finding for individual ADs.

No abstract

BackgroundSelf-management of diabetes minimizes the risk of macrovascular and microvascular complications, but understanding and/or adherence to self-management recommendations is often suboptimal. DIABEO is a smartphone app (downloaded via the internet) used to calculate bolus insulin doses. A previous study (TELEDIAB 1) showed that the use of DIABEO was associated with a significant improvement in glycemic control in patients with poorly controlled type 1 diabetes mellitus, particularly when combined with teleconsultations with physicians.ObjectiveHere, we present the protocol for a new study (Suivi A Grande Echelle d’une cohorte de diabétiques de type 1 et de type 2 sous schéma insulinique basal bolus par la TELEmédecine; abbreviated TELESAGE), conducted in a larger population of diabetic patients with poorly controlled basal-bolus insulin levels.MethodsTELESAGE is a multicenter, double-randomized, open-label, three parallel–arms study, conducted in approximately 100 centers in France. The study will compare a control group (arm 1: usual follow-up) with two DIABEO telemedicine systems: (1) physician-assisted telemedicine (arm 2), and (2) nurse-assisted telemonitoring and teleconsultations by a diabetologist’s task delegation (arm 3). Initial randomization will allocate the study arms in 12 French regions. A second randomization will assign patients in the groups allocated to each studied region. The primary objective of TELESAGE will be to investigate the effect of the DIABEO telemedicine system versus usual follow-up, with respect to improvements in the glycated hemoglobin levels of approximately 696 diabetic patients with poorly controlled basal-bolus insulin levels.ResultsThe TELESAGE study is sponsored by Sanofi (Gentilly, France). A primary completion date is expected in June 2018, and publication of results is expected within 6 months of work completion.ConclusionsThe TELESAGE study is expected to confirm the previous results of the TELEDIAB 1 study using a larger sample of diabetic patients. It is also expected to evaluate a nurse-assisted telemonitoring system. We will assess the potential of the DIABEO telemedicine service in terms of its utility and explore whether it can become an integral part of diabetes care for patients.Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT02287532; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02287532 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6ykajhJKd)