The Optimal “Time in Range” and “Time below Range” are Difficult to Coordinate in Patients with Type 1 Diabetes

Sekiguchi, Sho; Yamada, Eijiro; Nakajima, Yasuyo; Matsumoto, Shunichi; Yoshino, Satoshi; Horiguchi, Kazuhiko; Ishida, Emi; Uehara, Ryota; Okada, Shuichi; Yamada, Masanobu

doi:10.1620/tjem.255.221

Cited by 2 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

Section: Definition Of Time In Rangementioning

confidence: 99%

“…In comparison, it is not challenging for well-controlled T2DM patients to achieve both TIR and TBR targets. [15] When the upper limit of the target range is set in the range of 140 to 200 mg/dL (7.8-11.1 mmol/L), abnormal CIMT and DR severity are significantly correlated with TIR, indicating it is feasible to adjust the target range according to the population studied. [16] Clinical targets for TIR In February 2019, the International Consensus on Time in Range recommended the TIR (70-180 mg/dL [3.9-10.0 mmol/L]) target of >70%, with the TBR <70 mg/dL (3.9 mmol/L) of <4%, and the TBR <54 mg/dL (3.0 mmol/L) of <1% for the general population of T1DM and T2DM.…”

Section: Definition Of Time In Rangementioning

confidence: 99%

“…In addition, it can be difficult for children with T1DM to achieve the target TIR safely (avoiding excessive hypoglycemia) when the target range of TIR is set at 70 to 180 mg/dL (3.9–10.0 mmol/L). In comparison, it is not challenging for well-controlled T2DM patients to achieve both TIR and TBR targets [15] . When the upper limit of the target range is set in the range of 140 to 200 mg/dL (7.8–11.1 mmol/L), abnormal CIMT and DR severity are significantly correlated with TIR, indicating it is feasible to adjust the target range according to the population studied [16] …”

Section: Definition Of Time In Rangementioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Research progress in the application of time in range: more than a percentage

Wan

et al. 2023

Chinese Medical Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Glucose monitoring is an important part of medical care in diabetes mellitus, which not only helps assess glycemic control and treatment safety, but also assists with treatment adjustment. With the development of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM), the use of CGM has increased rapidly. With the wealth of glucose data produced by CGM, new metrics are greatly needed to optimally evaluate glucose status and guide the treatment. One of the parameters that CGM provides, time in range (TIR), has been recognized as a key metric by the international consensus. Before the adoption of TIR in clinical practice, several issues including the minimum length of CGM use, the setting of the target range, and individualized TIR goals are summarized. Additionally, we discussed the mounting evidence supporting the association between TIR and diabetes-related outcomes. As a novel glucose metric, it is of interest to compare TIR with other conventional glucose markers such as glycated hemoglobin A1c. It is anticipated that the use of TIR may provide further information on the quality of glucose control and lead to improved diabetes management.

show abstract

Section: Definition Of Time In Rangementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Definition Of Time In Rangementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Definition Of Time In Rangementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Research progress in the application of time in range: more than a percentage

Wan

et al. 2023

Chinese Medical Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Glycemic metrics in Japanese isCGM users – Analysis by diabetes type and therapy

Ogawa,

Urakami,

Kadowaki

et al. 2024

J of Diabetes Invest

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aims/IntroductionThe FreeStyle Libre (FSL) intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitoring (isCGM) system continually measures interstitial glucose levels and provides the data to users in numerical and graphical formats that guide users in their daily diabetes self‐management. Although numerous studies have demonstrated the glycemic benefits of FSL in pediatric and adult populations, few studies have characterized FSL use specifically by Japanese adults with type 1 or 2 diabetes. We utilized established CGM metrics to assess glycemic control in a large cohort of Japanese adults with type 1 and 2 diabetes.Materials and MethodsA total of 3,463 anonymized FSL users provided categorization into one of four therapy groups of interest: type 1 diabetes (n = 1,768), type 2 diabetes‐multiple daily injections (MDI) (n = 612), type 2 diabetes‐basal (BOI) (n = 343), and type 2 diabetes‐non‐insulin (NIT) (n = 740). Established CGM metrics were used to assess glycemic control.ResultsAll study groups showed relatively good glycemic control. Type 1 diabetes users showed the highest glucose variability (SD, 61 mg/dL; and %CV, 40%), above the established target level (%CV ≤ 36%). type 2 diabetes‐MDI and type 2 diabetes‐BOI users had similar levels of glucose variability (both within target). Type 2 diabetes‐NIT users had the highest mean % time in range (TIR) (84.3%) and largest percentage of users that met the target of %TIR > 70% (87.4%). In contrast, type 1 diabetes users had the lowest mean %TIR (62.6%) and the lowest percentage meeting the established %TIR target (30.5%).ConclusionsBy utilizing CGM devices in daily diabetes care, both healthcare professionals and patients can monitor glycemic excursions and gain insights into their historical glucose control patterns.

show abstract

The Optimal “Time in Range” and “Time below Range” are Difficult to Coordinate in Patients with Type 1 Diabetes

Cited by 2 publications

References 18 publications

Research progress in the application of time in range: more than a percentage

Research progress in the application of time in range: more than a percentage

Glycemic metrics in Japanese isCGM users – Analysis by diabetes type and therapy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About