• Je něco špatně v tomto záznamu ?

Lower Glycated Hemoglobin with Real-Time Continuous Glucose Monitoring Than with Intermittently Scanned Continuous Glucose Monitoring After 1 Year: The CORRIDA LIFE Study

L. Radovnická, A. Hásková, QD. Do, E. Horová, V. Navrátilová, O. Mikeš, D. Cihlář, CG. Parkin, G. Grunberger, M. Prázný, J. Šoupal

. 2022 ; 24 (12) : 859-867. [pub] 20220922

Jazyk angličtina Země Spojené státy americké

Typ dokumentu klinické zkoušky, časopisecké články, práce podpořená grantem

Perzistentní odkaz   https://www.medvik.cz/link/bmc22032454

Background: The aim was to compare the efficacy of real-time continuous glucose monitoring (rtCGM) and intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitoring (isCGM) focusing on glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) as the primary endpoint. Methods: The CORRIDA LIFE was a 12-month, real-world, nonrandomized study that is part of the CORRIDA clinical trials program. The study compared rtCGM (Dexcom G5 or G6) and isCGM (FreeStyle Libre 14-Day; Abbott) in adults with type 1 diabetes (T1D). Only patients on multiple daily insulin injections or continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion with no automatic functions were included in this study. Primary outcome was the difference in HbA1c between study groups at 12 months. Results: One hundred ninety-one adults with T1D (mean age 40 ± 13 years, HbA1c 8.1% ± 3.4% [65 ± 14 mmol/mol]) participated in this study; 81 patients initiated rtCGM and 110 initiated isCGM. After 12-months, HbA1c was significantly lower with rtCGM versus isCGM (7.1% ± 3.1% [54.1 ± 10.1 mmol/mol] vs. 7.7% ± 3.3% [61.2 ± 12.2 mmol/mol]), P = 0.0001. The percentage of time in hypoglycemia (<70 mg/dL [<3.9 mmol/L]) was lower among rtCGM vs. isCGM participants [4.3% ± 2.8% vs. 6.4% ± 5.3%], P = 0.003). Patients with rtCGM spent less time in clinically significant hypoglycemia (<54 mg/dL [<3.0 mmol/L]) (0.9% ± 1.0% vs. 2.3% ± 2.5%, P < 0.0001) and more time in target range (70-180 mg/dL [3.9-10 mmol/L]) than isCGM users (67.5% ± 14.8% vs. 57.8% ± 17.0%), P = 0.0002. Conclusions: rtCGM was superior to isCGM in HbA1c, hypoglycemia, and other glycemic outcomes. Our findings provide guidance to clinicians when discussing monitoring options with their patients. The study was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04759495).

Citace poskytuje Crossref.org

000      
00000naa a2200000 a 4500
001      
bmc22032454
003      
CZ-PrNML
005      
20240228100640.0
007      
ta
008      
230120s2022 xxu f 000 0|eng||
009      
AR
024    7_
$a 10.1089/dia.2022.0152 $2 doi
035    __
$a (PubMed)36037056
040    __
$a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
041    0_
$a eng
044    __
$a xxu
100    1_
$a Radovnická, Lucie $u First Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic $u Department of Internal Medicine, Masaryk Hospital, Ústí nad Labem, Czech Republic
245    10
$a Lower Glycated Hemoglobin with Real-Time Continuous Glucose Monitoring Than with Intermittently Scanned Continuous Glucose Monitoring After 1 Year: The CORRIDA LIFE Study / $c L. Radovnická, A. Hásková, QD. Do, E. Horová, V. Navrátilová, O. Mikeš, D. Cihlář, CG. Parkin, G. Grunberger, M. Prázný, J. Šoupal
520    9_
$a Background: The aim was to compare the efficacy of real-time continuous glucose monitoring (rtCGM) and intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitoring (isCGM) focusing on glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) as the primary endpoint. Methods: The CORRIDA LIFE was a 12-month, real-world, nonrandomized study that is part of the CORRIDA clinical trials program. The study compared rtCGM (Dexcom G5 or G6) and isCGM (FreeStyle Libre 14-Day; Abbott) in adults with type 1 diabetes (T1D). Only patients on multiple daily insulin injections or continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion with no automatic functions were included in this study. Primary outcome was the difference in HbA1c between study groups at 12 months. Results: One hundred ninety-one adults with T1D (mean age 40 ± 13 years, HbA1c 8.1% ± 3.4% [65 ± 14 mmol/mol]) participated in this study; 81 patients initiated rtCGM and 110 initiated isCGM. After 12-months, HbA1c was significantly lower with rtCGM versus isCGM (7.1% ± 3.1% [54.1 ± 10.1 mmol/mol] vs. 7.7% ± 3.3% [61.2 ± 12.2 mmol/mol]), P = 0.0001. The percentage of time in hypoglycemia (<70 mg/dL [<3.9 mmol/L]) was lower among rtCGM vs. isCGM participants [4.3% ± 2.8% vs. 6.4% ± 5.3%], P = 0.003). Patients with rtCGM spent less time in clinically significant hypoglycemia (<54 mg/dL [<3.0 mmol/L]) (0.9% ± 1.0% vs. 2.3% ± 2.5%, P < 0.0001) and more time in target range (70-180 mg/dL [3.9-10 mmol/L]) than isCGM users (67.5% ± 14.8% vs. 57.8% ± 17.0%), P = 0.0002. Conclusions: rtCGM was superior to isCGM in HbA1c, hypoglycemia, and other glycemic outcomes. Our findings provide guidance to clinicians when discussing monitoring options with their patients. The study was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04759495).
650    _2
$a dospělí $7 D000328
650    _2
$a lidé $7 D006801
650    _2
$a lidé středního věku $7 D008875
650    _7
$a glykovaný hemoglobin $x analýza $7 D006442 $2 czmesh
650    _2
$a selfmonitoring glykemie $7 D015190
650    _2
$a krevní glukóza $7 D001786
650    12
$a diabetes mellitus 1. typu $x farmakoterapie $7 D003922
650    _2
$a hypoglykemika $x terapeutické užití $7 D007004
650    12
$a hypoglykemie $x prevence a kontrola $x farmakoterapie $7 D007003
650    _2
$a inzulin $x terapeutické užití $7 D007328
655    _2
$a klinické zkoušky $7 D016430
655    _2
$a časopisecké články $7 D016428
655    _2
$a práce podpořená grantem $7 D013485
700    1_
$a Hásková, Aneta $u Third Department of Internal Medicine, First Faculty of Medicine Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic
700    1_
$a Do, Quoc Dat, $u Third Department of Internal Medicine, First Faculty of Medicine Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic $d 1994- $7 xx0314623
700    1_
$a Horová, Eva $u Third Department of Internal Medicine, First Faculty of Medicine Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic
700    1_
$a Navrátilová, Vendula $u Third Department of Internal Medicine, First Faculty of Medicine Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic
700    1_
$a Mikeš, Ondřej $u Third Department of Internal Medicine, First Faculty of Medicine Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic
700    1_
$a Cihlář, David $u Department of Physical Education and Sport, Pedagogical Faculty, Jan Evangelista Purkyně University in Ústí nad Labem, Ústí nad Labem, Czech Republic
700    1_
$a Parkin, Christopher G $u CGParkin Communications, Inc., Henderson, Nevada, USA $1 https://orcid.org/0000000168385355
700    1_
$a Grunberger, George $u Grunberger Diabetes Institute, Bloomfield Hills, Michigan, USA
700    1_
$a Prázný, Martin $u Third Department of Internal Medicine, First Faculty of Medicine Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic
700    1_
$a Šoupal, Jan $u Third Department of Internal Medicine, First Faculty of Medicine Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic
773    0_
$w MED00173679 $t Diabetes technology & therapeutics $x 1557-8593 $g Roč. 24, č. 12 (2022), s. 859-867
856    41
$u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36037056 $y Pubmed
910    __
$a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y p $z 0
990    __
$a 20230120 $b ABA008
991    __
$a 20240228100635 $b ABA008
999    __
$a ok $b bmc $g 1891297 $s 1183789
BAS    __
$a 3
BAS    __
$a PreBMC-MEDLINE
BMC    __
$a 2022 $b 24 $c 12 $d 859-867 $e 20220922 $i 1557-8593 $m Diabetes technology & therapeutics $n Diabetes Technol Ther $x MED00173679
LZP    __
$a Pubmed-20230120

Najít záznam

Citační ukazatele

Možnosti archivace