Page 139 - Glucose Monitoring Devices
P. 139

140    CHAPTER 7 Clinical impact of CGM use





                         CGM efficacy
                         Given the recent availability of CGM and limited long-term complication data, het-
                         erogeneous outcomes of glycemic control have been adopted as measures of clinical
                         efficacy. These include HbA1c, time in range, time spent in hypo- or hyperglycemia,
                         and various metrics of glycemic variability.

                         Retrospective CGM studies
                         Without immediate access to CGM data, retrospective (blinded) CGM users are un-
                         able to make real-time therapeutic changes and study outcomes derived from this
                         population are largely based on interventions following retrospective data analysis.

                         Observational trials
                         Observational retrospective studies have reported significant HbA1c reductions
                         across various age groups in individuals with T1DM, with some studies maintaining
                         insulin dose neutrality [42e44]. Although critiqued for low participant numbers, not
                         showing significant hypoglycemia reduction, and no comparative control arm, these
                         studies reinforce the value of CGM in identifying glucose trends and facilitating
                         effective therapeutic intervention.
                         Randomized controlled trials
                         Apart from a 3-month randomized controlled crossover study reporting a significant
                         reduction in HbA1c during the retrospective CGM phase [45], randomized
                         controlled trials (RCTs) have largely failed to establish superior glycemic control
                         using retrospective CGM. A large 12-week trial of 128 randomized T1DM children
                         found no significant difference in HbA1c change when comparing retrospective
                         CGM against SMBG [46]. Similarly, a 3-month adult trial comparing adjunctive
                         blinded CGM against SMBG failed to show a difference in the improvement of
                         HbA1c despite identifying half the cases of asymptomatic hypoglycemia [47]. Inter-
                         estingly, the control arms in both studies saw participants performing SMBG more
                         than the clinically recommended 4 times a day, an achievement most individuals
                         would find challenging under normal circumstances. These shortcomings are heavily
                         biased toward SMBG when comparing against CGM and must be considered before
                         transferring outcomes into real-world clinical settings.


                         Real-time CGM studies
                         Real-time CGM (RT-CGM) provides users with immediate access to glucose levels,
                         rate and direction of change, and glycemic profile patterns.

                         Observational
                         Observational studies following adults and children using RT-CGM also report
                         improvement in glycemic control and highlight the benefits of dynamic therapeutic
                         modification. Reduced time spent in hypo- and hyperglycemia has been successfully
   134   135   136   137   138   139   140   141   142   143   144