Hybrid Closed-Loop Versus Manual Insulin Delivery in Adults With Type 1 Diabetes: A Post Hoc Analysis Using the Glycemia Risk Index
Primary result · GRIResult — go to the resultMean difference −22.8 CI −27.2 to −18.3Authors' conclusion
Twenty-six weeks of HCL improved GRI, in addition to other CGM metrics, compared with standard insulin therapy. The improvement in GRI was proportionally greater than the change in TIR, and GRI correlated with all CGM metrics. We suggest that GRI may be an appropriate primary outcome for closed-loop trials.
Study context
- Population
- Adults with T1D
- Participants
- 61 vs 59
- Comparison
- Hybrid closed-loop (HCL) vs manual insulin delivery
- HCLn = 61
- Controln = 59reference
- Primary endpoint
- Glycemia risk index (GRI), HCL vs control
- Follow-up
- 26 weeks
Primary result
GRI
Mean difference
−22.8
CI −27.2 to −18.3
P = 0.001
By group
HCL
33.5
mean · SD 11.7
Control
56.1
mean · SD 14.4
HCLvs Control
mean difference −22.8 (CI −27.2 to −18.3); P = 0.001
As reported in the abstract
Further findings
Time in range (TIR)
- Mean increase in TIR
- +14.8 (11.0, 18.5)%
Correlation of glycemia risk index (GRI) with continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) metrics (combined arms)
- GRI vs TIR (P = .001)
- r = −.954
- GRI vs time above range (TAR) >250 mg/dL (P = .001)
- r = .901
- GRI vs time below range (TBR) < 54 mg/dL (P = .001)
- r = .416
- GRI vs glycemic variability SD (P = .001)
- r = .916
- GRI vs CV (P = .001)
- r = .732
Original publication
Hybrid Closed-Loop Versus Manual Insulin Delivery in Adults With Type 1 Diabetes: A Post Hoc Analysis Using the Glycemia Risk Index. J Diabetes Sci Technol. Published 19 February 2024. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →