Search

Introduction: An error grid compares measured versus reference glucose concentrations to assign clinical risk values to observed errors. Widely used error grids for blood glucose monitors (BGMs) have limited value because they do not also reflect clinical accuracy of continuous glucose monitors (CGMs)., Methods: Diabetes Technology Society (DTS) convened 89 international experts in glucose monitoring to (1) smooth the borders of the Surveillance Error Grid (SEG) zones and create a user-friendly tool-the DTS Error Grid; (2) define five risk zones of clinical point accuracy (A-E) to be identical for BGMs and CGMs; (3) determine a relationship between DTS Error Grid percent in Zone A and mean absolute relative difference (MARD) from analyzing 22 BGM and nine CGM accuracy studies; and (4) create trend risk categories (1-5) for CGM trend accuracy., Results: The DTS Error Grid for point accuracy contains five risk zones (A-E) with straight-line borders that can be applied to both BGM and CGM accuracy data. In a data set combining point accuracy data from 18 BGMs, 2.6% of total data pairs equally moved from Zones A to B and vice versa (SEG compared with DTS Error Grid). For every 1% increase in percent data in Zone A, the MARD decreased by approximately 0.33%. We also created a DTS Trend Accuracy Matrix with five trend risk categories (1-5) for CGM-reported trend indicators compared with reference trends calculated from reference glucose., Conclusion: The DTS Error Grid combines contemporary clinician input regarding clinical point accuracy for BGMs and CGMs. The DTS Trend Accuracy Matrix assesses accuracy of CGM trend indicators., Competing Interests: Declaration of Conflicting InterestsThe author(s) declared the following potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: D.C.K. is a consultant for Afon, Lifecare, Novo, Samsung, embecta, Glucotrack, SynchNeuro, and Thirdwayv. G.F. is CEO of IfDT. G.F./IfDT has/have received research support, speakers’ honoraria or consulting fees in the last three years from Abbott, Ascensia, Berlin Chemie, Boydsense, Dexcom, Glucoset, i-SENS, Lilly, Menarini, Novo Nordisk, Perfood, Pharmasens, Roche, Sinocare, Terumo, Ypsomed. S.P. is an employee of IfDT. B.P.K. declares patent royalties handled by UVA from: DexCom, J&J, Novo Nordisk, and Sanofi; and research support handled by UVA: Dexcom, Novo Nordisk, Tandem Diabetes Care. D.K. has received research support from Abbott Diabetes Care. M.S.D.A. is currently receiving in kind support (CGM devices) from Dexcom Inc for an investigator-initiated clinical study. K.D. receives research funding from Dexcom, Abbott, Sanofi, Viacyte, Insulet, consulting fees from Eli Lilly, Dexcom, Insulet, Oppenheimer, Elsevier, honoraria from Academy for Continued Healthcare Learning, Med Learning Group, Medscape, Impact Education, and royalties from UptoDate. S.M. is in receipt of an investigator-initiated grant from DexCom, has received speaker fees from Sanofi & Lilly, is funded by a Wellcome Trust (223024/Z/21/Z), and is supported by the NIHR Imperial Biomedical Research Centre. A.S. was supported by the NSF Engineering Research Center for Precise Advanced Technologies and Health Systems for Underserved Populations (PATHS-UP) (#1648451). V.N.S. reports receiving personal fees from Sanofi, Embecta, NovoNordisk, Dexcom, Insulet, Tandem Diabetes Care, Ascensia Diabetes Care, Genomelink and LumosFit for consulting, advising or speaking. N.K.T. is a consultant for Roche Diagnostics / Roche Molecular Systems / Radiometer. UC Davis is a Roche Diagnostics Center of Excellence. N.K.T. has received speaking honoraria for Roche Diagnostics, Nova Biomedical, Thermo Fisher, and Radiometer. N.K.T. is also Chair-Elect for the Association for Diagnostic and Laboratory Medicine (ADLM) Critical and Point-of-Care Testing Division, Co-Founder of the Machine Intelligene Learning Optimizer (MILO), Inc, and a member of the International Federation for Clinical Chemistry (IFCC) continuous glucose monitoring workgroup. T.T. is a consultant for Clinical ink. R.E.A. is a consultant for Clinical ink. D.T.A. has received speaker’s honoraria from Abbott, Ascensia Diabetes Care, Insulet, Lilly Diabetes, Mannkind, Novo Nordisk, and Xeris Pharmaceuticals. D.T.A. has received consulting fees from Ascensia Diabetes Care, Lilly Diabetes, and Senseonics. H.K.A. received research grants through University of Colorado from Dexcom, Tandem Diabetes, Medtronic, Mannkind, IM Therapeutics, IAFMS, and received honorarium through University of Colorado for consulting from Dexcom, Tandem Diabetes, and Medtronic. M.E.A.-S. has served on the advisory boards for Abbott, Medtronic, Insulet, VitalAire, Sanofi, Eli Lilly, and Dexcom; has received honoraria for speaking from Abbott, Eli Lilly, Medtronic, Novo Nordisk, Sanofi, VitalAire, and Eli Lilly; and received research support from Medtronic and Sanofi. T.S.B. has received research support from Abbott Rapid Diagnostics, Biolinq, Dexcom, Eli Lilly, Medtronic, Medtrum, Novo Nordisk, Sanofi, Senseonics, and vTv Therapeutics and consulting honoraria from Abbott Diabetes, Abbott Rapid Diagnostics, ACON, CeQur, HagarTech, Intuity Medical, Lifescan, Mannkind, Medtronic, Novo, Perspirion, Sanofi, Sequel Med Tech, and Ypsomed. M.B. currently participates on the Hospital Advisory board with Dexcom and has received research support from Dexcom. L.B. has received research/product support from Dexcom, Ypsomed, and Boehringer Ingelheim; speaker honoraria from Dexcom and Oviva; and participated in advisory boards of Dexcom, Novo Nordisk, Sanofi, Ypsomed, Oviva, and Roche Diabetes Care. Y.M.B. has received honoraria for lectures and scientific advisory from Roche and AstraZeneca in the past 12 months. J.E.B. is on the Speaker’s bureau for Insulet and on the Advisory Board for Cardinal Health and Lifescan. J.E.B. is a consultant for Embecta. J.E.B. receives research support from the Leona M. and Harry B. Helmsley Charitable Trust. E.C. is on the scientific advisory board for Novo Nordisk, Eli-Lilly, Adocia, Arecor, Proventionbio, Portal Insulin, and MannKind. D.C. was a Dexcom employee from August 2018 to May 2024. D.C. is a shareholder of Dexcom, Lilly, Abbott and Tandem. M.C. has received consulting fees from Glooko and research support from Dexcom and Abbott Diabetes Care. G.L.C. is a shareholder of BioTex, Inc., Basepair Biotechnologies Inc., Coordination Centric, Inc., and Shape Memory Medical, Inc. G.L.C. is supported by the NSF Engineering Research Center for Precise Advanced Technologies and Health Systems for Underserved Populations (PATHS-UP) (#1648451). K.K.D. has received honoraria, travel, or fees for advisory boards from AstraZeneca, Novo Nordisk, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, Abbott Diabetes, Menarini, and Sanofi in the last 12 months. J.E. receives federal funding from FDA, NIMHD, and NCATS and is a consultant for Sanofi. C.F. receives royalties from Dexcom and Novo Nordisk managed through her institution. G.A.F. is an advisor for 180 Life Sciences, 89bio, Adocia, Abbott, AdipoPharma, Aerami, Amolyt, Carthera, Catalyst, Cohen Global, CMC Magnetics, Diasome, Eleos, Entera Bio, Enterin, Glyscend, Hagar, Hogan Lovells, IM Therapeutics, Innoneo, Intarcia, Levicure, Lilly Asia Ventures, Lumos, Mars Symbioscience, Melior, metaLead Therapeutics, Microbiotix, MMD, Modular Medical, New Amsterdam, Northwestern, NuSirt, NuVox, Oramed, Pano, Pasithea, PhylloPharma, Pleiogenix, Recordati, Regor, Remodeless, Renaissance, RenovoRx, Rivus, RxMP, Sera Biopharma, Seraxis, Serpin, SFC Fluidics, Skinject, SROne, Stalicla, Surf Bio, TIXiMED, Veroscience, Verthermia, WaveBreak, Zealand Pharma, and Zucara. M.A.L.G. is a consultant for Abbott, Medtronic, Novonordisk, and Roche. R.J.G. received research support from Novo Nordisk, Dexcom and Eli Lilly and consulting fees/advisory fees from Abbott Diabetes Care, Aztra Zeneca, Bayer, Boehringer, Dexcom, Eli Lilly, Novo Nordisk, and Medtronic, outside of this work. R.J.G. is partially supported by the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases of the National Institutes of Health under Award Numbers P30DK111024, K23DK123384, R03DK138255, and U2CD137135. A.M.G.-M. reports speaker fees from Novo Nordisk, Sanofi, Elli Lilly, Boehringer Ingelheim, Abbott, and Medtronic. L.H. is a consultant for a number of companies that are developing innovative solutions for the treatment of people with diabetes. N.H. reports Advisory Board member fees from Abbott Diabetes Care and Insulet as well as honoraria for lectures from Berlin-Chemie AG, Becton Dickenson, Sanofi Germany, Roche Diabetes Care, and Dexcom Germany. T.H. serves on the advisory board for Acella and Horizons Therapeutics (no financial compensation). S.H. has served on the advisory board for Tandem, Dexcom, and Medtronic, and received honoraria for nonpromotional educational and/or consultancy work from Abbott, Insulet, Dexcom, Roche, and Sanofi. P.G.J. is a shareholder of Pacific Diabetes Technologies Inc. and serves on the advisory board for Eli Lilly. P.G.J. received grant support from SFC Fluidics and research support from Eli Lilly and Dexcom. J.J. has received fees from lectures and or advisory boards from Abbott, Astra Zeneca, Boeringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, Medtronic, Nordic Infucare, Novo Nordisk, and Sanofi. S.R.J is a consultant for USV, Marico, Glenmark, Franco Indian, Twin Health, Biocon, and Zydus Lifesciences. S.R.J. received speaking honoraria from Abbott, Novo Nordisk, MSD, Sanofi, Boehringer Ingelheim, AstraZeneca, Lupin, Bayer Zydus, USV, DRL, Meyer Organics, Servier, Natco. R.A.L. is a consultant for Abbott Diabetes Care, Biolinq, Capillary Biomedical, Deep Valley Labs, Gluroo, PhysioLogic Devices, Portal Insulin, Sanofi, and Tidepool. R.A.L. has served on advisory boards for. ProventionBio and Lilly. R.A.L. receives research support through his institution from Insulet, Medtronic, Tandem, and Sinocare. L.A.L. has received research funding from, has provided CME on behalf of, and/or has acted as an advisor to Abbott, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, Lexicon, Merck, Novo Nordisk, Pfizer, and Sanofi. M.L. has been a consultant or received honoraria from Astra Zeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, Nordic InfuCare, and Novo Nordisk, and has received research grants from Eli Lilly and Novo Nordisk, all outside of the submitted work. J.K.M. is a member of advisory boards of Abbott Diabetes Care, Becton-Dickinson, Biomea Fusion, Eli Lilly, Embecta, Medtronic, NovoNordisk A/S, Roche Diabetes Care, Sanofi-Aventis, and Viatris and received speaker honoraria from A. Menarini Diagnostics, Abbott Diabetes Care, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Dexcom, Eli Lilly, Medtrust, MSD, NovoNordisk A/S, Roche Diabetes Care, Sanofi, Viatris, and Ypsomed. J.K.M. is a shareholder of decide Clinical Software GmbH and elyte Diagnostics. A.M. reports speaker fees from Novo Nordisk. M.M. has an existing research & development relationship with Scientific Bioprocessing, Inc and has been a consultant for Abbott. S.-J.M. is a consultant for Abbott, Curestream, Daewoong, EOFlow, G2e, Huons, iSense, Medtronic, Novo Nordisk, and Sanofi. D.N.O. has served on advisory boards for Abbott Laboratories, Medtronic, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novo Nordisk, Roche, and Sanofi; received research support from Medtronic, Novo Nordisk, Roche, Eli Lilly and Company, and Sanofi; and received travel support from Novo Nordisk and Merck Sharp & Dohme. F.J.P. has received research support (to Emory University) from Dexcom, Insulet, Novo Nordisk, Tandem, and Ideal Medical Technologies, and has received consulting fees from Dexcom. A.L.P. is on the advisory board of Medscape, Vertex, and Lilly; receives research support from Insulin and Abbott; and has stock options in Omada Health. R.P.-B. receives grant support from Novo Nordisk, Lexicon Pharmaceuticals, and Medtronic and received consulting fees from Bayer, Lexicon Pharmaceuticals, Novo Nordisk, and Roche. C.M.R. has received honoraria and/or grant support from AstraZeneca, Dexcom, Fresenius, and Vifor. D.B.S. is supported by the Intramural Research Program of the National Institutes of Health. S.S. was a Novo Nordisk employee from 2022-2023. S.S. has served as advisor for Novo Nordisk and has received speaker fees from Novo Nordisk and Nordic Infucare within the past three years. G.D.S’s employer, nonprofit International Diabetes Center, HealthPartners Institute, has received educational grant funds from Abbott Diabetes Care, Medscape, and Sanofi-Aventis Groupe. G.D.S receives no personal income/honorarium from these activities. K.S. received grant supports from Arkray, Terumo, and Dexcom. E.K.S. is partly supported by the VA Merit Award (1I01CX001825) from the US Department of Veterans Affairs Clinical Sciences Research and has received unrestricted research support from Dexcom and Tandem Diabetes (to Baltimore VA Medical Center and to University of Maryland) for the conduction of clinical trials. N.L.S. received funding from Novo Nordisk for an investigator-initiated research grant unrelated to the current project. G.E.U. is partly supported by research grants from National Institutes of Health (NIH/NATS UL 3UL1TR002378-05S2) from the Clinical and Translational Science Award program, and from National Institutes of Health and National Center for Research Resources (NIH/NIDDK 2P30DK111024-06). G.E.U. has received research support (to Emory University) from Abbott, Bayer, and Dexcom; and has participated in advisory boards for Dexcom and GlyCare. E.W. has received consulting fees from Abbott Diabetes Care, Ascensia, Bayer, Boehringer, Ingelheim, Embecta, GlaxoSmithKline, Lilly, Medtronic, Renalytix, and Sanofi. E.W. has received honoraria from Abbott Diabetes Care, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, GlaxoSmithKline, Lilly, Medtronic, Renalytix, and Sanofi. E.W. is on the Speakers’ Bureau from Abbott Diabetes Care, Bayer, Boehringer, Ingelheim, GlaxoSmithKline, Lilly, Renalytix, and Sanofi. M.Z. is a consultant for DexCom, Inc. M.A.K. is Chief Medical Officer of QuesGen, Inc. C.T., C.L., B.V.H., J.S.K., W.A.L., S.Y.R., J.J.S., K.W., C.W., K.R., C.N.H., A.T.A., A.A., R.R.B., E.M.B., J.G.C., K.Y.C., A.D., N.E., S.K.K., U.M., N.M., C.M., J.H.N., A.P., P.R., S.M.S., B.S., M.V., H.W.V., J.W., A.H.B.W., and S.Y. have nothing to disclose.

The Biomarkers for the Diagnosis of Heart Failure in Diabetes webinar was hosted by Diabetes Technology Society on September 20, 2023, with the objective to review current evidence and management practices of biomarker screening for heart failure in people with diabetes. The webinar discussed (1) the four stages of heart failure, (2) diabetes and heart failure, (3) natriuretic peptide and troponin for diagnosing heart failure in diabetes, (4) emerging composite and investigational biomarkers for diagnosing heart failure, and (5) prevention of heart failure progression. Experts in heart failure from the fields of clinical chemistry, cardiology, and diabetology presented data about the importance of screening for heart failure as an often-unnoticed complication of people with type 1 and type 2 diabetes., Competing Interests: Declaration of Conflicting InterestsThe author(s) declared the following potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: GAF is the Executive Chairman of Kinexum, which advises multiple health product companies, including multiple insulin manufacturers. Relevant device companies advised include Abbott, Biolinq, CMC Magnetics, Diabeloop, Hagar, Know Labs, Modular Medical, SFC Fluidics, and Surf Bio. He was formerly the Group Leader of the Division of Metabolism and Endocrine Drug Products at the US Food and Drug Administration. DBS receives research support from the Intramural Research Program at the National Institutes of Health. JLJ receives grant support from Novartis Pharmaceuticals, Applied Therapeutics, and Innolife; receives consulting income from Abbott Diagnostics, Jana Care, Janssen, Novartis, Prevencio, Quidel, and Roche Diagnostics; and belongs to clinical endpoint committees/data safety monitoring boards for Abbott, AbbVie, Amgen, CVRx, Janssen, MyoKardia, and Takeda. JLJ is also a trustee of the American College of Cardiology. AP has received grant funding (to the institution) from Applied Therapeutics, Gilead Sciences, Ultromics, Myovista, and Roche; has served as a consultant for and/or received honoraria outside of this study as an advisor/consultant for Tricog Health Inc, Lilly USA, Rivus, Cytokinetics, Roche Diagnostics, Sarfez Therapeutics, Edwards Lifesciences, Merck, Bayer, Novo Nordisk, Alleviant, Axon Therapies; and has received nonfinancial support from Pfizer and Merck. AP is also a consultant for Palomarin Inc with stocks compensation and has received research support from the National Institute on Aging GEMSSTAR Grant (1R03AG067960-01), the National Institute on Minority Health and Disparities (R01MD017529), and the National Institute of Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (R21HL169708). RP-B receives grant support from Novo Nordisk, Lexicon Pharmaceuticals, and Medtronic and received consulting fee from Bayer, Lexicon Pharmaceuticals, Novo Nordisk, Roche. DCK is a consultant for Afon, Better Therapeutics, Integrity, Lifecare, Nevro, Novo, and Thirdwayv. REA, TT, AHBW, and IAH have no disclosures.

Background: We evaluated the feasibility of real-time continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) for titrating continuous intravenous insulin infusion (CII) to manage hyperglycemia in postoperative individuals in the cardiovascular intensive care unit and assessed their accuracy, nursing acceptance, and postoperative individual satisfaction., Methods: Dexcom G6 CGM devices were applied to 59 postsurgical patients with hyperglycemia receiving CII. A hybrid approach combining CGM with periodic point-of-care blood glucose (POC-BG) tests with two phases (initial-ongoing) of validation was used to determine CGM accuracy. Mean and median absolute relative differences and Clarke Error Grid were plotted to evaluate the CGM accuracy. Surveys of nurses and patients on the use of CGMs experience were conducted and results were analyzed., Results: In this cohort (mean age 64, 32% female, 32% with diabetes) with 864 paired POC-BG and CGM values analyzed, mean and median absolute relative difference between POC-BG and CGM values were 13.2% and 9.8%, respectively. 99.7% of paired CGM and POC-BG were in Zones A and B of the Clarke Error Grid. Responses from nurses reported CGMs being very or quite convenient (n = 28; 93%) and it was favored over POC-BG testing (n = 28; 93%). Majority of patients (n = 42; 93%) reported their care process using CGM as being good or very good., Conclusion: This pilot study demonstrates the feasibility, accuracy, and nursing convenience of adopting CGM via a hybrid approach for insulin titration in postoperative settings. These findings provide robust rationale for larger confirmatory studies to evaluate the benefit of CGM in postoperative care to improve workflow, enhance health outcomes, and cost-effectiveness., Competing Interests: Declaration of Conflicting InterestsThe author(s) declared the following potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: LA, YKL, LFS, YH, CAD, PA, FA, SK, ED, ND, YQ, RF, NHE, and RG have no conflicting interest to disclose. RPB received grant support to University of Michigan from Dexcom.

This article examines the importance of advanced glycation endproducts (AGEs) and summarizes the structure of AGEs, pathological changes associated with AGEs, the contribution of AGEs to metabolic memory, and the value of AGEs as a predictor of diabetic complications and cardiovascular disease in people with and without diabetes. As a practical focus, skin autofluorescence (SAF) is examined as an attractive approach for estimating AGE burden. The measurement of AGEs may be of significant value to specific individuals and groups, including Black and Hispanic/Latino Americans, as they appear to have higher concentrations of hemoglobin A 1c (HbA 1c ) than would be predicted by other metrics of mean glycemia. We hypothesize that if the amount of glycation of HbA 1c is greater than expected from measured glucose levels, and if AGEs are accumulating, then this accumulation of AGEs might account for the increased rate of complications of diabetes in populations with high rates of vascular disease and other complications. Thus, identifying and modifying the burden of AGEs based on measurement of AGEs by SAF may turn out to be a worthwhile metric to determine individuals who are at high risk for the complications of diabetes as well as others without diabetes at risk of vascular disease. We conclude that available evidence supports SAF as both a clinical measurement and as a means of evaluating interventions aimed at reducing the risks of vascular disease and diabetic complications., Competing Interests: Declaration of Conflicting InterestsThe author(s) declared the following potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: DCK is a consultant for Afon, Better Therapeutics, Integrity, Lifecare, Nevro, Novo, Samsung, and Thirdwayv. AP has received grant funding (to the institution) from Applied Therapeutics, Gilead Sciences, Ultromics, Myovista, and Roche; has served as a consultant for and/or received honoraria outside of the present study as an advisor/consultant for Tricog Health Inc, Lilly USA, Rivus, Cytokinetics, Roche Diagnostics, Sarfez Therapeutics, Edwards Lifesciences, Merck, Bayer, Novo Nordisk, Alleviant, Axon Therapies, and has received nonfinancial support from Pfizer and Merck. AP is also a consultant for Palomarin Inc with stocks compensation and has received research support from the National Institute on Aging GEMSSTAR Grant (1R03AG067960-01), the National Institute on Minority Health and Disparities (R01MD017529), and the National Institute of Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (R21HL169708). CR has received honoraria and/or grant support from AstraZeneca, Dexcom, Fresenius, and Vifor. GAF is an advisor for 180 Life Sciences, 89bio, Adocia, Abbott, AdipoPharma, Aerami, Amolyt, Carthera, Catalyst, Cohen Global, CMC Magnetics, Diasome, Eleos, Entera Bio, Enterin, Glyscend, Hagar, Hogan Lovells, IM Therapeutics, Innoneo, Intarcia, Levicure, Lilly Asia Ventures, Lumos, Mars Symbioscience, Melior, metaLead Therapeutics, Microbiotix, MMD, Modular Medical, New Amsterdam, Northwestern, NuSirt, NuVox, Oramed, Pano, Pasithea, PhylloPharma, Pleiogenix, Recordati, Regor, Remodeless, Renaissance, RenovoRx, Rivus, RxMP, Sera Biopharma, Seraxis, Serpin, SFC Fluidics, Skinject, SROne, Stalicla, Surf Bio, TIXiMED, Veroscience, Verthermia, WaveBreak, Zealand Pharma, and Zucara. DBS receives research support from the Intramural Research Program of the National Institutes of Health. RP-B receives grant support from Novo Nordisk, Lexicon Pharmaceuticals, and Medtronic and received consulting fee from Bayer, Lexicon Pharmaceuticals, Novo Nordisk, and Roche. DK has received research support from Abbott Diabetes Care and has been a Consultant to Sanofi, Better Therapeutics, and Abbott Diagnostics.

Background: A composite metric for the quality of glycemia from continuous glucose monitor (CGM) tracings could be useful for assisting with basic clinical interpretation of CGM data., Methods: We assembled a data set of 14-day CGM tracings from 225 insulin-treated adults with diabetes. Using a balanced incomplete block design, 330 clinicians who were highly experienced with CGM analysis and interpretation ranked the CGM tracings from best to worst quality of glycemia. We used principal component analysis and multiple regressions to develop a model to predict the clinician ranking based on seven standard metrics in an Ambulatory Glucose Profile: very low-glucose and low-glucose hypoglycemia; very high-glucose and high-glucose hyperglycemia; time in range; mean glucose; and coefficient of variation., Results: The analysis showed that clinician rankings depend on two components, one related to hypoglycemia that gives more weight to very low-glucose than to low-glucose and the other related to hyperglycemia that likewise gives greater weight to very high-glucose than to high-glucose. These two components should be calculated and displayed separately, but they can also be combined into a single Glycemia Risk Index (GRI) that corresponds closely to the clinician rankings of the overall quality of glycemia (r = 0.95). The GRI can be displayed graphically on a GRI Grid with the hypoglycemia component on the horizontal axis and the hyperglycemia component on the vertical axis. Diagonal lines divide the graph into five zones (quintiles) corresponding to the best (0th to 20th percentile) to worst (81st to 100th percentile) overall quality of glycemia. The GRI Grid enables users to track sequential changes within an individual over time and compare groups of individuals., Conclusion: The GRI is a single-number summary of the quality of glycemia. Its hypoglycemia and hyperglycemia components provide actionable scores and a graphical display (the GRI Grid) that can be used by clinicians and researchers to determine the glycemic effects of prescribed and investigational treatments.

The National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK) Diabetic Foot Consortium (DFC) was established in September 2018 by the NIDDK to build an organization to facilitate the highest quality of clinical research on diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs) that will answer clinically significant questions to improve DFU healing and prevent amputations. The initial focus of the DFC is to develop and validate biomarkers for DFUs that can be used in clinical care and research. The DFC consists of a data coordinating center (DCC) for operational oversight and statistical analysis, clinical sites for participant recruitment and evaluation, and biomarker analysis units (BAUs). The DFC is currently studying biomarkers to predict wound healing and recurrence and is collecting biosamples for future studies through a biorepository. The DFC plans to address the challenges of recruitment and eligibility criteria for DFU clinical trials by taking an approach of "No DFU Patient Goes Unstudied." In this platform approach, clinical history, DFU outcome, wound imaging, and biologic measurements from a large number of patients will be captured and the in-depth longitudinal data set will be analyzed to develop a computational-based DFU risk factor profile to facilitate scientifically sound clinical trial design. The DFC will expand its platform to include studies of the role of social determinants of health, such as food insecurity, housing instability, limited health literacy, and poor social support. The DFC is starting partnerships with the broad group of stakeholders in the wound care community.

Background: While we expect that patients who adjust their insulin delivery algorithms between clinic visits to have better glucose control compared to those who do not, this effect has not been quantified., Method: This is a single-center retrospective cohort study including pediatric and adult patients with type 1 diabetes evaluating insulin pump self-management behaviors. Basal insulin dose information was obtained from the Glooko-Diasend database, and used to quantify the frequency and magnitude of basal insulin daily dose adjustments within the 90-day window preceding HbA1c measurement. We use a linear mixed-effects model to analyze associations between frequency/magnitude of daily basal insulin changes and HbA1c., Results: We present data on 114 adult (44 ± 17 years, 60% female) and 212 pediatric (12 ± 4 years, 50% female) patients. Individuals changed their basal insulin dose on 72%-94% (interquartile range [IQR]) of observed days relative to the previous day. These changes varied 0.6%-2.4% IQR from the previous day's value. In pediatric patients, lower HbA1c was associated with more frequent daily profile adjustments, while controlling for rate of hypoglycemia (z = -3.2, P  = .001). In adults, there was no relationship between HbA1c and magnitude or frequency of basal profile adjustments., Conclusions: Pediatric patients who frequently modify their basal insulin exhibit somewhat better clinical outcomes, although the magnitude by which their basal amount is changed does not contribute to this effect.

Shear stresses have been implicated in the formation of diabetes-related foot ulcers. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of a novel shear-reducing insole on the thermal response to walking, balance, and gait. Twenty-seven diabetes peripheral neuropathy patients were enrolled and asked to take 200 steps in both intervention and standard insoles. Thermal foot images of the feet were taken at baseline (1) following a 5-minute temperature acclimatization and (2) after walking. Testing order was randomized, and a 5-minute washout period was used between testing each insole condition. Sudomotor function was also assessed. Gait and balance were measured under single and dual task conditions using a validated body worn sensor system. The mean age was 65.1 years, height was 67.3 inches, weight was 218 pounds, and body mass index was 33.9, 48% were female, and 82% had type 2 diabetes. After walking in both insole conditions, foot temperatures increased significantly in standard insoles. The intervention insole significantly reduced forefoot and midfoot temperature increases (64.1%, P = .008; 48%, P = .046) compared to standard insoles. There were significant negative correlations with sudomotor function and baseline temperatures (r = .53-.57). The intervention demonstrated 10.4% less gait initiation double support time compared to standard insoles (P = .05). There were no differences in static balance measures. We found significantly lower forefoot and midfoot temperature increases following walking with shear-reducing insoles compared to standard insoles. We also found improvements in gait. These findings merit future study for the prevention of foot ulcer., (© 2014 Diabetes Technology Society.)