Improved Glycemic Control in Adult Subjects With Type 1 Diabetes on MDI Using Insulin Guidance Software
|First Received Date ICMJE||October 31, 2007|
|Last Updated Date||August 10, 2015|
|Start Date ICMJE||July 2005|
|Primary Completion Date||Not Provided|
|Current Primary Outcome Measures ICMJE
||Decrease in A1c of at least 0.4% in the insulin guidance software group as compared to the control group at 6 months and/or 1 year. [ Time Frame: 1 year ]|
|Original Primary Outcome Measures ICMJE||Same as current|
|Change History||Complete list of historical versions of study NCT00552734 on ClinicalTrials.gov Archive Site|
|Current Secondary Outcome Measures ICMJE
||Hypoglycemic episodes, weight gain, insulin dose, frequency of self monitoring of glucose [ Time Frame: 1 year ]|
|Original Secondary Outcome Measures ICMJE||Same as current|
|Current Other Outcome Measures ICMJE||Not Provided|
|Original Other Outcome Measures ICMJE||Not Provided|
|Brief Title ICMJE||Improved Glycemic Control in Adult Subjects With Type 1 Diabetes on MDI Using Insulin Guidance Software|
|Official Title ICMJE||Glycemic Control and Prevention of Hypoglycemia in Intensively Treated Subjects With Type 1 Diabetes Using Accu-Chek® Advisor Insulin Guidance Software|
140 subjects will be enrolled into the clinical study and randomized into the Control Group or the Experimental Group by block randomization. The subjects must meet all inclusion and none of the exclusion criteria. Each subject will have 7 clinic visits and 3 phone visits. The Baseline Visit will consist of a complete history, vitals, a physical examination and completion of the consent and screening process. All clinic visits, except for the Baseline Visit will include meter/PDA download. In addition, meter education will be provided to all subjects, and PDA education will be provided to the Experimental group at the Baseline Visit and 2-Week Visit as needed to ensure subject understanding. The phone visits will consist of a history including any changes in insulin dose, and any hypoglycemic events, hyperglycemic events, or other adverse events that have occurred since the last clinic visit.
The primary endpoint in this study was to show a reduction in A1c of at least 0.4% or higher in the insulin guidance software group at 6 months and/or 1 year.
Research Design and Methods A total of 123 adult subjects with type 1 diabetes with a baseline A1c of 7.5-11% were enrolled in the study at the Barbara Davis Center for Childhood Diabetes at the University of Colorado at Denver Health Sciences Center. Two patients screen failed (entry criteria not met) before randomization, leaving 60 subjects randomized to the control group and 61 subjects randomized to the experimental group (Advisor). Subjects were randomized based on lottery system using sealed envelopes. All patients had baseline blood work which included a complete blood count (CBC), complete metabolic panel (CMP), creatnine kinase (CK) and an A1c. The mean A1c at baseline was 8.54 ±0.11 in the control group and 8.42 ±0.11 in the experimental group (p=0.4265).
Subjects were randomized on a 1:1 basis to either the experimental or control group. All subjects in the experimental group received the same training for insulin guidance software program for personal data assistant (PDA). All subjects were given a glucose meter and an unlimited supply of test strips for self monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG). Women who were pregnant or planning to become pregnant were excluded from participation in the study as were patients on insulin pumps, those taking glucocorticoid therapy, and those diagnosed with cancer, liver disease, anemia or hepatitis. Patients who exercised more than five days a week, or often traveled internationally were also excluded.
The protocol was approved by the Colorado Multiple Institutional Review Board (COMIRB). All subjects signed an informed consent form before being enrolled in the study.
Visits All subjects were asked to attend 7 in clinic visits (baseline, 2 week, 6 week, 3 month, 6 month, 9 month and 12 month) and participate in 3 telephone visits (4.5month, 7.5month, 9.5 month) throughout the course of the study. Data for blood glucose values, testing frequency, hyperglycemic excursions, hypoglycemic events (all, nocturnal, and severe), insulin dose, weight and BMI, hospitalizations, emergency room visits and illnesses were recorded at each in clinic visit. All subjects completed a patient satisfaction questionnaire and the experimental group also completed an Advisor questionnaire.
As part of their routine clinical care, any additional phone visits were equally encouraged in both groups.
Advisor Insulin Guidance Software (Figure 1a) Subjects randomized to the experimental group received a PDA loaded with the insulin guidance software. At baseline (visit 1), a healthcare provider and/or certified diabetes educator (CDE) reviewed the features of the software on the PDA and loaded a subject specific insulin dosing algorithm into the software based on the physician's recommendations. The software program allowed the healthcare provider to enter demographic data such as age, height and weight which could potentially affect the insulin sensitivity factor already programmed into the device. The program advised basal, bolus and correction insulin dosages based on individual patients' prescriptions in addition to being alerted for SMBG testing. Subjects in the experimental group were also asked to input their blood glucose values into the PDA via the touch screen. Subjects then received a recommended insulin dose based on their prescription which was programmed by the healthcare provider. The patients were asked to either agree with the recommended insulin dose or disagree, and manually enter the insulin dose they took for a given event. All the data from the glucose meters and the PDAs were downloaded at every visit.
Glucose Target Ranges Glucose values were captured in one of the following categories to assess target glycemia and pie charts were created. Within Target Range (WTR) glucose values were those between 70-150mg/dL (3.89 to 8.33 mmol/L) (20). Below Target Range (BTR) glucose values were defined as ≤ 69mg/dL (3.83 mmol/L) and Above Target Range (ATR) glucose values were those values above 150mg/dL (8.33 mmol/L). These glucose levels were chosen based on our previous research on SMBG downloads (20).
Hypoglycemia Hypoglycemia was defined as glucose values ≤ 59mg/dL (3.27mmol/L). Severe hypoglycemia was defined as subjects needing assistance as previously described by DCCT Research Group (1).
A1c and Other Lab Measurement
The A1c values were measured by the DCA 2000® Analyzer, distributed by Bayer Corporation (Elkhart, IN). The DCA 2000® A1c assay gives accurate and precise results over a range of total hemoglobin from 7 to 24 g/dL. All subjects had hemoglobin concentrations well within these values. Normal A1c values are 3.4 to 6.2 % (18). The CBC (Beckman Coulter LH750, Beckman Coulter, Hialeah, FL), CMP (AU-5200 Olympus Japan Co Ltd, Tokyo) and CK (Olympus AU-800; Olympus, Tokyo, Japan) were performed by Quest Diagnostics, Denver, Colorado.
Statistical Analysis Wilcoxon Rank Sum and Chi Square tests of independence were used to compare continuous and categorical variables, respectively, at baseline. Chi Square test of independence was used to compare the number of discontinued subjects between the two groups. Mixed model repeated measures analysis with an unstructured covariance structure and pre-planned contrasts were used to compare the experimental and control groups on A1c, percent of glucose readings within, above, and below target, percent of total hypoglycemic events, basal insulin dose, weight, and BMI. Paired t-tests were used to test the within group change in weight from baseline to 12 months among those who completed all 12 months. Fisher's Exact test was used to compare the number of patients achieving target values between groups at each time point. Poisson regression was used to compare the frequency of severe hypoglycemic events between the two groups. Data are presented as least squares mean ± SE unless otherwise noted. All analyses were performed using SAS 9.1. Results were considered significant at p < 0.05 using a two-sided alpha.
|Study Type ICMJE||Observational|
|Study Design ICMJE||Time Perspective: Prospective|
|Target Follow-Up Duration||Not Provided|
|Sampling Method||Non-Probability Sample|
|Study Population||123 adult subjects ages 18-60 with type 1 diabetes on mulitiple daily injections|
|Intervention ICMJE||Device: Insulin Guidance Software
At baseline a healthcare provider reviewed the features of the software on the PDA and loaded a subject specific insulin dosing algorithm into the software based on the physician's recommendations. The program advised basal, bolus and correction insulin dosages based on individual patients' prescriptions in addition to being alerted for SMBG testing. Subjects in the experimental group were also asked to input their blood glucose values into the PDA via the touch screen. Subjects then received a recommended insulin dose based on their prescription which was programmed by the healthcare provider. The patients were asked to either agree with the recommended insulin dose or disagree, and manually enter the insulin dose they took for a given event.
Other Name: Accu-Chek Insulin Guidance Software
|Publications *||Not Provided|
* Includes publications given by the data provider as well as publications identified by ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier (NCT Number) in Medline.
|Recruitment Status ICMJE||Completed|
|Completion Date||May 2007|
|Primary Completion Date||Not Provided|
|Eligibility Criteria ICMJE||
|Ages||18 Years to 60 Years (Adult)|
|Accepts Healthy Volunteers||No|
|Contacts ICMJE||Contact information is only displayed when the study is recruiting subjects|
|Listed Location Countries ICMJE||United States|
|Removed Location Countries|
|NCT Number ICMJE||NCT00552734|
|Other Study ID Numbers ICMJE||04-0834|
|Has Data Monitoring Committee||No|
|U.S. FDA-regulated Product||Not Provided|
|Plan to Share Data||Not Provided|
|IPD Description||Not Provided|
|Responsible Party||University of Colorado, Denver|
|Study Sponsor ICMJE||University of Colorado, Denver|
|Collaborators ICMJE||Not Provided|
|Information Provided By||University of Colorado, Denver|
|Verification Date||August 2015|
ICMJE Data element required by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors and the World Health Organization ICTRP