Switch of Open-Source Automated Insulin Delivery (AID) System—AndroidAPS to Commercially Available AID Systems in Type 1 Diabetes: The Extension of the CODIAC Study

Kód výsledku v IS VaVaI

<a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F00064165%3A_____%2F25%3A10503526" target="_blank" >RIV/00064165:_____/25:10503526 - isvavai.cz</a>

Nalezeny alternativní kódy

RIV/00216208:11110/25:10503526 RIV/00159816:_____/25:00082369

Výsledek na webu

<a href="https://verso.is.cuni.cz/pub/verso.fpl?fname=obd_publikace_handle&handle=3Xa_MGgH1p" target="_blank" >https://verso.is.cuni.cz/pub/verso.fpl?fname=obd_publikace_handle&handle=3Xa_MGgH1p</a>

DOI - Digital Object Identifier

<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/15209156251376013" target="_blank" >10.1177/15209156251376013</a>

Jazyk výsledku

angličtina

Název v původním jazyce

Switch of Open-Source Automated Insulin Delivery (AID) System—AndroidAPS to Commercially Available AID Systems in Type 1 Diabetes: The Extension of the CODIAC Study

Popis výsledku v původním jazyce

Objective: This study was designed to investigate the switch between the open-source automated insulin delivery (OS-AID) system AndroidAPS (AAPS) and commercially available AID systems Control-IQ (CIQ) and MiniMed 780G (780G) conducted in a new extended follow-up study. Research Design and Methods: In this prospective open-label single-arm clinical trial, 41 adults with type 1 diabetes (age 35 +/- 11 years, glycated hemoglobin [HbA1c] 6.4 +/- 2.8% [46 +/- 6.8 mmol/mol]) who have voluntarily used AAPS entered a total of three study phases. In the first phase, participants continued with AAPS for 3 months. In the second 3-month study phase, all participants initiated CIQ (n = 25) or 780G (n = 16). Finally, participants were switched back to the AAPS for the last 3 months phase. Results of the treatment with commercially available AID systems were compared with both AAPS phases. Results: Commercially available systems were comparable to AAPS in achieving time in range (TIR) (84.2 +/- 7.6 vs. 85 +/- 6.9%; P = 0.31) and in HbA1c (6.4 +/- 3 vs. 6.3 +/- 2.7% [46 +/- 8.8 vs. 45.7 +/- 6.2 mmol/mol]; P = 0.68). In contrast, time in tight range (TITR) was significantly higher in AAPS (66.38 +/- 11.84 vs. 63.4 +/- 11.77, P = 0.035). However, the time in hypoglycemia &lt;70 mg/dL [&lt;3.9 mmol/L] was significantly lower with commercially available AID systems (2.2 +/- 1.2 vs. 3.8 +/- 1.9%; P &lt; 0.001). These results were consistent after switching back to AAPS. Conclusion: The extension of the Comparison of Different Hybrid Closed-Loop Systems-AndroidAPS and Control-IQ-in adults with Type 1 Diabetes study is the only prospective study to investigate switching between OS and commercially available AID systems. The switch from AAPS to commercially available systems was not associated with a change in TIR. However, the use of AAPS was associated with a higher TITR, but also with a higher risk of hypoglycemia.

Název v anglickém jazyce

Switch of Open-Source Automated Insulin Delivery (AID) System—AndroidAPS to Commercially Available AID Systems in Type 1 Diabetes: The Extension of the CODIAC Study

Popis výsledku anglicky

Objective: This study was designed to investigate the switch between the open-source automated insulin delivery (OS-AID) system AndroidAPS (AAPS) and commercially available AID systems Control-IQ (CIQ) and MiniMed 780G (780G) conducted in a new extended follow-up study. Research Design and Methods: In this prospective open-label single-arm clinical trial, 41 adults with type 1 diabetes (age 35 +/- 11 years, glycated hemoglobin [HbA1c] 6.4 +/- 2.8% [46 +/- 6.8 mmol/mol]) who have voluntarily used AAPS entered a total of three study phases. In the first phase, participants continued with AAPS for 3 months. In the second 3-month study phase, all participants initiated CIQ (n = 25) or 780G (n = 16). Finally, participants were switched back to the AAPS for the last 3 months phase. Results of the treatment with commercially available AID systems were compared with both AAPS phases. Results: Commercially available systems were comparable to AAPS in achieving time in range (TIR) (84.2 +/- 7.6 vs. 85 +/- 6.9%; P = 0.31) and in HbA1c (6.4 +/- 3 vs. 6.3 +/- 2.7% [46 +/- 8.8 vs. 45.7 +/- 6.2 mmol/mol]; P = 0.68). In contrast, time in tight range (TITR) was significantly higher in AAPS (66.38 +/- 11.84 vs. 63.4 +/- 11.77, P = 0.035). However, the time in hypoglycemia &lt;70 mg/dL [&lt;3.9 mmol/L] was significantly lower with commercially available AID systems (2.2 +/- 1.2 vs. 3.8 +/- 1.9%; P &lt; 0.001). These results were consistent after switching back to AAPS. Conclusion: The extension of the Comparison of Different Hybrid Closed-Loop Systems-AndroidAPS and Control-IQ-in adults with Type 1 Diabetes study is the only prospective study to investigate switching between OS and commercially available AID systems. The switch from AAPS to commercially available systems was not associated with a change in TIR. However, the use of AAPS was associated with a higher TITR, but also with a higher risk of hypoglycemia.

Druh

J_imp - Článek v periodiku v databázi Web of Science

CEP obor

—

OECD FORD obor

30202 - Endocrinology and metabolism (including diabetes, hormones)

Projekt

<a href="/cs/project/LX22NPO5104" target="_blank" >LX22NPO5104: Národní institut pro výzkum metabolických a kardiovaskulárních onemocnění</a><br>

Návaznosti

I - Institucionalni podpora na dlouhodoby koncepcni rozvoj vyzkumne organizace

Rok uplatnění

2025

Kód důvěrnosti údajů

S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů

Název periodika

Diabetes Technology &amp; Therapeutics

ISSN

1520-9156

e-ISSN

1557-8593

Svazek periodika

27

Číslo periodika v rámci svazku

11

Stát vydavatele periodika

US - Spojené státy americké

Počet stran výsledku

9

Strana od-do

928-936

Kód UT WoS článku

001569440100001

EID výsledku v databázi Scopus

2-s2.0-105015688888