Credit: Pixabay/CC0 Public Domain
JAEB Center for Health Research Drive a Randomized Controlled Trial Evaluating The Impact of Automated Insulin Delivery (AID) In Adults with Insulin-Treated Type 2 Diabetes. Aid Significantly Lowered Glycated hemoglobin (HBA1C) Levels and Improved Glucose Control Compred to Standard Insulin Therapy with Continous Glucose Monitoring (CGM).
AID THERAPY Resulted in a Mean Hba1c Reducion of 0.9 Percentage Points Over 13 Weeks, While the Control Group Experienced A 0.3 Percentage Point Reduction.
Automated insulin delivery Systems have demonstrated benefits for patients with type 1 diabetes, Yet Their Effficacy and Safety for Individuals with Type 2 Diabetes Remain Less Established. Prior Studies Have Either Lacked Randomized Controlled Designs or Involved Limited Sample Suffles, Creating A Gap in Clinical Understanding.
WHILE MEDICATIONS SUCH AS GLUCAGON-LIKE PEPTIDE 1 (GLP-1) RECEIVER AGONISTS AND SODIUM-GLUCOSIS COTRANSPORTER 2 (SGLT2) INHIBITORS HELP SOME INDIVIDUALS ACHIEVE GLUCOST TARGETS, THE SUBSTANTIAL NUMBER OF INSULIN-TREATED PATS CONTINUE TO STRUGLEGLEK WITH GLYCEMIC Control.
In the Study, “The Randomized Trial of Automated Insulin Delivery in Type 2 Diabetes,” published In the New England Journal of MedicineResearchers conducted a multicenter randomized control trial to assess the effective and safety of anid in adults Using multiple daily insulin injections or insulin pumps.
The Total of 319 Patients Across 21 Centers in the United States and Canada Participated. PATIES WERE RANDOMLY ASSIGNED IN A 2: 1 Ratio to EITHER THE AID GROUP, WHICH REIVED THE T: SLIM X2 INSULIN PUMP WITH CONTROL-IQ+ TECHNOLOGY AND A DEXCOM G6 SENSOR, OR THE CONTROL GROUP, WHICH CONTRIENT INSILIN REGEMNIZED REAL-TIME UNBLEDED CGM.
Baseline HBA1C Levels Averaged 8.2% (± 1.4) In the aid group and 8.1% (± 1.2) In the control group. OVER 13 Weeks, HBA1C DECREASED TO 7.3% (± 0.9) In the aid group and 7.7% (± 1.1) in the control group. The Difference of –0.6 Percentage Points was observed Between the groups.
CGM Date Indicated an Increase in Time SPent Within The Target Glucose Range (70–180 mg/dl) From 48% (± 24) to 64% (± 16) In the aid group and from 51% (± 21) to 52% (± 21) in the control group. AN ADJUSTED DIFFERENCE OF 14 PERCENTAGE Points Was Recorded, Equating to 3.4 Additional Hours Per Day SPent In The Target Glucose Range With Aid.
ADDITIONAL CGM-BASED MASSURES OF HYPERGLYMIA SHOW SIGNENT IMPROVEMENT IN THE AID GROUP. Mean Glucose Levels Decreated by 21 mg/dl. Time SPent with glucose Levels Above 250 mg/dl Decreated by 9.1 Percentage Points.
LOW LEVES OF CGM-MEASURED HYPOGLYMIA WERE OBSERED IN BOTH GROUPS. One Severe Hypoglycemia Event Was Reported in the Aid Group, with no Occurities in the Control Group. In the cases of diabetic ketoacidosis or hyperosmolar hyperglycemic syndrome were recorded.
Add 44% of participants Were on LPG-1 Receiver Agonists, 37% on SGLT2 Inhibitors, and 21% On Both. Subgroup Analyses Showed That Aid Delivered Consistency Benefits Regardless of Specific Medications. There was the 93% Medians Time Spent in Automatic Mode, Suggesting Strong Adherence or Ease of Use.
Findings Suggest Aid May Be a Valuable Tool For Managing Insulin-Treated Type 2 Diabetes, Even Among Patients with at Prior Experience Using Insulin Pumps or Carbohydrate Counting Methods.
More information:
Yogish C. Kudva et al, a randomized trial of automated insulin delivery in type 2 diabetes, New England Journal of Medicine (2025). Doi: 10.1056/Nejmoa2415948
© 2025 Science x Network
Citation: Automated insulin delivery Improves Glycemic Control of Type 2 diabetes in randomized trial (2025, March 22) Retrieved 22 March 2025 from
This document is Subject to Copyright. Apart from Any Fair Dealing for the Purpose of Private Study or Research at Part May Be Reproduced Without The Written Permission. The Content is Provided for Information Purposes Only.
