Efficacy and Safety of Different Hybrid Closed Loop Systems for Automated Insulin Delivery in People With Type 1 Diabetes: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis
Sergio Di Molfetta, Ludovico Di Gioia, Irene Caruso, Angelo Cignarelli, Suetonia C. Green, Patrizia Natale, Giovanni F. M. Strippoli, Gian Pio Sorice, Sebastio Perrini, Annalisa Natalicchio, Luigi Laviola, Francesco Giorgino
{"title":"Efficacy and Safety of Different Hybrid Closed Loop Systems for Automated Insulin Delivery in People With Type 1 Diabetes: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis","authors":"Sergio Di Molfetta, Ludovico Di Gioia, Irene Caruso, Angelo Cignarelli, Suetonia C. Green, Patrizia Natale, Giovanni F. M. Strippoli, Gian Pio Sorice, Sebastio Perrini, Annalisa Natalicchio, Luigi Laviola, Francesco Giorgino","doi":"10.1002/dmrr.3842","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Aims</h3>\n \n <p>To compare the efficacy and safety of different hybrid closed loop (HCL) systems in people with diabetes through a network meta-analysis.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL and PubMed for randomised clinical trials (RCTs) enrolling children, adolescents and/or adults with type 1 or type 2 diabetes, evaluating Minimed 670G, Minimed 780G, Control-IQ, CamAPS Fx, DBLG-1, DBLHU, and Omnipod 5 HCL systems against other types of insulin therapy, and reporting time in target range (TIR) as outcome.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>A total of 28 RCTs, all enrolling people with type 1 diabetes, were included. HCL systems significantly increased TIR compared with subcutaneous insulin therapy without continuous glucose monitoring (SIT). Minimed 780G achieved the highest TIR ahead of Control IQ (mean difference (MD) 5.1%, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) [0.68; 9.52], low certainty), Minimed 670G (MD 7.48%, 95% CI [4.27; 10.7], moderate certainty), CamAPS Fx (MD 8.94%, 95% CI [4.35; 13.54], low certainty), and DBLG1 (MD 10.69%, 95% CI [5.73; 15.65], low certainty). All HCL systems decreased time below target range, with DBLG1 (MD −3.69%, 95% CI [−5.2; −2.19], high certainty), Minimed 670G (MD −2.9%, 95% CI [−3.77; −2.04], moderate certainty) and Minimed 780G (MD −2.79%, 95% CI [−3.94; −1.64], high certainty) exhibiting the largest reductions compared to SIT. The risk of severe hypoglycaemia and diabetic ketoacidosis was similar to other types of insulin therapy.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>We show a hierarchy of efficacy among the different HCL systems in people with type 1 diabetes, thus providing support to clinical decision-making.</p>\n \n <p><b>Trial Registration:</b> PROSPERO CRD42023453717</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":11335,"journal":{"name":"Diabetes/Metabolism Research and Reviews","volume":"40 6","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/dmrr.3842","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Diabetes/Metabolism Research and Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/dmrr.3842","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Aims
To compare the efficacy and safety of different hybrid closed loop (HCL) systems in people with diabetes through a network meta-analysis.
Methods
We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL and PubMed for randomised clinical trials (RCTs) enrolling children, adolescents and/or adults with type 1 or type 2 diabetes, evaluating Minimed 670G, Minimed 780G, Control-IQ, CamAPS Fx, DBLG-1, DBLHU, and Omnipod 5 HCL systems against other types of insulin therapy, and reporting time in target range (TIR) as outcome.
Results
A total of 28 RCTs, all enrolling people with type 1 diabetes, were included. HCL systems significantly increased TIR compared with subcutaneous insulin therapy without continuous glucose monitoring (SIT). Minimed 780G achieved the highest TIR ahead of Control IQ (mean difference (MD) 5.1%, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) [0.68; 9.52], low certainty), Minimed 670G (MD 7.48%, 95% CI [4.27; 10.7], moderate certainty), CamAPS Fx (MD 8.94%, 95% CI [4.35; 13.54], low certainty), and DBLG1 (MD 10.69%, 95% CI [5.73; 15.65], low certainty). All HCL systems decreased time below target range, with DBLG1 (MD −3.69%, 95% CI [−5.2; −2.19], high certainty), Minimed 670G (MD −2.9%, 95% CI [−3.77; −2.04], moderate certainty) and Minimed 780G (MD −2.79%, 95% CI [−3.94; −1.64], high certainty) exhibiting the largest reductions compared to SIT. The risk of severe hypoglycaemia and diabetic ketoacidosis was similar to other types of insulin therapy.
Conclusions
We show a hierarchy of efficacy among the different HCL systems in people with type 1 diabetes, thus providing support to clinical decision-making.
期刊介绍:
Diabetes/Metabolism Research and Reviews is a premier endocrinology and metabolism journal esteemed by clinicians and researchers alike. Encompassing a wide spectrum of topics including diabetes, endocrinology, metabolism, and obesity, the journal eagerly accepts submissions ranging from clinical studies to basic and translational research, as well as reviews exploring historical progress, controversial issues, and prominent opinions in the field. Join us in advancing knowledge and understanding in the realm of diabetes and metabolism.