Format

Send to

Choose Destination
Diabetes Care. 2017 Apr;40(4):538-545. doi: 10.2337/dc16-2482. Epub 2017 Feb 16.

REPLACE-BG: A Randomized Trial Comparing Continuous Glucose Monitoring With and Without Routine Blood Glucose Monitoring in Adults With Well-Controlled Type 1 Diabetes.

Author information

1
Northwestern University, Chicago, IL.
2
Jaeb Center for Health Research, Tampa, FL.
3
Jaeb Center for Health Research, Tampa, FL t1dstats5@jaeb.org.
4
Henry Ford Health System, Detroit, MI.
5
Keck School of Medicine of the University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA.
6
University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, WA.
7
Park Nicollet International Diabetes Center, Minneapolis, MN.
8
Joslin Diabetes Center, Boston, MA.
9
Harold Schnitzer Diabetes Health Center at Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR.
10
Barbara Davis Center for Childhood Diabetes, Aurora, CO.
11
University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA.
12
Atlanta Diabetes Associates, Atlanta, GA.
13
Scripps Whittier Diabetes Institute, La Jolla, CA.
14
University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.
15
University of South Florida, Tampa, FL.
16
Iowa Diabetes and Endocrinology Research Center, Des Moines, IA.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE:

To determine whether the use of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) without confirmatory blood glucose monitoring (BGM) measurements is as safe and effective as using CGM adjunctive to BGM in adults with well-controlled type 1 diabetes (T1D).

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS:

A randomized noninferiority clinical trial was conducted at 14 sites in the T1D Exchange Clinic Network. Participants were ≥18 years of age (mean 44 ± 14 years), had T1D for ≥1 year (mean duration 24 ± 12 years), used an insulin pump, and had an HbA1c ≤9.0% (≤75 mmol/mL) (mean 7.0 ± 0.7% [53 ± 7.7 mmol/mol]); prestudy, 47% were CGM users. Participants were randomly assigned 2:1 to the CGM-only (n = 149) or CGM+BGM (n = 77) group. The primary outcome was time in range (70-180 mg/dL) over the 26-week trial, with a prespecified noninferiority limit of 7.5%.

RESULTS:

CGM use averaged 6.7 ± 0.5 and 6.8 ± 0.4 days/week in the CGM-only and CGM+BGM groups, respectively, over the 26-week trial. BGM tests per day (including the two required daily for CGM calibration) averaged 2.8 ± 0.9 and 5.4 ± 1.4 in the two groups, respectively (P < 0.001). Mean time in 70-180 mg/dL was 63 ± 13% at both baseline and 26 weeks in the CGM-only group and 65 ± 13% and 65 ± 11% in the CGM+BGM group (adjusted difference 0%; one-sided 95% CI -2%). No severe hypoglycemic events occurred in the CGM-only group, and one occurred in the CGM+BGM group.

CONCLUSIONS:

Use of CGM without regular use of confirmatory BGM is as safe and effective as using CGM with BGM in adults with well-controlled T1D at low risk for severe hypoglycemia.

TRIAL REGISTRATION:

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02258373.

PMID:
28209654
PMCID:
PMC5864100
DOI:
10.2337/dc16-2482
[Indexed for MEDLINE]
Free PMC Article

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for HighWire Icon for PubMed Central
Loading ...
Support Center