Add‐on therapy with dapagliflozin under full closed loop control improves time in range in adolescents and young adults with type 1 diabetes: The DAPADream study

Aim To investigate the effect of the sodium‐glucose co‐transporter‐2 inhibitor dapagliflozin on glucose levels overnight and during the following day after two unannounced meals under full closed loop (FCL) conditions. Materials and Methods For this single‐centre, double‐blind, randomized, placebo‐c...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Diabetes, obesity & metabolism obesity & metabolism, 2021-02, Vol.23 (2), p.599-608
Hauptverfasser: Biester, Torben, Muller, Ido, von dem Berge, Thekla, Atlas, Eran, Nimri, Revital, Phillip, Moshe, Battelino, Tadej, Bratina, Natasa, Dovc, Klemen, Scheerer, Markus F., Kordonouri, Olga, Danne, Thomas
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Aim To investigate the effect of the sodium‐glucose co‐transporter‐2 inhibitor dapagliflozin on glucose levels overnight and during the following day after two unannounced meals under full closed loop (FCL) conditions. Materials and Methods For this single‐centre, double‐blind, randomized, placebo‐controlled, cross‐over trial, non‐obese persons with type 1 diabetes (T1D) were studied twice (10 mg dapagliflozin bid vs. placebo) for 24 hours with two unannounced mixed meal tests 6 hours apart under FCL conditions. Primary outcome was sensor glucose time in range (TIR; 3.9‐10 mmol/L). For safety evaluation, ß‐hydroxybutyrate (BHB), glucagon, insulin and gastric inhibitory polypeptide were measured. Results Fifteen adolescents (aged 15.4 ± 1.6 years, diabetes duration 10.0 ± 3.4 years, HbA1c 8.4% ± 0.9% [67.7 ± 10.1 mmol/mol]) and 15 young adults (aged 18.7 ± 0.8 years; diabetes duration 12.5 ± 3.6 years; HbA1c 8.3% ± 0.9% [68.5 ± 11.2 mmol/mol]) completed the trial. TIR was significantly higher in the intervention group compared with placebo (68% ± 6% vs. 50% ± 13%; P
ISSN:1462-8902
1463-1326
DOI:10.1111/dom.14258