A few diabetes papers of interest

i. Reevaluating the Evidence for Blood Pressure Targets in Type 2 Diabetes.

“There is general consensus that treating adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and hypertension to a target blood pressure (BP) of <140/90 mmHg helps prevent cardiovascular disease (CVD). Whether more intensive BP control should be routinely targeted remains a matter of debate. While the American Diabetes Association (ADA) BP guidelines recommend an individualized assessment to consider different treatment goals, the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association BP guidelines recommend a BP target of <130/80 mmHg for most individuals with hypertension, including those with T2DM (1–3).

In large part, these discrepant recommendations reflect the divergent results of the Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes-BP trial (ACCORD-BP) among people with T2DM and the Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT), which excluded people with diabetes (4,5). Both trials evaluated the effect of intensive compared with standard BP treatment targets (<120 vs. <140 mmHg systolic) on a composite CVD end point of nonfatal myocardial infarction or stroke or death from cardiovascular causes. SPRINT also included unstable angina and acute heart failure in its composite end point. While ACCORD-BP did not show a significant benefit from the intervention (hazard ratio [HR] 0.88; 95% CI 0.73–1.06), SPRINT found a significant 25% relative risk reduction on the primary end point favoring intensive therapy (0.75; 0.64–0.89).”

“To some extent, CVD mechanisms and causes of death differ in T2DM patients compared with the general population. Microvascular disease (particularly kidney disease), accelerated vascular calcification, and diabetic cardiomyopathy are common in T2DM (13–15). Moreover, the rate of sudden cardiac arrest is markedly increased in T2DM and related, in part, to diabetes-specific factors other than ischemic heart disease (16). Hypoglycemia is a potential cause of CVD mortality that is specific to diabetes (17). In addition, polypharmacy is common and may increase CVD risk (18). Furthermore, nonvascular causes of death account for approximately 40% of the premature mortality burden experienced by T2DM patients (19). Whether these disease processes may render patients with T2DM less amenable to derive a mortality benefit from intensive BP control, however, is not known and should be the focus of future research.

In conclusion, the divergent results between ACCORD-BP and SPRINT are most readily explained by the apparent lack of benefit of intensive BP control on CVD and all-cause mortality in ACCORD-BP, rather than differences in the design, population characteristics, or interventions between the trials. This difference in effects on mortality may be attributable to differential mechanisms underlying CVD mortality in T2DM, to chance, or to both. These observations suggest that caution should be exercised extrapolating the results of SPRINT to patients with T2DM and support current ADA recommendations to individualize BP targets, targeting a BP of <140/90 mmHg in the majority of patients with T2DM and considering lower BP targets when it is anticipated that individual benefits outweigh risks.”

…

ii. Modelling incremental benefits on complications rates when targeting lower HbA1c levels in people with Type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease.

“Glucose‐lowering interventions in Type 2 diabetes mellitus have demonstrated reductions in microvascular complications and modest reductions in macrovascular complications. However, the degree to which targeting different HbA_1c reductions might reduce risk is unclear. […] Participant‐level data for Trial Evaluating Cardiovascular Outcomes with Sitagliptin (TECOS) participants with established cardiovascular disease were used in a Type 2 diabetes‐specific simulation model to quantify the likely impact of different HbA_1c decrements on complication rates. […] The use of the TECOS data limits our findings to people with Type 2 diabetes and established cardiovascular disease. […] Ten‐year micro‐ and macrovascular rates were estimated with HbA_1c levels fixed at 86, 75, 64, 53 and 42 mmol/mol (10%, 9%, 8%, 7% and 6%) while holding other risk factors constant at their baseline levels. Cumulative relative risk reductions for each outcome were derived for each HbA_1c decrement. […] Of 5717 participants studied, 72.0% were men and 74.2% White European, with a mean (sd) age of 66.2 (7.9) years, systolic blood pressure 134 (16.9) mmHg, LDL‐cholesterol 2.3 (0.9) mmol/l, HDL‐cholesterol 1.13 (0.3) mmol/l and median Type 2 diabetes duration 9.6 (5.1–15.6) years. Ten‐year cumulative relative risk reductions for modelled HbA_1c values of 75, 64, 53 and 42 mmol/mol, relative to 86 mmol/mol, were 4.6%, 9.3%, 15.1% and 20.2% for myocardial infarction; 6.0%, 12.8%, 19.6% and 25.8% for stroke; 14.4%, 26.6%, 37.1% and 46.4% for diabetes‐related ulcer; 21.5%, 39.0%, 52.3% and 63.1% for amputation; and 13.6%, 25.4%, 36.0% and 44.7 for single‐eye blindness. […] We did not investigate outcomes for renal failure or chronic heart failure as previous research conducted to create the model did not find HbA_1c to be a statistically significant independent risk factor for either condition, therefore no clinically meaningful differences would be expected from modelling different HbA_1c levels 11.”

“For microvascular complications, the absolute median estimates tended to be lower than for macrovascular complications at the same HbA_1c level, but cumulative relative risk reductions were greater. For amputation the 10‐year absolute median estimate for a modelled constant HbA_1c of 86 mmol/mol (10%) was 3.8% (3.7, 3.9), with successively lower values for each modelled 1% HbA_1c decrement. Compared with the 86 mmol/mol (10%) HbA_1c level, median relative risk reductions for amputation were 21.5% (21.1, 21.9) at 75 mmol/mol (9%) increasing to 52.3% (52.0, 52.6) at 53 mmol/mol (7%). […] Relative risk reductions in micro‐ and macrovascular complications for each 1% HbA_1c reduction were similar for each decrement. The exception was all‐cause mortality, where the relative risk reductions for 1% HbA_1c decrements were greater at higher baseline HbA_1c levels. These simulated outcomes differ from the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial outcome in people with Type 1 diabetes, where lowering HbA_1c from higher baseline levels had a greater impact on microvascular risk reduction 18.”

…

iii. Laser photocoagulation for proliferative diabetic retinopathy (Cochrane review).

“Diabetic retinopathy is a complication of diabetes in which high blood sugar levels damage the blood vessels in the retina. Sometimes new blood vessels grow in the retina, and these can have harmful effects; this is known as proliferative diabetic retinopathy. Laserphotocoagulation is an intervention that is commonly used to treat diabetic retinopathy, in which light energy is applied to the retinawith the aim of stopping the growth and development of new blood vessels, and thereby preserving vision. […] The aim of laser photocoagulation is to slow down the growth of new blood vessels in the retina and thereby prevent the progression of visual loss (Ockrim 2010). Focal laser photocoagulation uses the heat of light to seal or destroy abnormal blood vessels in the retina. Individual vessels are treated with a small number of laser burns.

PRP [panretinal photocoagulation, US] aims to slow down the growth of new blood vessels in a wider area of the retina. Many hundreds of laser burns are placed on the peripheral parts of the retina to stop blood vessels from growing (RCOphth 2012). It is thought that the anatomic and functional changes that result from photocoagulation may improve the oxygen supply to the retina, and so reduce the stimulus for neovascularisation (Stefansson 2001). Again the exact mechanisms are unclear, but it is possible that the decreased area of retinal tissue leads to improved oxygenation and a reduction in the levels of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor. A reduction in levels of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor may be important in reducing the risk of harmful new vessels forming. […] Laser photocoagulation is a well-established common treatment for DR and there are many different potential strategies for delivery of laser treatment that are likely to have different effects. A systematic review of the evidence for laser photocoagulation will provide important information on benefits and harms to guide treatment choices. […] This is the first in a series of planned reviews on laser photocoagulation. Future reviews will compare different photocoagulation techniques.”

“We identified a large number of trials of laser photocoagulation of diabetic retinopathy (n = 83) but only five of these studies were eligible for inclusion in the review, i.e. they compared laser photocoagulation with currently available lasers to no (or deferred) treatment. Three studies were conducted in the USA, one study in the UK and one study in Japan. A total of 4786 people (9503 eyes) were included in these studies. The majority of participants in four of these trials were people with proliferative diabetic retinopathy; one trial recruited mainly people with non-proliferative retinopathy.”

“At 12 months there was little difference between eyes that received laser photocoagulation and those allocated to no treatment (or deferred treatment), in terms of loss of 15 or more letters of visual acuity (risk ratio (RR) 0.99, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.89 to1.11; 8926 eyes; 2 RCTs, low quality evidence). Longer term follow-up did not show a consistent pattern, but one study found a 20% reduction in risk of loss of 15 or more letters of visual acuity at five years with laser treatment. Treatment with laser reduced the risk of severe visual loss by over 50% at 12 months (RR 0.46, 95% CI 0.24to 0.86; 9276 eyes; 4 RCTs, moderate quality evidence). There was a beneficial effect on progression of diabetic retinopathy with treated eyes experiencing a 50% reduction in risk of progression of diabetic retinopathy (RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.64; 8331 eyes; 4 RCTs, low quality evidence) and a similar reduction in risk of vitreous haemorrhage (RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.85; 224 eyes; 2RCTs, low quality evidence).”

“Overall there is not a large amount of evidence from RCTs on the effects of laser photocoagulation compared to no treatment or deferred treatment. The evidence is dominated by two large studies conducted in the US population (DRS 1978; ETDRS 1991). These two studies were generally judged to be at low or unclear risk of bias, with the exception of inevitable unmasking of patients due to differences between intervention and control. […] In current clinical guidelines, e.g. RCOphth 2012, PRP is recommended in high-risk PDR. The recommendation is that “as retinopathy approaches the proliferative stage, laser scatter treatment (PRP) should be increasingly considered to prevent progression to high risk PDR” based on other factors such as patients’ compliance or planned cataract surgery.

These recommendations need to be interpreted while considering the risk of visual loss associated with different levels of severity of DR, as well as the risk of progression. Since PRP reduces the risk of severe visual loss, but not moderate visual loss that is more related to diabetic maculopathy, most ophthalmologists judge that there is little benefit in treating non-proliferative DR at low risk of severe visual damage, as patients would incur the known adverse effects of PRP, which, although mild, include pain and peripheral visual field loss and transient DMO [diabetic macular oedema, US]. […] This review provides evidence that laser photocoagulation is beneficial in treating diabetic retinopathy. […] based on the baseline risk of progression of the disease, and risk of visual loss, the current approach of caution in treating non-proliferative DR with laser would appear to be justified.

By current standards the quality of the evidence is not high, however, the effects on risk of progression and risk of severe visual loss are reasonably large (50% relative risk reduction).”

…

iv. Immune Recognition of β-Cells: Neoepitopes as Key Players in the Loss of Tolerance.

I should probably warn beforehand that this one is rather technical. It relates reasonably closely to topics covered in the molecular biology book I recently covered here on the blog, and if I had not read that book quite recently I almost certainly would not have been able to read the paper – so the coverage below is more ‘for me’ than ‘for you’. Anyway, some quotes:

“Prior to the onset of type 1 diabetes, there is progressive loss of immune self-tolerance, evidenced by the accumulation of islet autoantibodies and emergence of autoreactive T cells. Continued autoimmune activity leads to the destruction of pancreatic β-cells and loss of insulin secretion. Studies of samples from patients with type 1 diabetes and of murine disease models have generated important insights about genetic and environmental factors that contribute to susceptibility and immune pathways that are important for pathogenesis. However, important unanswered questions remain regarding the events that surround the initial loss of tolerance and subsequent failure of regulatory mechanisms to arrest autoimmunity and preserve functional β-cells. In this Perspective, we discuss various processes that lead to the generation of neoepitopes in pancreatic β-cells, their recognition by autoreactive T cells and antibodies, and potential roles for such responses in the pathology of disease. Emerging evidence supports the relevance of neoepitopes generated through processes that are mechanistically linked with β-cell stress. Together, these observations support a paradigm in which neoepitope generation leads to the activation of pathogenic immune cells that initiate a feed-forward loop that can amplify the antigenic repertoire toward pancreatic β-cell proteins.”

“Enzymatic posttranslational processes that have been implicated in neoepitope generation include acetylation (10), citrullination (11), glycosylation (12), hydroxylation (13), methylation (either protein or DNA methylation) (14), phosphorylation (15), and transglutamination (16). Among these, citrullination and transglutamination are most clearly implicated as processes that generate neoantigens in human disease, but evidence suggests that others also play a role in neoepitope formation […] Citrulline, which is among the most studied PTMs in the context of autoimmunity, is a diagnostic biomarker of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). […] Anticitrulline antibodies are among the earliest immune responses that are diagnostic of RA and often correlate with disease severity (18). We have recently documented the biological consequences of citrulline modifications and autoimmunity that arise from pancreatic β-cell proteins in the development of T1D (19). In particular, citrullinated GAD65 and glucose-regulated protein (GRP78) elicit antibody and T-cell responses in human T1D and in NOD diabetes, respectively (20,21).”

“Carbonylation is an irreversible, iron-catalyzed oxidative modification of the side chains of lysine, arginine, threonine, or proline. Mitochondrial functions are particularly sensitive to carbonyl modification, which also has detrimental effects on other intracellular enzymatic pathways (30). A number of diseases have been linked with altered carbonylation of self-proteins, including Alzheimer and Parkinson diseases and cancer (27). There is some data to support that carbonyl PTM is a mechanism that directs unstable self-proteins into cellular degradation pathways. It is hypothesized that carbonyl PTM [post-translational modification] self-proteins that fail to be properly degraded in pancreatic β-cells are autoantigens that are targeted in T1D. Recently submitted studies have identified several carbonylated pancreatic β-cell neoantigens in human and murine models of T1D (27). Among these neoantigens are chaperone proteins that are required for the appropriate folding and secretion of insulin. These studies imply that although some PTM self-proteins may be direct targets of autoimmunity, others may alter, interrupt, or disturb downstream metabolic pathways in the β-cell. In particular, these studies indicated that upstream PTMs resulted in misfolding and/or metabolic disruption between proinsulin and insulin production, which provides one explanation for recent observations of increased proinsulin-to-insulin ratios in the progression of T1D (31).”

“Significant hypomethylation of DNA has been linked with several classic autoimmune diseases, such as SLE, multiple sclerosis, RA, Addison disease, Graves disease, and mixed connective tissue disease (36). Therefore, there is rationale to consider the possible influence of epigenetic changes on protein expression and immune recognition in T1D. Relevant to T1D, epigenetic modifications occur in pancreatic β-cells during progression of diabetes in NOD mice (37). […] Consequently, DNMTs [DNA methyltransferases] and protein arginine methyltransferases are likely to play a role in the regulation of β-cell differentiation and insulin gene expression, both of which are pathways that are altered in the presence of inflammatory cytokines. […] Eizirik et al. (38) reported that exposure of human islets to proinflammatory cytokines leads to modulation of transcript levels and increases in alternative splicing for a number of putative candidate genes for T1D. Their findings suggest a mechanism through which alternative splicing may lead to the generation of neoantigens and subsequent presentation of novel β-cell epitopes (39).”

“The phenomenon of neoepitope recognition by autoantibodies has been shown to be relevant in a variety of autoimmune diseases. For example, in RA, antibody responses directed against various citrullinated synovial proteins are remarkably disease-specific and routinely used as a diagnostic test in the clinic (18). Appearance of the first anticitrullinated protein antibodies occurs years prior to disease onset, and accumulation of additional autoantibody specificities correlates closely with the imminent onset of clinical arthritis (44). There is analogous evidence supporting a hierarchical emergence of autoantibody specificities and multiple waves of autoimmune damage in T1D (3,45). Substantial data from longitudinal studies indicate that insulin and GAD65 autoantibodies appear at the earliest time points during progression, followed by additional antibody specificities directed at IA-2 and ZnT8.”

“Multiple autoimmune diseases often cluster within families (or even within one person), implying shared etiology. Consequently, relevant insights can be gleaned from studies of more traditional autoantibody-mediated systemic autoimmune diseases, such as SLE and RA, where inter- and intramolecular epitope spreading are clearly paradigms for disease progression (47). In general, early autoimmunity is marked by restricted B- and T-cell epitopes, followed by an expanded repertoire coinciding with the onset of more significant tissue pathology […] Akin to T1D, other autoimmune syndromes tend to cluster to subcellular tissues or tissue components that share biological or biochemical properties. For example, SLE is marked by autoimmunity to nucleic acid–bearing macromolecules […] Unlike other systemic autoantibody-mediated diseases, such as RA and SLE, there is no clear evidence that T1D-related autoantibodies play a pathogenic role. Autoantibodies against citrulline-containing neoepitopes of proteoglycan are thought to trigger or intensify arthritis by forming immune complexes with this autoantigen in the joints of RA patients with anticitrullinated protein antibodies. In a similar manner, autoantibodies and immune complexes are hallmarks of tissue pathology in SLE. Therefore, it remains likely that autoantibodies or the B cells that produce them contribute to the pathogenesis of T1D.”

“In summation, the existing literature demonstrates that oxidation, citrullination, and deamidation can have a direct impact on T-cell recognition that contributes to loss of tolerance.”

“There is a general consensus that the pathogenesis of T1D is initiated when individuals who possess a high level of genetic risk (e.g., susceptible HLA, insulin VNTR, PTPN22 genotypes) are exposed to environmental factors (e.g., enteroviruses, diet, microbiome) that precipitate a loss of tolerance that manifests through the appearance of insulin and/or GAD autoantibodies. This early autoimmunity is followed by epitope spreading, increasing both the number of antigenic targets and the diversity of epitopes within these targets. These processes create a feed-forward loop antigen release that induces increasing inflammation and increasing numbers of distinct T-cell specificities (64). The formation and recognition of neoepitopes represents one mechanism through which epitope spreading can occur. […] mechanisms related to neoepitope formation and recognition can be envisioned at multiple stages of T1D pathogenesis. At the level of genetic risk, susceptible individuals may exhibit a genetically driven impairment of their stress response, increasing the likelihood of neoepitope formation. At the level of environmental exposure, many of the insults that are thought to initiate T1D are known to cause neoepitope formation. During the window of β-cell destruction that encompasses early autoimmunity through dysglycemia and diagnosis of T1D it remains unclear when neoepitope responses appear in relation to “classic” responses to insulin and GAD65. However, by the time of onset, neoepitope responses are clearly present and remain as part of the ongoing autoimmunity that is present during established T1D. […] The ultimate product of both direct and indirect generation of neoepitopes is an accumulation of robust and diverse autoimmune B- and T-cell responses, accelerating the pathological destruction of pancreatic islets. Clearly, the emergence of sophisticated methods of tissue and single-cell proteomics will identify novel neoepitopes, including some that occur at near the earliest stages of disease. A detailed mechanistic understanding of the pathways that lead to specific classes of neoepitopes will certainly suggest targets of therapeutic manipulation and intervention that would be hoped to impede the progression of disease.”

…

v. Diabetes technology: improving care, improving patient‐reported outcomes and preventing complications in young people with Type 1 diabetes.

“With the evolution of diabetes technology, those living with Type 1 diabetes are given a wider arsenal of tools with which to achieve glycaemic control and improve patient‐reported outcomes. Furthermore, the use of these technologies may help reduce the risk of acute complications, such as severe hypoglycaemia and diabetic ketoacidosis, as well as long‐term macro‐ and microvascular complications. […] Unfortunately, diabetes goals are often unmet and people with Type 1 diabetes too frequently experience acute and long‐term complications of this condition, in addition to often having less than ideal psychosocial outcomes. Increasing realization of the importance of patient‐reported outcomes is leading to diabetes care delivery becoming more patient‐centred. […] Optimal diabetes management requires both the medical and psychosocial needs of people with Type 1 diabetes and their caregivers to be addressed. […] The aim of this paper was to demonstrate how, by incorporating technology into diabetes care, we can increase patient‐centered care, reduce acute and chronic diabetes complications, and improve clinical outcomes and quality of life.”

[The paper’s Table 2 on page 422 of the pdf-version is awesome, it includes a lot of different Hba1c estimates from various patient populations all across the world. The numbers included in the table are slightly less awesome, as most populations only achieve suboptimal metabolic control.]

“The risks of all forms of complications increase with higher HbA_1c concentration, increasing diabetes duration, hypertension, presence of other microvascular complications, obesity, insulin resistance, hyperlipidaemia and smoking 6. Furthermore, the Diabetes Research in Children (DirecNet) study has shown that individuals with Type 1 diabetes have white matter differences in the brain and cognitive differences compared with individuals without Type 1 diabetes. These studies showed that the degree of structural differences in the brain were related to the degree of chronic hyperglycaemia, hypoglycaemia and glucose variability 7. […] In addition to long‐term complications, people with Type 1 diabetes are also at risk of acute complications. Severe hypoglycaemia, a hypoglycaemic event resulting in altered/loss of consciousness or seizures, is a serious complication of insulin therapy. If unnoticed and untreated, severe hypoglycaemia can result in death. […] The incidence of diabetic ketoacidosis, a life‐threatening consequence of diabetes, remains unacceptably high in children with established diabetes (Table 5). The annual incidence of ketoacidosis was 5% in the Prospective Diabetes Follow‐Up Registry (DPV) in Germany and Austria, 6.4% in the National Paediatric Diabetes Audit (NPDA), and 7.1% in the Type 1 Diabetes Exchange (T1DX) registry 10. Psychosocial factors including female gender, non‐white race, lower socio‐economic status, and elevated HbA_1c all contribute to increased risk of diabetic ketoacidosis 11.”

“Depression is more common in young people with Type 1 diabetes than in young people without a chronic disease […] Depression can make it more difficult to engage in diabetes self‐management behaviours, and as a result, contributes to suboptimal glycaemic control and lower rates of self‐monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) in young people with Type 1 diabetes 15. […] Unlike depression, diabetes distress is not a clinical diagnosis but rather emotional distress that comes from the burden of living with and managing diabetes 16. A recent systematic review found that roughly one‐third of young people with Type 1 diabetes (age 10–20 years) have some level of diabetes distress and that diabetes distress was consistently associated with higher HbA_1c and worse self‐management 17. […] Eating and weight‐related comorbidities also exist for individuals with Type 1 diabetes. There is a higher incidence of obesity in individuals with Type 1 diabetes on intensive insulin therapy. […] Adolescent girls and young adult women with Type 1 diabetes are more likely to omit insulin for weight loss and have disordered eating habits 20.”

“In addition to screening for and treating depression and diabetes distress to improve overall diabetes management, it is equally important to assess quality of life as well as positive coping factors that may also influence self‐management and well‐being. For example, lower scores on the PROMIS^® measure of global health, which assesses social relationships as well as physical and mental well‐being, have been linked to higher depression scores and less frequent blood glucose checks 13. Furthermore, coping strategies such as problem‐solving, emotional expression, and acceptance have been linked to lower HbA_1c and enhanced quality of life 21.”

“Self‐monitoring of blood glucose via multiple finger sticks for capillary blood samples per day has been the ‘gold standard’ for glucose monitoring, but SMBG only provides glucose measurements as snapshots in time. Still, the majority of young people with Type 1 diabetes use SMBG as their main method to assess glycaemia. Data from the T1DX registry suggest that an increased frequency of SMBG is associated with lower HbA_1c levels 23. The development of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) provides more values, along with the rate and direction of glucose changes. […] With continued use, CGM has been shown to decrease the incidence of hypoglycaemia and HbA_1c levels 26. […] Insulin can be administered via multiple daily injections or continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (insulin pumps). Over the last 30 years, insulin pumps have become smaller with more features, making them a valuable alternative to multiple daily injections. Insulin pump use in various registries ranges from as low as 5.9% among paediatric patients in the New Zealand national register 28 to as high as 74% in the German/Austrian DPV in children aged <6 years (Table 2) 29. Recent data suggest that consistent use of insulin pumps can result in improved HbA_1c values and decreased incidence of severe hypoglycaemia 30, 31. Insulin pumps have been associated with improved quality of life 32. The data on insulin pumps and diabetic ketoacidosis are less clear.”

“The majority of Type 1 diabetes management is carried out outside the clinical setting and in individuals’ daily lives. People with Type 1 diabetes must make complex treatment decisions multiple times daily; thus, diabetes self‐management skills are central to optimal diabetes management. Unfortunately, many people with Type 1 diabetes and their caregivers are not sufficiently familiar with the necessary diabetes self‐management skills. […] Parents are often the first who learn these skills. As children become older, they start receiving more independence over their diabetes care; however, the transition of responsibilities from caregiver to child is often unstructured and haphazard. It is important to ensure that both individuals with diabetes and their caregivers have adequate self‐management skills throughout the diabetes journey.”

“In the developed world (nations with the highest gross domestic product), 87% of the population has access to the internet and 68% report using a smartphone 39. Even in developing countries, 54% of people use the internet and 37% own smartphones 39. In many areas, smartphones are the primary source of internet access and are readily available. […] There are >1000 apps for diabetes on the Apple App Store and the Google Play store. Many of these apps have focused on nutrition, blood glucose logging, and insulin dosing. Given the prevalence of smartphones and the interest in having diabetes apps handy, there is the potential for using a smartphone to deliver education and decision support tools. […] The new psychosocial position statement from the ADA recommends routine psychosocial screening in clinic. These recommendations include screening for: 1) depressive symptoms annually, at diagnosis, or with changes in medical status; 2) anxiety and worry about hypoglycaemia, complications and other diabetes‐specific worries; 3) disordered eating and insulin omission for purposes of weight control; 4) and diabetes distress in children as young as 7 or 8 years old 16. Implementation of in‐clinic screening for depression in young people with Type 1 diabetes has already been shown to be feasible, acceptable and able to identify individuals in need of treatment who may otherwise have gone unnoticed for a longer period of time which would have been having a detrimental impact on physical health and quality of life 13, 40. These programmes typically use tablets […] to administer surveys to streamline the screening process and automatically score measures 13, 40. This automation allows psychologists and social workers to focus on care delivery rather than screening. In addition to depression screening, automated tablet‐based screening for parental depression, distress and anxiety; problem‐solving skills; and resilience/positive coping factors can help the care team understand other psychosocial barriers to care. This approach allows the development of patient‐ and caregiver‐centred interventions to improve these barriers, thereby improving clinical outcomes and complication rates.”

“With the advent of electronic health records, registries and downloadable medical devices, people with Type 1 diabetes have troves of data that can be analysed to provide insights on an individual and population level. Big data analytics for diabetes are still in the early stages, but present great potential for improving diabetes care. IBM Watson Health has partnered with Medtronic to deliver personalized insights to individuals with diabetes based on device data 48. Numerous other systems […] allow people with Type 1 diabetes to access their data, share their data with the healthcare team, and share de‐identified data with the research community. Data analysis and insights such as this can form the basis for the delivery of personalized digital health coaching. For example, historical patterns can be analysed to predict activity and lead to pro‐active insulin adjustment to prevent hypoglycaemia. […] Improvements to diabetes care delivery can occur at both the population level and at the individual level using insights from big data analytics.”

…

vi. Route to improving Type 1 diabetes mellitus glycaemic outcomes: real‐world evidence taken from the National Diabetes Audit.

“While control of blood glucose levels reduces the risk of diabetes complications, it can be very difficult for people to achieve. There has been no significant improvement in average glycaemic control among people with Type 1 diabetes for at least the last 10 years in many European countries 6.

The National Diabetes Audit (NDA) in England and Wales has shown relatively little change in the levels of HbA_1c being achieved in people with Type 1 diabetes over the last 10 years, with >70% of HbA_1c results each year being >58 mmol/mol (7.5%) 7.

Data for general practices in England are published by the NDA. NHS Digital publishes annual prescribing data, including British National Formulary (BNF) codes 7, 8. Together, these data provide an opportunity to investigate whether there are systematic associations between HbA_1c levels in people with Type 1 diabetes and practice‐level population characteristics, diabetes service levels and use of medication.”

“The Quality and Outcomes Framework (a payment system for general practice performance) provided a baseline list of all general practices in England for each year, the practice list size and number of people (both with Type 1 and Type 2 diabetes) on their diabetes register. General practice‐level data of participating practices were taken from the NDA 2013–2014, 2014–2015 and 2015–2016 (5455 practices in the last year). They include Type 1 diabetes population characteristics, routine review checks and the proportions of people achieving target glycaemic control and/or being at higher glycaemic risk.

Diabetes medication data for all people with diabetes were taken from the general practice prescribing in primary care data for 2013–2014, 2014–2015 and 2015–2016, including insulin and blood glucose monitoring (BGM) […] A total of 20 indicators were created that covered the epidemiological, service, medication, technological, costs and outcomes performance for each practice and year. The variance in these indicators over the 4‐year period and among general practices was also considered. […] The values of the indicators found to be in the 90^th percentile were used to quantify the potential of highest performing general practices. […] In total 13 085 practice‐years of data were analysed, covering 437 000 patient‐years of management.”

“There was significant variation among the participating general practices (Fig. 3) in the proportion of people achieving target glycaemic control target [percentage of people with HbA_1c ≤58 mmol/mol (7.5%)] and in the proportion at high glycaemic risk [percentage of people with HbA_1c >86 mmol/mol (10%)]. […] Our analysis showed that, at general practice level, the median target glycaemic control attainment was 30%, while the 10th percentile was 16%, and the 90^th percentile was 45%. The corresponding median for the high glycaemic risk percentage was 16%, while the 10th percentile (corresponding to the best performing practices) was 6% and the 90^th percentile (greatest proportion of Type 1 diabetes at high glycaemic risk) was 28%. Practices in the deciles for both lowest target glycaemic control and highest high glycaemic risk had 49% of the results in the 58–86 mmol/mol range. […] A very wide variation was found in the percentage of insulin for presumed pump use (deduced from prescriptions of fast‐acting vial insulin), with a median of 3.8% at general practice level. The 10th percentile was 0% and the 90^th percentile was 255% of the median inferred pump usage.”

“[O]ur findings suggest that if all practices optimized service and therapies to the levels achieved by the top decile then 16 100 (7%) more people with Type 1 diabetes would achieve the glycaemic control target of 58 mmol/mol (7.5%) and 11 500 (5%) fewer people would have HbA_1c >86 mmol/mol (10%). Put another way, if the results for all practices were at the top decile level, 36% vs 29% of people with Type 1 diabetes would achieve the glycaemic control target of HbA_1c ≤ 58 mmol/mol (7.5%), and as few as 10% could have HbA_1c levels > 86 mmol/mol (10%) compared with 15% currently (Fig. 6). This has significant implications for the potential to improve the longer‐term outcomes of people with Type 1 diabetes, given the close link between glycaemia and complications in such individuals 5, 10, 11.”

“We found that the significant variation among the participating general practices (Fig. 2) in terms of the proportion of people with HbA_1c ≤58 mmol/mol (7.5%) was only partially related to a lower proportion of people with HbA_1c >86 mmol/mol (10%). There was only a weak relationship between level of target glycaemia achieved and avoidance of very suboptimal glycaemia. The overall r² value was 0.6. This suggests that there is a degree of independence between these outcomes, so that success factors at a general practice level differ for people achieving optimal glycaemia vs those factors affecting avoiding a level of at risk glycaemia.”