Moderator of 3 Sessions
Session Description:
This symposium will introduce Tempo™, a Personalized Diabetes Management System and Lyumjev®, a fast-acting mealtime insulin from Eli Lilly.
Tempo integrates insulin dosing data with technology to help simplify diabetes management. Digital health technologies can help improve patient data visibility, physician-patient collaboration, clinical decision-making, and patient self-management, ultimately leading to better outcomes.
Faculty will discuss the complexities of insulin management, and how insulin dosing data may help facilitate communication between you and the people you treat. Automating insulin dosing data may help:
• Gain an understanding of their management patterns
• Stay informed between office visits
• Feel empowered to engage in shared decision-making
Lyumjev is a formulation of insulin lispro indicated to improve glycaemic control in adults with diabetes by enabling accelerated absorption.
Faculty will discuss the clinical profile of Lyumjev and how it:
• Has the fastest insulin absorption and a shorter duration of exposure when compared to other rapid-acting insulins
• Helps reduce post-prandial glucose without increased risk of hypoglycaemia
• Significantly outperformed Humalog when dosed at the start of a meal
This program is for all healthcare professionals treating people with diabetes on multiple daily injections of mealtime insulin.
Session Description:
Introducing new breakthroughs in diabetes technology from Dexcom, the leader in trusted CGM performance. We invite you to join us to learn more about the two newest additions to the Dexcom portfolio: Dexcom G7 and Dexcom ONE. This program will review current data on the use of RT-CGM for people with type 1 and type 2 diabetes, revealing opportunities to improve care across the lifespan. In this session you will gain a deeper understanding of the performance and accuracy of the Dexcom G7 System in both adult and pediatric populations and hear more about the unique features that can improve the efficiency and effectiveness of clinical decision making. We will share our strategy to expand access to CGM technology and increase utilization with Dexcom ONE globally. Additionally, our experts will share their practical experience for incorporating both products into your practice.
Presenter of 5 Presentations
Innovations and opportunities for personal CGM: a global perspective
Welcome & Introductions
Q&A and Closing Remarks
Experience in the United Kingdom
The impact on policy of the changing science in T1D
Abstract
Abstract Body
The introduction of the clinical use of HbA1c in the early 1980s was a revolutionary step for the modern management and eventually the diagnosis of diabetes. The use of this objective and relatively inexpensive biomarker allowed both researchers and clinicians to track diabetes control. In fact, the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial (DCCT) would not have been possible if not for the use of HbA1c. The test now is standard of care for all types of diabetes for assessment of glycemic control.
While limitations of HbA1c (anemias, hemoglobinopathies, etc.) have been understood for 40 years, it has been more recently that the real limitations of HbA1c have been reported due to the use of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM). This was first observed in a population with no anemia, renal disease, or liver disease in 2008-an individual with a HbA1c of 9% could have the same mean glucose as someone with a HbA1c of 7%. For a population, the test is robust, but for any given individual, there may be major discordance between mean glucose and HbA1c. While more factors have been found to impact HbA1c since the 1980s, we have also learned that race/ethnicity may impact this biomarker. For example, on average we now know that in African Americans, HbA1c runs 0.4% higher than in Caucasian Americans.
The introduction of glucose management indicator (GMI) has resulted in many clinicians wondering if we need to measure HbA1c moving forward. While using GMI during the pandemic when it was not possible for patients to get blood work was helpful, HbA1c will remain as part of our standard of care. First, the majority of people with diabetes do not use CGM, so GMI is not possible. Still, in an ideal world it would be good to know if there is discordance between mean glucose and HbA1c tested with a one-time professional HbA1c for at least 14 days. Secondly, many clinicians and patients feel HbA1c is an important piece of information they want for routine clinic visits. It should also be noted that regulatory agencies are still dependent on HbA1c as an objective measure to confirm the efficacy of a pharmaceutical therapy. Still, it is also true HbA1c does not provide the granularity of someone’s diabetes control, particularly as it pertains to hypoglycemia.
After four decades of the use of HbA1c, it is not realistic that it will go away and more importantly, it will continue to have a role in the immediate future. Given the cost of CGM, it likely will continue to be used in the long-term future too.