Evidence Hub

Evaluation of Clinical Metrics for Identifying Defective Physiologic Responses to Hypoglycemia in Long-Standing Type 1 Diabetes

Flatt AJ, Chen E, Peleckis AJ, Dalton-Bakes C, Nguyen HL, Collins HW, Millar JS, Gallop RJ et al.

Diabetes technology & therapeutics, 2022

12 participants · 17 citations

Abstract

Repeated hypoglycemia exposure leads to impaired awareness of hypoglycemia (IAH) and the development of defective counterregulatory responses. To date, only pancreas or islet transplantation has demonstrated normalization of hypoglycemia awareness and the endogenous glucose production (EGP) response to defend against insulin-induced hypoglycemia in long-standing type 1 diabetes (T1D). This study aims to validate clinical metrics of IAH (Clarke score), hypoglycemia severity (HYPO score), glycemic lability (lability index), and continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) as predictors of absent autonomic symptom (AS) recognition and defective glucose counterregulation during insulin-induced hypoglycemia, thus enabling early identification of individuals with compromised physiologic defense against clinically significant hypoglycemia. Forty-three subjects with mean ± standard deviation age 43 ± 13 years and T1D duration 28 ± 13 years, including 32 with IAH and 11 with hypoglycemia awareness (Aware), and 12 nondiabetic control subjects, underwent single-blinded randomized-paired hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic and hypoglycemic clamp experiments. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves and sensitivity analyses were performed to assess metric prediction of absent AS recognition and defective EGP responses to hypoglycemia. Clarke score and CGM measures of hypoglycemia exposure demonstrated good ability to predict absent AS recognition (area under the curve ≥0.80). A composite threshold…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 12 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free