Item request has been placed! ×
Item request cannot be made. ×
loading  Processing Request

Glucose values from the same continuous glucose monitoring sensor significantly differ among readers with different generations of algorithm.

Item request has been placed! ×
Item request cannot be made. ×
loading   Processing Request
Read Online Read More Add to Saved list
  • Additional Information
    • Source:
      Publisher: Nature Publishing Group Country of Publication: England NLM ID: 101563288 Publication Model: Electronic Cited Medium: Internet ISSN: 2045-2322 (Electronic) Linking ISSN: 20452322 NLM ISO Abbreviation: Sci Rep Subsets: MEDLINE
    • Publication Information:
      Original Publication: London : Nature Publishing Group, copyright 2011-
    • Subject Terms:
      Blood Glucose* ; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1*; Humans ; Glucose ; Glycated Hemoglobin ; Blood Glucose Self-Monitoring ; Continuous Glucose Monitoring ; Algorithms
    • Abstract:
      Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) values obtained from CGM systems using the same sensor but with different internal algorithms (the first- and third-generation FreeStyle Libre (1st-gen-libre and 3rd-gen-libre, respectively)) were compared. We used 19,819 paired and simultaneously measured CGM values of 13 patients with diabetes. The average CGM value was significantly higher (P < 0.0001) and the time below range (CGM value < 70 mg/dL) was significantly lower (P < 0.0001) with the 3rd-gen-libre than with the 1st-gen-libre. There was a significant correlation (P < 0.0001) between the CGM values of the 3rd-gen-libre (y-axis, mg/dL) and 1st-gen-libre (x-axis, mg/dL) using the following formula: y = 0.9728x + 10.024. On assessing the association between glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c (%), y-axis) and the average CGM values (x-axis, mg/dL) by applying the obtained equation to previously reported 1st-gen-libre data and converting it to 3rd-gen-libre data, we obtained the equation y = 0.02628x + 3.233, indicating that the glucose management indicator reported in the West may be underestimated compared with the laboratory-measured HbA1c in the Japanese population. Glucose values from the same sensor were found to be significantly different between readers with different algorithms, and the calculation of CGM-related indices may need to be individualized for each device.
      (© 2024. The Author(s).)
    • References:
      J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2022 May 17;107(6):e2221-e2236. (PMID: 35094087)
      Lancet. 2016 Nov 5;388(10057):2254-2263. (PMID: 27634581)
      Diabetes Obes Metab. 2023 Feb;25(2):596-601. (PMID: 36314133)
      Diabetes Technol Ther. 2015 Nov;17(11):787-94. (PMID: 26171659)
      Biosensors (Basel). 2022 Apr 29;12(5):. (PMID: 35624589)
      Diabetes Care. 2021 Dec;44(12):2787-2789. (PMID: 34635503)
      Diabetes Obes Metab. 2022 Apr;24(4):599-608. (PMID: 34984825)
      Diabetes Care. 2017 Jul;40(7):832-838. (PMID: 28039172)
      Sci Rep. 2021 Feb 17;11(1):4006. (PMID: 33597626)
      Diabetes Care. 2018 Nov;41(11):2275-2280. (PMID: 30224348)
      Diabetes Care. 2022 Mar 1;45(3):659-665. (PMID: 35076697)
      Diabetes Care. 2019 Aug;42(8):1593-1603. (PMID: 31177185)
      J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2022 Jan;16(1):70-77. (PMID: 32954812)
      Diabetes Technol Ther. 2021 Nov;23(11):745-752. (PMID: 34160289)
      Diabetes Care. 2017 Aug;40(8):994-999. (PMID: 28733374)
    • Grant Information:
      JP21K08539 Japan Society for the Promotion of Science; JP21K08567 Japan Society for the Promotion of Science; JP21K08589 Japan Society for the Promotion of Science
    • Accession Number:
      0 (Blood Glucose)
      IY9XDZ35W2 (Glucose)
      0 (Glycated Hemoglobin)
    • Publication Date:
      Date Created: 20240301 Date Completed: 20240304 Latest Revision: 20240304
    • Publication Date:
      20240304
    • Accession Number:
      PMC10907350
    • Accession Number:
      10.1038/s41598-024-55124-3
    • Accession Number:
      38429333