The Need for Standardization of Continuous Glucose Monitoring Performance Evaluation: An Opinion by the International Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine Working Group on Continuous Glucose Monitoring.

Stefan Pleus, Manuel Eichenlaub, Elisabet Eriksson Boija, Marion Fokkert, Rolf Hinzmann, Johan Jendle, David C Klonoff, Konstantinos Makris, James H Nichols, John Pemberton, Elizabeth Selvin, Robbert J Slingerland, Andreas Thomas, Nam K Tran, Lilian Witthauer, Guido Freckmann
Author Information
  1. Stefan Pleus: Working Group on Continuous Glucose Monitoring, Scientific Division, The International Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine, Milano, Italy. ORCID
  2. Manuel Eichenlaub: Institut f��r Diabetes-Technologie, Forschungs- und Entwicklungsgesellschaft mbH an der Universit��t Ulm, Ulm, Germany. ORCID
  3. Elisabet Eriksson Boija: Working Group on Continuous Glucose Monitoring, Scientific Division, The International Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine, Milano, Italy.
  4. Marion Fokkert: Working Group on Continuous Glucose Monitoring, Scientific Division, The International Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine, Milano, Italy.
  5. Rolf Hinzmann: Working Group on Continuous Glucose Monitoring, Scientific Division, The International Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine, Milano, Italy. ORCID
  6. Johan Jendle: Working Group on Continuous Glucose Monitoring, Scientific Division, The International Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine, Milano, Italy.
  7. David C Klonoff: Working Group on Continuous Glucose Monitoring, Scientific Division, The International Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine, Milano, Italy. ORCID
  8. Konstantinos Makris: Working Group on Continuous Glucose Monitoring, Scientific Division, The International Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine, Milano, Italy. ORCID
  9. James H Nichols: Working Group on Continuous Glucose Monitoring, Scientific Division, The International Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine, Milano, Italy. ORCID
  10. John Pemberton: Working Group on Continuous Glucose Monitoring, Scientific Division, The International Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine, Milano, Italy.
  11. Elizabeth Selvin: Working Group on Continuous Glucose Monitoring, Scientific Division, The International Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine, Milano, Italy.
  12. Robbert J Slingerland: Working Group on Continuous Glucose Monitoring, Scientific Division, The International Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine, Milano, Italy.
  13. Andreas Thomas: Working Group on Continuous Glucose Monitoring, Scientific Division, The International Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine, Milano, Italy. ORCID
  14. Nam K Tran: Working Group on Continuous Glucose Monitoring, Scientific Division, The International Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine, Milano, Italy. ORCID
  15. Lilian Witthauer: Working Group on Continuous Glucose Monitoring, Scientific Division, The International Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine, Milano, Italy. ORCID
  16. Guido Freckmann: Working Group on Continuous Glucose Monitoring, Scientific Division, The International Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine, Milano, Italy. ORCID

Abstract

Metrics derived from continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) systems are often discordant between systems. A major cause is that CGM systems are not standardized; they use various algorithms and calibration methods, leading to discordant CGM readings across systems. This discordance can be addressed by standardizing CGM performance assessments: If manufacturers aim their CGM systems at the same target, then CGM readings will align across systems. This standardization should include the comparator device, sample origin, and study procedures. With better aligned CGM readings, CGM-derived metrics will subsequently also align better between systems.

Keywords

References

  1. J Diabetes. 2022 Jul;14(7):476-484 [PMID: 35864804]
  2. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2024 Apr;26(4):263-275 [PMID: 38194227]
  3. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2024 May;18(3):686-694 [PMID: 36278402]
  4. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2016 Jun 28;10(4):872-5 [PMID: 26902794]
  5. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2021 Sep;15(5):1104-1110 [PMID: 32513087]
  6. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2022 Sep;16(5):1076-1088 [PMID: 32814455]
  7. J Clin Pathol. 2004 Jul;57(7):752-4 [PMID: 15220370]
  8. Diabetes Metab Res Rev. 2022 Oct;38(7):e3560 [PMID: 35728796]
  9. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2024 Apr 17;:19322968241242386 [PMID: 38629871]
  10. Int J Med Sci. 2012;9(8):665-81 [PMID: 23055818]
  11. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2023 Nov;17(6):1506-1526 [PMID: 37599389]
  12. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2024 Sep;18(5):1265-1266 [PMID: 38801205]
  13. Diabetes Care. 2019 Aug;42(8):1593-1603 [PMID: 31177185]
  14. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2024 Apr;26(4):238-245 [PMID: 38156961]
  15. Pediatr Diabetes. 2019 Aug;20(5):604-612 [PMID: 30945397]
  16. Clin Chim Acta. 2013 Mar 15;418:63-71 [PMID: 23318564]
  17. Clin Chim Acta. 2021 Apr;515:5-12 [PMID: 33359497]
  18. J Diabetes Investig. 2019 May;10(3):851-856 [PMID: 30390385]
  19. Exp Clin Endocrinol Diabetes. 2022 May;130(5):343-350 [PMID: 33511578]

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0CGMsystemsreadingscontinuousglucosemonitoringdiscordantacrosswillalignstandardizationbetterContinuousGlucoseMonitoringMetricsderivedoftenmajorcausestandardizedusevariousalgorithmscalibrationmethodsleadingdiscordancecanaddressedstandardizingperformanceassessments:manufacturersaimtargetincludecomparatordevicesampleoriginstudyproceduresalignedCGM-derivedmetricssubsequentlyalsoNeedStandardizationPerformanceEvaluation:OpinionInternationalFederationClinicalChemistryLaboratoryMedicineWorkingGroupIFCC

Similar Articles

Cited By