Longitudinal Analysis of Real-World Performance of an Implantable Continuous Glucose Sensor over Multiple Sensor Insertion and Removal Cycles.

Katherine S Tweden, Dorothee Deiss, Ravi Rastogi, Suresh Addaguduru, Francine R Kaufman
Author Information
  1. Katherine S Tweden: Senseonics, Incorporated, Germantown, Maryland.
  2. Dorothee Deiss: Center for Endocrinology and Diabetology, Medicover Berlin-Mitte, Berlin, Germany.
  3. Ravi Rastogi: Senseonics, Incorporated, Germantown, Maryland.
  4. Suresh Addaguduru: Senseonics, Incorporated, Germantown, Maryland.
  5. Francine R Kaufman: Senseonics, Incorporated, Germantown, Maryland.

Abstract

The Eversense Continuous Glucose Monitoring (CGM) System, with the first long-term, implantable glucose sensor, has been commercially available in Europe and South Africa since 2016 for adults with diabetes. The performance of the sensor over multiple, sequential 90- or 180-day cycles from either real-world experience or clinical studies has not been previously published. The Eversense Data Management System (DMS) was used to evaluate the accuracy of General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR)-compliant sensor glucose (SG) values against self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) from June 2016 through August 2019 among patients with at least four sensor cycles from European and South African health care practices. Mean SG and associated measures of variability, glucose management indicator (GMI), and percent and time in various hypoglycemic, euglycemic, and hyperglycemic ranges were calculated for the 24-h time period over each cycle. In addition, transmitter wear time was evaluated across each sensor wear cycle. Among the 945 users included in the analysis, the mean absolute relative difference (standard deviation [SD]) using 152,206, 174,645, 206,024, and 172,587 calibration matched pairs against SMBG was 11.9% (3.6%), 11.5% (4.0%), 11.8% (4.7%), and 11.5% (4.1%) during the first four sensor cycles, respectively. Mean values of the CGM metrics over the first sensor cycle were 156.5 mg/dL for SG, 54.7 mg/dL for SD, 0.35 for coefficient of variation, and 7.04% for GMI. Percent SG at different glycemic ranges was as follows: <54 mg/dL was 1.1% (16 min), <70 mg/dL was 4.6% (66 min), ≥70-180 mg/dL (time in range) was 64.5% (929 min), >180-250 mg/dL was 22.8% (328 min), and >250 mg/dL was 8.1% (117 min). The median transmitter wear time over the first cycle was 83.2%. CGM metrics and wear time were similar over the subsequent three cycles. This real-world evaluation of adult patients with diabetes using the Eversense CGM System in the home setting demonstrated that the implantable sensor provides consistent stable accuracy and CGM metrics over multiple, sequential sensor cycles with no indication of degradation of sensor performance.

Keywords

References

  1. Diabetologia. 2012 Dec;55(12):3155-62 [PMID: 22965294]
  2. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2013 Mar 01;7(2):562-78 [PMID: 23567014]
  3. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2020 Jan;22(1):48-52 [PMID: 31418587]
  4. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2018 Apr;20(4):296-302 [PMID: 29470128]
  5. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2019 Apr;21(4):155-158 [PMID: 30896290]
  6. JAMA. 2017 Jan 24;317(4):371-378 [PMID: 28118453]
  7. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2020 Jan;14(1):135-150 [PMID: 31216870]
  8. N Engl J Med. 2010 Jul 22;363(4):311-20 [PMID: 20587585]
  9. Diabetes Care. 2011 Nov;34(11):2403-5 [PMID: 21933908]
  10. Diabetes Care. 2019 Aug;42(8):1593-1603 [PMID: 31177185]
  11. Diabetes Care. 2019 Mar;42(3):400-405 [PMID: 30352896]
  12. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2020 Nov;22(11):846-852 [PMID: 32453604]
  13. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2019 Feb;21(2):81-85 [PMID: 30575414]
  14. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2019 Dec;21(12):677-681 [PMID: 31385732]
  15. Diabetes Care. 2017 Jan;40(1):63-68 [PMID: 27815290]
  16. Diabetes Care. 2017 Apr;40(4):538-545 [PMID: 28209654]
  17. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2019 May;21(5):231-237 [PMID: 30925083]
  18. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2018 Apr;20(4):274-284 [PMID: 29608107]
  19. Diabetes Care. 2018 Nov;41(11):2370-2376 [PMID: 30201847]
  20. JAMA. 2017 Jan 24;317(4):379-387 [PMID: 28118454]
  21. Ann Intern Med. 2017 Sep 19;167(6):365-374 [PMID: 28828487]
  22. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2018 May;12(3):634-638 [PMID: 28990436]
  23. Diabetes Care. 2018 Nov;41(11):2275-2280 [PMID: 30224348]
  24. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2018 Mar;20(3):197-206 [PMID: 29381090]
  25. BMJ. 2011 Jul 07;343:d3805 [PMID: 21737469]

MeSH Term

Blood Glucose
Blood Glucose Self-Monitoring
Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1
Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2
Humans
Hypoglycemic Agents
Insulin
Insulin Infusion Systems

Chemicals

Blood Glucose
Hypoglycemic Agents
Insulin

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0sensorCGMtimeglucosecyclesfirstdiabetesSGcyclewear114metricsEversenseContinuousSystem5%1%SensorGlucoseimplantableSouth2016performancemultiplesequentialreal-worldDataaccuracyvaluesSMBGpatientsfourMeanGMIrangestransmitterusing2066%8%1ImplantableTypeMonitoringlong-termcommerciallyavailableEuropeAfricasinceadults90-180-dayeitherexperienceclinicalstudiespreviouslypublishedManagementDMSusedevaluateGeneralProtectionRegulationGDPR-compliantself-monitoringbloodJuneAugust2019amongleastEuropeanAfricanhealthcarepracticesassociatedmeasuresvariabilitymanagementindicatorpercentvarioushypoglycemiceuglycemichyperglycemiccalculated24-hperiodadditionevaluatedacrossAmong945usersincludedanalysismeanabsoluterelativedifferencestandarddeviation[SD]152174645024172587calibrationmatchedpairs9%30%7%respectively1565 mg/dL547 mg/dLSD035coefficientvariation704%Percentdifferentglycemicfollows:<54 mg/dL16 min<70 mg/dL66 min≥70-180 mg/dLrange64929 min>180-250 mg/dL22328 min>250 mg/dL8117 minmedian832%similarsubsequentthreeevaluationadulthomesettingdemonstratedprovidesconsistentstableindicationdegradationLongitudinalAnalysisReal-WorldPerformanceMultipleInsertionRemovalCyclesAccuracymonitoringGlucometrics2

Similar Articles

Cited By