Impact of Ultra-Rapid Insulin on Boost and Ease-Off in the Cambridge Hybrid Closed-Loop System for Individuals With Type 1 Diabetes.

OBJECTIVE

The objective was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of ultra-rapid-acting insulin with the Boost and Ease-off features of the Cambridge hybrid closed-loop system.

METHODS

A secondary analysis of Boost and Ease-off from two double-blind, randomized, crossover hybrid closed-loop studies comparing (1) Fiasp to insulin aspart (n = 25), and (2) Lyumjev to insulin lispro (n = 26) was carried out. Mean glucose on initialization of Boost and Ease-off, change in glucose 60 and 120 minutes after initialization, duration and frequency of use, mean glucose, and time in, above, and below target glucose range were calculated for periods of Boost use, Ease-off use, or neither.

RESULTS

Participants used Boost for longer with Fiasp than insulin aspart (median [interquartile range, IQR] = 75 [53-125] minutes vs 60 [49-75] minutes; = .01). Mean glucose on Boost initialization with Fiasp was 238 ± 62 mg/dL compared with 218 ± 45 mg/dL with insulin aspart ( = .08). Fiasp use resulted in a greater glucose reduction 120 minutes after Boost initialization [-59 ± 34 mg/dL vs -43 ± 31 mg/dL; = .02]. There were no statistically significant differences in sensor glucose endpoints during Boost or Ease-off periods between Fiasp and aspart. There were no statistically significant differences during Boost or Ease-off periods when comparing Lyumjev with insulin lispro. There were no safety issues when using Boost and Ease-off with ultra-rapid insulins.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of Fiasp and Lyumjev during Boost or Ease-off resulted in comparable safety and efficacy to using insulin aspart and lispro.