{"database":"biostudies-literature","file_versions":[],"scores":null,"additional":{"submitter":["Brown SA"],"funding":["NIDDK NIH HHS","National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases"],"pagination":["1822-1828"],"full_dataset_link":["https://www.ebi.ac.uk/biostudies/studies/S-EPMC7372060"],"repository":["biostudies-literature"],"omics_type":["Unknown"],"volume":["43(8)"],"pubmed_abstract":["<h4>Objective</h4>Limited information is available about glycemic outcomes with a closed-loop control (CLC) system compared with a predictive low-glucose suspend (PLGS) system.<h4>Research design and methods</h4>After 6 months of use of a CLC system in a randomized trial, 109 participants with type 1 diabetes (age range, 14-72 years; mean HbA<sub>1c</sub>, 7.1% [54 mmol/mol]) were randomly assigned to CLC (<i>N</i> = 54, Control-IQ) or PLGS (<i>N</i> = 55, Basal-IQ) groups for 3 months. The primary outcome was continuous glucose monitor (CGM)-measured time in range (TIR) for 70-180 mg/dL. Baseline CGM metrics were computed from the last 3 months of the preceding study.<h4>Results</h4>All 109 participants completed the study. Mean ± SD TIR was 71.1 ± 11.2% at baseline and 67.6 ± 12.6% using"],"journal":["Diabetes care"],"pubmed_title":["Glycemic Outcomes of Use of CLC Versus PLGS in Type 1 Diabetes: A Randomized Controlled Trial."],"pmcid":["PMC7372060"],"funding_grant_id":["P30 DK036836","UC4 DK108483","UC4 108483"],"pubmed_authors":["McCrady-Spitzer S","Willi SM","Levy CJ","Patibandla N","Eggerman T","Slover R","Laffel LM","Anderson SM","Dadlani V","Isganaitis E","Forlenza G","Flint E","Tabatabai I","Beck R","Beck RW","Calvo K","Simha V","Brown SA","Legault L","Ambler-Osborn L","Levister C","Renard E","Keller J","Berget C","Pinsker JE","Andre C","Murphy C","Kollman C","Campos T","iDCL Trial Research Group","Emory E","Jost E","Jacobson T","Gabrielson D","Breton MD","Conshafter K","Kovatchev B","O'Malley G","Castle J","Lam D","Doyle Iii F","Kudva YC","Reznik Y","Anderson S","Kim K","Levy C","Rossick-Solis A","Raghinaru D","Borgman S","Kovatchev BP","Laffel L","Pinsker J","Ekhlaspour L","Morris K","Dassau E","Lum JW","Wysham C","Towers L","Belle SH","Church MM","Salas E","Voelmle M","Messer L","Doyle F","Buckingham BA","Doyle FJ","Mitchell H","Roethke L","Piper M","Alonso GT","Buckingham B","Lum J","Wakeman C","Green J","Breton M","Ogyaadu S","Passman S","Green N","Forlenza GP","Cobelli C","Lovett J","Oliveri M","Gondor-Fredrick L","Town M","Arreza-Rubin G","Wadwa RP","Reid C","Kumari K","Brown S","Janicek R"],"additional_accession":[]},"is_claimable":false,"name":"Glycemic Outcomes of Use of CLC Versus PLGS in Type 1 Diabetes: A Randomized Controlled Trial.","description":"<h4>Objective</h4>Limited information is available about glycemic outcomes with a closed-loop control (CLC) system compared with a predictive low-glucose suspend (PLGS) system.<h4>Research design and methods</h4>After 6 months of use of a CLC system in a randomized trial, 109 participants with type 1 diabetes (age range, 14-72 years; mean HbA<sub>1c</sub>, 7.1% [54 mmol/mol]) were randomly assigned to CLC (<i>N</i> = 54, Control-IQ) or PLGS (<i>N</i> = 55, Basal-IQ) groups for 3 months. The primary outcome was continuous glucose monitor (CGM)-measured time in range (TIR) for 70-180 mg/dL. Baseline CGM metrics were computed from the last 3 months of the preceding study.<h4>Results</h4>All 109 participants completed the study. Mean ± SD TIR was 71.1 ± 11.2% at baseline and 67.6 ± 12.6% using","dates":{"release":"2020-01-01T00:00:00Z","publication":"2020 Aug","modification":"2025-05-29T20:48:18.583Z","creation":"2022-02-11T02:08:12.753Z"},"accession":"S-EPMC7372060","cross_references":{"pubmed":["32471910"],"doi":["10.2337/dc20-0124"]}}