Randomized comparison of self-monitored blood glucose (BGM) versus continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) data to optimize glucose control in type 2 diabetes

Aims: Evaluate whether structured BGM testing (BGM) or real-time CGM (CGM) lead to improved glucose control (A1c). Determine which approach optimized glucose control more effectively. Methods-multi-arm parallel: trial of three type 2 diabetes (T2D) therapies +/- metformin: (1) sulfonylurea (SU), (2) incretin (DPP4 inhibitor or GLP-1 agonist), or (3) insulin. After a baseline CGM, 114 adult subjects were randomized to either BGM (4 times daily) or CGM (24/7) for 16 weeks with therapies adjusted every 4 weeks. Results: A1c means decreased from 8.19 to 7.07 (1.12% difference) with CGM (n = 59) and 7.85 to 7.03 (0.82% difference) with BGM (n = 55) (p < 0.001). BGM and CGM groups showed significant improvements in time in range and glucose variability-with no significant difference between the two groups. Clinically important hypoglycemia (<50 mg/dL) was significantly reduced for the CGM group compared with BGM (p < 0.01), particularly in subjects taking insulin or therapies with higher hypoglycemic risk (SU). Conclusion: In T2D, structured, consistent use of glucose data regardless of device (structured BGM or CGM) leads to improvements in A1c control. CGM is more effective than BGM in minimizing hypoglycemia particularly for those using higher hypoglycemic risk therapies.

Automated summary

This study evaluated the effects of structured BGM testing and real-time CGM on glucose control and found that both methods improved A1c control. However, CGM was more effective in reducing the risk of hypoglycemia.