Open-Source Versus Commercial Automated Insulin Delivery System for Type 1 Diabetes Management: A Prospective Observational Comparative Study from Canada

<b><i>Objective:</i></b> This study compares unregulated open-source (OS) automated insulin delivery (AID) systems and commercial-AID (C-AID) systems regarding glucose management, patient-reported outcomes (PROs), and safety among adults with type 1 diabetes (T1D). <b><i>Methods:</i></b> We conducted a 12-week, prospective, observational, noninferiority, comparative, real-world study involving 78 adults with T1D and having used an AID system for ≥3 months (26 OS-AID and 52 C-AID users). A total of 4-week data from a blinded continuous glucose monitor was used to assess the effectiveness in glucose management (primary outcome: 24 h time in range [TIR%] for 4 weeks, with a noninferiority margin of 5%). <b><i>Results:</i></b> Our study suggested that OS-AIDs were noninferior to C-AIDs regarding the 24 h TIR% (78.3% [standard deviation or SD 11.0] vs. 71.2% [SD 10.9], mean difference 7.2% [95.08% confidence interval or CI: 1.9% to 12.5%], <i>P</i> < 0.001), even after adjusting for various confounding factors. OS-AIDs spent more time in hypoglycemia (<3.9 mmol/L) than C-AIDs (3.9% [SD 3.1] vs. 1.8% [SD 1.3], <i>P</i> < 0.001) yet within the recommended range. OS-AID users reported less fear of hypoglycemia, while other PRO measures (diabetes distress, hypoglycemia awareness, sleep, fear of hypoglycemia, treatment satisfaction, and overall quality of life) were not different between groups. No severe hypoglycemia or diabetic ketoacidosis was reported in either group, with a similar occurrence rate of technical issues during the 12-week study period. <b><i>Conclusions:</i></b> OS-AIDs are safe and noninferior to C-AIDs for TIR% among adults with T1D in real-world settings. Both OS-AID and C-AID systems can be considered for T1D management.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Diabetes Technology & Therapeutics
Published
2025-03-18
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1089/dia.2024.0561
Citations
6
Primary Topic
Diabetes Management and Research
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
7.77
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Open-Source Versus Commercial Automated Insulin Delivery System for Type 1 Diabetes Management: A Prospective Observational Comparative Study from Canada

Valérie Boudreau, Virginie Messier, Caroline Grou, RÉMI P.R. RABASA-LHORET et al.
6 citations
Diabetes Technology & Therapeutics
Diabetes Management and Research
7.77
article

Open-Source Versus Commercial Automated Insulin Delivery System for Type 1 Diabetes Management: A Prospective Observational Comparative Study from Canada

Valérie Boudreau, Virginie Messier, Caroline Grou, RÉMI P.R. RABASA-LHORET, Marie‐Françoise Devaux, Zekai Wu, Marie Raffray, Alain Vanasse, Maha Lebbar, Anne‐Sophie Brazeau, Anne Bonhoure
article en
6 citations

Abstract

<b><i>Objective:</i></b> This study compares unregulated open-source (OS) automated insulin delivery (AID) systems and commercial-AID (C-AID) systems regarding glucose management, patient-reported outcomes (PROs), and safety among adults with type 1 diabetes (T1D). <b><i>Methods:</i></b> We conducted a 12-week, prospective, observational, noninferiority, comparative, real-world study involving 78 adults with T1D and having used an AID system for ≥3 months (26 OS-AID and 52 C-AID users). A total of 4-week data from a blinded continuous glucose monitor was used to assess the effectiveness in glucose management (primary outcome: 24 h time in range [TIR%] for 4 weeks, with a noninferiority margin of 5%). <b><i>Results:</i></b> Our study suggested that OS-AIDs were noninferior to C-AIDs regarding the 24 h TIR% (78.3% [standard deviation or SD 11.0] vs. 71.2% [SD 10.9], mean difference 7.2% [95.08% confidence interval or CI: 1.9% to 12.5%], <i>P</i> < 0.001), even after adjusting for various confounding factors. OS-AIDs spent more time in hypoglycemia (<3.9 mmol/L) than C-AIDs (3.9% [SD 3.1] vs. 1.8% [SD 1.3], <i>P</i> < 0.001) yet within the recommended range. OS-AID users reported less fear of hypoglycemia, while other PRO measures (diabetes distress, hypoglycemia awareness, sleep, fear of hypoglycemia, treatment satisfaction, and overall quality of life) were not different between groups. No severe hypoglycemia or diabetic ketoacidosis was reported in either group, with a similar occurrence rate of technical issues during the 12-week study period. <b><i>Conclusions:</i></b> OS-AIDs are safe and noninferior to C-AIDs for TIR% among adults with T1D in real-world settings. Both OS-AID and C-AID systems can be considered for T1D management.

Diabetes Technology & TherapeuticsVol. 27(7)
Diabetes Canada (CA), Centre Hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal (CA), Montreal Clinical Research Institute (CA), McGill University (CA), Université de Montréal (CA)
Openalex Percentile: Top 3%
Diabetes Management and Research
7.77
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.