Evidence mapPaperPMID 39690388Full record

ArticleDiabetes, obesity & metabolism2025

Precision medicine in type 1 diabetes: comparing metabolic outcomes of Control-IQ and MiniMed 780G according to patient characteristics.

Imene Gargouri, Hana Charfi, Wafa Belabed, Cécilia Outenah, Armelle Pochat, Menaouar Touimer, Pascaline Huynh, Catherine Petit, Marie Lejeune, Juliette Eroukhmanoff and 3 more

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Diabetes, obesity & metabolism, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors.

Imene GargouriDepartment of Endocrinology and Diabetes, Sud-Francilien Hospital, Corbeil-Essonnes, France.
Hana CharfiDepartment of Endocrinology and Diabetes, Sud-Francilien Hospital, Corbeil-Essonnes, France.
Wafa BelabedDepartment of Endocrinology and Diabetes, Sud-Francilien Hospital, Corbeil-Essonnes, France.
Cécilia OutenahDepartment of Endocrinology and Diabetes, Sud-Francilien Hospital, Corbeil-Essonnes, France.
Armelle PochatDepartment of Endocrinology and Diabetes, Sud-Francilien Hospital, Corbeil-Essonnes, France.
Menaouar TouimerDepartment of Endocrinology and Diabetes, Sud-Francilien Hospital, Corbeil-Essonnes, France.
Pascaline HuynhDepartment of Endocrinology and Diabetes, Sud-Francilien Hospital, Corbeil-Essonnes, France.
Catherine PetitDepartment of Endocrinology and Diabetes, Sud-Francilien Hospital, Corbeil-Essonnes, France.
Marie LejeuneDepartment of Endocrinology and Diabetes, Sud-Francilien Hospital, Corbeil-Essonnes, France.
Juliette EroukhmanoffDepartment of Endocrinology and Diabetes, Sud-Francilien Hospital, Corbeil-Essonnes, France.
Khadijatou Ly SallDepartment of Endocrinology and Diabetes, Sud-Francilien Hospital, Corbeil-Essonnes, France.
Alfred PenfornisDepartment of Endocrinology and Diabetes, Sud-Francilien Hospital, Corbeil-Essonnes, France.
Coralie AmadouDepartment of Endocrinology and Diabetes, Sud-Francilien Hospital, Corbeil-Essonnes, France.ORCID 0000-0002-0581-7592

Funding

Clinical Research Department of the Sud-Francilien Hospital
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimsThis study aimed to compare 12-month metabolic outcomes in patients with type 1 diabetes (T1D) treated with either MiniMed 780G (Guardian 4) or Control-IQ (Dexcom G6) automated insulin delivery (AID) systems and identify interaction with patient characteristics. MATERIALS AND

methodsWe conducted a single-centre, retrospective study including all patients (aged ≥16) with T1D who were started on either MiniMed 780G or Control-IQ between January 2021 and October 2022 and continued for ≥12 months. We used propensity score matching to compare the average marginal effects between MiniMed 780G and Control-IQ regarding the primary outcome (time in range [TIR]) and secondary outcomes (time below range [TBR], glucose monitoring indicator [GMI] and coefficient of variation [CV]) after 12 months. We tested for interaction effects between baseline characteristics (age, sex, socio-professional background, body mass index, insulin daily dose, carbohydrate counting practice) and treatment effect.

resultsWe included 245 patients (58% women): 178 treated with Control-IQ and 67 with MiniMed 780G. The mean ± SD age and haemoglobin A1c were 39 ± 15 years and 8.7 ± 1.8% (72 ± 20 mmol/mol) respectively. In the propensity score-matched sample (n = 221), we observed significant differences in 12-month TIR (MiniMed 780G minus Control-IQ [95% CI]: 6.4 [3.4;9.5]), GMI (-0.42 [-0.59; -0.25]) and CV (-2.12 [-3.68; -0.55]), while TBR showed no significant difference (-0.04 [-0.47; +0.40]). The 12-month TIR difference was consistent across subgroups, including baseline carbohydrate counting characteristics.

conclusionMiniMed 780G is associated with moderate metabolic superiority compared to Control-IQ, without interaction with patient characteristics. These results suggest that neither model is more appropriate for certain populations, particularly patients without carbohydrate counting practice.

Indexed as

Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1Hypoglycemic AgentsInsulinInsulin Infusion SystemsPrecision MedicineAdultBlood GlucoseBlood Glucose Self-MonitoringFemaleGlycated HemoglobinHumansMaleMiddle AgedPropensity ScoreRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeBlood GlucoseGlycated Hemoglobinhemoglobin A1c protein, humanHypoglycemic AgentsInsulinautomated insulin deliverycarbohydrate countingprecision medicinetype 1 diabetes

Identifiers

PMID39690388
PMCPMC11802389

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.