974-P: BGM Readings in Range as a Marker of Glycemic Variability in People with Type 2 Diabetes—Interim Analysis from an Ongoing Prospective Study

Background: Glycemic variability (GV) is emerging as an independent risk factor for long-term complications. However, measuring GV using CGM is expensive and used sparingly in India. We evaluated BGM readings in-range, above range, and below range (RIR, RAR, RBR) using the OneTouch Verio Flex^® (OTVF) BGM with the OneTouch Reveal^® (OTR) application to assess GV and its correlation with TIR, TAR and TBR measured using CGM.

Aims and Objectives:1. To evaluate structured BGM as a tool for estimating GV 2. To assess the correlation between BGM-measured RIR, RAR, RBR and the GV parameters reported on AGP using Libre Pro CGM

Materials and Methods: We performed data analysis of 76 completed patients from an ongoing, prospective, multicentre, investigator-initiated study being conducted in New Delhi, India. Persons with T2D on stable treatment (OADs, OADs + Insulin, or Insulin) for ≥ 4 weeks were randomized 1:1 to perform daily 4-point profiles or 7-point profiles using structured BGM readings for 14 days while also wearing blinded CGM using the Libre Pro system. CGM parameters were compared with BGM readings in different ranges measured on the OTR platform.

Results: Most of the PwD performed fewer BGM readings than advised (average readings/day 3.62±1.4). There were strong correlations between daily average glucose, TIR and RIR, TAR and RAR, TBR and RBR (r 0.926, p<0.0001; r 0.805, p<0.00001; r 0.826, p<0.00001; r 0.348, p=0.0092, respectively). Further, there was a significant correlation between 14 days average glucose (158.3mg/dl±56.85 vs 186.13mg/dl±58.9, p=0.0139), TIR vs RIR (66.09%±27.59 vs 52.477%±28.65), TAR vs RAR (30%±29.45 vs 46.95%±28.78, p=0.0029), and TBR vs RBR (3.91%±6.27 vs 0.58%±1.54, p=0.0002).

Conclusion: Structured BGM using OneTouch Verio Flex® paired with the OneTouch Reveal application may be used to assess glycemic variability.