Comparison of Control-IQ and open-source AndroidAPS automated insulin delivery systems in adults with type 1 diabetes: The CODIAC study
Abstract
Aim: To compare open-source AndroidAPS (AAPS) and commercially available Control-IQ (CIQ) automated insulin delivery (AID) systems in a prospective, open-label, single-arm clinical trial. Methods: Adults with type 1 diabetes who had been using AAPS by their own decision entered the first 3-month AAPS phase then were switched to CIQ for 3 months.
The results of this treatment were compared with those after the 3-month AAPS phase. The primary endpoint was the change in time in range (% TIR; 70-80 mg/dL).
Results: Twenty-five people with diabetes (mean age 34.32 +- 11.07 years; HbA1c 6.4% +- 3%) participated in this study. CIQ was comparable with AAPS in achieving TIR (85.72% +- 7.64% vs. 84.24% +- 8.46%; P = .12).
Similarly, there were no differences in percentage time above range (> 180 and > 250 mg/dL), mean sensor glucose (130.3 +- 13.9 vs. 128.3 +- 16.9 mg/dL; P = .21) or HbA1c (6.3% +- 2.1% vs. 6.4% +- 3.1%; P = .59). Percentage time below range (< 70 and < 54 mg/dL) was significantly lower using CIQ than AAPS.
Even although participants were mostly satisfied with CIQ (63.6% mostly agreed, 9.1% strongly agreed), they did not plan to switch to CIQ. Conclusions: The CODIAC study is the first prospective study investigating the switch between open-source and commercially available AID systems.
CIQ and AAPS were comparable in achieving TIR. However, hypoglycaemia was significantly lower with CIQ.