Improved Glycemic Outcomes With Diabetes Technology Use Independent of Socioeconomic Status in Youth With Type 1 Diabetes.

OBJECTIVE: Technology use in type 1 diabetes (T1D) is impacted by socioeconomic status (SES). This analysis explored relationships between SES, glycemic outcomes, and technology use. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: A cross-sectional analysis of HbA1c data from 2,822 Australian youth with T1D was undertaken. Residential postcodes were used to assign SES based on the Index of Relative Socio-Economic Disadvantage (IRSD). Linear regression models were used to evaluate associations among IRSD quintile, HbA1c, and management regimen. RESULTS: Insulin pump therapy, continuous glucose monitoring, and their concurrent use were associated with lower mean HbA1c across all IRSD quintiles (P < 0.001). There was no interaction between technology use and IRSD quintile on HbA1c (P = 0.624), reflecting a similar association of lower HbA1c with technology use across all IRSD quintiles. CONCLUSIONS: Technology use was associated with lower HbA1c across all socioeconomic backgrounds. Socioeconomic disadvantage does not preclude glycemic benefits of diabetes technologies, highlighting the need to remove barriers to technology access.

Following in Banting's footsteps or straying from the path? Observations from contemporary diabetes innovation.

While advancements in the treatment of diabetes continue to rapidly evolve, many of the newer technologies have financial barriers to care, opposing the egalitarian ethos of Banting who sold his patent on insulin for a nominal cost to allow it to be made widely available. Inequity in access to new therapies drives disparity in diabetes burden with potential for these gaps to widen in the future. The 2023 International Conference on Advanced Technologies and Treatments of Diabetes (ATTD) presented ground-breaking and current research in diabetes technology. Oral presentations of the ATTD conference 2023 were analyzed to describe what percentage of speakers discussed equity in their talks. Overall, less than a quarter of presenters discussed equity, though there was regional variation. To ensure that diabetes technologies reduce disparity and improve outcomes, we encourage future speakers at diabetes (technology) conferences to consider equity of diabetes care and incorporate this into their presentations.

Socioeconomic status and diabetes technology use in youth with type 1 diabetes: a comparison of two funding models.

Background: Technology use, including continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) and insulin pump therapy, is associated with improved outcomes in youth with type 1 diabetes (T1D). In 2017 CGM was universally funded for youth with T1D in Australia. In contrast, pump access is primarily accessed through private health insurance, self-funding or philanthropy. The study aim was to investigate the use of diabetes technology across different socioeconomic groups in Australian youth with T1D, in the setting of two contrasting funding models. Methods: A cross-sectional evaluation of 4957 youth with T1D aged <18 years in the national registry was performed to determine technology use. The Index of Relative Socio-Economic Disadvantage (IRSD) derived from Australian census data is an area-based measure of socioeconomic status (SES). Lower quintiles represent greater disadvantage. IRSD based on most recent postcode of residence was used as a marker of SES. A multivariable generalised linear model adjusting for age, diabetes duration, sex, remoteness classification, and location within Australia was used to determine the association between SES and device use. Results: CGM use was lower in IRSD quintile 1 in comparison to quintiles 2 to 5 (p<0.001) where uptake across the quintiles was similar. A higher percentage of pump use was observed in the least disadvantaged IRSD quintiles. Compared to the most disadvantaged quintile 1, pump use progressively increased by 16% (95% CI: 4% to 31%) in quintile 2, 19% (6% to 33%) in quintile 3, 35% (21% to 50%) in quintile 4 and 51% (36% to 67%) in the least disadvantaged quintile 5. Conclusion: In this large national dataset, use of diabetes technologies was found to differ across socioeconomic groups. For nationally subsidised CGM, use was similar across socioeconomic groups with the exception of the most disadvantaged quintile, an important finding requiring further investigation into barriers to CGM use within a nationally subsidised model. User pays funding models for pump therapy result in lower use with socioeconomic disadvantage, highlighting inequities in this funding approach. For the full benefits of diabetes technology to be realised, equitable access to pump therapy needs to be a health policy priority.

Neonatal Onset Interstitial Lung Disease as a Primary Presenting Manifestation of Mucopolysaccharidosis Type I.

We describe two cases of neonatal onset interstitial lung disease eventually diagnosed as mucopolysaccharidosis type I (MPS I). In both cases, evaluation led to lung biopsy, pathology review, and identification of glycogen deposition. Pulmonary interstitial glycogenosis (PIG) was considered as a clinical diagnosis in case one; however, further review of electron microscopy (EM) was more consistent with MPS I rather than PIG. Both cases were confirmed to have MPS I by enzyme and molecular analysis. Neonatal interstitial lung disease is an atypical presentation for MPS I which is likely under-recognized. Diagnosis through clinical guidelines and a multidisciplinary approach had a major impact on patient management. The diagnosis of MPS I prompted timely initiation of enzyme replacement therapy (ERT) and the patients ultimately underwent hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) to improve symptomatic outcomes. In addition to treatment, immediate precautionary recommendations were made to avoid potentially catastrophic outcomes associated with cervical instability. These cases add to the clinical spectrum of MPS I in the newborn period. They further illustrate the difficulties in early recognition of the disease, and importance of a definitive diagnosis of MPS I in infants with interstitial lung disease.