Belle, Steven H.

ImportanceDisparities in treatment initiation may affect outcomes, but data on racially diverse populations with chronic hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection are limited.ObjectiveTo examine whether HBV treatment initiation and outcomes differ among racial groups.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsFrom January 14, 2011, to January 28, 2018, hepatitis B surface antigen—positive adults (age ≥18 years) not receiving anti-HBV therapy were enrolled and followed up at weeks 12, 24, and every 24 weeks thereafter in a multicenter longitudinal cohort study (Hepatitis B Research Network [HBRN] adult cohort study) conducted in North America. The last study visit and data collection were completed January 28, 2019. Data were analyzed from August 27, 2021, to August 25, 2022. All HBRN participants were included unless they had acute HBV, HIV, hepatitis C or D, less than 24-weeks of follow-up after enrollment, initiated treatment at or immediately after enrollment, or had unknown race.ExposuresParticipants had clinical and laboratory assessments and could receive anti-HBV treatment after enrollment.Main Outcomes and MeasuresHepatitis B virus treatment initiation and major adverse liver outcomes (hepatic decompensation, hepatocellular carcinoma, liver transplant, and death).ResultsOf 1550 participants, 193 (12%) were African American or Black, 1157 (75%) were Asian, 157 (10%) were White, and 43 (3%) were other races; 789 (51%) were women, and the median age was 41.2 (IQR, 32.9-51.6) years. Sociodemographic and virologic parameters differed between groups. During 5727 person-years of follow-up, 504 participants initiated treatment, with incidences of 4.8 per 100 person-years in African American or Black individuals, 9.9 per 100 person-years in Asian individuals, 6.6 per 100 person-years in White individuals, and 7.9 per 100 person-years in those of other races (P < .001). A lower proportion (14%) of African American or Black participants met treatment criteria compared with Asian (22%) and White (27%) individuals (P = .01). The cumulative probabilities of treatment initiation after meeting the criteria were not significantly different among racial groups (African American or Black, 0.45; Asian, 0.38; White, 0.40 at 48 weeks and African American or Black, 0.45; Asian, 0.51; White, 0.51 at 72 weeks; P = .68). The incidence of major adverse liver outcomes was 0.1 per 100 person-years and did not differ by race.Conclusions and RelevanceIn this observational study of chronic HBV, African American or Black participants were less likely than individuals of other races to meet treatment criteria, but among those who did, HBV treatment receipt did not differ significantly by race or socioeconomic factors. Not all eligible participants initiated treatment, but adverse liver outcomes were rare. These findings may not be generalizable to patients with chronic HBV receiving care in other settings.

INTRODUCTION: Hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) loss is associated with improved long-term outcomes of patients with chronic hepatitis B but is infrequently achieved with current monotherapies. We assessed whether combination strategies that included treatment withdrawal enhanced HBsAg loss. METHODS: A randomized (1:1) trial of tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) for 192 weeks with or without peginterferon (PegIFN) alfa-2a for the first 24 weeks, followed by withdrawal of TDF at week 192 with 48 weeks of off-treatment follow-up to week 240. The primary end point was HBsAg loss at week 240. RESULTS: Of 201 participants (52% HBeAg positive, 12%/6% genotype A/A2, 7% cirrhosis) randomized to TDF + PegIFN (n = 102) or TDF alone (n = 99), 6 participants had lost HBsAg at the end of the treatment phase (week 192), 5 (5.3%) in the combination group, and 1 (1.0%) in the TDF alone group ( P = 0.09). By week 240, 9 participants had cleared HBsAg, 5.3% in combination, and 4.1% in monotherapy arms ( P = 0.73). HBsAg decline and loss occurred earlier with TDF + PegIFN than TDF, with a ≥1-logIU/mL qHBsAg decline by week 24 in 28% in TDF + PegIFN compared with 6% in TDF ( P = 0.04). HBsAg loss occurred in 7 of 12 (58%) with hepatitis B virus subgenotype A2 (all HBeAg positive) compared with only 2 of 189 (1%) with other hepatitis B virus genotypes and in 8 of 93 (8.6%) HBeAg positive vs 1 of 87 (1.1%) HBeAg negative. DISCUSSION: PegIFN combined TDF followed by protocolized TDF withdrawal led to earlier but not higher percentages of HBsAg clearance. Pretreatment HBeAg positivity and subgenotype A2 were strongly associated with HBsAg clearance.

Background: Automated insulin delivery (AID) systems have proven effective in increasing time-in-range during both clinical trials and real-world use. Further improvements in outcomes for single-hormone (insulin only) AID may be limited by suboptimal insulin delivery settings. Methods: Adults (≥18 years of age) with type 1 diabetes were randomized to either sensor-augmented pump (SAP) (inclusive of predictive low-glucose suspend) or adaptive zone model predictive control AID for 13 weeks, then crossed over to the other arm. Each week, the AID insulin delivery settings were sequentially and automatically updated by an adaptation system running on the study phone. Primary outcome was sensor glucose time-in-range 70–180 mg/dL, with noninferiority in percent time below 54 mg/dL as a hierarchical outcome. Results: Thirty-five participants completed the trial (mean age 39 ± 16 years, HbA1c at enrollment 6.9% ± 1.0%). Mean time-in-range 70–180 mg/dL was 66% with SAP versus 69% with AID (mean adjusted difference +2% [95% confidence interval: −1% to +6%], P = 0.22). Median time <70 mg/dL improved from 3.0% with SAP to 1.6% with AID (−1.5% [−2.4% to −0.5%], P = 0.002). The adaptation system decreased initial basal rates by a median of 4% (−8%, 16%) and increased initial carbohydrate ratios by a median of 45% (32%, 59%) after 13 weeks. Conclusions: Automated adaptation of insulin delivery settings with AID use did not significantly improve time-in-range in this very well-controlled population. Additional study and further refinement of the adaptation system are needed, especially in populations with differing degrees of baseline glycemic control, who may show larger benefits from adaptation.

Objective: To analyze insulin delivery and glycemic metrics throughout the menstrual cycle for women with type 1 diabetes using closed loop control (CLC) insulin delivery. Methods: Menstruating women using a CLC system in a clinical trial were invited to record their menstrual cycles through a cycle-tracking application. Sixteen participants provided data for this secondary analysis over three or more complete cycles. Insulin delivery and continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) data were analyzed in relation to reported cycle phases. Results: Insulin delivery and CGM metrics remained consistent during cycle phases. Intraparticipant variability of CGM metrics and weight-based insulin delivery did not change through cycle phases. Conclusions: For this sample of menstruating women with type 1 diabetes using a CLC system, insulin delivery and glycemic metrics remained stable throughout menstrual cycle phases. Additional studies in this population are needed, particularly among women who report variable glycemic control during their cycles. Trial Registration: NCT03591354.

Background: Closed-loop control (CLC) has been shown to improve glucose time in range and other glucose metrics; however, randomized trials >3 months comparing CLC with sensor-augmented pump (SAP) therapy are limited. We recently reported glucose control outcomes from the 6-month international Diabetes Closed-Loop (iDCL) trial; we now report patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in this iDCL trial. Methods: Participants were randomized 2:1 to CLC ( N = 112) versus SAP ( N = 56) and completed questionnaires, including Hypoglycemia Fear Survey, Diabetes Distress Scale (DDS), Hypoglycemia Awareness, Hypoglycemia Confidence, Hyperglycemia Avoidance, and Positive Expectancies of CLC (INSPIRE) at baseline, 3, and 6 months. CLC participants also completed Diabetes Technology Expectations and Acceptance and System Usability Scale (SUS). Results: The Hypoglycemia Fear Survey Behavior subscale improved significantly after 6 months of CLC compared with SAP. DDS did not differ except for powerless subscale scores, which worsened at 3 months in SAP. Whereas Hypoglycemia Awareness and Hyperglycemia Avoidance did not differ between groups, CLC participants showed a tendency toward improved confidence in managing hypoglycemia. The INSPIRE questionnaire showed favorable scores in the CLC group for teens and parents, with a similar trend for adults. At baseline and 6 months, CLC participants had high positive expectations for the device with Diabetes Technology Acceptance and SUS showing high benefit and low burden scores. Conclusion: CLC improved some PROs compared with SAP. Participants reported high benefit and low burden with CLC. Clinical Trial Identifier: NCT03563313.

Objective: To assess the efficacy and safety of closed-loop control (CLC) insulin delivery system in adolescents and young adults with type 1 diabetes. Research Design and Methods: Prespecified subanalysis of outcomes in adolescents and young adults aged 14–24 years old with type 1 diabetes in a previously published 6-month multicenter randomized trial. Participants were randomly assigned 2:1 to CLC (Tandem Control-IQ) or sensor augmented pump (SAP, various pumps+Dexcom G6 CGM) and followed for 6 months. Results: Mean age of the 63 participants was 17 years, median type 1 diabetes duration was 7 years, and mean baseline HbA1c was 8.1%. All 63 completed the trial. Time in range (TIR) increased by 13% with CLC versus decreasing by 1% with SAP (adjusted treatment group difference = +13% [+3.1 h/day]; 95% confidence interval [CI] 9–16, P < 0.001), which largely reflected a reduction in time >180 mg/dL (adjusted difference −12% [−2.9 h/day], P < 0.001). Time <70 mg/dL decreased by 1.6% with CLC versus 0.3% with SAP (adjusted difference −0.7% [−10 min/day], 95% CI −1.0% to −0.2%, P = 0.002). CLC use averaged 89% of the time for 6 months. The mean adjusted difference in HbA1c after 6 months was 0.30% in CLC versus SAP (95% CI −0.67 to +0.08, P = 0.13). There was one diabetic ketoacidosis episode in the CLC group. Conclusions: CLC use for 6 months was substantial and associated with improved TIR and reduced hypoglycemia in adolescents and young adults with type 1 diabetes. Thus, CLC has the potential to improve glycemic outcomes in this challenging age group. The clinical trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03563313).

OBJECTIVE Limited information is available about glycemic outcomes with a closed-loop control (CLC) system compared with a predictive low-glucose suspend (PLGS) system. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS After 6 months of use of a CLC system in a randomized trial, 109 participants with type 1 diabetes (age range, 14–72 years; mean HbA1c, 7.1% [54 mmol/mol]) were randomly assigned to CLC (N = 54, Control-IQ) or PLGS (N = 55, Basal-IQ) groups for 3 months. The primary outcome was continuous glucose monitor (CGM)-measured time in range (TIR) for 70–180 mg/dL. Baseline CGM metrics were computed from the last 3 months of the preceding study. RESULTS All 109 participants completed the study. Mean ± SD TIR was 71.1 ± 11.2% at baseline and 67.6 ± 12.6% using intention-to-treat analysis (69.1 ± 12.2% using per-protocol analysis excluding periods of study-wide suspension of device use) over 13 weeks on CLC vs. 70.0 ± 13.6% and 60.4 ± 17.1% on PLGS (difference = 5.9%; 95% CI 3.6%, 8.3%; P &lt; 0.001). Time &gt;180 mg/dL was lower in the CLC group than PLGS group (difference = −6.0%; 95% CI −8.4%, −3.7%; P &lt; 0.001) while time &lt;54 mg/dL was similar (0.04%; 95% CI −0.05%, 0.13%; P = 0.41). HbA1c after 13 weeks was lower on CLC than PLGS (7.2% [55 mmol/mol] vs. 7.5% [56 mmol/mol], difference −0.34% [−3.7 mmol/mol]; 95% CI −0.57% [−6.2 mmol/mol], −0.11% [1.2 mmol/mol]; P = 0.0035). CONCLUSIONS Following 6 months of CLC, switching to PLGS reduced TIR and increased HbA1c toward their pre-CLC values, while hypoglycemia remained similarly reduced with both CLC and PLGS.

AbstractThe aim of this study was to assess the validity of categorization of chronic hepatitis B viral infection into stages or phases based upon measures of disease activity and viral load, assuming these phenotypes will be useful for prognostication and determining the need for antiviral therapy. We assessed the phenotype of hepatitis B of 1,390 adult participants enrolled in the Hepatitis B Research Network Cohort Study, using a computer algorithm. Only 4% were immune tolerant, while 35% had chronic hepatitis B (18% e antigen positive and 17% e antigen negative) while 23% were inactive carriers. Strikingly, 38% of participants did not fit clearly into any one of these groups and were considered indeterminant. The largest subset of indeterminants had elevated serum aminotransferases with low levels of HBV DNA (less than 10,000 iu/mL). Subsequent determination of hepatitis B phenotype on the next available laboratory tests showed that 64% remained indeterminant. These findings call into question the validity of conventional staging of hepatitis B, in large part because of the substantial proportion of patients who do not fit readily into one of the usual stages or phases. Further studies are needed of the indeterminant category of chronic hepatitis B viral infection, including assessments of whether patients in this group are perhaps in transition to another phase or if they are a distinct phenotype with a need to assess liver disease severity and need for antiviral therapy. (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT01263587).