Clinical trial comparing Fiasp v Novolog with 670G in auto mode

Texas Diabetes & Endocrinology started a clinical trial in June on this subject.

The primary comparator is 1-hour postrandial BGL. There are many other secondary outcome measures.

I found it interesting that Texas Diabetes and Endocrinology is conducting the trail with no commercial sponsors listed, or that I could find. This appears to be primarily a medical practice specializing in diabetes, but they also conduct diabetes-related clinical trial. It’s also a member of Type 1 Diabetes Trialnet - another organization I hadn’t heard of before.

1 Like

I switched from Novolog to Fiasp about 6 months ago. Accordingly, I will be very interested in the results.

When I started my A1c was 7.8, a bit elevated from my normal level. Three months later I was at 7.2; however,last month my A1c went up to 7.4. I occasionally forget to Bolus for meals which throws off my a1cs. Accordingly, I wouldn’t make a good trial candidate.

Glad to see someone’s doing a formal study on this. I switched to Fiasp after giving up on the 670, but I’ve heard anecdotally that some people have found it solved a lot their problems with automode not being aggressive enough. Enough so that I thought of giving it another try, but then I got my G5->G6 upgrade and I really just don’t want to go back to the Guardian system. Just too many things annoyed me with it even though the accuracy seemed ok compared to the G5. Compared to the G6, though, no contest at all.

This may help with some information about Trialnet. TUDiabetes has a rich history of content about Trialnet.