Skip to content

Glucose Control Using 1,5-AG Testing

Glucose Control Using 1,5-AG: Randomized Controlled Trial

Status
Completed
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT03765164
Acronym
GLUCAR
Enrollment
156
Registered
2018-12-05
Start date
2018-11-05
Completion date
2019-02-24
Last updated
2020-10-28

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Diabetes

Brief summary

Glycemic excursions (temporary increases in blood glucose) are associated with health complications. Standard tests for diabetes (e.g. random blood sugar and HbA1c) do not test for these excursions despite their association with several health complications. GlycoMark's 1,5-anhydroglucitol (1,5-AG) is a validated indicator of glucose excursions in addition to short-term (1-2 weeks) hyperglycemia. This study is a pre-post, two-round randomized controlled study of a nationally representative sample of primary care physicians. Investigators will assess whether physician participants are able to identify and address glycemic variability and hyperglycemia in their patients and, when given access to GlycoMark assay results, improve their patient management decisions by taking steps to optimize glycemic control, and reduce unnecessary resource utilization.

Detailed description

Nearly half of the adult population, 114 million Americans, are diagnosed with diabetes or pre-diabetes, making it one of the most important public and personal health problems. Diabetes is the 7th leading cause of death in America and a contributing factor in many more deaths and lost days of productivity. Its complications include vascular disease, cardiovascular disease, stroke and dementia. The cost of diabetes care and its complications lead to $176 billion in direct medical costs and $69 billion in reduced productivity. With an over 2-fold increase in diabetes prevalence in the past two decades and an estimated 1.5 million new cases expected annually, it is clinically and economically critical for this condition to be managed appropriately. Diabetes treatment programs focus on controlling hyperglycemia (random glucose \> 200 mg/dL) without causing hypoglycemia (glucose \< 70 mg/dL). Glucose control is determined in a number of ways in current clinical practice. Immediate and fasting blood sugars are determined in routine chemistry tests. The standard measure of long-term diabetes control, HbA1c testing, provides a reliable reading of average blood glucose levels over a 2-3-month period. In patients with high HbA1c levels, HbA1c measurement guides management decisions and helps the clinician bring the long-term glucose levels under control in poorly controlled diabetic patients. Random blood sugars and HbA1c is limited in that they do not reflect glycemic control in intervals greater than the past few hours and 2-3 months. In particular, they do not provide an indication of frequent, temporary increases in blood glucose, termed glycemic excursions, which have been independently associated with several health complications. Since it takes months for HbA1c levels to stabilize, HbA1c levels are also not helpful for patients starting medication or changing drug therapy. 1,5-anhydroglucitol (1,5-AG) is a molecule found in the blood and is a validated indicator of glucose excursions and short-term (1-2 weeks) hyperglycemia. In healthy patients without diabetes, or those with well-controlled diabetes, 1,5-AG is maintained at a steady state in the blood. However, during glycemic excursions, the molecule is actively purged from the body through the urine. Cleared by the FDA in 2003, the GlycoMark assay measures 1,5-AG levels in the blood. Low levels of 1,5-AG indicate the presence of potentially harmful glycemic excursion over the last 1 to 2 weeks, which may have been missed during random blood glucose testing and not sensitively detected by HbA1c. GlycoMark testing provides clinical details on peak glucose levels, daily spikes, and response to drugs, including short term effects, of hypoglycemic agents that are otherwise not available, giving physicians a more complete understanding of their patient's glycemic control. This information may be clinically useful to help physicians make better management decisions, improve diabetes outcomes, avoid complications and reduce unnecessary spending. This study is a pre-post, two-round randomized controlled study of a nationally representative sample of primary care physicians randomly assigned to a control or intervention arm. Enrolled participants will be asked to care for a sample of CPV® simulated patients. The simulated patients are adults aged 18-75 who present with diabetes, different levels of glycemic control and various co-morbidities. Participants randomized into an intervention-arm will receive educational materials and 1,5-AG test results when caring for their patients in round 2. Investigators will assess the participants' ability to identify and address glycemic variability and hyperglycemia and evaluate whether physicians who have access to GlycoMark take steps to optimize glycemic control and reduce unnecessary resource utilization.

Interventions

DIAGNOSTIC_TESTGlycoMark 1-5-AG

Online educational materials on GlycoMark 1,5-AG and sample test results for simulated patients

Simulated diabetic patients cared for online

Sponsors

GlycoMark, Inc.
CollaboratorINDUSTRY
Qure Healthcare, LLC
Lead SponsorINDUSTRY

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
OTHER
Masking
NONE

Intervention model description

The study is a pre-post, two-round, randomized controlled study of a nationally representative sample of primary care physicians, including internists and family physicians, randomly assigned to a control or intervention arm. Once eligibility is determined and providers are enrolled in the study, they will be asked to complete a questionnaire describing their practice and professional background. They will then care for a total of 6 CPV® simulated patients over the two rounds (3 per round). The simulated patients are adults aged 18-75 who present with diabetes, different levels of glycemic control and various co-morbidities. The study design consists of two study arms, a control arm and an intervention-arm that receives educational materials and the 1,5-AG results.

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Healthy volunteers
Yes

Inclusion criteria

* A minimum of 2 years post residency but no more than 30 years in practice * Board-certified in internal medicine or family practice, primary care physicians * In a private solo or multi-group practice * Minimum threshold of patients (40+) currently seen weekly * A minimum of 15% of their panel under their care for diabetes * Have not used GlycoMark assay in the past * Informed, signed and voluntarily consented to be in the study

Exclusion criteria

* Not board certified in their respective area of care * Academic-based practice * Have practiced as a board-certified physician for less than 2 or greater than 30 years * Have used the GlycoMark assay * Follow \<40 patients weekly * \< 15% of their patient panel under their care for diabetes * Non-English speaking * Unable to access the internet

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Diagnosis-Treatment3 monthsDifference-in-differences regression analysis between the control and the intervention group's identification and treatment of hyperglycemia, as measured by the participants diagnostic and treatment CPV case domain scores. In each domain of a CPV (history, physical exam, workup, diagnosis and treatment), participants' care recommendations are evaluated against evidence-based care scoring criteria which can sum to a high potential score of up to 100% in each domain.

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Quality of Care3 monthsDifference-in-differences regression analysis between the control and the intervention group's overall quality of care scores. In each CPV case, participants' care recommendations are evaluated against evidence-based care scoring criteria which can sum to a high potential score of up to 100% in each case.
Workup Costs3 monthsDifference-in-differences regression analysis between between the control and the intervention group in the average cost of diagnostic tests ordered.

Countries

United States

Participant flow

Participants by arm

ArmCount
Control
Control participants will care for the same set of CPV patients as the intervention arm, but will not have knowledge of or access to GlycoMark 1,5-AG test results. Investigators will compare control participants' clinical recommendations to those in the intervention arm. Clinical Performance and Value Vignettes: Simulated diabetic patients cared for online
73
Intervention
Intervention participants will care for the same set of CPV patients as the control arm, but will be educated on and given access to GlycoMark 1,5-AG test results. Investigators will compare intervention participants' clinical recommendations to those in the control arm. GlycoMark 1-5-AG: Online educational materials on GlycoMark 1,5-AG and sample test results for simulated patients Clinical Performance and Value Vignettes: Simulated diabetic patients cared for online
72
Total145

Withdrawals & dropouts

PeriodReasonFG000FG001
Pre-interventionWithdrawal by Subject56

Baseline characteristics

CharacteristicControlInterventionTotal
Age, Customized
<40
5 Participants3 Participants8 Participants
Age, Customized
40-55
45 Participants42 Participants87 Participants
Age, Customized
>55
23 Participants27 Participants50 Participants
Practice locale (urban, suburban, or rural)
Rural
14 Participants15 Participants29 Participants
Practice locale (urban, suburban, or rural)
Suburban
45 Participants33 Participants78 Participants
Practice locale (urban, suburban, or rural)
Urban
14 Participants24 Participants38 Participants
Race and Ethnicity Not Collected0 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Female
11 Participants18 Participants29 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Male
62 Participants54 Participants116 Participants
U.S. Region Location of Practice
Midwest
20 Participants13 Participants33 Participants
U.S. Region Location of Practice
Northeast
17 Participants13 Participants30 Participants
U.S. Region Location of Practice
South
22 Participants30 Participants52 Participants
U.S. Region Location of Practice
West
14 Participants16 Participants30 Participants

Adverse events

Event typeEG000
affected / at risk
EG001
affected / at risk
deaths
Total, all-cause mortality
0 / 730 / 72
other
Total, other adverse events
0 / 730 / 72
serious
Total, serious adverse events
0 / 730 / 72

Outcome results

Primary

Diagnosis-Treatment

Difference-in-differences regression analysis between the control and the intervention group's identification and treatment of hyperglycemia, as measured by the participants diagnostic and treatment CPV case domain scores. In each domain of a CPV (history, physical exam, workup, diagnosis and treatment), participants' care recommendations are evaluated against evidence-based care scoring criteria which can sum to a high potential score of up to 100% in each domain.

Time frame: 3 months

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
ControlDiagnosis-TreatmentRound 231.7 CPV diagnosis-treatment percentage scoreStandard Deviation 13.4
ControlDiagnosis-TreatmentRound 129.1 CPV diagnosis-treatment percentage scoreStandard Deviation 12.3
InterventionDiagnosis-TreatmentRound 235.0 CPV diagnosis-treatment percentage scoreStandard Deviation 15
InterventionDiagnosis-TreatmentRound 131.9 CPV diagnosis-treatment percentage scoreStandard Deviation 12.2
Secondary

Quality of Care

Difference-in-differences regression analysis between the control and the intervention group's overall quality of care scores. In each CPV case, participants' care recommendations are evaluated against evidence-based care scoring criteria which can sum to a high potential score of up to 100% in each case.

Time frame: 3 months

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
ControlQuality of CareRound 251.4 CPV overall percentage scoreStandard Deviation 11.1
ControlQuality of CareRound 150.9 CPV overall percentage scoreStandard Deviation 10
InterventionQuality of CareRound 252.1 CPV overall percentage scoreStandard Deviation 12.3
InterventionQuality of CareRound 148.9 CPV overall percentage scoreStandard Deviation 10.8
Secondary

Workup Costs

Difference-in-differences regression analysis between between the control and the intervention group in the average cost of diagnostic tests ordered.

Time frame: 3 months

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
ControlWorkup CostsRound 154 US$Standard Deviation 100
ControlWorkup CostsRound 278 US$Standard Deviation 156
InterventionWorkup CostsRound 160 US$Standard Deviation 116
InterventionWorkup CostsRound 237 US$Standard Deviation 87

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026