This page contains a Flash digital edition of a book.
Diabetes Blood Glucose Monitoring

In Pursuit of an Ideal – A Perspective on Non-Invasive Continuous Glucose Monitoring

Lisa B English Director of Scientific and Technological Affairs, C8 MediSensors


Diabetes is one of the most common non-communicable diseases globally, and is the fourth or fifth leading cause of death in many countries. Medical technology for the management of diabetes has advanced steadily since the discovery of insulin in the early 20th century. Today, individuals with diabetes benefit from home-use blood glucose meters, continuous insulin pumps and, most recently, continuous glucose monitoring (CGM). Numerous studies have shown that frequent use of real-time CGM can improve glycaemic control with reduced risk of hypoglycaemia. However, current CGM devices have not been wholeheartedly embraced, limiting their potential. A CGM device that is accurate, non-invasive, pain-free and non-intrusive to daily activities could drive increased adoption and use of CGM, potentially improving health and quality of life for many individuals living with diabetes.


Diabetes, continuous glucose monitoring, non-invasive continuous glucose monitoring, real-time continuous glucose monitoring, HbA1c, tight glycaemic control, ideal glucose monitor

Disclosure: Lisa B English is an employee of C8 MediSensors. Received: 15 December 2011 Accepted: 19 January 2012 Citation: European Endocrinology, 2012; 8(1):18–21. Correspondence: Lisa B English, C8 MediSensors, 6375 San Ignacio Avenue, San Jose, California 95119, US. E:

Support: The publication of this article was funded by C8 MediSensors.

Approximately 366 million individuals worldwide have type 1 or type 2 diabetes, and it is likely that global prevalence will rise to 552 million individuals by 2030.1

attributed to diabetes annually.1


Currently, an estimated 4.6 million deaths are Undisputedly, the best way to address

this ‘diabetes epidemic’ is through a global commitment to prevention, early diagnosis, accurate monitoring and effective treatment.

Criticality of Tight Glycaemic Control The comprehensive, 10-year Diabetes Control and Complications Trial

(DCCT) in 1993, which established glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) as a gold standard measure of long-term glycaemic control, clearly demonstrated that individuals with type 1 diabetes who kept blood glucose levels as close to normal as possible for as long as possible had less chance of developing disease-related complications.2–4

Since that time, other studies

have confirmed the importance of tight glycaemic control with minimal glucose excursions in reducing disease-related complications not only in type 1 diabetes, but also in type 2 diabetes.5–9

Today, individuals with

diabetes are encouraged to maintain blood glucose at normal or near- normal levels. Furthermore, those who take insulin injections are encouraged to follow intensive treatment programmes with tight glycaemic control targets, which require frequent glucose monitoring.10

Barriers to Tight Glycaemic Control Despite advances in technologies and therapeutics, intensive treatment

of type 1 diabetes frequently fails to achieve target HbA1c as recommended by the DCCT more than 15 years ago.11

Many individuals

– including those who measure blood glucose several times daily – still experience postprandial hyperglycaemia and asymptomatic nocturnal


These findings suggest that tight glycaemic control is difficult to achieve for many individuals with diabetes. There are a variety of reasons for this, including fear of hypoglycaemia, poor adherence to self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) and lack of continuous data about glucose dynamics.


Hypoglycaemia can lead to neurologic, cognitive and cardiovascular dysfunctions, and if left untreated, death.13

Frequent hypoglycaemic

episodes can cause ‘hypoglycaemia unawareness’, a condition that leaves an individual unable to recognise hypoglycaemia when it occurs. As the most feared complication of insulin therapy,14,15

hypoglycaemia is

the main reason why individuals with diabetes who take insulin injections are hesitant to pursue intensive blood glucose control.11

Insufficient Monitoring

Despite ever-increasing evidence that tight glycaemic control reduces risk of disease-related complications, many individuals with diabetes do not monitor glucose often enough to achieve this objective.16–19


study showed that only 40 % of those with type 1 diabetes and 26 % of those with type 2 diabetes performed SMBG at least once a day,20 and several other studies have demonstrated low SMBG adherence.21–23 The reasons are numerous, but often include cost, pain, inconvenience and complexity of testing requirements.18,21,24–26

Incomplete Data

The rate of formation of HbA1c is directly proportional to the ambient glucose concentration. Since erythrocytes are freely permeable


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68