DiabetesNCT01714232
Evaluation of Blood Glucose Meter Systems
A study testing Contour® PLUS BGMS, OneTouch® SelectSimple™ BGMS and Accu-Chek® Performa BGMS in people with Diabetes, run by Ascensia Diabetes Care at 1 site in United States.
Trial summary
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the performance of a Bayer Blood Glucose Monitoring System (BGMS) and four additional Blood Glucose Monitoring Systems (BGMS) from other manufacturers. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and olderHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Diabetes
- What is being tested?
- Contour® PLUS BGMS, OneTouch® SelectSimple™ BGMS and Accu-Chek® Performa BGMS
- Type of treatment
- Medical device
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 106 participants
- Where
- 1 siteUnited States
- Study dates
- Oct 2012to Nov 2012
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- Yes, posted in the registrySummary in the doctors' view
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 years and older
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Males and females, 18 years of age or older
- Willing to complete all study procedures
Who cannot join
- Blood Borne infections like hepatitis or HIV or infections such as tuberculosis
- Hemophilia or any other bleeding disorder
- Pregnancy
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
United States1 site
Bayer HealthCare LLC, Diabetes Care
Mishawaka, Indiana, 46544
About this study
Official title: Evaluation of Blood Glucose Meter Systems - Contour® PLUS Study
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the performance of a Bayer Blood Glucose Monitoring System (BGMS) and four additional Blood Glucose Monitoring Systems (BGMS) from other manufacturers. All meter BG results were compared with plasma results obtained with a reference laboratory glucose method (YSI Glucose Analyzer).
Read the detailed description
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the performance of a Bayer Blood Glucose Monitoring System (BGMS) and four additional Blood Glucose Monitoring Systems (BGMS) from other manufacturers. All meter BG results were compared with plasma results obtained with a reference laboratory glucose method (YSI Glucose Analyzer). Performance of the five systems were evaluated across the glucose range of the BGMSs using capillary blood. All testing and lancing were performed by study staff and some samples were tested from subject fingertips. Additionally, some blood samples were glycolyzed to lower the glucose concentration levels and glucose solution was added to other samples to raise glucose concentration levels.
- Conditions
- Diabetes
- Being tested
- Contour® PLUS BGMS, OneTouch® SelectSimple™ BGMS, Accu-Chek® Performa BGMS, Accu-Chek® Active BGMS, Freestyle Freedom® BGMS
- Medical subject headings
- Diabetes Mellitus
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Contour® PLUS BGMSDevice
Study staff performed Blood Glucose (BG) tests with capillary fingerstick blood collected from subjects with diabetes and without diabetes (up to 10% of subjects without diabetes were included). All meter BG results were compared with capillary plasma results obtained with a reference laboratory glucose method (YSI Glucose Analyzer).
OneTouch® SelectSimple™ BGMSDevice
Study staff performed Blood Glucose (BG) tests with capillary fingerstick blood collected from subjects with diabetes and without diabetes (up to 10% of subjects without diabetes were included). All meter BG results were compared with capillary plasma results obtained with a reference laboratory glucose method (YSI Glucose Analyzer).
Accu-Chek® Performa BGMSDevice
Study staff performed Blood Glucose (BG) tests with capillary fingerstick blood collected from subjects with diabetes and without diabetes (up to 10% of subjects without diabetes were included). All meter BG results were compared with capillary plasma results obtained with a reference laboratory glucose method (YSI Glucose Analyzer).
Accu-Chek® Active BGMSDevice
Study staff performed Blood Glucose (BG) tests with capillary fingerstick blood collected from subjects with diabetes and without diabetes (up to 10% of subjects without diabetes were included). All meter BG results were compared with capillary plasma results obtained with a reference laboratory glucose method (YSI Glucose Analyzer).
Freestyle Freedom® BGMSDevice
Study staff performed Blood Glucose (BG) tests with capillary fingerstick blood collected from subjects with diabetes and without diabetes (up to 10% of subjects without diabetes were included). All meter BG results were compared with capillary plasma results obtained with a reference laboratory glucose method (YSI Glucose Analyzer).
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Study Staff Test BGMSs | Experimental | All testing and lancing were performed by the study staff; subjects did not perform any lancing or self-testing in this study. Study Staff lanced the fingers of subjects and tested the blood samples using five Blood Glucose Monitoring Systems (BGMS): Contour® PLUS BGMS; OneTouch® SelectSimple™ BGMS; Accu-Chek® Performa BGMS; Accu-Chek® Active BGMS; Freestyle Freedom® BGMS. Receives: Device: Contour® PLUS BGMS; Device: OneTouch® SelectSimple™ BGMS; Device: Accu-Chek® Performa BGMS; Device: Accu-Chek® Active BGMS; Device: Freestyle Freedom® BGMS |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
MARD (Mean Absolute Relative Difference Between BGMS Results and Reference Method Results) Across the Overall Tested Glucose Range
Using the overall Blood Glucose (BG) range (27 to 460 mg/dL), the Mean Absolute Relative Differences (MARD) between the BGM System readings and the YSI laboratory reference values were compared. MARD was calculated from the sum of all |(BG meter)-(BG reference)|/(BG reference) assessments, divided by the number of assessments, then multiplied by 100(%). Each evaluable sample was tested on all 5 BGMS, thus the same number of BG test results was analyzed for each BGMS intervention. Lower MARD values indicate smaller differences between meter value and the reference value. Higher MARD values indicate higher differences between meter value and the reference value.
Measured: 8 hours
Secondary outcomes (2)
MARD (Mean Absolute Relative Difference Between BGMS Results and Reference Method Results) in the Low Glucose Range(<=80 mg/dL)
Using fresh and glycolyzed samples with Blood Glucose (BG) <=80 mg/dL, the Mean Absolute Relative Differences (MARD) between the BGM System readings and the YSI laboratory reference values were compared. MARD was calculated from the sum of all |(BG meter)-(BG reference)|/(BG reference) assessments, divided by the number of assessments, then multiplied by 100(%). Each evaluable sample was tested on all 5 BGMS, thus the same number of BG test results was analyzed for each BGMS intervention. Lower MARD values indicate smaller differences between meter value and the reference value. Higher MARD values indicate higher differences between meter value and the reference value.
Measured: 8 hours
MARD (Mean Absolute Relative Difference Between BGMS Results and Reference Method Results) in the High Glucose Range (>180 mg/dL)
Using samples with Blood Glucose >180 mg/dL, the Mean Absolute Relative Differences (MARD) between the BGM System readings and the YSI laboratory reference values were compared. MARD was calculated from the sum of all |(BG meter)-(BG reference)|/(BG reference) assessments, divided by the number of assessments, then multiplied by 100(%). Each evaluable sample was tested on all 5 BGMS, thus the same number of BG test results was analyzed for each BGMS intervention. Lower MARD values indicate smaller differences between meter value and the reference value. Higher MARD values indicate higher differences between meter value and the reference value.
Measured: 8 hours
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted25 Oct 2012 (estimated)
- Study startOct 2012
- Primary completionNov 2012
- Study completionNov 2012
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, outcome measures and adverse events reported by the sponsor.
- Publications (2)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for DiabetesStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Diagnosis
- Allocation
- Not applicable
- Intervention model
- Single group
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 106 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Ascensia Diabetes Care
- Sponsor type
- Industry (pharma, biotech, devices)
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- David Simmons, MD, Principal investigator, Ascensia Diabetes Care
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT01714232
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- CTD-2012-008-01
- Status last verified
- Jan 2016
- First submitted
- 23 Oct 2012
- Last updated
- 29 Feb 2016
- Results posted
- Yes, on ClinicalTrials.gov
- Data monitoring committee
- No
Publications
Pardo S, Dunne N, Simmons DA. A comparison of bolus insulin dose errors based on results of a clinical trial of five blood glucose monitoring systems. Ther Deliv. 2019 Dec;10(12):793-799. doi: 10.4155/tde-2019-0047. Epub 2019 Dec 2.
PubMed 31789119Dunne N, Viggiani MT, Pardo S, Robinson C, Parkes JL. Accuracy Evaluation of CONTOUR((R))PLUS Compared With Four Blood Glucose Monitoring Systems. Diabetes Ther. 2015 Sep;6(3):377-88. doi: 10.1007/s13300-015-0121-3. Epub 2015 Jul 14.
PubMed 26169192
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 29 Feb 2016. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Evaluation of Blood Glucose Meter Systems - Contour® PLUS Study
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT01714232
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- CTD-2012-008-01
- Conditions
- Diabetes
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 106 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Ascensia Diabetes CareIndustry (pharma, biotech, devices)
- Study start
- Oct 2012
- Primary completion
- Nov 2012 (actual)
- Study completion
- Nov 2012 (actual)
- First posted
- 25 Oct 2012 (estimated)
- Results
- Posted 27 Dec 2013
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the performance of a Bayer Blood Glucose Monitoring System (BGMS) and four additional Blood Glucose Monitoring Systems (BGMS) from other manufacturers. All meter BG results were compared with plasma results obtained with a reference laboratory glucose method (YSI Glucose Analyzer).
Detailed description
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the performance of a Bayer Blood Glucose Monitoring System (BGMS) and four additional Blood Glucose Monitoring Systems (BGMS) from other manufacturers. All meter BG results were compared with plasma results obtained with a reference laboratory glucose method (YSI Glucose Analyzer). Performance of the five systems were evaluated across the glucose range of the BGMSs using capillary blood. All testing and lancing were performed by study staff and some samples were tested from subject fingertips. Additionally, some blood samples were glycolyzed to lower the glucose concentration levels and glucose solution was added to other samples to raise glucose concentration levels.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Diagnosis
- Allocation
- Not applicable
- Intervention model
- Single group
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 1
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Study Staff Test BGMSs | Experimental | Device: Contour® PLUS BGMS, Device: OneTouch® SelectSimple™ BGMS, Device: Accu-Chek® Performa BGMS, Device: Accu-Chek® Active BGMS, Device: Freestyle Freedom® BGMSAll testing and lancing were performed by the study staff; subjects did not perform any lancing or self-testing in this study. Study Staff lanced the fingers of subjects and tested the blood samples using five Blood Glucose Monitoring Systems (BGMS): Contour® PLUS BGMS; OneTouch® SelectSimple™ BGMS; Accu-Chek® Performa BGMS; Accu-Chek® Active BGMS; Freestyle Freedom® BGMS. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (2 listed)
- Males and females, 18 years of age or older
- Willing to complete all study procedures
Key exclusion criteria (3 listed)
- Blood Borne infections like hepatitis or HIV or infections such as tuberculosis
- Hemophilia or any other bleeding disorder
- Pregnancy
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Contour® PLUS BGMSStudy staff performed Blood Glucose (BG) tests with capillary fingerstick blood collected from subjects with diabetes and without diabetes (up to 10% of subjects without diabetes were included). All meter BG results were compared with capillary plasma results obtained with a reference laboratory glucose method (YSI Glucose Analyzer). | Device | Study Staff Test BGMSs |
| OneTouch® SelectSimple™ BGMSStudy staff performed Blood Glucose (BG) tests with capillary fingerstick blood collected from subjects with diabetes and without diabetes (up to 10% of subjects without diabetes were included). All meter BG results were compared with capillary plasma results obtained with a reference laboratory glucose method (YSI Glucose Analyzer). | Device | Study Staff Test BGMSs |
| Accu-Chek® Performa BGMSStudy staff performed Blood Glucose (BG) tests with capillary fingerstick blood collected from subjects with diabetes and without diabetes (up to 10% of subjects without diabetes were included). All meter BG results were compared with capillary plasma results obtained with a reference laboratory glucose method (YSI Glucose Analyzer). | Device | Study Staff Test BGMSs |
| Accu-Chek® Active BGMSStudy staff performed Blood Glucose (BG) tests with capillary fingerstick blood collected from subjects with diabetes and without diabetes (up to 10% of subjects without diabetes were included). All meter BG results were compared with capillary plasma results obtained with a reference laboratory glucose method (YSI Glucose Analyzer). | Device | Study Staff Test BGMSs |
| Freestyle Freedom® BGMSStudy staff performed Blood Glucose (BG) tests with capillary fingerstick blood collected from subjects with diabetes and without diabetes (up to 10% of subjects without diabetes were included). All meter BG results were compared with capillary plasma results obtained with a reference laboratory glucose method (YSI Glucose Analyzer). | Device | Study Staff Test BGMSs |
Primary outcome
MARD (Mean Absolute Relative Difference Between BGMS Results and Reference Method Results) Across the Overall Tested Glucose Range
Time frame: 8 hours
Using the overall Blood Glucose (BG) range (27 to 460 mg/dL), the Mean Absolute Relative Differences (MARD) between the BGM System readings and the YSI laboratory reference values were compared. MARD was calculated from the sum of all |(BG meter)-(BG reference)|/(BG reference) assessments, divided by the number of assessments, then multiplied by 100(%). Each evaluable sample was tested on all 5 BGMS, thus the same number of BG test results was analyzed for each BGMS intervention. Lower MARD values indicate smaller differences between meter value and the reference value. Higher MARD values indicate higher differences between meter value and the reference value.
2 secondary outcomes
MARD (Mean Absolute Relative Difference Between BGMS Results and Reference Method Results) in the Low Glucose Range(<=80 mg/dL)
Time frame: 8 hours
MARD (Mean Absolute Relative Difference Between BGMS Results and Reference Method Results) in the High Glucose Range (>180 mg/dL)
Time frame: 8 hours
Results and safety
Loading the posted results from ClinicalTrials.gov…
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 29 Feb 2016.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, baseline, all outcome measures and adverse events.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 31789119Pardo S, Dunne N, Simmons DA. A comparison of bolus insulin dose errors based on results of a clinical trial of five blood glucose monitoring systems. Ther Deliv. 2019 Dec;10(12):793-799. doi: 10.4155/tde-2019-0047. Epub 2019 Dec 2.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 26169192Dunne N, Viggiani MT, Pardo S, Robinson C, Parkes JL. Accuracy Evaluation of CONTOUR((R))PLUS Compared With Four Blood Glucose Monitoring Systems. Diabetes Ther. 2015 Sep;6(3):377-88. doi: 10.1007/s13300-015-0121-3. Epub 2015 Jul 14.
Related trials for Diabetes
Recruiting
Using Ultromics EchoGo HFpEF Algorithm to Identify and Treat High Heart Failure Risk in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes
Heart Failure, Diabetes
Not yet recruiting
STRONG: SMART Trial
Gestational Diabetes Mellitus (GDM)
Recruiting
Continuous Glucose Monitoring Systems in People With Type 2 Diabetes Not Treated With Insulin
Type 2 Diabetes
Active, not recruitingPhase 4
Pentoxifylline in Diabetic Kidney Disease
Diabetic Kidney Disease
Not yet recruiting
Inter-Arm Differences in Continuous Glucose Monitor Readings in Adults With Diabetes
Continuous Glucose Monitoring, Type 1 Diabetes
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
David Simmons, MD principal investigator
Ascensia Diabetes Care
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Contour® PLUS BGMS, OneTouch® SelectSimple™ BGMS and Accu-Chek® Performa BGMS in people with Diabetes, run by Ascensia Diabetes Care at 1 site in United States.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 2 inclusion and 3 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 29 Feb 2016. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in United States. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
Yes. Results are posted in the registry (first posted 27 Dec 2013). A summary is in the For doctors view, and the full results are on ClinicalTrials.gov.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
MARD (Mean Absolute Relative Difference Between BGMS Results and Reference Method Results) Across the Overall Tested Glucose Range (time frame: 8 hours). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT01714232, which also lists 2 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 29 Feb 2016.