Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2NCT06641765
Continuous Glucose Monitoring in Dialysis Patients With Diabetes
A study testing Continous Glucose Monitoring in people with Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2 and Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1, run by Bo Feldt-Rasmussen at 5 sites in Denmark.
Trial summary
The primary objective of this multicenter, randomized controlled trial is to assess whether the intermittent or continuous use of continous glucose monitoring can enhance glycaemic control among dialysis patients with type 1 or type 2 diabetes, in comparison to the standard monitoring involving finger-prick glucose… Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2, Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1, Continuous Glucose Monitoring
- What is being tested?
- Continous Glucose Monitoring
- Type of treatment
- Medical device
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 96 participants
- Where
- 5 sitesDenmark
- Study dates
- 1 Nov 2024to 30 Oct 2026
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- Not yet: the study is under way
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
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Written informed consent obtained before any trial-related procedures are performed
- Diabetes, one of the following groups: Type 1 diabetes OR Type 2 diabetes receiving glucose-lowering therapy OR Type 2 diabetes managed with lifestyle changes with an HbA1c ≥ 50 mmol/mol
- Maintenance haemodialysis or peritoneal dialysis (minimum of two weeks)
- Subject must be willing and able to comply with trial protocol and be fluent in Danish or English
Who cannot join
- Major allergy to tape/adhesives
- Women who are pregnant or planning pregnancy
- Ongoing use of CGM
- Ongoing use of insulin pump
Trial locations and contacts
5 sites in 1 country.
5 sites in 1 country
Denmark5 sites
Rigshospitalet
Copenhagen, 2100
Herlev Hospital
Herlev, 2730
North Zealand Hospital, Hillerød
Hillerød, 3400
Holbæk Sygehus
Holbæk, 4300
Zealand University Hospital
Roskilde, 4000
About this study
Official title: Continuous Glucose Monitoring in Haemodialysis and Peritoneal Dialysis Patients With Type 1 and Type 2 Diabetes
The primary objective of this multicenter, randomized controlled trial is to assess whether the intermittent or continuous use of continous glucose monitoring can enhance glycaemic control among dialysis patients with type 1 or type 2 diabetes, in comparison to the standard monitoring involving finger-prick glucose and HbA1c.
Participants will be monitored for 9 months and randomly assigned to one of three groups:
Read more
- Group 1, the control group, will undergo standard monitoring (using HbA1c and BGM) along with double-blinded CGM sessions at month 0, 3, 6, and 9.
- Group 2 will have intermittent access to open CGM during the same time intervals.
- Group 3 will have continuous access to open CGM throughout the entire duration of the study.
During the study period, participants will have three consultations with an endocrinologist for adjustments in their glucose-lowering treatment.
The goal is to compare markers of glycaemic control between the three groups. Secondary objectives include evaluating the impact on hypoglycaemia, quality of life, hospitals admissions and cardiovascular events.
Read the detailed description
INTRODUCTION
Dialysis patients with diabetes have a very short life expectancy likely caused by a high incidence of co-morbidities combined with an increased risk of hypoglycaemia and poor glycaemic control. Glycaemic monitoring is a challenge in dialysis patients, and the number of available glucose-lowering agents are reduced often necessitating the use of insulin. Overall, this means that dialysis patients do not receive the same high quality of treatment as the general diabetes population.
In the past decades various diabetes technologies have revolutionised treatment, primarily in type 1 diabetes, but have also shown effect in type 2 diabetes. Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) is a device applied to the skin that provides a detailed glucose profile which enables the endocrinologist to tailor and optimize diabetes treatment. We hypothesise that intermittent and/or continuous utilization of CGM will significantly improve glycaemic control for patients undergoing haemodialysis or peritoneal dialysis, thereby potentially reducing complications associated with diabetes in this population.
OBJECTIVES
The primary objective is to assess whether the intermittent or continuous use of CGM can enhance glycaemic control among dialysis patients with type 1 or type 2 diabetes, in comparison to the standard-monitoring involving finger-prick glucose and HbA1c.
Secondary objectives include assessing the impact of CGM on hypoglycaemia incidence, quality of life, and cardiovascular events.
BACKGROUND
The combination of diabetes and end-stage renal disease is associated with a high risk of diabetic complications with a mean survival time of 3 to 4 years. To reduce the risk of diabetic complications, glycaemic control is essential, where the aim is to avoid both hypo- and hyperglycaemia. For patients undergoing dialysis, HbA1c is currently the most widely used tool for glycaemic monitoring. However, several studies have found HbA1c to be an unreliable glycaemic marker. In addition, glycaemic targets using HbA1c are not provided in current guidelines as studies report conflicting results on the optimal HbA1c target. Therefore, new approaches for glycaemic control are warranted to improve diabetes treatment.
Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM):
CGM uses a subcutaneous sensor to measure glucose levels every 5 to 15 min depending on the model. A CGM provides a detailed estimate of the glucose profile and studies in patients with type 1 and type 2 diabetes have demonstrated that CGM-use improved glycaemic control without increasing the risk of hypoglycaemic events.
A CGM provides several glycaemic indexes including mean sensor glucose, variables for glucose variability, time-in-ranges and are used to adjust antidiabetic treatment. Time-in-ranges is a relatively new tool in glycaemic control where the percentage time spent in different glucose intervals is calculated from the measured CGM data, for a period (typically 10 to 14 days). Time-in-ranges are defined as the percentage time spent in time-below-range (<3.9 mmol/L); time-in-target-range (3.9 to 10.0 mmol/L); time-above-range (>10.0 mmol/L) mmol/L). The advantage of using time-in-ranges for glycaemic control is the ability to diminish the risk of hypoglycaemia while maintaining glycaemic control by optimizing the time spent in the target-range.
Current use of CGM in dialysis patients:
Two minor studies have used CGM to adjust the antidiabetic treatment in patients receiving dialysis. These studies reported that the use of CGM with subsequent adjustment in antidiabetic treatment was associated with a reduction in HbA1c level and could indicate a beneficial effect of CGMs in the dialysis population8. However, a CGM-based approach to diabetes treatment is not well defined and is currently bases on a consensus report recommending patients with high risk of hypoglycaemia (which includes dialysis patients) achieving the following glycaemic targets using time-in-ranges:
- More than 50% time within time-in-target-range (3.9-10.0 mmol/L) (>12 h per day)
- Less than 1% spent below-range (<3.9 mmol/L) (<15 min per day)
- Less than 50% above-range (>10.0 mmol/L) (<12 h per day)
- Less than 10% above 13.9 mmol/L (<2 h and 24 min per day) However, these recommendations have not been evaluated in dialysis patients and it remains unknown if these targets provide sufficient glycaemic control, reduce complications, improves quality of life or are practical feasible.
The technical aspects of daily CGM use could constitute a problem for some of the most fragile dialysis patients. Intermittent use of CGMs could therefore be an alternative approach and have, in non-dialysis patients with diabetes, lead to a lowering of elevated HbA1c levels. Intermittent CGM usage could alleviate the practical burden on both patients and medical staff, reduce expenses, and still equip endocrinologists with CGM data for optimizing glycaemic control. However, recent advancements in CGM technology have enhanced usability and continuous use of CGMs likely hold advantages over intermittent usage.
DESIGN AND POPULATION
This multicentre, prospective, randomized controlled study will be conducted at Rigshospitalet, Roskilde University Hospital, North Zealand Hospital Hillerød, Herlev Hospital, and Holbæk Hospital, encompassing all dialysis centres in eastern Denmark.
The study will include a total of 96 participants with type 1 or type 2 diabetes undergoing either haemodialysis or peritoneal dialysis. Participants will be randomly assigned in a 1:1:1 ratio to either receive standard glycaemic monitoring (Group 1), intermittent CGM (Group 2) or continuous CGM (Group 3).
METHODS
All participants will be monitored for 9 months and randomly assigned to one of three groups (Figure 3). Group 1, the control group, will undergo standard monitoring (using HbA1c and finger-prick glucose) along with double-blinded CGM sessions scheduled at months 0, 3, 6, and 9. Group 2 will have intermittent access to open CGM during the same time intervals. Meanwhile, Group 3 will have continuous access to open CGM throughout the entire duration of the study.
All three groups will undergo a 10-day period of double-blinded CGM to assess their baseline glucose profiles. Additionally, participants will have three consultations with an endocrinologist or a diabetes nurse at months 0, 3, and 6 for adjustments in their glucose-lowering treatment. At the final visit (month 9), Groups 1 and 2 will undergo a 10-day period of double-blinded CGM, while Group 3 will have an open CGM session.
The objective for the intervention groups (Group 2 and 3) is to adjust their glucose-lowering treatment to ensure patients spend less than 1% of their time with glucose levels below 3.9 mmol/L and more than 60% of the time within the target range (3.9 to 10.0 mmol/L). Meanwhile, for the control group, CGM data will be double-blinded, and adjustment of glucose lowering medicine will be based on usual monitoring of HbA1c and finger-prick glucose.
STATISTICAL ANALYSIS
Statistical analysis is performed as intention-to-treat and will be conducted by the investigators in close collaboration with an experienced statistician. All data will be described including data-incompleteness as well as reasons for data-incompleteness. A linear mixed model with a participant-specific random intercept is used to analyse the effect of changes in mean sensor glucose, time in range and HbA1c. This analysis will compare changes across the three study groups from baseline to end of the study.
ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS
CGM is a well-tested technology that has significantly improved glucose management in the general diabetes population. It is expected to be safe and well tolerated, in dialysis patients as well. The many examinations are time consuming for the study participants. The project, however, will likely yield important knowledge on how to optimize diabetes management in dialysis patients, which expectedly will benefit both the study participants and in general all dialysis patients with diabetes.
The study will be registered at ClinicalTrials.gov prior to initiation. The trial protocol adheres to the principles of the Helsinki Declaration II, and the study will be conducted in compliance with Good Clinical Practice, the Act on the Processing of Personal Data, and the General Data Protection Regulation. Approval from the regional Research Ethical Committees are underway. Participants are covered by The Patient Compensation Association.
PERSPECTIVES
We expect that blood glucose regulation tailored to CGM, instead of HbA1c/finger prick will improve blood glucose levels and reduce the incidence of hypoglycemia among dialysis patients. We expect the project to contribute to rethinking diabetes treatment among these patients, leading to increased survival, reduced diabetes complications and hospitalizations, and improved quality of life.
- Conditions
- Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2, Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1, Continuous Glucose Monitoring, Haemodialysis, Peritoneal Dialysis
- Being tested
- Continous Glucose Monitoring
- Keywords
- Hypoglycaemia, Quality of life, Time-in-range, HbA1c, Diabetes, Dialysis
- Medical subject headings
- Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2, Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1, Hypoglycemia, Diabetes Mellitus
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Continous Glucose MonitoringDevice
Also called Dexcom G7
10 days of real time open access to Continous Glucose Monitoring - either at defined time intervals (Group 2) or continuously for 9 months (Group 3).
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Control group (Group 1) | No intervention | Will undergo standard glycaemic monitoring (HbA1c and finger-prick glucose) along with 10 days double-blinded CGM sessions scheduled at months 0, 3, 6, and 9. Glucose-lowering treatment is adjusted by an endocrinologist or a diabetes nurse at months 0, 3, and 6. CGM data will be double-blinded, and treatment adjustments will be based on usual monitoring of HbA1c and finger-prick glucose. |
| Intermittent CGM (Group 2) | Active comparator | Will have intermittent access to 10 days of open CGM scheduled at months 0, 3, 6 along with double-blinded CGM at month 9.
Glucose-lowering treatment is adjusted by an endocrinologist or a diabetes nurse at months 0, 3, and 6.
The objective is to adjust their glucose-lowering treatment to ensure patients spend less than 1% of their time with glucose levels below 3.9 mmol/L and more than 60% of the time within the target range (3.9 to 10.0 mmol/L). Receives: Device: Continous Glucose Monitoring |
| Continuous CGM (Group 3) | Active comparator | Will have continuous access to open CGM throughout the entire duration of the study from month 0-9.
Glucose-lowering treatment is adjusted by an endocrinologist or a diabetes nurse at months 0, 3, and 6.
The objective is to adjust their glucose-lowering treatment to ensure patients spend less than 1% of their time with glucose levels below 3.9 mmol/L and more than 60% of the time within the target range (3.9 to 10.0 mmol/L). Receives: Device: Continous Glucose Monitoring |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Change in time-in-target-range (3.9-10 mmol/L) from baseline through to study end between the three groups.
Evaluated by 10 days of CGM obtained at baseline, months 0, 3, 6, and 9.
Measured: 9 Months
Secondary outcomes (16)
Difference in percentage of participants reaching the goal of minimum of 60% of time-in-target-range (3.9-10 mmol/L) between the three groups.
Evaluated by 10 days of CGM obtained at baseline, months 0, 3, 6, and 9.
Measured: 9 Months
Change in time-in-range < 3 mmol/L from baseline through to study end between the three groups.
Evaluated by 10 days of CGM obtained at baseline, months 0, 3, 6, and 9.
Measured: 9 Months
Change in time-in-range < 3.9 mmol/L from baseline through to study end between the three groups.
Evaluated by 10 days of CGM obtained at baseline, months 0, 3, 6, and 9.
Measured: 9 Months
Change in time-in-range 3.9-7.8 mmol/L from baseline through to study end between the three groups.
Evaluated by 10 days of CGM obtained at baseline ,months 0, 3, 6, and 9.
Measured: 9 Months
Change in time-in-range > 10 mmol/L from baseline through to study end between the three groups.
Evaluated by 10 days of CGM obtained at baseline, months 0, 3, 6, and 9.
Measured: 9 Months
Change in time-in-range > 13.9 mmol/L from baseline through to study end between the three groups.
Evaluated by 10 days of CGM obtained at baseline, months 0, 3, 6, and 9.
Measured: 9 Months
Change in Mean Sensor Glucose (mmol/L) from baseline through to study end between the three groups.
Evaluated by 10 days of CGM obtained at baseline, months 0, 3, 6, and 9.
Measured: 9 Months
Change in Glucose Variability (SD (mmol/L) and coefficient of variation (%)) from baseline through to study end between the three groups.
Evaluated by 10 days of CGM obtained at baseline, months 0, 3, 6, and 9.
Measured: 9 Months
Change in HbA1c (%, mmol/mol) from baseline through to study end between the three groups.
Evaluated by 10 days of CGM obtained at baseline, months 0, 3, 6, and 9.
Measured: 9 Months
Change in Glucose Management Indicator (%, mmol/mol) from baseline through to study end between the three groups.
Evaluated by 10 days of CGM obtained at baseline, months 0, 3, 6, and 9.
Measured: 9 Months
Difference in length of time-period with active CGM between the three groups
Evaluated by 10 days of CGM obtained at baseline, months 0, 3, 6, and 9.
Measured: 9 Months
Difference in incidence of CGM time in <3.0mmol/L range lasting >15 minutes between the three groups
Evaluated by 10 days of CGM obtained at baseline, months 0, 3, 6, and 9.
Measured: 9 Months
Difference in incidence of severe hypoglycaemia (Requiring third party assistance) between the three groups
Evaluated by medical records and patient interview at months 0, 3, 6, and 9.
Measured: 9 Months
Difference in incidence of Adverse Events (AE) and Adverse Device Events between the three groups
Evaluated by medical records and patient interview at months 0, 3, 6, and 9.
Measured: 9 Months
Difference in incidence of Serious Adverse Events (SAE) and Serious Adverse Device Events between the three groups
Evaluated by medical records and patient interview at months 0, 3, 6, and 9.
Measured: 9 Months
Difference in incidence of Suspected Unexpected Serious Adverse Reactions (SUSAR) between the three groups
Evaluated by medical records and patient interview at months 0, 3, 6, and 9.
Measured: 9 Months
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted15 Oct 2024
- Study start1 Nov 2024
- Primary completion30 Oct 2026 (estimated)
- Study completion30 Oct 2026 (estimated)
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2Studies 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
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Model description
- Multicentre, prospective, randomized controlled study.
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 96 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Bo Feldt-Rasmussen
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Steno Diabetes Center Copenhagen
- Responsible party
- Sponsor-investigator, Bo Feldt-Rasmussen, Copenhagen University Hospital, Rigshospitalet
- Investigators
- Tobias Bomholt, MD, PhD, Principal investigator, Department of Nephrology, Rigshospitalet, University of Copenhagen
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT06641765
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- CGM-Dialysis study
- Status last verified
- Feb 2026
- First submitted
- 8 Oct 2024
- Last updated
- 27 Feb 2026
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- Yes
- Individual data sharing
- No
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 27 Feb 2026. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Continuous Glucose Monitoring in Haemodialysis and Peritoneal Dialysis Patients With Type 1 and Type 2 Diabetes
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT06641765
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- CGM-Dialysis study
- Conditions
- Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2, Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1, Continuous Glucose Monitoring, Haemodialysis, Peritoneal Dialysis
- Keywords
- Hypoglycaemia, Quality of life, Time-in-range, HbA1c, Diabetes, Dialysis
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Active, not recruiting
- Enrolment
- 96 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Bo Feldt-RasmussenUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Steno Diabetes Center Copenhagen
- Study start
- 1 Nov 2024 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 30 Oct 2026 (estimated)
- Study completion
- 30 Oct 2026 (estimated)
- First posted
- 15 Oct 2024 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
The primary objective of this multicenter, randomized controlled trial is to assess whether the intermittent or continuous use of continous glucose monitoring can enhance glycaemic control among dialysis patients with type 1 or type 2 diabetes, in comparison to the standard monitoring involving finger-prick glucose and HbA1c.
Participants will be monitored for 9 months and randomly assigned to one of three groups:
- Group 1, the control group, will undergo standard monitoring (using HbA1c and BGM) along with double-blinded CGM sessions at month 0, 3, 6, and 9.
- Group 2 will have intermittent access to open CGM during the same time intervals.
- Group 3 will have continuous access to open CGM throughout the entire duration of the study.
During the study period, participants will have three consultations with an endocrinologist for adjustments in their glucose-lowering treatment.
The goal is to compare markers of glycaemic control between the three groups. Secondary objectives include evaluating the impact on hypoglycaemia, quality of life, hospitals admissions and cardiovascular events.
Detailed description
INTRODUCTION
Dialysis patients with diabetes have a very short life expectancy likely caused by a high incidence of co-morbidities combined with an increased risk of hypoglycaemia and poor glycaemic control. Glycaemic monitoring is a challenge in dialysis patients, and the number of available glucose-lowering agents are reduced often necessitating the use of insulin. Overall, this means that dialysis patients do not receive the same high quality of treatment as the general diabetes population.
In the past decades various diabetes technologies have revolutionised treatment, primarily in type 1 diabetes, but have also shown effect in type 2 diabetes. Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) is a device applied to the skin that provides a detailed glucose profile which enables the endocrinologist to tailor and optimize diabetes treatment. We hypothesise that intermittent and/or continuous utilization of CGM will significantly improve glycaemic control for patients undergoing haemodialysis or peritoneal dialysis, thereby potentially reducing complications associated with diabetes in this population.
OBJECTIVES
The primary objective is to assess whether the intermittent or continuous use of CGM can enhance glycaemic control among dialysis patients with type 1 or type 2 diabetes, in comparison to the standard-monitoring involving finger-prick glucose and HbA1c.
Secondary objectives include assessing the impact of CGM on hypoglycaemia incidence, quality of life, and cardiovascular events.
BACKGROUND
The combination of diabetes and end-stage renal disease is associated with a high risk of diabetic complications with a mean survival time of 3 to 4 years. To reduce the risk of diabetic complications, glycaemic control is essential, where the aim is to avoid both hypo- and hyperglycaemia. For patients undergoing dialysis, HbA1c is currently the most widely used tool for glycaemic monitoring. However, several studies have found HbA1c to be an unreliable glycaemic marker. In addition, glycaemic targets using HbA1c are not provided in current guidelines as studies report conflicting results on the optimal HbA1c target. Therefore, new approaches for glycaemic control are warranted to improve diabetes treatment.
Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM):
CGM uses a subcutaneous sensor to measure glucose levels every 5 to 15 min depending on the model. A CGM provides a detailed estimate of the glucose profile and studies in patients with type 1 and type 2 diabetes have demonstrated that CGM-use improved glycaemic control without increasing the risk of hypoglycaemic events.
A CGM provides several glycaemic indexes including mean sensor glucose, variables for glucose variability, time-in-ranges and are used to adjust antidiabetic treatment. Time-in-ranges is a relatively new tool in glycaemic control where the percentage time spent in different glucose intervals is calculated from the measured CGM data, for a period (typically 10 to 14 days). Time-in-ranges are defined as the percentage time spent in time-below-range (<3.9 mmol/L); time-in-target-range (3.9 to 10.0 mmol/L); time-above-range (>10.0 mmol/L) mmol/L). The advantage of using time-in-ranges for glycaemic control is the ability to diminish the risk of hypoglycaemia while maintaining glycaemic control by optimizing the time spent in the target-range.
Current use of CGM in dialysis patients:
Two minor studies have used CGM to adjust the antidiabetic treatment in patients receiving dialysis. These studies reported that the use of CGM with subsequent adjustment in antidiabetic treatment was associated with a reduction in HbA1c level and could indicate a beneficial effect of CGMs in the dialysis population8. However, a CGM-based approach to diabetes treatment is not well defined and is currently bases on a consensus report recommending patients with high risk of hypoglycaemia (which includes dialysis patients) achieving the following glycaemic targets using time-in-ranges:
- More than 50% time within time-in-target-range (3.9-10.0 mmol/L) (>12 h per day)
- Less than 1% spent below-range (<3.9 mmol/L) (<15 min per day)
- Less than 50% above-range (>10.0 mmol/L) (<12 h per day)
- Less than 10% above 13.9 mmol/L (<2 h and 24 min per day) However, these recommendations have not been evaluated in dialysis patients and it remains unknown if these targets provide sufficient glycaemic control, reduce complications, improves quality of life or are practical feasible.
The technical aspects of daily CGM use could constitute a problem for some of the most fragile dialysis patients. Intermittent use of CGMs could therefore be an alternative approach and have, in non-dialysis patients with diabetes, lead to a lowering of elevated HbA1c levels. Intermittent CGM usage could alleviate the practical burden on both patients and medical staff, reduce expenses, and still equip endocrinologists with CGM data for optimizing glycaemic control. However, recent advancements in CGM technology have enhanced usability and continuous use of CGMs likely hold advantages over intermittent usage.
DESIGN AND POPULATION
This multicentre, prospective, randomized controlled study will be conducted at Rigshospitalet, Roskilde University Hospital, North Zealand Hospital Hillerød, Herlev Hospital, and Holbæk Hospital, encompassing all dialysis centres in eastern Denmark.
The study will include a total of 96 participants with type 1 or type 2 diabetes undergoing either haemodialysis or peritoneal dialysis. Participants will be randomly assigned in a 1:1:1 ratio to either receive standard glycaemic monitoring (Group 1), intermittent CGM (Group 2) or continuous CGM (Group 3).
METHODS
All participants will be monitored for 9 months and randomly assigned to one of three groups (Figure 3). Group 1, the control group, will undergo standard monitoring (using HbA1c and finger-prick glucose) along with double-blinded CGM sessions scheduled at months 0, 3, 6, and 9. Group 2 will have intermittent access to open CGM during the same time intervals. Meanwhile, Group 3 will have continuous access to open CGM throughout the entire duration of the study.
All three groups will undergo a 10-day period of double-blinded CGM to assess their baseline glucose profiles. Additionally, participants will have three consultations with an endocrinologist or a diabetes nurse at months 0, 3, and 6 for adjustments in their glucose-lowering treatment. At the final visit (month 9), Groups 1 and 2 will undergo a 10-day period of double-blinded CGM, while Group 3 will have an open CGM session.
The objective for the intervention groups (Group 2 and 3) is to adjust their glucose-lowering treatment to ensure patients spend less than 1% of their time with glucose levels below 3.9 mmol/L and more than 60% of the time within the target range (3.9 to 10.0 mmol/L). Meanwhile, for the control group, CGM data will be double-blinded, and adjustment of glucose lowering medicine will be based on usual monitoring of HbA1c and finger-prick glucose.
STATISTICAL ANALYSIS
Statistical analysis is performed as intention-to-treat and will be conducted by the investigators in close collaboration with an experienced statistician. All data will be described including data-incompleteness as well as reasons for data-incompleteness. A linear mixed model with a participant-specific random intercept is used to analyse the effect of changes in mean sensor glucose, time in range and HbA1c. This analysis will compare changes across the three study groups from baseline to end of the study.
ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS
CGM is a well-tested technology that has significantly improved glucose management in the general diabetes population. It is expected to be safe and well tolerated, in dialysis patients as well. The many examinations are time consuming for the study participants. The project, however, will likely yield important knowledge on how to optimize diabetes management in dialysis patients, which expectedly will benefit both the study participants and in general all dialysis patients with diabetes.
The study will be registered at ClinicalTrials.gov prior to initiation. The trial protocol adheres to the principles of the Helsinki Declaration II, and the study will be conducted in compliance with Good Clinical Practice, the Act on the Processing of Personal Data, and the General Data Protection Regulation. Approval from the regional Research Ethical Committees are underway. Participants are covered by The Patient Compensation Association.
PERSPECTIVES
We expect that blood glucose regulation tailored to CGM, instead of HbA1c/finger prick will improve blood glucose levels and reduce the incidence of hypoglycemia among dialysis patients. We expect the project to contribute to rethinking diabetes treatment among these patients, leading to increased survival, reduced diabetes complications and hospitalizations, and improved quality of life.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 3
- Model description
- Multicentre, prospective, randomized controlled study.
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Control group (Group 1) | No intervention | –Will undergo standard glycaemic monitoring (HbA1c and finger-prick glucose) along with 10 days double-blinded CGM sessions scheduled at months 0, 3, 6, and 9. Glucose-lowering treatment is adjusted by an endocrinologist or a diabetes nurse at months 0, 3, and 6. CGM data will be double-blinded, and treatment adjustments will be based on usual monitoring of HbA1c and finger-prick glucose. |
| Intermittent CGM (Group 2) | Active comparator | Device: Continous Glucose MonitoringWill have intermittent access to 10 days of open CGM scheduled at months 0, 3, 6 along with double-blinded CGM at month 9. Glucose-lowering treatment is adjusted by an endocrinologist or a diabetes nurse at months 0, 3, and 6. The objective is to adjust their glucose-lowering treatment to ensure patients spend less than 1% of their time with glucose levels below 3.9 mmol/L and more than 60% of the time within the target range (3.9 to 10.0 mmol/L). |
| Continuous CGM (Group 3) | Active comparator | Device: Continous Glucose MonitoringWill have continuous access to open CGM throughout the entire duration of the study from month 0-9. Glucose-lowering treatment is adjusted by an endocrinologist or a diabetes nurse at months 0, 3, and 6. The objective is to adjust their glucose-lowering treatment to ensure patients spend less than 1% of their time with glucose levels below 3.9 mmol/L and more than 60% of the time within the target range (3.9 to 10.0 mmol/L). |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (4 listed)
- Written informed consent obtained before any trial-related procedures are performed
- Diabetes, one of the following groups: Type 1 diabetes OR Type 2 diabetes receiving glucose-lowering therapy OR Type 2 diabetes managed with lifestyle changes with an HbA1c ≥ 50 mmol/mol
- Maintenance haemodialysis or peritoneal dialysis (minimum of two weeks)
- Subject must be willing and able to comply with trial protocol and be fluent in Danish or English
Key exclusion criteria (4 listed)
- Major allergy to tape/adhesives
- Women who are pregnant or planning pregnancy
- Ongoing use of CGM
- Ongoing use of insulin pump
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Continous Glucose MonitoringAlso: Dexcom G710 days of real time open access to Continous Glucose Monitoring - either at defined time intervals (Group 2) or continuously for 9 months (Group 3). | Device | Continuous CGM (Group 3), Intermittent CGM (Group 2) |
Primary outcome
Change in time-in-target-range (3.9-10 mmol/L) from baseline through to study end between the three groups.
Time frame: 9 Months
Evaluated by 10 days of CGM obtained at baseline, months 0, 3, 6, and 9.
16 secondary outcomes
Difference in percentage of participants reaching the goal of minimum of 60% of time-in-target-range (3.9-10 mmol/L) between the three groups.
Time frame: 9 Months
Change in time-in-range < 3 mmol/L from baseline through to study end between the three groups.
Time frame: 9 Months
Change in time-in-range < 3.9 mmol/L from baseline through to study end between the three groups.
Time frame: 9 Months
Change in time-in-range 3.9-7.8 mmol/L from baseline through to study end between the three groups.
Time frame: 9 Months
Change in time-in-range > 10 mmol/L from baseline through to study end between the three groups.
Time frame: 9 Months
Change in time-in-range > 13.9 mmol/L from baseline through to study end between the three groups.
Time frame: 9 Months
Change in Mean Sensor Glucose (mmol/L) from baseline through to study end between the three groups.
Time frame: 9 Months
Change in Glucose Variability (SD (mmol/L) and coefficient of variation (%)) from baseline through to study end between the three groups.
Time frame: 9 Months
Change in HbA1c (%, mmol/mol) from baseline through to study end between the three groups.
Time frame: 9 Months
Change in Glucose Management Indicator (%, mmol/mol) from baseline through to study end between the three groups.
Time frame: 9 Months
Difference in length of time-period with active CGM between the three groups
Time frame: 9 Months
Difference in incidence of CGM time in <3.0mmol/L range lasting >15 minutes between the three groups
Time frame: 9 Months
Difference in incidence of severe hypoglycaemia (Requiring third party assistance) between the three groups
Time frame: 9 Months
Difference in incidence of Adverse Events (AE) and Adverse Device Events between the three groups
Time frame: 9 Months
Difference in incidence of Serious Adverse Events (SAE) and Serious Adverse Device Events between the three groups
Time frame: 9 Months
Difference in incidence of Suspected Unexpected Serious Adverse Reactions (SUSAR) between the three groups
Time frame: 9 Months
Results and safety
This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 27 Feb 2026.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Related trials for Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2
Not yet recruitingPhase 3
Efficacy and Safety of Once-Weekly SHR-3167 Compared With Once-Daily Insulin Glargine in Adults With Insulin-Naive Type 2 Diabetes
Type 2 Diabetes
Active, not recruiting
Digital Reinforcement of Motivational Interviewing Micro-Skills Among Primary Care Healthcare Professionals
Hypertension (Without Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus)
Recruiting
Investigating Vascular Properties of HEMI and SPG Signals in Individuals With or at Risk for Chronic Kidney Disease
Chronic Kidney Disease, Hypertension (HTN)
Not yet recruitingPhase 3
A Study to Evaluate the Effectiveness and Safety of the Drug AZD6234 for Managing Weight in Adults Who Are Obese or Overweight. These Participants May or May Not Also Have Type 2 Diabetes
Obesity, Overweight
Not yet recruiting
Impact of Endoscopic Sleeve Gastroplasty (ESG) in Obese Adults With Type 2 Diabetes (T2D)
Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus (T2D), Obesity (BMI>30)
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.
Tobias Bomholt, MD, PhD principal investigator
Department of Nephrology, Rigshospitalet, University of Copenhagen
5 sites in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Continous Glucose Monitoring in people with Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2 and Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1, run by Bo Feldt-Rasmussen at 5 sites in Denmark.
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 4 inclusion and 4 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: under way, not looking for participants, as of the sponsor's last update on 27 Feb 2026. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 5 sites in Denmark. 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?
This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.
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?
Change in time-in-target-range (3.9-10 mmol/L) from baseline through to study end between the three groups. (time frame: 9 Months). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
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 27 Feb 2026.