Retrospective study of glycemic variability, BMI, and blood pressure in diabetes patients in the Digital Twin Precision Treatment Program

Abstract

Abstract The objective of this retrospective observational cohort study was to measure glycemic variability and reductions in body mass index (BMI), blood pressure (BP), and use of antihypertensive medications in type 2 diabetes (T2D) patients participating in the digital twin-enabled Twin Precision Treatment (TPT) Program. Study participants included 19 females and 45 males with T2D who chose to participate in the TPT Program and adhered to program protocols. Nine additional enrollees were excluded due to major program non-adherence. Enrollees were required to have adequate hepatic and renal function, no myocardial infarction, stroke, or angina ≤ 90 days before enrollment, and no history of ketoacidosis or major psychiatric disorders. The TPT program uses Digital Twin technology, machine learning algorithms, and precision nutrition to aid treatment of patients with T2D. Each study participant had ≥ 3 months of follow-up. Outcome measures included glucose percentage coefficient of variation (%CV), low blood glucose index (LBGI), high blood glucose index (HBGI), systolic and diastolic BP, number of antihypertensive medications, and BMI. Sixty-four patients participated in the program. Mean (± standard deviation) %CV, LBGI, and HBGI values were low (17.34 ± 4.35, 1.37 ± 1.37, and 2.13 ± 2.79, respectively) throughout the 90-day program. BMI decreased from 29.23 ± 5.83 at baseline to 27.43 ± 5.25 kg/m2. Systolic BP fell from 134.72 ± 17.73 to 124.58 ± 11.62 mm Hg. Diastolic BP decreased from 83.95 ± 10.20 to 80.33 ± 7.04 mm Hg. The percent of patients taking antihypertensive medications decreased from 35.9% at baseline to 4.7% at 90 days. During 90 days of the TPT Program, patients achieved low glycemic variability and significant reductions in BMI and BP. Antihypertensive medication use was eliminated in nearly all patients. Future research will focus on randomized case–control comparisons.