Last updated August 22, 2026
Key finding
mean-adjusted difference −0.6% [95% CI −1.8% to 0.7%]; p < .001 for non-inferiority
This study evaluated the effectiveness of hybrid closed-loop glucose control using faster-acting insulin aspart (Fiasp) in adults with type 1 diabetes. It found that Fiasp reduced the time spent with low glucose levels compared to standard insulin aspart.
Quick read
The essential study design details in one scan.
EvidenceScore™
Moderate
Study type
RCTs
Follow-up
Short-Term (≤3 mo)
Risk of bias
Some Concerns
Save research, organize studies, and quickly find important evidence again.
Plain-language summary
A plain-language read of the study’s main message and where it applies.
Study focus
This study evaluated the effectiveness of hybrid closed-loop glucose control using faster-acting insulin aspart (Fiasp) in adults with type 1 diabetes. It found that Fiasp reduced the time spent with low glucose levels compared to standard insulin aspart.
This research is significant as it highlights the potential benefits of faster-acting insulin in managing blood glucose levels for individuals with type 1 diabetes. Reducing the time spent in hypoglycemia can improve patient safety and quality of life, making it a crucial consideration for diabetes management strategies.
The study's sample size may limit the generalizability of findings. Potential confounding factors were not fully controlled. The duration of the study may not capture long-term effects.
Published in
Publication details and source links for this paper.
Charlotte KB, Sara H, Hood T, et al. Hybrid closed-loop glucose control with faster-acting insulin aspart in adults with type 1 diabetes. Diabetes, Obesity & Metabolism. 2021;23(6):1389-1396. doi:10.1111/dom.14355
Fiasp reduced the proportion of time with sensor glucose < 3.9 mmol/L (2.4% vs. 2.9%; p = .01).
Fiasp reduced the proportion of time with sensor glucose < 3.0 mmol/L (0.4% vs. 0.7%; p = .03).
No significant difference in mean glucose levels between Fiasp and standard insulin aspart (8.1 vs. 8.0 mmol/L; p = .13).
Evidence network
Understand where this research contributes within the broader evidence network.
This study contributes evidence to Hybrid closed-loop system and Glucose variability, Percentage of time spent with sensor glucose levels <3.9 mmol/L, Pre-meal mean glucose, and 3 more.
This study contributes evidence to
Primary intervention
Hybrid closed-loop system
Primary outcomes
Evidence topics
Primary intervention
Intervention and outcome relationships this study adds to the evidence network.
Editorial context
See why this paper is useful beyond its individual results.
Evidence network role
This section describes how the study fits into the current evidence network. It does not determine whether an intervention works on its own.
2
Related topics
6
Evidence pairs
537
Related studies
Evidence topic
Contributes evidence
Evidence topic
Contributes evidence
Save studies and evidence pages, organize your personal Evidence Tracker, and keep the research you care about in one place.
Primary evidence
Evidence relationship
Related evidence
Evidence relationship
Save evidence
Evidence relationship
Save evidence
Core evidence
The primary outcomes reported in this study.
Hybrid closed-loop system → Glucose variability
Hybrid closed-loop system → Glucose variability
Hybrid closed-loop system → Percentage of time spent with sensor glucose levels <3.9 mmol/L
Hybrid closed-loop system → Percentage of time spent with sensor glucose levels <3.9 mmol/L
Hybrid closed-loop system → Pre-meal mean glucose
Hybrid closed-loop system → Pre-meal mean glucose
Hybrid closed-loop system → Proportion of time with sensor glucose < 3.0 mmol/L
Hybrid closed-loop system → Proportion of time with sensor glucose < 3.0 mmol/L
Hybrid closed-loop system → Total daily insulin dose
Hybrid closed-loop system → Total daily insulin dose
Evidence Library
Save research, organize studies, and quickly find important evidence again.
Evidence Library
Save research, organize studies, and quickly find important evidence again.
Explore related studies, evidence collections, and research questions.
Relationships organized using the Dediabetes Evidence Intelligence™ framework.
This study contributes to evidence on Insulin Delivery Systems and CGM Time in Range, Insulin Delivery Systems and Glucose Variability.
This study contributes to the evidence on the following intervention-outcome relationships.
Devices & Technology
Devices & Technology
Curated evidence collections and hubs this study is part of.
All studies measuring CGM Time in Range
Measures CGM Time in Range as a key outcome.
All studies on Insulin Delivery Systems
Contributes to Insulin Delivery Systems evidence base.
All studies measuring Glucose Variability
Measures Glucose Variability as a key outcome.
Jump to pre-filtered views in Evidence Explorer.
17 results
4 results
17 results
17 results
4 results
Generated from the study's connected evidence using Evidence Intelligence™.
Insulin Delivery Systems may improve CGM Time in Range.
ConsistencyScore™: Results are mixed and should be interpreted cautiously.
Ranked evidence signals
Time in range
EvidenceScore™ Strong | EvidenceScore™ 87.9 | moderate positive | ConsistencyScore™ Generally Consistent | 1 study
Pre-meal mean glucose
EvidenceScore™ Emerging | EvidenceScore™ 59.0 | neutral | ConsistencyScore™ Unclear | 1 study
Why this answer: This answer is cautious because the available studies report mixed findings.
Limitations
Insulin Delivery Systems may improve Glucose Variability.
ConsistencyScore™: Results are generally consistent across studies.
Ranked evidence signals
Glucose variability
EvidenceScore™ Strong | EvidenceScore™ 79.0 | weak positive | ConsistencyScore™ Mixed | 1 study
Why this answer: This answer is based on 6 supporting studies with generally consistent results and a positive effect signal.
Limitations
Insulin Delivery Systems may worsen Insulin Resistance or be associated with harm.
ConsistencyScore™: Results are generally consistent across studies.
Ranked evidence signals
Total daily insulin dose
EvidenceScore™ Strong | EvidenceScore™ 78.6 | weak negative | ConsistencyScore™ Generally Consistent | 1 study
Why this answer: This answer is based on 3 supporting studies and existing graph evidence signals.
Limitations
Hybrid closed-loop system may improve Percentage of time spent with sensor glucose levels <3.9 mmol/L.
ConsistencyScore™: Results are generally consistent across studies.
Ranked evidence signals
Percentage of time spent with sensor glucose levels <3.9 mmol/L
EvidenceScore™ Strong | EvidenceScore™ 79.0 | weak positive | ConsistencyScore™ Generally Consistent | 1 study
Why this answer: This answer is based on a single supporting study.
Limitations
Next steps
Choose a next path through related evidence topics, Evidence Explorer views, and research summaries.
Follow the topics this study contributes to.
Open broader Evidence Explorer views for this relationship.
Read related research summaries.
Focused on evidence, not advertising.
Your data is always protected.
New studies added every day.
