Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Evaluates DBLG1 System’s impact on glucose levels during aerobic, anaerobic, and mixed activities, suggesting targeted adjustments matter.
Introduction and Objective: Physical activity (PA) impacts glucose variability differently depending on the activity type. The DBLG1 System utilizes distinct target adjustments for Aerobic (+70 mg/dL), Mixed (+40), and Anaerobic (+20) activities. We evaluated the efficacy of these types by analyzing declared sessions, excluding generic “Sport” declarations to ensure physiological accuracy. Methods: We analyzed 8,358 PA sessions (Aerobic, Anaerobic or Mixed) from 982 adult users. We compared glycemic outcomes during the PA to matched non-PA control periods (shifted 24/48 hour). Metrics included Time Above Range (TAR >180 mg/dL) and Rescue Carbs (RC) consumption. Results: The algorithm demonstrated effective control for Anaerobic PA despite the lower target increase (Table 1): TAR increased by only 2.9 percentage points (pp) with minimal RC increase (+2.3 g). Conversely, Mixed PA was the most challenging: despite the intermediate target, they were associated with the largest TAR increase (+6.5 pp) and the highest RC increase (+4.1 g). Aerobic activities showed intermediate results (+3.6 pp TAR). Conclusion: The target strategy effectively prevents hypoglycemia. Mixed PA remains prone to hyperglycemia and high carbohydrate intake. The unpredictability of Mixed PA, combined with preventive snacking, could benefit from further algorithmic adaptations. Future improvements could consider PA type not just for target adjustment, but also to tailor RC recommendations to the specific PA type. Disclosure A. Adenis: Employee; Current; Diabeloop SA. S. Lachal: Employee; Current; Diabeloop SA. P. Gauthier: Employee; Current; Diabeloop SA. P. Gimenez: Employee; Current; Diabeloop SA. C. Desir: Employee; Current; Diabeloop SA. T. Le Roux-Mallouf: None. E. Huneker: Employee; Current; Diabeloop SA. P.Y. Benhamou: Employee; Current; Diabeloop SA. Advisory Panel; Ended; Eli Lilly and Company, Novo Nordisk.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Adenis et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: