Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2024 Jan;18(1):143-147.
doi: 10.1177/19322968221099879. Epub 2022 Jun 13.

Comparisons of Fifth-, Sixth-, and Seventh-Generation Continuous Glucose Monitoring Systems

John B Welsh  1 , Simon Psavko  1 , Xiaohe Zhang  1 , Peggy Gao  1 , Andrew K Balo  1
Affiliations
Review

Comparisons of Fifth-, Sixth-, and Seventh-Generation Continuous Glucose Monitoring Systems

John B Welsh et al. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2024 Jan.

Abstract

Background: Between-system differences for continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) devices have important clinical consequences.

Purpose: Here we review attributes of Dexcom's fifth-, sixth-, and seventh-generation (G5, G6, and G7) CGM systems.

Methods: Accuracy metrics were derived from preapproval trials of the three systems and compared after propensity score adjustments were used to balance baseline demographic characteristics. Metrics included mean absolute relative differences (MARD) between CGM and YSI values and the proportion of CGM values within 20% or 20 mg/dL of the YSI values ("%20/20"). Ease-of-use was evaluated by formal task analysis.

Conclusions: Adjusted MARD and %20/20 agreement rates were 9.0%/93.1% (abdomen-placed G5), 9.9%/92.3% (abdomen-placed G6), 9.1%/93.2% (abdomen-placed G7), and 8.2%/95.3% (arm-placed G7). Task analysis favored G7 over earlier systems. Favorable clinical outcomes such as hemoglobin A1c reduction and hypoglycemia avoidance seen with G5 and G6 are anticipated with G7 use.

Keywords: Dexcom; G7; accuracy; continuous glucose monitoring; human factors.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Declaration of Conflicting InterestsThe author(s) declared the following potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: The authors are employees and stockholders of Dexcom, Inc.

References

    1. FDA advisory panel votes to recommend non-adjunctive use of Dexcom G5 mobile CGM. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2016;18:512-516. - PubMed
    1. Akturk HK, Dowd R, Shankar K, Derdzinski M. Real-world evidence and glycemic improvement using Dexcom G6 features. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2021;23(suppl 1):S21-S26. - PMC - PubMed
    1. North R, Pospisil C, Clukey RJ, Parkin CG. Impact of human factors testing on medical device design: validation of an automated CGM sensor applicator. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2019;13(5):949-953. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Lind M, Polonsky W, Hirsch IB, et al.. Continuous glucose monitoring vs conventional therapy for glycemic control in adults with type 1 diabetes treated with multiple daily insulin injections: the GOLD randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2017;317(4):379-387. - PubMed
    1. Beck RW, Riddlesworth T, Ruedy K, et al.. Effect of continuous glucose monitoring on glycemic control in adults with type 1 diabetes using insulin injections: the DIAMOND randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2017;317(4):371-378. - PubMed