Correction: Diabetes Ther (2025) 16:121–134 https://doi.org/10.1007/s13300-024-01670-y

The original version of this article unfortunately contained a few errors.

In the Abstract Results, the percentage of male patients included in this study should be 60.6% and the sentence “From baseline (54.3%), TIR changed at week 12 (mean change 0.3% [± 14.3]; p = 0.8383) and at week 24 (+ 4.5% [± 14.9], p = 0.078)” should have read “From baseline (54.3%), TIR changed at week 12 (mean change 0.3% [± 14.3]; p = 0.8383) and at week 24 (+ 3.0% [± 14.9], p = 0.078).” The sentence “At week 24, there was a significant reduction in the HbA1c value (8.1 ± 0.6% vs. 7.7 ± 0.9%; p < 0.001)…” should have read “At week 24, there was a significant reduction in the HbA1c value (8.1 ± 0.7% vs. 7.7 ± 0.9%; p < 0.001)…”.

In the Abstract Conclusions, the sentence “Although switching to Gla-300 in poorly controlled PwT1D did not significantly reduce TIR, it significantly decreased HbA1c values and glycemic variability without changes in BW and basal insulin dose” should have read “Switching to Gla-300 in poorly controlled PwT1D significantly decreased in HbA1c, improved time in range (TIR), reduced glycemic variability without change in body weight and basal insulin dose in 12 and 24 weeks.”

In Table 1, the mean/SD value for male patients was given as 60.4 but should have been 60.6.

In the Results, Efficacy, Primary Endpoint section, the mean (SD) change at approximately week 24 was given as 4.5% but should have been 3.0%. The mean (SD) TBR (< 70 mg/dl) at baseline was given as 3.8% but should have been 3.9%. The sentence “However, TBR at 24 weeks was 0.1% ± 0.7 for BMI > 30 kg/m2 and 0.20% ± 0.8; n = 25 for prior insulin detemir treatment)” should have been “However, TBR at 24 weeks was 0.5%; ± 2.8 for BMI > 30 kg/m2 and − 1.0% ± 3.5; n = 25 for prior insulin detemir treatment).”

In the Results, Efficacy, Secondary Endpoints section, the sentences “At week 24 after switching to Gla-300, there was a significant reduction in the HbA1c value (8.1 ± 0.6% vs. 7.7 ± 0.9%; p < 0.001), a reduction in the CV% of plasma glucose (36.1 ± 12.4% vs. 32.8 ± 9.6%, p = 0.056), and increase in total insulin dose (51.4 ± 12.4% vs. 53.1 ± 27.53), increase in bolus insulin dose (26.5 ± 16.3 U/day vs. 27.9 ± 16.6 U/day; p = 0.042; Supplementary Fig. 1). FPG (p = 0.3512), BW and basal insulin dose were not significantly changed” should have read “At week 24 after switching to Gla-300, there was a significant reduction in the HbA1c value (8.1 ± 0.7% vs. 7.7 ± 0.9%; p < 0.001), a reduction in the CV% of plasma glucose (36.1 ± 12.4% vs. 32.8 ± 9.6%, p = 0.056), and increase in total insulin dose (51.4 ± 27.0% vs. 53.1 ± 27.53), increase in bolus insulin dose (26.5 ± 16.3 U/day vs. 27.9 ± 16.6 U/day; p = 0.042; Supplementary Fig. 1). FPG, BW and basal insulin dose were not significantly changed.”

In the Results, Efficacy, Patient-Reported Outcome—Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire section, the sentence “Perceived frequency of hyperglycemia (item 2 of DTSQ) slightly decreased from 3.6 (± 1.23, n = 93) at baseline to 2.94 (± 1.39, n = 93) at approximately week 24 (change from baseline: − 0.62 ± 1.44)” should have read “Perceived frequency of hyperglycemia (item 2 of DTSQ) slightly decreased from 3.6 (± 1.23, n = 93) at baseline to 2.94 (± 1.39, n = 77) at approximately week 24 (change from baseline: − 0.62 ± 1.44).”

In the Results, Safety Endpoints, Adverse Events section, the sentence “Apart from hypoglycemia (n = 26), all other TEAEs were only reported once” should have read “Apart from hypoglycemia (n = 29), all other TEAEs were only reported once.”

In Fig. 4, the value for fasting plasma glucose [mg/dL] at 24 weeks was 157.2 (n = 58) but should have been 157.2 (n = 61).

In Fig. 5, the reported hypoglycemia events at night time/ patient at ADA level 2 was given as 0.3 but should have been 0.2.

In the Discussion section, the sentence “After approximately 24 weeks, the TIR increased by + 4.5% (p = 0.078) for all participants…” should have read “After approximately 24 weeks, the TIR increased by 3.0% (p = 0.078) for all participants…”.

Also in the Discussion section, the paragraph “HbA1c values decreased significantly (− 0.4%; p < 0.001) despite the rather small reduction in FPG (− 8.7 mg/dl; p = 0.3512). This result support the interpretation of a stable and steady improvement of the glycemic control, even in the absence of pre-defined titration algorithms in concordance with the non-interventional study design. From baseline (54.3%), HbA1c levels at week 24. However, this aspect is not explored in this study since it would require more than 24 weeks of follow-up to optimize treatment with Gla-300 after switching” should have read “HbA1c values decreased significantly (− 0.3%; p < 0.001) despite the rather small reduction in FPG (− 8.7 mg/dl). This result support the interpretation of a stable and steady improvement of the glycemic control, even in the absence of pre-defined titration algorithms in concordance with the non-interventional study design. However, this aspect is not explored in this study since it would require more than 24 weeks of follow-up to optimize treatment with Gla-300 after switching.”

In Table 2, the % value for hypoglycemia was given as 19.8% but should have been 19.9%.

In supplementary Table 2, the value given for number of patients for “Other reason” was “3 (3.19)” but should have been “3 (3.29)”.

Supplementary Table 3 given as below also contained a few errors:

The correct supplementary Table 3 has been provided below:

Supplementary Fig. 1 given as below also contained a few errors:

The correct supplementary Fig. 1 has been provided below:

The original article has been corrected.