AGP in daily clinical practice: a guide for use with the FreeStyle Libre flash glucose monitoring system

Fraser W Gibb, Peter Jennings, Lalantha Leelarathna, Emma G Wilmot


As real-time continuous glucose monitoring and flash glucose monitoring systems become more widely prescribed in the daily management of diabetes, it is important that the ambulatory glucose profile (AGP) methodology for reviewing and interpreting trends in glucose control is effectively applied. In this article we look at the essential features of the AGP and provide systematic and practical guidance on how the AGP can be interpreted in daily diabetes care with confidence. Using examples taken from glucose data captured by the FreeStyle Libre flash glucose monitoring system, we show how each aspect of the AGP can be used to understand daily patterns in glucose control for a person with diabetes, including the importance of time in range and adjunct use of individual daily logs. Using these elements collectively, we show how and why treatment adjustments can be made, with the goal of improving glycaemic control and diabetes outcomes.


ambulatory glucose profile, AGP, continuous glucose monitoring, flash glucose monitoring, CGM, glycaemic control, glycaemic variability, glycaemic stability, hypoglycaemia, hyperglycaemia

Full Text:



Mazze RS, Lucido D, Langer O, Hartmann K, Rodbard D. Ambulatory Glucose Profile: Representation of Verified Self-Monitored Blood Glucose Data. Diabetes Care. 1987; 10:111–117.

Bergenstal RM, Ahmann AJ, Bailey T, et al. Recommendations for Standardizing Glucose Reporting and Analysis to Optimize Clinical Decision Making in Diabetes: The Ambulatory Glucose Profile. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2013; 15: 198-211.

Mazze RS, Strock E, Wesley D, et al. Characterizing glucose exposure for individuals with normal glucose tolerance using continuous glucose monitoring and ambulatory glucose profile analysis. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2008; 10:149–159.

Matthaei S, DeAlaiz R, Bosi E, Evans M, Geelhoed-Duijvestijn N, Joubert M. Consensus recommendations for the use of Ambulatory Glucose Profile in clinical practice. Br J Diabetes. 2014; 14:153–157.

Evans M, Cranston I, Bailey CJ. Ambulatory glucose profile (AGP): utility in UK clinical practice. Br J Diabetes. 2017; 17:26–33.

Riddlesworth TD, Beck RW, Gal RL, et al. Optimal Sampling Duration for Continuous Glucose Monitoring to Determine Long-Term Glycemic Control. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2018; 4:314-316.

Johnson ML, Martens TW, Criego AB, Carlson AE, Simonson GD, Bergenstal RM. Utilizing the Ambulatory Glucose Profile to Standardize and Implement Continuous Glucose Monitoring in Clinical Practice. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2019; 21(Suppl 2): S217-S225.

Dunn TC, Crouther N. Assessment of the variance of the ambulatory glucose profile over 3 to 20 days of continuous glucose monitoring. 46th EASD Conference, Stockholm. Poster 1054.

Beck RW, Bergenstal RM, Cheng P, et al. The Relationships Between Time in Range, Hyperglycemia Metrics, and HbA1c. J Diabetes Sci Technology. 2019; 13: 614-626.

Lu J, Ma X, Zhou J, et al. Association of Time in Range, as Assessed by Continuous Glucose Monitoring, With Diabetic Retinopathy in Type 2 Diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2018; 41: 2370-2376.

Danne T, Nimri R, Battelino T, et al. International Consensus on Use of Continuous Glucose Monitoring. Diabetes Care. 2017; 40: 1631–1640.

Petrie JR, Peters AL, Bergenstal RM, et al. Improving the Clinical Value and Utility of CGM Systems: Issues and Recommendations: A Joint Statement of the European Association for the Study of Diabetes and the American Diabetes Association Diabetes Technology Working Group. Diabetes Care. 2017; 40: 1614-1621.

Agiostratidou G, Anhalt H, Ball D, et al. Standardizing Clinically Meaningful Outcome Measures Beyond HbA1c for Type 1 Diabetes: A Consensus Report of the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists, the American Association of Diabetes Educators, the American Diabetes Association, the Endocrine Society, JDRF International, The Leona M. and Harry B. Helmsley Charitable Trust, the Pediatric Endocrine Society, and the T1D Exchange. Diabetes Care. 2017; 40: 1622–1630.

Battellino T, Danne T, Amiel SA et al. Clinical targets for continuous glucose monitoring data interpretation: recommendations from the International Consensus on Time in Range. Diabetes Care 2019; 42: 1593-1603.

American Diabetes Association. Glycemic Targets: Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes—2019. Diabetes Care. 2019; 42:S61–70.

Diabetes Control and Complications Trial Research Group, Nathan DM, Genuth S, Lachin J, et al. The Effect of Intensive Treatment of Diabetes on the Development and Progression of Long-Term Complications in Insulin-Dependent Diabetes Mellitus. New Engl J Medicine. 1993; 329:977–986.

Stratton IM, Adler AI, Neil AH, et al. Association of glycaemia with macrovascular and microvascular complications of type 2 diabetes (UKPDS 35): prospective observational study. BMJ. 2000; 321:405-412.

Holman RR, Paul SK, Bethel AM, Matthews DR, Neil AW. 10-Year Follow-up of Intensive Glucose Control in Type 2 Diabetes. New Engl J Medicine. 2008; 359:1577–1589.

Ceriello A, Monnier L, Owens D. Glycaemic variability in diabetes: clinical and therapeutic implications. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2018; 7:221-230.



  • There are currently no refbacks.

The Journal of the Association of British Clinical Diabetologists