Effectiveness of artificial pancreas in the non-adult population: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

Hybrid closed-loop therapy: Where are we in 2021?

Hybrid closed-loop systems are characterized by the coexistence of algorithm-driven automated insulin delivery combined with manual mealtime boluses. Used correctly, these insulin delivery systems offer better glucose control and reduced risk of hypoglycaemia and represent the most advanced form of insulin delivery available for people with type 1 diabetes. The aim of this paper was to compare the currently available commercial hybrid closed-loop systems in the UK: the Medtronic 670G/780G, Tandem t:slim X2 Control IQ and CamAPS FX systems. The Medtronic 670G/780G systems use Guardian 3 sensor (7-day use, two to four calibrations per day), while Tandem and CamAPS systems use the calibration-free Dexcom G6 sensor (10 days). The CamAPS system is available as an android app, whereas the other two systems have the algorithm embedded in the insulin pump. During pivotal studies, depending on the study population and baseline glycated haemoglobin level, these systems achieve a time spent in the target range 3.9 to 10 mmol/L (70 to 180 mg/dL) of 65% to 76% with low burden of hypoglycaemia. All three systems allow a higher glucose target for announced exercise, while the Tandem system offers an additional night-time tighter target. The CamAPS system offers fully customizable glucose targets and is the only system licensed for use during pregnancy. Additional education is required for both users and healthcare professionals to harness the best performance from these systems as well as to troubleshoot when "automode exits" occur. We provide consensus recommendations to develop pragmatic pathways to guide patients, clinicians and commissioners in making informed decisions on the appropriate use of the diabetes technology.

The Digital/Virtual Diabetes Clinic: The Future Is Now-Recommendations from an International Panel on Diabetes Digital Technologies Introduction

The increasing prevalence of diabetes, combined with a growing global shortage of health care professionals (HCP), necessitates the need to develop new approaches to diabetes care delivery to expand access to care, lessen the burden on people with diabetes, improve efficiencies, and reduce the unsustainable financial liability on health systems and payers. Use of digital diabetes technologies and telehealth protocols within a digital/virtual diabetes clinic has the potential to address these challenges. However, several issues must be resolved to move forward. In February 2020, organizers of the Advanced Technologies & Treatments for Diabetes Annual Conference convened an international panel of HCP, researchers, patient advocates, and industry representatives to review the status of digital diabetes technologies, characterize deficits in current technologies, and identify issues for consideration. Since that meeting, the importance of using telehealth and digital diabetes technologies has been demonstrated amid the global coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic. This article summarizes the panel's discussion of the opportunities, obstacles, and requisites for advancing the use of these technologies as a standard of care for the management of diabetes.

A Systematic Review of Collective Evidences Investigating the Effect of Diabetes Monitoring Systems and Their Application in Health Care

INTRODUCTION

Diabetes monitoring systems (DMS) are a possible approach for regular control of glucose levels in patients with Type 1 or 2 diabetes in order to improve therapeutic outcomes or to identify and modify inappropriate patient behaviors in a timely manner. Despite the significant number of studies observing the DMS, no collective evidence is available about the effect of all devices.

GOAL

To review and consolidate evidences from multiple systematic reviews on the diabetes monitoring systems and the outcomes achieved.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Internet-based search in PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane was performed to identify all studies relevant to the research question. The data regarding type of intervention, type of diabetes mellitus, type of study, change in clinical parameter(s), or another relevant outcome were extracted and summarized.

RESULTS

Thirty-three out of 1,495 initially identified studies, involving more than 44,100 patients with Type 1, Type 2, or gestational diabetes for real-time or retrospective Continuous Glucose Monitoring (CGMS), Sensor Augmented Pump Therapy (SAPT), Self-monitoring Blood Glucose (SMBG), Continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII), Flash Glucose Monitoring (FGM), Closed-loop systems and telemonitoring, were included. Most of the studies observed small nominal effectiveness of DMS. In total 11 systematic reviews and 15 meta-analyses, with most focusing on patients with Type 1 diabetes (10 and 6, respectively), reported a reduction in glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) levels from 0.17 to 0.70% after use of DMS.

CONCLUSION

Current systematic review of already published systematic reviews and meta-analyses suggests that no statistically significant difference exists between the values of HbA1c as a result of application of any type of DMS. The changes in HbA1c values, number and frequency of hypoglycemic episodes, and time in glucose range are the most valuable for assessing the appropriateness and effectiveness of DMS. Future more comprehensive studies assessing the effectiveness, cost-effectiveness, and comparative effectiveness of DMS are needed to stratify them for the most suitable diabetes patients' subgroups.

7. Diabetes Technology: Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes-2021

The American Diabetes Association (ADA) "Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes" includes the ADA's current clinical practice recommendations and is intended to provide the components of diabetes care, general treatment goals and guidelines, and tools to evaluate quality of care. Members of the ADA Professional Practice Committee, a multidisciplinary expert committee (https://doi.org/10.2337/dc21-SPPC), are responsible for updating the Standards of Care annually, or more frequently as warranted. For a detailed description of ADA standards, statements, and reports, as well as the evidence-grading system for ADA's clinical practice recommendations, please refer to the Standards of Care Introduction (https://doi.org/10.2337/dc21-SINT). Readers who wish to comment on the Standards of Care are invited to do so at professional.diabetes.org/SOC.

Continuous glucose monitoring: The achievement of 100 years of innovation in diabetes technology

Monitoring of glucose levels is essential to effective diabetes management. Over the past 100 years, there have been numerous innovations in glucose monitoring methods. The most recent advances have centered on continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) technologies. Numerous studies have demonstrated that use of continuous glucose monitoring confers significant glycemic benefits on individuals with type 1 diabetes (T1DM) and type 2 diabetes (T2DM). Ongoing improvements in accuracy and convenience of CGM devices have prompted increasing adoption of this technology. The development of standardized metrics for assessing CGM data has greatly improved and streamlined analysis and interpretation, enabling clinicians and patients to make more informed therapy modifications. However, many clinicians many be unfamiliar with current CGM and how use of these devices may help individuals with T1DM and T2DM achieve their glycemic targets. The purpose of this review is to present an overview of current CGM systems and provide guidance to clinicians for initiating and utilizing CGM in their practice settings.

Practical implementation of automated closed-loop insulin delivery: A French position statement

Automated closed-loop (CL) insulin therapy has come of age. This major technological advance is expected to significantly improve the quality of care for adults, adolescents and children with type 1 diabetes. To improve access to this innovation for both patients and healthcare professionals (HCPs), and to promote adherence to its requirements in terms of safety, regulations, ethics and practice, the French Diabetes Society (SFD) brought together a French Working Group of experts to discuss the current practical consensus. The result is the present statement describing the indications for CL therapy with emphasis on the idea that treatment expectations must be clearly defined in advance. Specifications for expert care centres in charge of initiating the treatment were also proposed. Great importance was also attached to the crucial place of high-quality training for patients and healthcare professionals. Long-term follow-up should collect not only metabolic and clinical results, but also indicators related to psychosocial and human factors. Overall, this national consensus statement aims to promote the introduction of marketed CL devices into standard clinical practice.

Glucagon for hypoglycaemia treatment in type 1 diabetes

To achieve strict glycaemic control and avoid chronic diabetes complications, individuals with type 1 diabetes (T1D) are recommended to follow an intensive insulin regimen. However, the risk and fear of hypoglycaemia often prevent individuals from achieving the treatment goals. Apart from early insulin suspension in insulin pump users, carbohydrate ingestion is the only option for preventing and treating non-severe hypoglycaemic events. These rescue treatments may give extra calories and cause overweight. As an alternative, the use of low-dose glucagon to counter hypoglycaemia has been proposed as a tool to raise glucose concentrations without adding extra calories. Previously, the commercially available glucagon formulations required reconstitution from powder to a solution before being injected subcutaneously or intramuscularly-making it practical only for treating severe hypoglycaemia. Several companies have developed more stable formulations that do not require the time-consuming reconstitution process before use. As well as treating severe hypoglycaemia, non-severe and impending hypoglycaemia can also be treated with lower doses of glucagon. Once available, low-dose glucagon can be either delivered manually, as an injection, or automatically, by an infusion pump. This review focuses on the role and perspectives of using glucagon to treat and prevent hypoglycaemia in T1D.

Nutrition habits of children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes changed in a 10 years span

BACKGROUND

Diet plays a key role in the treatment of type 1 diabetes (T1D). Dietary habits changed rapidly in the last decades and few data are available on recent dietary changes in children and adolescents with T1D.

OBJECTIVE

To test the hypothesis that diet composition changed in a 10-year period in children and adolescents with T1D.

METHODS

Two hundred and twenty-nine T1D subjects (M/F:121/108) aged 6 to 16 years were recruited: 114 (group A) enrolled in 2009, not using CGM and/or CSII, and 115 (group B) enrolled in 2019. Anthropometric biochemical (HbA1c, lipid profile), diet, and insulin therapy parameters were compared between the two groups. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed with HbA1c as dependent variable (HbA1c > 58 mmol/mol = 1) and nutritional variables and technology use as independent ones.

RESULTS

Energy intake of group A was not statistically different from that of group B. Group B had a significantly (P < 0.001) higher protein and lipids intake and lower total carbohydrate and fiber intake than group A. HbA1c was significantly (P < 0.01) lower in group B than in group A. Logistic regression analysis showed that MUFA (OR 0.83, 95%CI:0.693-0.998), fiber intake (OR 0.82, 95%CI:0.699-0.0969), and technology use (OR 0.15, 95%CI:0.031-0.685), adjusted for age, gender, BMI, energy intake and diabetes duration, were associated with a HbA1c higher than 58 mmol/mol) (R² = 0.27, P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

In a 10-year period, diet composition of children and adolescents with T1D changed and glucometabolic control improved. Fiber and MUFA intake showed a positive effect on HbA1c, independent from technology use, supporting the importance of educating children with T1D and families to maintain healthy eating habits.

Intraperitoneal and subcutaneous glucagon delivery in anaesthetized pigs: effects on circulating glucagon and glucose levels

Glucagon is a pancreatic hormone and increases the blood glucose levels. It may be incorporated in a dual hormone artificial pancreas, a device to automatically and continuously control blood glucose levels of individuals with diabetes. Artificial pancreas systems have been developed for use in the subcutaneous tissue; however, the systems are not fully automated due to slow dynamics. The intraperitoneal space is therefore investigated as an alternative location for an artificial pancreas. Glucose dynamics after subcutaneous and intraperitoneal glucagon delivery in ten anaesthetized pigs were investigated. The pigs received intraperitoneal boluses of 0.3 µg/kg and 0.6 µg/kg and a subcutaneous bolus of 0.6 µg/kg in randomized order. They also received an intraperitoneal bolus of 1 mg given at the end of the experiments to test the remaining capacity of rapid glucose release. Six pigs were included in the statistical analysis. The intraperitoneal glucagon bolus of 0.6 µg/kg gave a significantly higher glucose response from 14 to 30 min compared with the subcutaneous bolus. The results indicate that glucagon induces a larger glucose response after intraperitoneal delivery compared with subcutaneous delivery and is encouraging for the incorporation of glucagon in an intraperitoneal artificial pancreas.

Diabetic ketoacidosis

Diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) is the most common acute hyperglycaemic emergency in people with diabetes mellitus. A diagnosis of DKA is confirmed when all of the three criteria are present - 'D', either elevated blood glucose levels or a family history of diabetes mellitus; 'K', the presence of high urinary or blood ketoacids; and 'A', a high anion gap metabolic acidosis. Early diagnosis and management are paramount to improve patient outcomes. The mainstays of treatment include restoration of circulating volume, insulin therapy, electrolyte replacement and treatment of any underlying precipitating event. Without optimal treatment, DKA remains a condition with appreciable, although largely preventable, morbidity and mortality. In this Primer, we discuss the epidemiology, pathogenesis, risk factors and diagnosis of DKA and provide practical recommendations for the management of DKA in adults and children.

The Evolving Treatment of Diabetic Retinopathy

Purpose

To review the current therapeutic options for the management of diabetic retinopathy (DR) and diabetic macular edema (DME) and examine the evidence for integration of laser and pharmacotherapy.

Methods

A review of the PubMed database was performed using the search terms diabetic retinopathy, diabetic macular edema, neovascularization, laser photocoagulation, intravitreal injection, vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), vitrectomy, pars plana vitreous surgery, antiangiogenic therapy. With additional cross-referencing, this yielded 835 publications of which 301 were selected based on content and relevance.

Results

Many recent studies have evaluated the pharmacological, laser and surgical therapeutic strategies for the treatment and prevention of DR and DME. Several newer diagnostic systems such as optical coherence tomography (OCT), microperimetry, and multifocal electroretinography (mfERG) are also assisting in further refinements in the staging and classification of DR and DME. Pharmacological therapies for both DR and DME include both systemic and ocular agents. Systemic agents that promote intensive glycemic control, control of dyslipidemia and antagonists of the renin-angiotensin system demonstrate beneficial effects for both DR and DME. Ocular therapies include anti-VEGF agents, corticosteroids and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. Laser therapy, both as panretinal and focal or grid applications continue to be employed in management of DR and DME. Refinements in laser devices have yielded more tissue-sparing (subthreshold) modes in which many of the benefits of conventional continuous wave (CW) lasers can be obtained without the adverse side effects. Recent attempts to lessen the burden of anti-VEGF injections by integrating laser therapy have met with mixed results. Increasingly, vitreoretinal surgical techniques are employed for less advanced stages of DR and DME. The development and use of smaller gauge instrumentation and advanced anesthesia agents have been associated with a trend toward earlier surgical intervention for diabetic retinopathy. Several novel drug delivery strategies are currently being examined with the goal of decreasing the therapeutic burden of monthly intravitreal injections. These fall into one of the five categories: non-biodegradable polymeric drug delivery systems, biodegradable polymeric drug delivery systems, nanoparticle-based drug delivery systems, ocular injection devices and with sustained release refillable devices. At present, there remains no one single strategy for the management of the particular stages of DR and DME as there are many options that have not been rigorously tested through large, randomized, controlled clinical trials.

Conclusion

Pharmacotherapy, both ocular and systemic, will be the primary mode of intervention in the management of DR and DME in many cases when cost and treatment burden are less constrained. Conventional laser therapy has become a secondary intervention in these instances, but remains a first-line option when cost and treatment burden are more constrained. Results with subthreshold laser appear promising but will require more rigorous study to establish its role as adjunctive therapy. Evidence to support an optimal integration of the various treatment options is lacking. Central to the widespread adoption of any therapeutic regimen for DR and DME is substantiation of safety, efficacy, and cost-effectiveness by a body of sound clinical trials.

Evening and overnight closed-loop control versus 24/7 continuous closed-loop control for type 1 diabetes: a randomised crossover trial

Background

Automated closed-loop control (CLC), known as the "artificial pancreas" is emerging as a treatment option for Type 1 Diabetes (T1D), generally superior to sensor-augmented insulin pump (SAP) treatment. It is postulated that evening-night (E-N) CLC may account for most of the benefits of 24-7 CLC; however, a direct comparison has not been done.

Methods

In this trial (NCT02679287), adults with T1D were randomised 1:1 to two groups, which followed different sequences of four 8-week sessions, resulting in two crossover designs comparing SAP vs E-N CLC and E-N CLC vs 24-7 CLC, respectively. Eligibility: T1D for at least 1 year, using an insulin pump for at least six months, ages 18 years or older. Primary hypothesis: E-N CLC compared to SAP will decrease percent time <70mg/dL (3.9mmol/L) measured by continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) without deterioration in HbA1c. Secondary Hypotheses: 24-7 CLC compared to SAP will increase CGM-measured time in target range (TIR, 70-180mg/dL; 3.9-10mmol/L) and will reduce glucose variability during the day.

Findings

Ninety-three participants were randomised and 80 were included in the analysis, ages 18-69 years; HbA1c levels 5.4-10.6%; 66% female. Compared to SAP, E-N CLC reduced overall time <70mg/dL from 4.0% to 2.2% () resulting in an absolute difference of 1.8% (95%CI: 1.2-2.4%), p<0.0001. This was accompanied by overall reduction in HbA1c from 7.4% at baseline to 7.1% at the end of study, resulting in an absolute difference of 0.3% (95% CI: 0.1-0.4%), p<0.0001. There were 5 severe hypoglycaemia adverse events attributed to user-directed boluses without malfunction of the investigational device, and no diabetic ketoacidosis events.

Interpretation

In type 1 diabetes, evening-night closed-loop control was superior to sensor-augmented pump therapy, achieving most of the glycaemic benefits of 24-7 closed-loop.

7. Diabetes Technology: Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes-2020

The American Diabetes Association (ADA) "Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes" includes the ADA's current clinical practice recommendations and is intended to provide the components of diabetes care, general treatment goals and guidelines, and tools to evaluate quality of care. Members of the ADA Professional Practice Committee, a multidisciplinary expert committee (https://doi.org/10.2337/dc20-SPPC), are responsible for updating the Standards of Care annually, or more frequently as warranted. For a detailed description of ADA standards, statements, and reports, as well as the evidence-grading system for ADA's clinical practice recommendations, please refer to the Standards of Care Introduction (https://doi.org/10.2337/dc20-SINT). Readers who wish to comment on the Standards of Care are invited to do so at professional.diabetes.org/SOC.

Six-Month Randomized, Multicenter Trial of Closed-Loop Control in Type 1 Diabetes

BACKGROUND

Closed-loop systems that automate insulin delivery may improve glycemic outcomes in patients with type 1 diabetes.

METHODS

In this 6-month randomized, multicenter trial, patients with type 1 diabetes were assigned in a 2:1 ratio to receive treatment with a closed-loop system (closed-loop group) or a sensor-augmented pump (control group). The primary outcome was the percentage of time that the blood glucose level was within the target range of 70 to 180 mg per deciliter (3.9 to 10.0 mmol per liter), as measured by continuous glucose monitoring.

RESULTS

A total of 168 patients underwent randomization; 112 were assigned to the closed-loop group, and 56 were assigned to the control group. The age range of the patients was 14 to 71 years, and the glycated hemoglobin level ranged from 5.4 to 10.6%. All 168 patients completed the trial. The mean (±SD) percentage of time that the glucose level was within the target range increased in the closed-loop group from 61±17% at baseline to 71±12% during the 6 months and remained unchanged at 59±14% in the control group (mean adjusted difference, 11 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], 9 to 14; P<0.001). The results with regard to the main secondary outcomes (percentage of time that the glucose level was >180 mg per deciliter, mean glucose level, glycated hemoglobin level, and percentage of time that the glucose level was <70 mg per deciliter or <54 mg per deciliter [3.0 mmol per liter]) all met the prespecified hierarchical criterion for significance, favoring the closed-loop system. The mean difference (closed loop minus control) in the percentage of time that the blood glucose level was lower than 70 mg per deciliter was -0.88 percentage points (95% CI, -1.19 to -0.57; P<0.001). The mean adjusted difference in glycated hemoglobin level after 6 months was -0.33 percentage points (95% CI, -0.53 to -0.13; P = 0.001). In the closed-loop group, the median percentage of time that the system was in closed-loop mode was 90% over 6 months. No serious hypoglycemic events occurred in either group; one episode of diabetic ketoacidosis occurred in the closed-loop group.

CONCLUSIONS

In this 6-month trial involving patients with type 1 diabetes, the use of a closed-loop system was associated with a greater percentage of time spent in a target glycemic range than the use of a sensor-augmented insulin pump. (Funded by the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases; iDCL ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03563313.).

Neuromodulation of metabolic functions: from pharmaceuticals to bioelectronics to biocircuits

Neuromodulation of central and peripheral neural circuitry brings together neurobiologists and neural engineers to develop advanced neural interfaces to decode and recapitulate the information encoded in the nervous system. Dysfunctional neuronal networks contribute not only to the pathophysiology of neurological diseases, but also to numerous metabolic disorders. Many regions of the central nervous system (CNS), especially within the hypothalamus, regulate metabolism. Recent evidence has linked obesity and diabetes to hyperactive or dysregulated autonomic nervous system (ANS) activity. Neural regulation of metabolic functions provides access to control pathology through neuromodulation. Metabolism is defined as cellular events that involve catabolic and/or anabolic processes, including control of systemic metabolic functions, as well as cellular signaling pathways, such as cytokine release by immune cells. Therefore, neuromodulation to control metabolic functions can be used to target metabolic diseases, such as diabetes and chronic inflammatory diseases. Better understanding of neurometabolic circuitry will allow for targeted stimulation to modulate metabolic functions. Within the broad category of metabolic functions, cellular signaling, including the production and release of cytokines and other immunological processes, is regulated by both the CNS and ANS. Neural innervations of metabolic (e.g. pancreas) and immunologic (e.g. spleen) organs have been understood for over a century, however, it is only now becoming possible to decode the neuronal information to enable exogenous controls of these systems. Future interventions taking advantage of this progress will enable scientists, engineering and medical doctors to more effectively treat metabolic diseases.

A Century of Diabetes Technology: Signals, Models, and Artificial Pancreas Control

Arguably, diabetes mellitus is one of the best-quantified human conditions: elaborate in silico models describe the action of the human metabolic system; real-time signals such as continuous glucose monitoring are readily available; insulin delivery is being automated; and control algorithms are capable of optimizing blood glucose fluctuation in patients' natural environments. The transition of the artificial pancreas (AP) to everyday clinical use is happening now, and is contingent upon seamless concerted work of devices encompassing the patient in a digital treatment ecosystem. This review recounts briefly the story of diabetes technology, which began a century ago with the discovery of insulin, progressed through glucose monitoring and subcutaneous insulin delivery, and is now rapidly advancing towards fully automated clinically viable AP systems.

Surgical options for glycaemic control in Type 1 diabetes

In recent years, bariatric surgery, also referred to as metabolic surgery, has become the most successful treatment option in those with Type 2 diabetes and obesity. There are some similarities in the pathological pathways in Type 1 and Type 2 diabetes, but the use of surgery in Type 1 diabetes remains unestablished and controversial. The treatment and management of Type 1 diabetes can be very challenging but recent advances in surgical interventions and technology has the potential to expand and optimize treatment options. This review discusses the current status of some surgical options available to people with Type 1 diabetes. These include implantable continuous glucose monitoring systems, continuous intraperitoneal insulin infusion pumps, closed-loop insulin delivery systems (also known as the artificial pancreas system) utilizing the latter two modalities of glucose monitoring and insulin delivery, and bariatric or metabolic surgery. Whole pancreas and islet transplantation are beyond the scope of this review but are briefly discussed.