Day-and-Night Hybrid Closed-Loop Insulin Delivery in Adolescents With Type 1 Diabetes: A Free-Living, Randomized Clinical Trial

Closed-loop insulin delivery: current status of diabetes technologies and future prospects

INTRODUCTION

Type 1 diabetes is characterised by destruction of pancreatic beta cells, leading to insulin deficiency and hyperglycaemia. The mainstay of treatment remains lifelong insulin therapy as a sustainable cure has as yet proven elusive. The burden of daily management of type 1 diabetes has contributed to suboptimal outcomes for people living with the condition. Innovative technological approaches have been shown to improve glycaemic and patient-related outcomes.

AREAS COVERED

We discuss recent advances in technologies in type 1 diabetes including closed-loop systems, also known as the 'artificial pancreas. Its various components, technical aspects and limitations are reviewed. We also discuss its advent into clinical practice, and other systems in development. Evidence from clinical studies are summarised.

EXPERT COMMENTARY

The recent approval of a hybrid closed-loop system for clinical use highlights the significant progress made in this field. Results from clinical studies have shown safety and glycaemic benefit, however challenges remain around improving performance and acceptability. More data is required to establish long-term clinical efficacy and cost-effectiveness, to fulfil the expectations of people with type 1 diabetes.

Efficacy and safety of the artificial pancreas in the paediatric population with type 1 diabetes

BACKGROUND

Type 1 diabetes (DM1) is one of the most common chronic diseases in childhood and requires life-long insulin therapy and continuous health care support. An artificial pancreas (AP) or closed-loop system (CLS) have been developed with the aim of improving metabolic control without increasing the risk of hypoglycaemia in patients with DM1. As the impact of APs have been studied mainly in adults, the aim of this review is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the AP in the paediatric population with DM1.

MAIN BODY

The real advantage of a CLS compared to last-generation sensor-augmented pumps is the gradual modulation of basal insulin infusion in response to glycaemic variations (towards both hyperglycaemia and hypoglycaemia), which has the aim of improving the proportion of time spent in the target glucose range and reducing the mean glucose level without increasing the risk of hypoglycaemia. Some recent studies demonstrated that also in children and adolescents an AP is able to reduce the frequency of hypoglycaemic events, an important limiting factor in reaching good metabolic control, particularly overnight. However, the advantages of the AP in reducing hyperglycaemia, increasing the time spent in the target glycaemic range and thus reducing glycated haemoglobin are less clear and require more clinical trials in the paediatric population, in particular in younger children.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the first results from bi-hormonal CLS are promising, long-term, head-to-head studies will have to prove their superiority over insulin-only approaches. More technological progress, the availability of more fast-acting insulin, further developments of algorithms that could improve glycaemic control after meals and physical activity are the most important challenges in reaching an optimal metabolic control with the use of the AP in children and adolescents.

Artificial pancreas treatment for outpatients with type 1 diabetes: systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of artificial pancreas treatment in non-pregnant outpatients with type 1 diabetes.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.

DATA SOURCES

Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, and grey literature up to 2 February 2018.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES

Randomised controlled trials in non-pregnant outpatients with type 1 diabetes that compared the use of any artificial pancreas system with any type of insulin based treatment. Primary outcome was proportion (%) of time that sensor glucose level was within the near normoglycaemic range (3.9-10 mmol/L). Secondary outcomes included proportion (%) of time that sensor glucose level was above 10 mmol/L or below 3.9 mmol/L, low blood glucose index overnight, mean sensor glucose level, total daily insulin needs, and glycated haemoglobin. The Cochrane Collaboration risk of bias tool was used to assess study quality.

RESULTS

40 studies (1027 participants with data for 44 comparisons) were included in the meta-analysis. 35 comparisons assessed a single hormone artificial pancreas system, whereas nine comparisons assessed a dual hormone system. Only nine studies were at low risk of bias. Proportion of time in the near normoglycaemic range (3.9-10.0 mmol/L) was significantly higher with artificial pancreas use, both overnight (weighted mean difference 15.15%, 95% confidence interval 12.21% to 18.09%) and over a 24 hour period (9.62%, 7.54% to 11.7%). Artificial pancreas systems had a favourable effect on the proportion of time with sensor glucose level above 10 mmol/L (-8.52%, -11.14% to -5.9%) or below 3.9 mmol/L (-1.49%, -1.86% to -1.11%) over 24 hours, compared with control treatment. Robustness of findings for the primary outcome was verified in sensitivity analyses, by including only trials at low risk of bias (11.64%, 9.1% to 14.18%) or trials under unsupervised, normal living conditions (10.42%, 8.63% to 12.2%). Results were consistent in a subgroup analysis both for single hormone and dual hormone artificial pancreas systems.

CONCLUSIONS

Artificial pancreas systems are an efficacious and safe approach for treating outpatients with type 1 diabetes. The main limitations of current research evidence on artificial pancreas systems are related to inconsistency in outcome reporting, small sample size, and short follow-up duration of individual trials.

Optimizing Hybrid Closed-Loop Therapy in Adolescents and Emerging Adults Using the MiniMed 670G System

OBJECTIVE

The MiniMed 670G System is the first commercial hybrid closed-loop (HCL) system for management of type 1 diabetes. Using data from adolescent and young adult participants, we compared insulin delivery patterns and time-in-range metrics in HCL (Auto Mode) and open loop (OL). System alerts, usage profiles, and operational parameters were examined to provide suggestions for optimal clinical use of the system.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

Data from 31 adolescent and young adult participants (14-26 years old) at three clinical sites in the 670G pivotal trial were analyzed. Participants had a 2-week run-in period in OL, followed by a 3-month in-home study phase with HCL functionality enabled. Data were compared between baseline OL and HCL use after 1 week, 1 month, 2 months, and 3 months.

RESULTS

Carbohydrate-to-insulin (C-to-I) ratios were more aggressive for all meals with HCL compared with baseline OL. Total daily insulin dose and basal-to-bolus ratio did not change during the trial. Time in range increased 14% with use of Auto Mode after 3 months (P < 0.001), and HbA_1c decreased 0.75%. Auto Mode exits were primarily due to sensor/insulin delivery alerts and hyperglycemia. The percentage of time in Auto Mode gradually declined from 87%, with a final use rate of 72% (-15%).

CONCLUSIONS

In transitioning young patients to the 670G system, providers should anticipate immediate C-to-I ratio adjustments while also assessing active insulin time. Users should anticipate occasional Auto Mode exits, which can be reduced by following system instructions and reliably bolusing for meals. Unique 670G system functionality requires ongoing clinical guidance and education from providers.

An investigation into closed-loop treatment of neurological disorders based on sensing mitochondrial dysfunction

Dynamic feedback based closed-loop medical devices offer a number of advantages for treatment of heterogeneous neurological conditions. Closed-loop devices integrate a level of neurobiological feedback, which allows for real-time adjustments to be made with the overarching aim of improving treatment efficacy and minimizing risks for adverse events. One target which has not been extensively explored as a potential feedback component in closed-loop therapies is mitochondrial function. Several neurodegenerative and psychiatric disorders including Parkinson's disease, Major Depressive disorder and Bipolar disorder have been linked to perturbations in the mitochondrial respiratory chain. This paper investigates the potential to monitor this mitochondrial function as a method of feedback for closed-loop neuromodulation treatments. A generic model of the closed-loop treatment is developed to describe the high-level functions of any system designed to control neural function based on mitochondrial response to stimulation, simplifying comparison and future meta-analysis. This model has four key functional components including: a sensor, signal manipulator, controller and effector. Each of these components are described and several potential technologies for each are investigated. While some of these candidate technologies are quite mature, there are still technological gaps remaining. The field of closed-loop medical devices is rapidly evolving, and whilst there is a lot of interest in this area, widespread adoption has not yet been achieved due to several remaining technological hurdles. However, the significant therapeutic benefits offered by this technology mean that this will be an active area for research for years to come.

The Effect of Prior Continuous Glucose Monitoring Use on Glycemic Outcomes in the Pivotal Trial of the MiniMed™ 670G Hybrid Closed-Loop System

A 3-month pivotal trial using the MiniMed™ 670G hybrid closed-loop (HCL) system in adolescent and adult patients with type 1 diabetes (T1D), relative to a 2-week baseline run-in period, resulted in increased sensor glucose (SG) values in target range (71-180 mg/dL), reduced HbA1c levels, and no events of diabetic ketoacidosis or severe hypoglycemia ( Clinicaltrials.gov : NCT02463097). This brief report evaluated how prior continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) experience influenced glycemic outcomes, in the same pivotal trial. HbA1c levels and the percentage of SG values in low, high, and in-target ranges were analyzed from participants (n = 124) completing the Hybrid Closed-Loop Pivotal Trial in T1D. There were 78 individuals comprising the prior CGM group and 46 comprising the no prior CGM group. Compared to baseline, HbA1c was reduced from 7.4% ± 0.9% to 6.9% ± 0.7% for the prior CGM group and from 7.5% ± 0.9% to 6.8% ± 0.5% for the no prior CGM group. For those with prior CGM experience, the mean percentage of in-target SG values increased from 66.9% ± 12.5% to 72.6% ± 9.1%, and for those with no prior CGM experience it increased from 66.6% ± 11.7% to 71.5% ± 8.5%. Similar improvement in glucose values in the low and high ranges, relative to baseline, was observed for both groups. Resulting outcomes, from baseline to study end, did not differ between each group. These findings suggest that individuals without prior CGM experience, and those already using CGM, will benefit similarly with use of the FDA-approved MiniMed 670G HCL system therapy.

Evolving Mechanistic Views and Emerging Therapeutic Strategies for Cystic Fibrosis-Related Diabetes

Diabetes is a common and important complication of cystic fibrosis, an autosomal recessive genetic disease due to mutations in the cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator (CFTR) gene. Cystic fibrosis-related diabetes (CFRD) is associated with profound detrimental effects on the disease course and mortality and is expected to increase in prevalence as the survival of patients with cystic fibrosis continues to improve. Despite progress in the functional characterization of CFTR molecular defects, the mechanistic basis of CFRD is not well understood, in part because of the relative inaccessibility of the pancreatic tissue and the limited availability of representative animal models. This review presents a concise overview of the current understanding of CFRD pathogenesis and provides a cutting-edge update on novel findings from human and animal studies. Potential contributions from paracrine mechanisms and β-cell compensatory mechanisms are highlighted, as well as functional β-cell and α-cell defects, incretin defects, exocrine pancreatic insufficiency, and loss of islet cell mass. State-of-the-art and emerging treatment options are explored, including advances in insulin administration, CFTR modulators, cell replacement, gene replacement, and gene editing therapies.

Keeping Up with the Diabetes Technology: 2016 Endocrine Society Guidelines of Insulin Pump Therapy and Continuous Glucose Monitor Management of Diabetes

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Decades after the invention of insulin pump, diabetes management has encountered a technology revolution with the introduction of continuous glucose monitoring, sensor-augmented insulin pump therapy and closed-loop/artificial pancreas systems. In this review, we discuss the significance of the 2016 Endocrine Society Guidelines for insulin pump therapy and continuous glucose monitoring and summarize findings from relevant diabetes technology studies that were conducted after the publication of the 2016 Endocrine Society Guidelines.

RECENT FINDINGS

The 2016 Endocrine Society Guidelines have been a great resource for clinicians managing diabetes in this new era of diabetes technology. There is good body of evidence indicating that using diabetes technology systems safely tightens glycemic control while managing both type 1 and type 2 diabetes. The first-generation diabetes technology systems will evolve as we gain more experience and collaboratively work to improve them with an ultimate goal of keeping people with diabetes complication and burden-free until the cure for diabetes becomes a reality.

Insulin delivery and nocturnal glucose control in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes

Introduction: Nocturnal glucose control remains challenging in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes due to highly variable overnight insulin requirements. The issue may be addressed by glucose responsive insulin delivery based on real-time continuous glucose measurements.

Areas covered: This review outlines recent developments of glucose responsive insulin delivery systems from a paediatric perspective. We cover threshold-based suspend application, predictive low glucose suspend, and more advanced single hormone and dual-hormone closed-loop systems. Approaches are evaluated in relation to nocturnal glucose control particularly during outpatient randomised controlled trials.

Expert opinion: Significant progress translating research from controlled clinical centre settings to free-living unsupervised home studies have been achieved over the past decade. Nocturnal glycaemic control can be improved whilst reducing the risk of hypoglycaemia with closed-loop systems. Following the US regulatory approval of the first hybrid closed-loop system in non-paediatric population, large multinational closed-loop clinical trials and pivotal studies including paediatric populations are underway or in preparation to facilitate the use of closed-loop systems in clinical practice.

Pharmacotherapy options for pediatric diabetes

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Type 1 diabetes (T1D) and type 2 diabetes (T2D) are frequent conditions during childhood and adolescence. The present review offers an update on current available treatment strategies for T1D and T2D approved for use in children and adolescents.

RECENT FINDINGS

Insulin remains the main and essential therapeutic strategy in youth with T1D. A second generation of insulin analogues is being evaluated and could help in improving glycemic control. Over the last decades advances in technology have allowed the implementation of insulin pump therapy and continuous glucose monitoring, and are now leading the way towards the development of an artificial pancreas or closed loop system.Treatment of T2D is based on lifestyle interventions and metformin as the first-line drug to be used. Little evidence is available for other oral hypoglycemic drugs, currently used in adults.

SUMMARY

Although much progress has been made in the field of diabetes management, there are still several unmet goals. One of the main issues is to develop a system allowing more physiological insulin coverage. For both T1D and T2D, there is a strong need of new drugs to be used alone or in combination, mainly in patients struggling to achieve good glycemic control.

Assessing the effectiveness of a 3-month day-and-night home closed-loop control combined with pump suspend feature compared with sensor-augmented pump therapy in youths and adults with suboptimally controlled type 1 diabetes: a randomised parallel study protocol

INTRODUCTION

Despite therapeutic advances, many individuals with type 1 diabetes are unable to achieve tight glycaemic target without increasing the risk of hypoglycaemia. The objective of this study is to determine the effectiveness of a 3-month day-and-night home closed-loop glucose control combined with a pump suspend feature, compared with sensor-augmented insulin pump therapy in youths and adults with suboptimally controlled type 1 diabetes.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The study adopts an open-label, multi-centre, multi-national (UK and USA), randomised, single-period, parallel design and aims for 84 randomised patients. Participants are youths (6-21 years) or adults (>21 years) with type 1 diabetes treated with insulin pump therapy and suboptimal glycaemic control (glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) ≥7.5% (58 mmol/mol) and ≤10% (86 mmol/mol)). Following a 4-week run-in period, eligible participants will be randomised to a 3-month use of automated closed-loop insulin delivery combined with pump suspend feature or to sensor-augmented insulin pump therapy. Analyses will be conducted on an intention-to-treat basis. The primary outcome is the time spent in the target glucose range from 3.9 to 10.0 mmol/L based on continuous glucose monitoring levels during the 3-month free-living phase. Secondary outcomes include HbA1c at 3 months, mean glucose, time spent below and above target; time with glucose levels <3.5 and <2.8 mmol/L; area under the curve when sensor glucose is <3.5 mmol/L, time with glucose levels >16.7 mmol/L, glucose variability; total, basal and bolus insulin dose and change in body weight. Participants' and their families' perception in terms of lifestyle change, daily diabetes management and fear of hypoglycaemia will be evaluated.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethics/institutional review board approval has been obtained. Before screening, all participants/guardians will be provided with oral and written information about the trial. The study will be disseminated by peer-reviewed publications and conference presentations.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT02523131; Pre-results.

Effect of artificial pancreas systems on glycaemic control in patients with type 1 diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis of outpatient randomised controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Closed-loop artificial pancreas systems have been in development for several years, including assessment in numerous varied outpatient clinical trials. We aimed to summarise the efficacy and safety of artificial pancreas systems in outpatient settings and explore the clinical and technical factors that can affect their performance.

METHODS

We did a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials comparing artificial pancreas systems (insulin only or insulin plus glucagon) with conventional pump therapy (continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion [CSII] with blinded continuous glucose monitoring [CGM] or unblinded sensor-augmented pump [SAP] therapy) in adults and children with type 1 diabetes. We searched Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for studies published from 1946, to Jan 1, 2017. We excluded studies not published in English, those involving pregnant women or participants who were in hospital, and those testing adjunct medications other than glucagon. The primary outcome was the mean difference in percentage of time blood glucose concentration remained in target range (3·9-10 mmol/L or 3·9-8 mmol/L, depending on the study), assessed by random-effects meta-analysis. This study is registered with PROSPERO, number 2015:CRD42015026854.

FINDINGS

We identified 984 reports; after exclusions, 27 comparisons from 24 studies (23 crossover and one parallel design) including a total of 585 participants (219 in adult studies, 265 in paediatric studies, and 101 in combined studies) were eligible for analysis. Five comparisons assessed dual-hormone (insulin and glucagon), two comparisons assessed both dual-hormone and single-hormone (insulin only), and 20 comparisons assessed single-hormone artificial pancreas systems. Time in target was 12·59% higher with artificial pancreas systems (95% CI 9·02-16·16; p<0·0001), from a weighted mean of 58·21% for conventional pump therapy (I²=84%). Dual-hormone artificial pancreas systems were associated with a greater improvement in time in target range compared with single-hormone systems (19·52% [95% CI 15·12-23·91] vs 11·06% [6·94 to 15·18]; p=0·006), although six of seven comparisons compared dual-hormone systems to CSII with blinded CGM, whereas 21 of 22 single-hormone comparisons had SAP as the comparator. Single-hormone studies had higher heterogeneity than dual-hormone studies (I² 79% vs 66%). Bias assessment characteristics were incompletely reported in 12 of 24 studies, no studies masked participants to the intervention assignment, and masking of outcome assessment was not done in 12 studies and was unclear in 12 studies.

INTERPRETATION

Artificial pancreas systems uniformly improved glucose control in outpatient settings, despite heterogeneous clinical and technical factors.

FUNDING

None.

Closed-Loop Control of Postprandial Glycemia Using an Insulin-on-Board Limitation Through Continuous Action on Glucose Target

BACKGROUND

Postprandial (PP) control remains a challenge for closed-loop (CL) systems. Few studies with inconsistent results have systematically investigated the PP period.

OBJECTIVE

To compare a new CL algorithm with current pump therapy (open loop [OL]) in the PP glucose control in type 1 diabetes (T1D) subjects.

METHODS

A crossover randomized study was performed in two centers. Twenty T1D subjects (F/M 13/7, age 40.7 ± 10.4 years, disease duration 22.6 ± 9.9 years, and A1c 7.8% ± 0.7%) underwent an 8-h mixed meal test on four occasions. In two (CL1/CL2), after meal announcement, a bolus was given followed by an algorithm-driven basal infusion based on continuous glucose monitoring (CGM). Alternatively, in OL1/OL2 conventional pump therapy was used. Main outcome measures were as follows: glucose variability, estimated with the coefficient of variation (CV) of the area under the curve (AUC) of plasma glucose (PG) and CGM values, and from the analysis of the glucose time series; mean, maximum (C_max), and time to C_max glucose concentrations and time in range (<70, 70-180, >180 mg/dL).

RESULTS

CVs of the glucose AUCs were low and similar in all studies (around 10%). However, CL achieved greater reproducibility and better PG control in the PP period: CL1 = CL2<OL1<OL2 (PG_mean 123 ± 47 and 125 ± 44 vs. 152 ± 53 and 159 ± 54 mg/dL) and C_max OL 217.1 ± 67.0 mg/dL versus CL 183.3 ± 63.9 mg/dL, P < 0.0001. Time-in-range was higher with CL versus OL (80% vs. 64%; P < 0.001). Neither the time below 70 mg/dL (CL 6.1% vs. OL 3.2%; P > 0.05) nor the need for oral glucose was significantly different (CL 40.0% vs. OL 22.5% of meals; P = 0.054).

CONCLUSIONS

This novel CL algorithm effectively and consistently controls PP glucose excursions without increasing hypoglycemia. Study registered at ClinicalTrials.gov : study number NCT02100488.

Continuous Glucose Monitoring: A Review of Recent Studies Demonstrating Improved Glycemic Outcomes

Continuous Glucose Monitoring (CGM) has been demonstrated to be clinically valuable, reducing risks of hypoglycemia and hyperglycemia, glycemic variability (GV), and improving patient quality of life for a wide range of patient populations and clinical indications. Use of CGM can help reduce HbA1c and mean glucose. One CGM device, with accuracy (%MARD) of approximately 10%, has recently been approved for self-adjustment of insulin dosages (nonadjuvant use) and approved for reimbursement for therapeutic use in the United States. CGM had previously been used off-label for that purpose. CGM has been demonstrated to be clinically useful in both type 1 and type 2 diabetes for patients receiving a wide variety of treatment regimens. CGM is beneficial for people using either multiple daily injections (MDI) or continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII). CGM is used both in retrospective (professional, masked) and real-time (personal, unmasked) modes: both approaches can be beneficial. When CGM is used to suspend insulin infusion when hypoglycemia is detected until glucose returns to a safe level (low-glucose suspend), there are benefits beyond sensor-augmented pump (SAP), with greater reduction in the risk of hypoglycemia. Predictive low-glucose suspend provides greater benefits in this regard. Closed-loop control with insulin provides further improvement in quality of glycemic control. A hybrid closed-loop system has recently been approved by the U.S. FDA. Closed-loop control using both insulin and glucagon can reduce risk of hypoglycemia even more. CGM facilitates rigorous evaluation of new forms of therapy, characterizing pharmacodynamics, assessing frequency and severity of hypo- and hyperglycemia, and characterizing several aspects of GV.

Safety of using real-time sensor glucose values for treatment decisions in adolescents with poorly controlled type 1 diabetes mellitus: a pilot study

BACKGROUND

This study explored the safety of using real-time sensor glucose (SG) data for treatment decisions in adolescents with poorly controlled type 1 diabetes.

METHODS

Ten adolescents with type 1 diabetes, HbA1c ≥9% on insulin pumps were admitted to the clinical research center and a continuous glucose sensor was inserted. Plasma glucose was measured at least hourly using Yellow Springs Instrument's (YSI) glucose analyzer. Starting at dinner, SG rather than YSI was used for treatment decisions unless YSI was <70 mg/dL (<3.9 mmol/L) or specific criteria indicating SG and YSI were very discordant were met. Participants were discharged after lunch the next day.

RESULTS

Ten participants (seven males; 15.2-17.8 year old) completed the study. The range of differences between high glucose correction doses using SG vs YSI for calculations was -2 (SG < YSI dose) to +1 (SG > YSI dose); this difference was two units in only 2 of 23 correction doses given (all SG < YSI dose). There were five episodes of mild hypoglycemia in two patients, two of which occurred after using SG for dose calculations. There was no severe hypoglycemia and no YSI glucose >350 mg/dL (19.4 mmol/L). Mean (±SE) pre- and postmeal YSI glucose were 163 ± 11 and 183 ± 12 mg/dL (9.1 ± 0.6 and 10.2 ± 0.7 mmol/L), respectively.

CONCLUSION

Use of real-time continuous glucose monitoring for treatment decisions was safe and did not result in significant over- or undertreatment. Use of SG for treatment decisions under supervised inpatient conditions is a suitable alternative to repeated fingerstick glucose monitoring. Outpatient studies using SG in real-time are needed.

Outpatient Closed-Loop Control with Unannounced Moderate Exercise in Adolescents Using Zone Model Predictive Control

BACKGROUND

The artificial pancreas (AP) has the potential to improve glycemic control in adolescents. This article presents the first evaluation in adolescents of the Zone Model Predictive Control and Health Monitoring System (ZMPC+HMS) AP algorithms, and their first evaluation in a supervised outpatient setting with frequent exercise.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Adolescents with type 1 diabetes underwent 3 days of closed-loop control (CLC) in a hotel setting with the ZMPC+HMS algorithms on the Diabetes Assistant platform. Subjects engaged in twice-daily exercise, including soccer, tennis, and bicycling. Meal size (unrestricted) was estimated and entered into the system by subjects to trigger a bolus, but exercise was not announced.

RESULTS

Ten adolescents (11.9-17.7 years) completed 72 h of CLC, with data on 95 ± 14 h of sensor-augmented pump (SAP) therapy before CLC as a comparison to usual therapy. The percentage of time with continuous glucose monitor (CGM) 70-180 mg/dL was 71% ± 10% during CLC, compared to 57% ± 16% during SAP (P = 0.012). Nocturnal control during CLC was safe, with 0% (0%, 0.6%) of time with CGM <70 mg/dL compared to 1.1% (0.0%, 14%) during SAP. Despite large meals (estimated up to 120 g carbohydrate), only 8.0% ± 6.9% of time during CLC was spent with CGM >250 mg/dL (16% ± 14% during SAP). The system remained connected in CLC for 97% ± 2% of the total study time. No adverse events or severe hypoglycemia occurred.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of the ZMPC+HMS algorithms is feasible in the adolescent outpatient environment and achieved significantly more time in the desired glycemic range than SAP in the face of unannounced exercise and large announced meal challenges.

Event-Triggered Model Predictive Control for Embedded Artificial Pancreas Systems

OBJECTIVE

The development of artificial pancreas (AP) technology for deployment in low-energy, embedded devices is contingent upon selecting an efficient control algorithm for regulating glucose in people with type 1 diabetes mellitus. In this paper, we aim to lower the energy consumption of the AP by reducing controller updates, that is, the number of times the decision-making algorithm is invoked to compute an appropriate insulin dose.

METHODS

Physiological insights into glucose management are leveraged to design an event-triggered model predictive controller (MPC) that operates efficiently, without compromising patient safety. The proposed event-triggered MPC is deployed on a wearable platform. Its robustness to latent hypoglycemia, model mismatch, and meal misinformation is tested, with and without meal announcement, on the full version of the US-FDA accepted UVA/Padova metabolic simulator.

RESULTS

The event-based controller remains on for 18 h of 41 h in closed loop with unannounced meals, while maintaining glucose in 70-180 mg/dL for 25 h, compared to 27 h for a standard MPC controller. With meal announcement, the time in 70-180 mg/dL is almost identical, with the controller operating a mere 25.88% of the time in comparison with a standard MPC.

CONCLUSION

A novel control architecture for AP systems enables safe glycemic regulation with reduced processor computations.

SIGNIFICANCE

Our proposed framework integrated seamlessly with a wide variety of popular MPC variants reported in AP research, customizes tradeoff between glycemic regulation and efficacy according to prior design specifications, and eliminates judicious prior selection of controller sampling times.

Sensor Life and Overnight Closed Loop: A Randomized Clinical Trial

BACKGROUND

Closed-loop (CL) systems direct insulin delivery based on continuous glucose monitor (CGM) sensor values. CGM accuracy varies with sensor life, being least accurate on day 1 of sensor insertion. We evaluated the effect of sensor life (enhanced Enlite, Medtronic MiniMed, Northridge, CA) on overnight CL.

METHODS

In an open-label, randomized, 2-period, inpatient crossover pilot study, 12 adolescents on insulin pump (age 16.7 ± 1.9 years; HbA1c 66 ± 10 mmol/mol) attended a clinical research facility on 2 overnight occasions. In random order, participants received CL on day 1 or on day 3-4 after sensor insertion. During both periods, glucose was automatically controlled by a model predictive control algorithm informed by sensor glucose. Plasma glucose was measured every 30 to 60 min.

RESULTS

During overnight CL (22:30 to 07:30), the proportion of time with plasma glucose readings in the target range (3.9-8.0 mmol/l, primary endpoint) when initiated on day 1 of sensor insertion vs day 3-4 were comparable (58 ± 32% day 1 vs 56 ± 36% day 3-4; P = .34), and there were no significant differences between interventions in terms of mean plasma glucose ( P = .26), percentage time above 8.0 mmol/l ( P = .49), and time spent below 3.9 mmol/l ( P = .93). Sensor accuracy varied with sensor life (mean absolute relative difference 19.8 ± 15.0% on day 1 and 13.7 ± 10.2% on day 3 to 4). Sensor glucose tended to under-read plasma glucose inflating benefits of CL on glucose control.

CONCLUSIONS

In spite of differences in sensor accuracy, overnight CL glucose control informed by sensor glucose on day 1 or day 3-4 after sensor insertion was comparable. The model predictive controller appears to mitigate against sensor inaccuracies.

Basal Glucose Can Be Controlled, but the Prandial Problem Persists-It's the Next Target!

Both basal and postprandial elevations contribute to the hyperglycemic exposure of diabetes, but current therapies are mainly effective in controlling the basal component. Inability to control postprandial hyperglycemia limits success in maintaining overall glycemic control beyond the first 5 to 10 years after diagnosis, and it is also related to the weight gain that is common during insulin therapy. The "prandial problem"-comprising abnormalities of glucose and other metabolites, weight gain, and risk of hypoglycemia-deserves more attention. Several approaches to prandial abnormalities have recently been studied, but the patient populations for which they are best suited and the best ways of using them remain incompletely defined. Encouragingly, several proof-of-concept studies suggest that short-acting glucagon-like peptide 1 agonists or the amylin agonist pramlintide can be very effective in controlling postprandial hyperglycemia in type 2 diabetes in specific settings. This article reviews these topics and proposes that a greater proportion of available resources be directed to basic and clinical research on the prandial problem.

Glucose Outcomes with the In-Home Use of a Hybrid Closed-Loop Insulin Delivery System in Adolescents and Adults with Type 1 Diabetes

BACKGROUND

The safety and effectiveness of the in-home use of a hybrid closed-loop (HCL) system that automatically increases, decreases, and suspends insulin delivery in response to continuous glucose monitoring were investigated.

METHODS

Adolescents (n = 30, ages 14-21 years) and adults (n = 94, ages 22-75 years) with type 1 diabetes participated in a multicenter (nine sites in the United States, one site in Israel) pivotal trial. The Medtronic MiniMed^® 670G system was used during a 2-week run-in phase without HCL control, or Auto Mode, enabled (Manual Mode) and, thereafter, with Auto Mode enabled during a 3-month study phase. A supervised hotel stay (6 days/5 nights) that included a 24-h frequent blood sample testing with a reference measurement (i-STAT) occurred during the study phase.

RESULTS

Adolescents (mean ± standard deviation [SD] 16.5 ± 2.29 years of age and 7.7 ± 4.15 years of diabetes) used the system for a median 75.8% (interquartile range [IQR] 68.0%-88.4%) of the time (2977 patient-days). Adults (mean ± SD 44.6 ± 12.79 years of age and 26.4 ± 12.43 years of diabetes) used the system for a median 88.0% (IQR 77.6%-92.7%) of the time (9412 patient-days). From baseline run-in to the end of study phase, adolescent and adult HbA_1c levels decreased from 7.7% ± 0.8% to 7.1% ± 0.6% (P < 0.001) and from 7.3% ± 0.9% to 6.8% ± 0.6% (P < 0.001, Wilcoxon signed-rank test), respectively. The proportion of overall in-target (71-180 mg/dL) sensor glucose (SG) values increased from 60.4% ± 10.9% to 67.2% ± 8.2% (P < 0.001) in adolescents and from 68.8% ± 11.9% to 73.8% ± 8.4% (P < 0.001) in adults. During the hotel stay, the proportion of in-target i-STAT^® blood glucose values was 67.4% ± 27.7% compared to SG values of 72.0% ± 11.6% for adolescents and 74.2% ± 17.5% compared to 76.9% ± 8.3% for adults. There were no severe hypoglycemic or diabetic ketoacidosis events in either cohort.

CONCLUSIONS

HCL therapy was safe during in-home use by adolescents and adults and the study phase demonstrated increased time in target, and reductions in HbA_1c, hyperglycemia and hypoglycemia, compared to baseline.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT02463097.

Home use of a bihormonal bionic pancreas versus insulin pump therapy in adults with type 1 diabetes: a multicentre randomised crossover trial

BACKGROUND

The safety and effectiveness of a continuous, day-and-night automated glycaemic control system using insulin and glucagon has not been shown in a free-living, home-use setting. We aimed to assess whether bihormonal bionic pancreas initialised only with body mass can safely reduce mean glycaemia and hypoglycaemia in adults with type 1 diabetes who were living at home and participating in their normal daily routines without restrictions on diet or physical activity.

METHODS

We did a random-order crossover study in volunteers at least 18 years old who had type 1 diabetes and lived within a 30 min drive of four sites in the USA. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) in blocks of two using sequentially numbered sealed envelopes to glycaemic regulation with a bihormonal bionic pancreas or usual care (conventional or sensor-augmented insulin pump therapy) first, followed by the opposite intervention. Both study periods were 11 days in length, during which time participants continued all normal activities, including athletics and driving. The bionic pancreas was initialised with only the participant's body mass. Autonomously adaptive dosing algorithms used data from a continuous glucose monitor to control subcutaneous delivery of insulin and glucagon. The coprimary outcomes were the mean glucose concentration and time with continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) glucose concentration less than 3·3 mmol/L, analysed over days 2-11 in participants who completed both periods of the study. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02092220.

FINDINGS

We randomly assigned 43 participants between May 6, 2014, and July 3, 2015, 39 of whom completed the study: 20 who were assigned to bionic pancreas first and 19 who were assigned to the comparator first. The mean CGM glucose concentration was 7·8 mmol/L (SD 0·6) in the bionic pancreas period versus 9·0 mmol/L (1·6) in the comparator period (difference 1·1 mmol/L, 95% CI 0·7-1·6; p<0·0001), and the mean time with CGM glucose concentration less than 3·3 mmol/L was 0·6% (0·6) in the bionic pancreas period versus 1·9% (1·7) in the comparator period (difference 1·3%, 95% CI 0·8-1·8; p<0·0001). The mean nausea score on the Visual Analogue Scale (score 0-10) was greater during the bionic pancreas period (0·52 [SD 0·83]) than in the comparator period (0·05 [0·17]; difference 0·47, 95% CI 0·21-0·73; p=0·0024). Body mass and laboratory parameters did not differ between periods. There were no serious or unexpected adverse events in the bionic pancreas period of the study.

INTERPRETATION

Relative to conventional and sensor-augmented insulin pump therapy, the bihormonal bionic pancreas, initialised only with participant weight, was able to achieve superior glycaemic regulation without the need for carbohydrate counting. Larger and longer studies are needed to establish the long-term benefits and risks of automated glycaemic management with a bihormonal bionic pancreas.

FUNDING

National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases of the National Institutes of Health, and National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences.

Feasibility of Long-Term Closed-Loop Control: A Multicenter 6-Month Trial of 24/7 Automated Insulin Delivery

BACKGROUND

In the past few years, the artificial pancreas-the commonly accepted term for closed-loop control (CLC) of blood glucose in diabetes-has become a hot topic in research and technology development. In the summer of 2014, we initiated a 6-month trial evaluating the safety of 24/7 CLC during free-living conditions.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

Following an initial 1-month Phase 1, 14 individuals (10 males/4 females) with type 1 diabetes at three clinical centers in the United States and one in Italy continued with a 5-month Phase 2, which included 24/7 CLC using the wireless portable Diabetes Assistant (DiAs) developed at the University of Virginia Center for Diabetes Technology. Median subject characteristics were age 45 years, duration of diabetes 27 years, total daily insulin 0.53 U/kg/day, and baseline HbA1c 7.2% (55 mmol/mol).

RESULTS

Compared with the baseline observation period, the frequency of hypoglycemia below 3.9 mmol/L during the last 3 months of CLC was lower: 4.1% versus 1.3%, P < 0.001. This was accompanied by a downward trend in HbA1c from 7.2% (55 mmol/mol) to 7.0% (53 mmol/mol) at 6 months. HbA1c improvement was correlated with system use (Spearman r = 0.55). The user experience was favorable with identified benefit particularly at night and overall trust in the system. There were no serious adverse events, severe hypoglycemia, or diabetic ketoacidosis.

CONCLUSION

We conclude that CLC technology has matured and is safe for prolonged use in patients' natural environment. Based on these promising results, a large randomized trial is warranted to assess long-term CLC efficacy and safety.

Home Use of Day-and-Night Hybrid Closed-Loop Insulin Delivery in Suboptimally Controlled Adolescents With Type 1 Diabetes: A 3-Week, Free-Living, Randomized Crossover Trial

OBJECTIVE

This study evaluated the feasibility, safety, and efficacy of day-and-night hybrid closed-loop insulin delivery in adolescents with type 1 diabetes under free-living conditions.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

In an open-label randomized crossover study, 12 suboptimally controlled adolescents on insulin pump therapy (mean ± SD age 14.6 ± 3.1 years; HbA_1c 69 ± 8 mmol/mol [8.5 ± 0.7%]; duration of diabetes 7.8 ± 3.5 years) underwent two 21-day periods in which hybrid closed-loop insulin delivery was compared with sensor-augmented insulin pump therapy in random order. During the closed-loop intervention, a model predictive algorithm automatically directed insulin delivery between meals and overnight. Participants used a bolus calculator to administer prandial boluses.

RESULTS

The proportion of time that sensor glucose was in the target range (3.9-10 mmol/L; primary end point) was increased during the closed-loop intervention compared with sensor-augmented insulin pump therapy by 18.8 ± 9.8 percentage points (mean ± SD; P < 0.001), the mean sensor glucose level was reduced by 1.8 ± 1.3 mmol/L (P = 0.001), and the time spent above target was reduced by 19.3 ± 11.3 percentage points (P < 0.001). The time spent with sensor glucose levels below 3.9 mmol/L was low and comparable between interventions (median difference 0.4 [interquartile range -2.2 to 1.3] percentage points; P = 0.33). Improved glucose control during closed-loop was associated with increased variability of basal insulin delivery (P < 0.001) and an increase in the total daily insulin dose (53.5 [39.5-72.1] vs. 51.5 [37.6-64.3] units/day; P = 0.006). Participants expressed positive attitudes and experience with the closed-loop system.

CONCLUSIONS

Free-living home use of day-and-night closed-loop in suboptimally controlled adolescents with type 1 diabetes is safe, feasible, and improves glucose control without increasing the risk of hypoglycemia. Larger and longer studies are warranted.

Effectiveness of Automated Insulin Management Features of the MiniMed® 640G Sensor-Augmented Insulin Pump

BACKGROUND

Automated insulin management features of the MiniMed® 640G sensor-augmented pump system include suspension in response to predicted low sensor glucose (SG) values ("suspend before low"), suspension in response to existing low SG values ("suspend on low"), and automatic restarting of basal insulin delivery upon SG recovery. The effectiveness of these features was evaluated using CareLink® software data.

METHODS

Anonymized data from MiniMed 640G system users (n = 4818), MiniMed 530G system users (n = 39,219), and MiniMed Paradigm® Veo™ system users (n = 43,193) who voluntarily uploaded pump and sensor data were retrospectively analyzed. Comparisons were made between days in which system features were enabled at any time and those in which they were not. Comparisons were also made between pump suspension events for which insulin delivery was automatically or manually resumed and between glycemic parameters of users who switched from the MiniMed Paradigm Veo system to the MiniMed 640G system.

RESULTS

Days in which the MiniMed 640G "suspend before low" feature was enabled had lower percentages of SG readings ≤70 mg/dL (3.9 mmol/L) or ≥240 mg/dL (13.3 mmol/L) than days when it was not enabled (P < 0.001 for each). Users who switched from the MiniMed Paradigm Veo system to the MiniMed 640G system had fewer excursions below ≤70 mg/dL (P < 0.001) and ≥240 mg/dL (P < 0.001). SG values following automatically resumed pump suspension events recovered more rapidly and had a more stabilized endpoint than following manually resumed events.

CONCLUSIONS

Automated insulin management features of the MiniMed 640G system can reduce the frequency of both high and low SG values and help stabilize SG after resumption of insulin delivery.

Coming of age: the artificial pancreas for type 1 diabetes

The artificial pancreas (closed-loop system) addresses the unmet clinical need for improved glucose control whilst reducing the burden of diabetes self-care in type 1 diabetes. Glucose-responsive insulin delivery above and below a preset insulin amount informed by sensor glucose readings differentiates closed-loop systems from conventional, threshold-suspend and predictive-suspend insulin pump therapy. Insulin requirements in type 1 diabetes can vary between one-third-threefold on a daily basis. Closed-loop systems accommodate these variations and mitigate the risk of hypoglycaemia associated with tight glucose control. In this review we focus on the progress being made in the development and evaluation of closed-loop systems in outpatient settings. Randomised transitional studies have shown feasibility and efficacy of closed-loop systems under supervision or remote monitoring. Closed-loop application during free-living, unsupervised conditions by children, adolescents and adults compared with sensor-augmented pumps have shown improved glucose outcomes, reduced hypoglycaemia and positive user acceptance. Innovative approaches to enhance closed-loop performance are discussed and we also present the outlook and strategies used to ease clinical adoption of closed-loop systems.

Mitigating Meal-Related Glycemic Excursions in an Insulin-Sparing Manner During Closed-Loop Insulin Delivery: The Beneficial Effects of Adjunctive Pramlintide and Liraglutide

OBJECTIVE

Closed-loop (CL) insulin delivery effectively maintains glucose overnight but struggles when challenged with meals. Use of single-day, 30-μg/meal pramlintide lowers meal excursions during CL. We sought to further elucidate the potential benefits of adjunctive agents after 3-4 weeks of outpatient dose titration.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

Two CL studies were conducted: one evaluating adjunctive pramlintide and the other liraglutide. Ten subjects (age 16-23 years; A1C 7.2 ± 0.6% [55 ± 6.6 mmol/mol]) completed two 24-h sessions: one on CL alone and one on CL plus 60-μg pramlintide (CL + P), after a 3-4-week outpatient dose escalation. Eleven subjects (age 18-27 years; A1C 7.5 ± 0.9% [58 ± 9.8 mmol/mol]) were studied before and after treatment with 1.8 mg liraglutide (CL + L) after a similar 3-4-week dose escalation period. Timing and content of meals during CL were identical within experiments; meals were not announced.

RESULTS

Pramlintide delayed the time to peak plasma glucose (PG) excursion (CL 1.6 ± 0.5 h vs. CL + P 2.6 ± 0.9 h, P < 0.001) with concomitant blunting of peak postprandial increments in PG (P < 0.0001) and reductions in postmeal incremental PG area under the curve (AUC) (P = 0.0002). CL + L also led to reductions in PG excursions (P = 0.05) and incremental PG AUC (P = 0.004), with a 28% reduction in prandial insulin delivery. Outpatient liraglutide therapy led to a weight loss of 3.2 ± 1.8 kg, with a 26% reduction in total daily insulin dose.

CONCLUSIONS

Adjunctive pramlintide and liraglutide treatment mitigated postprandial hyperglycemia during CL control; liraglutide demonstrated the additional benefit of weight loss in an insulin-sparing manner. Further investigations of these and other adjunctive agents in long-term outpatient CL studies are needed.

Randomized Crossover Comparison of Personalized MPC and PID Control Algorithms for the Artificial Pancreas

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate two widely used control algorithms for an artificial pancreas (AP) under nonideal but comparable clinical conditions.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

After a pilot safety and feasibility study (n = 10), closed-loop control (CLC) was evaluated in a randomized, crossover trial of 20 additional adults with type 1 diabetes. Personalized model predictive control (MPC) and proportional integral derivative (PID) algorithms were compared in supervised 27.5-h CLC sessions. Challenges included overnight control after a 65-g dinner, response to a 50-g breakfast, and response to an unannounced 65-g lunch. Boluses of announced dinner and breakfast meals were given at mealtime. The primary outcome was time in glucose range 70-180 mg/dL.

RESULTS

Mean time in range 70-180 mg/dL was greater for MPC than for PID (74.4 vs. 63.7%, P = 0.020). Mean glucose was also lower for MPC than PID during the entire trial duration (138 vs. 160 mg/dL, P = 0.012) and 5 h after the unannounced 65-g meal (181 vs. 220 mg/dL, P = 0.019). There was no significant difference in time with glucose <70 mg/dL throughout the trial period.

CONCLUSIONS

This first comprehensive study to compare MPC and PID control for the AP indicates that MPC performed particularly well, achieving nearly 75% time in the target range, including the unannounced meal. Although both forms of CLC provided safe and effective glucose management, MPC performed as well or better than PID in all metrics.

Correlation Among Hypoglycemia, Glycemic Variability, and C-Peptide Preservation After Alefacept Therapy in Patients with Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus: Analysis of Data from the Immune Tolerance Network T1DAL Trial

PURPOSE

In natural history studies, maintenance of higher levels of C-peptide secretion (a measure of endogenous insulin production) correlates with a lower incidence of major hypoglycemic events in patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1D), but it is unclear whether this is also true for drug-induced C-peptide preservation.

METHODS

We analyzed hypoglycemic events and glycemic control data from the T1DAL (Inducing Remission in New-Onset T1D with Alefacept) study, a trial of alefacept in new-onset T1D, which found significant C-peptide preservation at 1 and 2 years. We performed a post hoc analysis using mixed models of the association between the meal-stimulated 4-hour C-peptide AUC (4-hour AUC) and rates of major hypoglycemia, measures of glycemic control (glycosylated hemoglobin [HbA1c]; mean glucometer readings), and variability (glucometer SDs; highest and lowest readings), and an index of partial remission (insulin dose-adjusted HbA1c[ IDAA1c]).

FINDINGS

Data from 49 participants (33 in the alefacept group and 16 in the placebo group) were analyzed at baseline and 12 and 24 months. We found that the 4-hour AUC at baseline and at 1 year was a significant predictor of the number of hypoglycemic events during the ensuing 12-month interval (p = 0.030). There was a strong association between the 4-hour AUC and glucometer SDs (P < 0.001), highest readings (p < 0.001), and lowest readings (p = 0.03), all measures of glycemic variability. There was a strong inverse correlation between the 4-hour AUC and 2 measures of glycemic control: HbA1c and mean glucometer readings (both p < 0.001). There was also a strong inverse correlation between the 4-hour AUC and IDAA1c values (p < 0.001), as well as a strong correlation between IDAA1c values and glucometer SDs (p < 0.001), suggesting that reduced glycemic variability is associated with a trend toward partial remission. None of these analyses found a significant difference between the alefacept and placebo groups.

IMPLICATIONS

Measures of glycemic variability and control, including rates of hypoglycemia, are significantly correlated with preservation of C-peptide regardless of whether this is achieved by immune intervention with alefacept or natural variability in patients with new-onset T1D. Thus, preservation of endogenous insulin production by an immunomodulatory drug may confer clinical benefits similar to those seen in patients with higher C-peptide secretion due to slow disease progression.