Home Use of Day-and-Night Hybrid Closed-Loop Insulin Delivery in Very Young Children: A Multicenter, 3-Week, Randomized Trial

Assessing the efficacy, safety and utility of closed-loop insulin delivery compared with sensor-augmented pump therapy in very young children with type 1 diabetes (KidsAP02 study): an open-label, multicentre, multinational, randomised cross-over study protocol

INTRODUCTION

Diabetes management in very young children remains challenging. Glycaemic targets are achieved at the expense of high parental diabetes management burden and frequent hypoglycaemia, impacting quality of life for the whole family. Our objective is to assess whether automated insulin delivery can improve glycaemic control and alleviate the burden of diabetes management in this particular age group.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The study adopts an open-label, multinational, multicentre, randomised, crossover design and aims to randomise 72 children aged 1-7 years with type 1 diabetes on insulin pump therapy. Following screening, participants will receive training on study insulin pump and study continuous glucose monitoring devices. Participants will be randomised to 16-week use of the hybrid closed-loop system (intervention period) or to 16-week use of sensor-augmented pump therapy (control period) with 1-4 weeks washout period before crossing over to the other arm. The order of the two study periods will be random. The primary endpoint is the between-group difference in time spent in the target glucose range from 3.9 to 10.0 mmol/L based on sensor glucose readings during the 16-week study periods. Analyses will be conducted on an intention-to-treat basis. Key secondary endpoints are between group differences in time spent above and below target glucose range, glycated haemoglobin and average sensor glucose. Participants' and caregivers' experiences will be evaluated using questionnaires and qualitative interviews, and sleep quality will be assessed. A health economic analysis will be performed.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethics approval has been obtained from Cambridge East Research Ethics Committee (UK), Ethics Committees of the University of Innsbruck, the University of Vienna and the University of Graz (Austria), Ethics Committee of the Medical Faculty of the University of Leipzig (Germany) and Comité National d'Ethique de Recherche (Luxembourg). The results will be disseminated by peer-reviewed publications and conference presentations.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT03784027.

Time in range centered diabetes care

Optimal glycemic control remains challenging and elusive for many people with diabetes. With the comprehensive clinical evidence on safety and efficiency in large populations, and with broader reimbursement, the adoption of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) is rapidly increasing. Standardized visual reporting and interpretation of CGM data and clear and understandable clinical targets will help professionals and individuals with diabetes use diabetes technology more efficiently, and finally improve long-term outcomes with less everyday disease burden. For the majority of people with type 1 or type 2 diabetes, time in range (between 70 and 180 mg/dL, or 3.9 and 10 mmol/L) target of more than 70% is recommended, with each incremental increase of 5% towards this target being clinically meaningful. At the same time, the goal is to minimize glycemic excursions: a recommended target for a time below range (< 70 mg/dL or < 3.9 mmol/L) is less than 4%, and time above range (> 180 mg/dL or 10 mmol/L) less than 25%, with less stringent goals for older individuals or those at increased risk. These targets should be individualized: the personal use of CGM with the standardized data presentation provides all necessary means to accurately tailor diabetes management to the needs of each individual with diabetes.

Psychological Well-Being of Parents of Very Young Children With Type 1 Diabetes - Baseline Assessment

BACKGROUND

Type 1 diabetes in young children is a heavy parental burden. As part of pilot phase of the KIDSAP01 study, we conducted a baseline assessment in parents to study the association between hypoglycemia fear, parental well-being and child behavior.

METHODS

All parents were invited to fill in baseline questionnaires: hypoglycemia fear survey (HFS), WHO-5, Epworth Sleepiness Scale and Strength and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ).

RESULTS

24 children (median age: 5-year, range 1-7 years, 63% male, mean diabetes duration: 3 ± 1.7 years) participated. 23/24 parents filled out the questionnaires. We found a higher score for the hypoglycemia fear behavior 33.9 ± 5.6 compared to hypoglycemia worry 34.6 ± 12.2. Median WHO-5 score was 16 (8 - 22) with poor well-being in two parents. Median daytime sleepiness score was high in five parents (>10). For six children a high total behavioral difficulty score (>16) was reported. Pro social behavior score was lower than normal in six children (<6). Parental well-being was negatively associated with HFS total (r = - 0.50, p <.05) and subscale scores (r = - 0.44, p <.05 for HFS-Worry and HFS-Behavior), child behavior (r = - 0.45, p = .05) and positively with child age and diabetes duration (r = 0.58, p <.01, r = 0.6, p <.01). HFS, parental well-being nor daytime sleepiness are associated with the HbA1c.

CONCLUSION

Regular screening of parental well-being, hypoglycemia fear and child behavior should be part of routine care to target early intervention.

Closed-loop insulin delivery systems in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes

Introduction: Optimal glycemic control remains challenging in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes due to highly variable day-to-day and night-to-night insulin requirements. This hurdle could be addressed by glucose-responsive insulin delivery based on real-time continuous glucose measurements.Areas covered: This review summaries recent advances of closed-loop systems in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes, using both single- and dual-hormone closed-loop systems. The main outcomes, proportions of time spent in target range 70-180 mg/dl, and time spent in hypoglycemia below 70 mg/dl, are assessed particularly during unsupervised free-living randomized controlled trials.Expert opinion: Noteworthy and clinically meaningful translation of experimental investigations from controlled in-hospital settings to unrestricted home studies have been achieved over the past years, resulting in the regulatory approval of the first hybrid closed-loop system also in the pediatric population and with several other advanced devices in the pipeline. Large multinational and pivotal clinical trials including broad age populations are underway to facilitate the use of closed-loop systems in routine clinical practice.

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.

Closed-loop control in insulin pumps for type-1 diabetes mellitus: safety and efficacy

INTRODUCTION

Type 1 diabetes is a lifelong disease with high management burden. The majority of people with type 1 diabetes fail to achieve glycemic targets. Algorithm-driven automated insulin delivery (closed-loop) systems aim to address these challenges. This review provides an overview of commercial and emerging closed-loop systems.

AREAS COVERED

We review safety and efficacy of commercial and emerging hybrid closed-loop systems. A literature search was conducted and clinical trials using day-and-night closed-loop systems during free-living conditions were used to report on safety data. We comment on efficacy where robust randomized controlled trial data for a particular system are available. We highlight similarities and differences between commercial systems.

EXPERT OPINION

Study data shows that hybrid closed-loop systems are safe and effective, consistently improving glycemic control when compared to standard therapy. While a fully closed-loop system with minimal burden remains the end-goal, these hybrid closed-loop systems have transformative potential in diabetes care.

Case series of a hybrid closed-loop system used in pregnancies in clinical practice

BACKGROUND

Hybrid closed-loop (HCL) therapy is rarely studied in pregnancy. We present three cases of women with type 1 diabetes who used the Medtronic 670G HCL system for most or all of gestation.

METHODS

The Medtronic 670G system has a manual mode (no automated insulin delivery) and an auto mode (AM, HCL therapy). Women in this case series used AM off-label in gestation.

RESULTS

Case 1 started HCL therapy in the second trimester, her sensor glucose time spent <3.9 and >10 mmol/L improved thereafter. Case 1 had average sensor glucose (ASG) levels of 6.4 ± 2.4 mmol/L in the first trimester, 7.0 ± 2.7 mmol/L in the second trimester before HCL use, 7.1 ± 2.1 mmol/L in the second trimester after HCL use, and 6.8 ± 1.9 mmol/L in the third trimester. Case 1 continued AM during operative delivery and post-partum. Cases 2 and 3 used HCL therapy throughout gestation but with inconsistent time in AM. When they increased time in AM their glycaemic indices improved. Case 2 had ASG of 9.5 ± 3.4, 8.6 ± 2.9, and 7.9 ± 2.5 mmol/L in the first through third trimesters, respectively. Case 3 had ASG of 11.1 ± 4.8 and 3.9 to 10 mmol/L in the first and second trimesters, respectively. Case 2 continued HCL therapy post-partum, Case 3 did not.

CONCLUSIONS

CareLink® Clinical Software only reports the non-pregnant time in range. Nonetheless, this represents the first report of HCL therapy in pregnancy with a system approved by the Food and Drug Administration in non-pregnant populations.

Type 1 diabetes mellitus management in young children: implementation of current technologies

The use of advanced technologies for diabetes management is on the rise among pediatric patients with type 1 diabetes (T1D). Continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII), continuous glucose monitoring, predictive low glucose suspend, hybrid closed-loop insulin delivery systems-all enable better diabetes management and glycemic control. However, when used by children, and especially very young children, specific aspects must be taken into consideration, including technical parameters, ease of use, parental stress, and satisfaction. The unique characteristics of T1D in children aged <6 years are reviewed and studies of the pros and cons of different technologies in this specific age group are presented. Addressing such issues when implementing advanced technologies among very young children with T1D will enable better diabetes management and will hopefully ease a tremendous burden of both children and families.

Safety and Performance of the Omnipod Hybrid Closed-Loop System in Adults, Adolescents, and Children with Type 1 Diabetes Over 5 Days Under Free-Living Conditions

Background: The objective of this study was to assess the safety and performance of the Omnipod^® personalized model predictive control (MPC) algorithm in adults, adolescents, and children aged ≥6 years with type 1 diabetes (T1D) under free-living conditions using an investigational device. Materials and Methods: A 96-h hybrid closed-loop (HCL) study was conducted in a supervised hotel/rental home setting following a 7-day outpatient standard therapy (ST) phase. Eligible participants were aged 6-65 years with A1C <10.0% using insulin pump therapy or multiple daily injections. Meals during HCL were unrestricted, with boluses administered per usual routine. There was daily physical activity. The primary endpoints were percentage of time with sensor glucose <70 and ≥250 mg/dL. Results: Participants were 11 adults, 10 adolescents, and 15 children aged (mean ± standard deviation) 28.8 ± 7.9, 14.3 ± 1.3, and 9.9 ± 1.0 years, respectively. Percentage time ≥250 mg/dL during HCL was 4.5% ± 4.2%, 3.5% ± 5.0%, and 8.6% ± 8.8% per respective age group, a 1.6-, 3.4-, and 2.0-fold reduction compared to ST (P = 0.1, P = 0.02, and P = 0.03). Percentage time <70 mg/dL during HCL was 1.9% ± 1.3%, 2.5% ± 2.0%, and 2.2% ± 1.9%, a statistically significant decrease in adults when compared to ST (P = 0.005, P = 0.3, and P = 0.3). Percentage time 70-180 mg/dL increased during HCL compared to ST, reaching significance for adolescents and children: HCL 73.7% ± 7.5% vs. ST 68.0% ± 15.6% for adults (P = 0.08), HCL 79.0% ± 12.6% vs. ST 60.6% ± 13.4% for adolescents (P = 0.01), and HCL 69.2% ± 13.5% vs. ST 54.9% ± 12.9% for children (P = 0.003). Conclusions: The Omnipod personalized MPC algorithm was safe and performed well over 5 days and 4 nights of use by a cohort of participants ranging from youth aged ≥6 years to adults with T1D under supervised free-living conditions with challenges, including daily physical activity and unrestricted meals.

Automated Insulin Delivery in Children with Type 1 Diabetes

The advent of insulin pump therapy marked an important milestone in diabetes treatment in the past few decades and has become the tipping point for the development of automated insulin delivery systems (AID). Standalone insulin pump systems have evolved over the course of years and have been replaced by modern high-technology insulin pumps with continuous glucose monitor interface allowing real-time insulin dose adjustment to optimize treatment. This review summarizes evidence from AID studies conducted in children with type 1 diabetes and discusses the outlook for future generation AID systems from a pediatric treatment perspective.

Faster Compared With Standard Insulin Aspart During Day-and-Night Fully Closed-Loop Insulin Therapy in Type 1 Diabetes: A Double-Blind Randomized Crossover Trial

OBJECTIVE

We evaluated the safety and efficacy of day-and-night fully closed-loop insulin therapy using faster (Faster-CL) compared with standard insulin aspart (Standard-CL) in young adults with type 1 diabetes.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

In a double-blind, randomized, crossover trial, 20 participants with type 1 diabetes on insulin pump therapy (11 females, aged 21.3 ± 2.3 years, HbA_1c 7.5 ± 0.5% [58.5 ± 5.5 mmol/mol]) underwent two 27-h inpatient periods with unannounced afternoon moderate-vigorous exercise and unannounced/uncovered meals. We compared Faster-CL and Standard-CL in random order. During both interventions, the fuzzy-logic control algorithm DreaMed GlucoSitter was used. Glucose sensor data were analyzed by intention-to-treat principle with the difference (between Faster-CL and Standard-CL) in proportion of time in range 70-180 mg/dL (TIR) over 27 h as the primary end point.

RESULTS

The proportion of TIR was similar for both arms: 53.3% (83% overnight) in Faster-CL and 57.9% (88% overnight) in Standard-CL (P = 0.170). The proportion of time in hypoglycemia <70 mg/dL was 0.0% for both groups. Baseline-adjusted interstitial prandial glucose increments 1 h after meals were greater in Faster-CL compared with Standard-CL (P = 0.017). The gaps between measured plasma insulin and estimated insulin-on-board levels at the beginning, at the end, and 2 h after the exercise were smaller in the Standard-CL group (P = 0.029, P = 0.003, and P = 0.004, respectively). No severe adverse events occurred.

CONCLUSIONS

Fully closed-loop insulin delivery using either faster or standard insulin aspart was safe and efficient in achieving near-normal glucose concentrations outside postprandial periods. The closed-loop algorithm was better adjusted to the standard insulin aspart.

Evidence on User-Led Innovation in Diabetes Technology (The OPEN Project): Protocol for a Mixed Methods Study

Background

Digital innovations in health care have traditionally followed a top-down pathway, with manufacturers leading the design and production of technology-enabled solutions and those living with chronic conditions involved only as passive recipients of the end product. However, user-driven open-source initiatives in health care are becoming increasingly popular. An example is the growing movement of people with diabetes, who create their own “Do-It-Yourself Artificial Pancreas Systems” (DIYAPS).

Objective

The overall aim of this study is to establish the empirical evidence base for the clinical effectiveness and quality-of-life benefits of DIYAPS and identify the challenges and possible solutions to enable their wider diffusion.

Methods

A research program comprising 5 work packages will examine the outcomes and potential for scaling up DIYAPS solutions. Quantitative and qualitative methodologies will be used to examine clinical and self-reported outcome measures of DIYAPS users. The majority of members of the research team live with type 1 diabetes and are active DIYAPS users, making Outcomes of Patients’ Evidence With Novel, Do-It-Yourself Artificial Pancreas Technology (OPEN) a unique, user-driven research project.

Results

This project has received funding from the European Commission’s Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation Program, under the Marie Skłodowska-Curie Action Research and Innovation Staff Exchange. Researchers with both academic and nonacademic backgrounds have been recruited to formulate research questions, drive the research process, and disseminate ongoing findings back to the DIYAPS community and other stakeholders.

Conclusions

The OPEN project is unique in that it is a truly patient- and user-led research project, which brings together an international, interdisciplinary, and intersectoral research group, comprising health care professionals, technical developers, biomedical and social scientists, the majority of whom are also living with diabetes. Thus, it directly addresses the core research and user needs of the DIYAPS movement. As a new model of cooperation, it will highlight how researchers in academia, industry, and the patient community can create patient-centric innovation and reduce disease burden together.

International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID)

PRR1-10.2196/15368

Advances in technology for management of type 1 diabetes

Technological advances have had a major effect on the management of type 1 diabetes. In addition to blood glucose meters, devices used by people with type 1 diabetes include insulin pumps, continuous glucose monitors, and, most recently, systems that combine both a pump and a monitor for algorithm-driven automation of insulin delivery. In the next 5 years, as many advances are expected in technology for the management of diabetes as there have been in the past 5 years, with improvements in continuous glucose monitoring and more available choices of systems that automate insulin delivery. Expansion of the use of technology will be needed beyond endocrinology practices to primary-care settings and broader populations of patients. Tools to support decision making will also need to be developed to help patients and health-care providers to use the output of these devices to optimise diabetes management.

Reduced burden of diabetes and improved quality of life: Experiences from unrestricted day-and-night hybrid closed-loop use in very young children with type 1 diabetes

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the experiences of families with very young children aged 1 to 7 years (inclusive) with type 1 diabetes using day-and-night hybrid closed-loop insulin delivery.

METHODS

Parents/caregivers of 20 children aged 1 to 7 years with type 1 diabetes completed a closed-loop experience survey following two 3-week periods of unrestricted day-and-night hybrid closed-loop insulin therapy using Cambridge FlorenceM system at home. Benefits, limitations, and improvements of closed-loop technology were explored.

RESULTS

Responders reported reduced burden of diabetes management, less time spent managing diabetes, and improved quality of sleep with closed-loop. Ninety percent of the responders felt less worried about their child's glucose control using closed-loop. Size of study devices, battery performance and connectivity issues were identified as areas for improvement. Parents/caregivers wished for more options to input information to the system such as temporary glucose targets.

CONCLUSIONS

Parents/caregivers of very young children reported important quality of life benefits associated with using closed-loop, supporting adoption of this technology in this population.

Efficacy and Safety of Real-Life Usage of MiniMed 670G Automode in Children with Type 1 Diabetes Less than 7 Years Old

The Medtronic MiniMed 670G system with SmartGuard™ (Medtronic, Northridge, CA) is a commercial hybrid closed-loop (HCL) system approved for use in 2018 for children >7 years. Studies of this HCL system in subjects >7 years old show improvement in glycemic control, but no study has described its use in younger children. This is a retrospective analysis of patients with type 1 diabetes (T1D) <7 years of age who used the 670G HCL system at Seattle Children's Hospital for 3 months. We compared 2-week data from Carelink™ while in manual mode (MM) with suspend before low active with those in auto mode (AM). We used two tailed t-test to compare variables related to glycemic control. Sixteen children were reviewed [age of AM start: average 4.3 years (range 2-6); 10 male]. The average time in AM was 6.3 ± 2.9 months (range 3-12). There was a statistically significant change for A1c [MM 7.9% (62.8 mmol/mol), AM 7.4% (57.4 mmol/mol); P-value <0.001], percentage time in range (MM 42.8%, AM 56.2%; P-value <0.001), percentage hypoglycemia (MM 1.3%, AM 2.4%; P-value 0.04), and average sensor glucose [MM 200 mg/dL (11.1 mmol/L), AM 176 mg/dL (9.8 mmol/L); P-value <0.001]. No serious adverse reports noted. This case series showed improvement in glycemic control in very young children using the 670G HCL. We did note more hypoglycemia although no serious adverse events, such as hypoglycemic seizure, were reported. A HCL system can be used in young children with T1D safely and effectively and should be an option for children <7 years.

Real-World Use of Do-It-Yourself Artificial Pancreas Systems in Children and Adolescents With Type 1 Diabetes: Online Survey and Analysis of Self-Reported Clinical Outcomes

Background

Patient-driven initiatives have made uptake of Do-it-Yourself Artificial Pancreas Systems (DIYAPS) increasingly popular among people with diabetes of all ages. Observational studies have shown improvements in glycemic control and quality of life among adults with diabetes. However, there is a lack of research examining outcomes of children and adolescents with DIYAPS in everyday life and their social context.

Objective

This survey assesses the self-reported clinical outcomes of a pediatric population using DIYAPS in the real world.

Methods

An online survey was distributed to caregivers to assess the hemoglobin A_1c levels and time in range (TIR) before and after DIYAPS initiation and problems during DIYAPS use.

Results

A total of 209 caregivers of children from 21 countries responded to the survey. Of the children, 47.4% were female, with a median age of 10 years, and 99.4% had type 1 diabetes, with a median duration of 4.3 years (SD 3.9). The median duration of DIYAPS use was 7.5 (SD 10.0) months. Clinical outcomes improved significantly, including the hemoglobin A_1c levels (from 6.91% [SD 0.88%] to 6.27% [SD 0.67]; P<.001) and TIR (from 64.2% [SD 15.94] to 80.68% [SD 9.26]; P<.001).

Conclusions

Improved glycemic outcomes were found across all pediatric age groups, including adolescents and very young children. These findings are in line with clinical trial results from commercially developed closed-loop systems.

Young Children Have Higher Variability of Insulin Requirements: Observations During Hybrid Closed-Loop Insulin Delivery

OBJECTIVE

To quantify age-related variability of insulin needs during day and night closed-loop insulin delivery.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed data from hybrid closed-loop studies involving young children (1-6 years old, n = 20), children (7-12 years, n = 21), adolescents (13-17 years, n = 15), and adults (>18 years, n = 58) with type 1 diabetes. The coefficient of variation quantified variability of insulin needs during 3 weeks of unrestricted-living hybrid closed-loop use.

RESULTS

Data from 2,365 nights and 2,367 days in 114 participants were analyzed. The coefficient of variation of insulin delivery was higher in young children compared with adults (mean difference at nighttime 10.7 percentage points [95% CI 2.9-18.4], P = 0.003; daytime 6.4 percentage points [95% CI 2.0-10.9], P = 0.002) and compared with adolescents (mean difference at nighttime 10.2 percentage points [95% CI 0.0-20.4], P = 0.049; daytime 7.0 percentage points [95% CI 1.1-12.8], P = 0.014).

CONCLUSIONS

Diabetes management in young children is complicated by higher variability in insulin requirements, supporting fast-track clinical practice adoption of closed-loop in this vulnerable population.