Jump neural network for real-time prediction of glucose concentration

Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning for Improving Glycemic Control in Diabetes: Best Practices, Pitfalls, and Opportunities

OBJECTIVE

Artificial intelligence and machine learning are transforming many fields including medicine. In diabetes, robust biosensing technologies and automated insulin delivery therapies have created a substantial opportunity to improve health. While the number of manuscripts addressing the topic of applying machine learning to diabetes has grown in recent years, there has been a lack of consistency in the methods, metrics, and data used to train and evaluate these algorithms. This manuscript provides consensus guidelines for machine learning practitioners in the field of diabetes, including best practice recommended approaches and warnings about pitfalls to avoid.

METHODS

Algorithmic approaches are reviewed and benefits of different algorithms are discussed including importance of clinical accuracy, explainability, interpretability, and personalization. We review the most common features used in machine learning applications in diabetes glucose control and provide an open-source library of functions for calculating features, as well as a framework for specifying data sets using data sheets. A review of current data sets available for training algorithms is provided as well as an online repository of data sources.

SIGNIFICANCE

These consensus guidelines are designed to improve performance and translatability of new machine learning algorithms developed in the field of diabetes for engineers and data scientists.

Modeling risk of hypoglycemia during and following physical activity in people with type 1 diabetes using explainable mixed-effects machine learning

BACKGROUND

Physical activity (PA) can cause increased hypoglycemia (glucose <70 mg/dL) risk in people with type 1 diabetes (T1D). We modeled the probability of hypoglycemia during and up to 24 h following PA and identified key factors associated with hypoglycemia risk.

METHODS

We leveraged a free-living dataset from Tidepool comprised of glucose measurements, insulin doses, and PA data from 50 individuals with T1D (6448 sessions) for training and validating machine learning models. We also used data from the T1Dexi pilot study that contains glucose management and PA data from 20 individuals with T1D (139 session) for assessing the accuracy of the best performing model on an independent test dataset. We used mixed-effects logistic regression (MELR) and mixed-effects random forest (MERF) to model hypoglycemia risk around PA. We identified risk factors associated with hypoglycemia using odds ratio and partial dependence analysis for the MELR and MERF models, respectively. Prediction accuracy was measured using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC).

RESULTS

The analysis identified risk factors significantly associated with hypoglycemia during and following PA in both MELR and MERF models including glucose and body exposure to insulin at the start of PA, low blood glucose index 24 h prior to PA, and PA intensity and timing. Both models showed overall hypoglycemia risk peaking 1 h after PA and again 5-10 h after PA, which is consistent with the hypoglycemia risk pattern observed in the training dataset. Time following PA impacted hypoglycemia risk differently across different PA types. Accuracy of hypoglycemia prediction using the fixed effects of the MERF model was highest when predicting hypoglycemia during the first hour following the start of PA (AUROCVALIDATION = 0.83 and AUROCTESTING = 0.86) and decreased when predicting hypoglycemia in the 24 h after PA (AUROCVALIDATION = 0.66 and AUROCTESTING = 0.68).

CONCLUSION

Hypoglycemia risk after the start of PA can be modeled using mixed-effects machine learning to identify key risk factors that may be used within decision support and insulin delivery systems. We published the population-level MERF model online for others to use.

Incorporating Glucose Variability into Glucose Forecasting Accuracy Assessment Using the New Glucose Variability Impact Index and the Prediction Consistency Index: An LSTM Case Example

BACKGROUND

In this work, we developed glucose forecasting algorithms trained and evaluated on a large dataset of free-living people with type 1 diabetes (T1D) using closed-loop (CL) and sensor-augmented pump (SAP) therapies; and we demonstrate how glucose variability impacts accuracy. We introduce the glucose variability impact index (GVII) and the glucose prediction consistency index (GPCI) to assess the accuracy of prediction algorithms.

METHODS

A long-short-term-memory (LSTM) neural network was designed to predict glucose up to 60 minutes in the future using continuous glucose measurements and insulin data collected from 175 people with T1D (41,318 days) and evaluated on 75 people (11,333 days) from the Tidepool Big Data Donation Dataset. LSTM was compared with two naïve forecasting algorithms as well as Ridge linear regression and a random forest using root-mean-square error (RMSE). Parkes error grid quantified clinical accuracy. Regression analysis was used to derive the GVII and GPCI.

RESULTS

The LSTM had highest accuracy and best GVII and GPCI. RMSE for CL was 19.8 ± 3.2 and 33.2 ± 5.4 mg/dL for 30- and 60-minute prediction horizons, respectively. RMSE for SAP was 19.6 ± 3.8 and 33.1 ± 7.3 mg/dL for 30- and 60-minute prediction horizons, respectively; 99.6% and 97.6% of predictions were within zones A+B of the Parkes error grid at 30- and 60-minute prediction horizons, respectively. Glucose variability was strongly correlated with RMSE (R≥0.64, P < 0.001); GVII and GPCI demonstrated a means to compare algorithms across datasets with different glucose variability.

CONCLUSIONS

The LSTM model was accurate on a large real-world free-living dataset. Glucose variability should be considered when assessing prediction accuracy using indices such as GVII and GPCI.

Hypoglycaemia detection and prediction techniques: A systematic review on the latest developments

The main objective of diabetes control is to correct hyperglycaemia while avoiding hypoglycaemia, especially in insulin-treated patients. Fear of hypoglycaemia is a hurdle to effective correction of hyperglycaemia because it promotes under-dosing of insulin. Strategies to minimise hypoglycaemia include education and training for improved hypoglycaemia awareness and the development of technologies to allow their early detection and thus minimise their occurrence. Patients with impaired hypoglycaemia awareness would benefit the most from these technologies. The purpose of this systematic review is to review currently available or in-development technologies that support detection of hypoglycaemia or hypoglycaemia risk, and identify gaps in the research. Nanomaterial use in sensors is a promising strategy to increase the accuracy of continuous glucose monitoring devices for low glucose values. Hypoglycaemia is associated with changes on vital signs, so electrocardiogram and encephalogram could also be used to detect hypoglycaemia. Accuracy improvements through multivariable measures can make already marketed galvanic skin response devices a good noninvasive alternative. Breath volatile organic compounds can be detected by dogs and devices and alert patients at hypoglycaemia onset, while near-infrared spectroscopy can also be used as a hypoglycaemia alarms. Finally, one of the main directions of research are deep learning algorithms to analyse continuous glucose monitoring data and provide earlier and more accurate prediction of hypoglycaemia. Current developments for early identification of hypoglycaemia risk combine improvements of available 'needle-type' enzymatic glucose sensors and noninvasive alternatives. Patient usability will be essential to demonstrate to allow their implementation for daily use in diabetes management.

Artificial Intelligence for Diabetes Management and Decision Support: Literature Review

Background

Artificial intelligence methods in combination with the latest technologies, including medical devices, mobile computing, and sensor technologies, have the potential to enable the creation and delivery of better management services to deal with chronic diseases. One of the most lethal and prevalent chronic diseases is diabetes mellitus, which is characterized by dysfunction of glucose homeostasis.

Objective

The objective of this paper is to review recent efforts to use artificial intelligence techniques to assist in the management of diabetes, along with the associated challenges.

Methods

A review of the literature was conducted using PubMed and related bibliographic resources. Analyses of the literature from 2010 to 2018 yielded 1849 pertinent articles, of which we selected 141 for detailed review.

Results

We propose a functional taxonomy for diabetes management and artificial intelligence. Additionally, a detailed analysis of each subject category was performed using related key outcomes. This approach revealed that the experiments and studies reviewed yielded encouraging results.

Conclusions

We obtained evidence of an acceleration of research activity aimed at developing artificial intelligence-powered tools for prediction and prevention of complications associated with diabetes. Our results indicate that artificial intelligence methods are being progressively established as suitable for use in clinical daily practice, as well as for the self-management of diabetes. Consequently, these methods provide powerful tools for improving patients’ quality of life.

Mechanistic modeling of hemoglobin glycation and red blood cell kinetics enables personalized diabetes monitoring

The amount of glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) in diabetic patients' blood provides the best estimate of the average blood glucose concentration over the preceding 2 to 3 months. It is therefore essential for disease management and is the best predictor of disease complications. Nevertheless, substantial unexplained glucose-independent variation in HbA1c makes its reflection of average glucose inaccurate and limits the precision of medical care for diabetics. The true average glucose concentration of a nondiabetic and a poorly controlled diabetic may differ by less than 15 mg/dl, but patients with identical HbA1c values may have true average glucose concentrations that differ by more than 60 mg/dl. We combined a mechanistic mathematical model of hemoglobin glycation and red blood cell kinetics with large sets of within-patient glucose measurements to derive patient-specific estimates of nonglycemic determinants of HbA1c, including mean red blood cell age. We found that between-patient variation in derived mean red blood cell age explains all glucose-independent variation in HbA1c. We then used our model to personalize prospective estimates of average glucose and reduced errors by more than 50% in four independent groups of greater than 200 patients. The current standard of care provided average glucose estimates with errors >15 mg/dl for one in three patients. Our patient-specific method reduced this error rate to 1 in 10. Our personalized approach should improve medical care for diabetes using existing clinical measurements.