Perceptions and expectations of adults with type 1 diabetes for the use of artificial pancreas systems with and without glucagon addition: Results of an online survey

Clinical Translation and Implementation of a Bioartificial Pancreas Therapy: A Qualitative Study Exploring the Perspectives of People With Type 1 Diabetes

Background

The development of a hybrid beta-cell replacement approach, referred to as a personalized, transplantable bioartificial pancreas (BAP), holds promise to treat type 1 diabetes (T1D). This interview study aimed to explore patients' expectations, needs, concerns, and considerations when considering to undergo a BAP transplantation.

Research Design and Methods

Semistructured interviews were conducted with 24 participants diagnosed with T1D. Data collection stopped once data saturation was reached. Audio recordings of the interviews were transcribed verbatim. The interviews were independently analyzed by 2 researchers. A qualitative content analysis using an inductive approach was used.

Results

Three main themes emerged as follow: (1) hoped-for benefits, (2) concerns and decision-making considerations, and (3) procedural aspects. First, the participants expected benefits across medical, psychological, and social domains. Over these 3 domains, 9 subthemes were identified, including improved clinical outcomes, a cure for diabetes, more headspace, emotional relief, a shift in responsibility, protection of privacy, improved flexibility in daily life, less visible diseases, and improved relationships with others. Second, concerns and considerations about undergoing a BAP transplant comprised adverse events, the functionality of the BAP, the surgery procedure, the biological materials used, the transplant location, and the intrusiveness associated with follow-up care. Finally, procedural considerations included equitable access, patient prioritization, and trust and control.

Conclusions

Incorporating insights from this study into the clinical development and implementation of the BAP is crucial to ensure alignment of the product and procedures with the needs and expectations of people with T1D.

Exploring Technology's Influence on Health Behaviours and Well-being in Type 1 Diabetes: a Review

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Maintaining positive health behaviours promotes better health outcomes for people with type 1 diabetes (T1D). However, implementing these behaviours may also lead to additional management burdens and challenges. Diabetes technologies, including continuous glucose monitoring systems, automated insulin delivery systems, and digital platforms, are being rapidly developed and widely used to reduce these burdens. Our aim was to review recent evidence to explore the influence of these technologies on health behaviours and well-being among adults with T1D and discuss future directions.

RECENT FINDINGS

Current evidence, albeit limited, suggests that technologies applied in diabetes self-management education and support (DSME/S), nutrition, physical activity (PA), and psychosocial care areas improved glucose outcomes. They may also increase flexibility in insulin adjustment and eating behaviours, reduce carb counting burden, increase confidence in PA, and reduce mental burden. Technologies have the potential to promote health behaviours changes and well-being for people with T1D. More confirmative studies on their effectiveness and safety are needed to ensure optimal integration in standard care practices.

Study protocol for a randomised open-label clinical trial examining the safety and efficacy of the Android Artificial Pancreas System (AAPS) with advanced bolus-free features in adults with type 1 diabetes: the 'CLOSE IT' (Closed Loop Open SourcE In Type 1 diabetes) trial

INTRODUCTION

Multiple automated insulin delivery (AID) systems have become commercially available following randomised controlled trials demonstrating benefits in people with type 1 diabetes (T1D). However, their real-world utility may be undermined by user-associated burdens, including the need to carbohydrate count and deliver manual insulin boluses. There is an important need for a 'fully automated closed loop' (FCL) AID system, without manual mealtime boluses. The (Closed Loop Open SourcE In Type 1 diabetes) trial is a randomised trial comparing an FCL AID system to the same system used as a hybrid closed loop (HCL) in people with T1D, in an outpatient setting over an extended time frame.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

Randomised, open-label, parallel, non-inferiority trial comparing the Android Artificial Pancreas System (AAPS) AID algorithm used as FCL to the same algorithm used as HCL. Seventy-five participants aged 18-70 will be randomised (1:1) to one of two treatment arms for 12 weeks: (a) FCL-participants will be advised not to bolus for meals and (b) HCL-participants will use the AAPS AID algorithm as HCL with announced meals. The primary outcome is the percentage of time in target sensor glucose range (3.9-10.0 mmol/L). Secondary outcomes include other glycaemic metrics, safety, psychosocial factors, platform performance and user dietary factors. Twenty FCL arm participants will participate in a 4-week extension phase comparing glycaemic and dietary outcomes using NovoRapid (insulin aspart) to Fiasp (insulin aspart and niacinamide).

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Approvals are by the Alfred Health Ethics Committee (615/22) (Australia) and Health and Disability Ethics Committees (2022 FULL 13832) (New Zealand). Each participant will provide written informed consent. Data protection and confidentiality will be ensured. Study results will be disseminated by publications, conferences and patient advocacy groups.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS

ACTRN12622001400752 and ACTRN12622001401741.

NIH Fifth Artificial Pancreas Workshop 2023: Meeting Report: The Fifth Artificial Pancreas Workshop: Enabling Fully Automation, Access, and Adoption

The Fifth Artificial Pancreas Workshop: Enabling Fully Automation, Access, and Adoption was held at the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Campus in Bethesda, Maryland on May 1 to 2, 2023. The organizing Committee included representatives of NIH, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), Diabetes Technology Society, Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation (JDRF), and the Leona M. and Harry B. Helmsley Charitable Trust. In previous years, the NIH Division of Diabetes, Endocrinology, and Metabolic Diseases along with other diabetes organizations had organized periodic workshops, and it had been seven years since the NIH hosted the Fourth Artificial Pancreas in July 2016. Since then, significant improvements in insulin delivery have occurred. Several automated insulin delivery (AID) systems are now commercially available. The workshop featured sessions on: (1) Lessons Learned from Recent Advanced Clinical Trials and Real-World Data Analysis, (2) Interoperability, Data Management, Integration of Systems, and Cybersecurity, Challenges and Regulatory Considerations, (3) Adaptation of Systems Through the Lifespan and Special Populations: Are Specific Algorithms Needed, (4) Development of Adaptive Algorithms for Insulin Only and for Multihormonal Systems or Combination with Adjuvant Therapies and Drugs: Clinical Expected Outcomes and Public Health Impact, (5) Novel Artificial Intelligence Strategies to Develop Smarter, More Automated, Personalized Diabetes Management Systems, (6) Novel Sensing Strategies, Hormone Formulations and Delivery to Optimize Close-loop Systems, (7) Special Topic: Clinical and Real-world Viability of IP-IP Systems. "Fully automated closed-loop insulin delivery using the IP route," (8) Round-table Panel: Closed-loop performance: What to Expect and What are the Best Metrics to Assess it, and (9) Round-table Discussion: What is Needed for More Adaptable, Accessible, and Usable Future Generation of Systems? How to Promote Equitable Innovation? This article summarizes the discussions of the Workshop.

Comparison of Nocturnal Glucose After Exercise Among Dual-Hormone, Single-Hormone Algorithm-Assisted Insulin Delivery System and Usual Care in Adults and Adolescents Living with Type 1 Diabetes: A Pooled Analysis

Background: Available studies comparing the efficacy of dual-hormone (DH)-algorithm-assisted insulin delivery (AID), single-hormone (SH)-AID and usual care on postexercise overnight glucose in people with type 1 diabetes (T1D) have had different outcomes. By pooling data from all available studies, we aim to draw stronger conclusions. Methods: Data were pooled from two three-arm, open-label, randomized, controlled, crossover studies. Forty-one adults [median (Q1, Q3) age: 34.0 years (29.5, 51.0), mean HbA1c: 7.5% ± 1.0%] and 17 adolescents with T1D [age: 14.0 (13.0, 16.0), HbA1c: 7.8% ± 0.8%] underwent DH-AID, SH-AID, and usual care. Each intervention involved evening aerobic exercise (60-min). The primary outcome, time in range% (TIR%) overnight (00:00-06:00) postexercise based on continuous glucose monitoring, was compared among treatments using linear mixed effect model or generalized linear mixed model. Results: Among adults, mean TIR% was 94.0% ± 11.9%, 83.1% ± 20.5%, and 65.1% ± 37.0% during DH-AID, SH-AID, and usual care intervention, respectively (P < 0.05 for all between-group comparisons). DH-AID was superior to SH-AID and usual care, and SH-AID was superior to usual care regarding hypoglycemia and hyperglycemia prevention, but not glycemic variability. Among adolescents, DH-AID and SH-AID reduced dysglycemia, but not glycemic variability, better than usual care. Glycemic outcomes were similar between DH-AID and SH-AID. Conclusion: AID systems allow improved postexercise nocturnal glycemic management than usual care for both adults and adolescents. DH-AID was better than SH-AID among adults, but not adolescents.

Amelioration of user experiences and glycaemic outcomes with an Advanced Hybrid Closed Loop System in a real-world clinical setting

AIMS

Automation in diabetes technology is rapidly evolving. The aim was to evaluate the real-world glycemic outcomes and user acceptance after 3 months of using the Medtronic 780G Advanced Hybrid Closed-Loop (AHCL) system.

METHODS

A prospective analysis was performed. A glucose target of 100 mg/dl and an active insulin time of 2 h were set. Capillary HbA1c, 2-week of pump and sensor data and several satisfaction questionnaire scores were compared at baseline and after 3 months of using the AHCL system.

RESULTS

52 subjects were selected (age: 43 ± 12 years, sex: 73% female, diabetes duration: 27 ± 11 years, higher education: 31%). Time in range (TIR) 70-180 mg/dl increased from 67.3 ± 13.6% to 80.1 ± 7.5% and time >180 mg/dl and >250 mg/dl were reduced (16.8 ± 8.4 vs 29.4 ± 15.1%, 2.7 ± 3.0% vs 6.9 ± 7.8%, respectively) (all p < 0.001), while time in hypoglycaemia remained below recommended targets. Time in Auto-Mode and sensor use were 94 ± 10% and 90 ± 11%, respectively. Auto-correction boluses represented 29 ± 12% of bolus insulin. Fear of hypoglycaemia, diabetes quality of life, sleep quality and satisfaction with the monitoring system improved after 3 months.

CONCLUSION

The real-world use of the AHCL system Medtronic 780G provides an 80.1% TIR 70-180 mg/dl with minimal hypoglycaemia and an increased level of patient satisfaction.

From loyalty to resignation: Patient-doctor figurations in type 1 diabetes

This paper contributes to the debate on the patient-doctor relationship by focussing on a specific chronic disease: type 1 diabetes. This field is characterised by an increasing use of technology, specifically therapeutic devices and a significant requirement of patient self-management. This paper presents the main findings of research conducted in Italy in 2018. It is argued that this relationship is more properly described as an interdependent figuration of actors characterised by a dynamic process of power balances, which recalls Elias' (What is sociology? Columbia University Press, 1978) figurational-processual and relational sociology. In this theoretical context, patients may manage their (dis)satisfaction with their diabetologists by choosing different behaviours that stem from Hirschman's archetype (Exit, voice, and loyalty. Responses to decline firms, organizations, and states. Harvard University Press, 1970): voice, exit, loyalty and, we would add, resignation. These categories are fluid, and all of them can be experienced by patients over time, depending on the quality of the figurations built among these transactors.