STAR-Liège Clinical Trial Interim Results: Safe and Effective Glycemic Control for All

Stochastic Modelling of Respiratory System Elastance for Mechanically Ventilated Respiratory Failure Patients

While lung protective mechanical ventilation (MV) guidelines have been developed to avoid ventilator-induced lung injury (VILI), a one-size-fits-all approach cannot benefit every individual patient. Hence, there is significant need for the ability to provide patient-specific MV settings to ensure safety, and optimise patient care. Model-based approaches enable patient-specific care by identifying time-varying patient-specific parameters, such as respiratory elastance, E_rs, to capture inter- and intra-patient variability. However, patient-specific parameters evolve with time, as a function of disease progression and patient condition, making predicting their future values crucial for recommending patient-specific MV settings. This study employs stochastic modelling to predict future E_rs values using retrospective patient data to develop and validate a model indicating future intra-patient variability of E_rs. Cross validation results show stochastic modelling can predict future elastance ranges with 92.59 and 68.56% of predicted values within the 5-95% and the 25-75% range, respectively. This range can be used to ensure patients receive adequate minute ventilation should elastance rise and minimise the risk of VILI should elastance fall. The results show the potential for model-based protocols using stochastic model prediction of future E_rs values to provide safe and patient-specific MV. These results warrant further investigation to validate its clinical utility.

Risk and reward: extending stochastic glycaemic control intervals to reduce workload

Background

STAR is a model-based, personalised, risk-based dosing approach for glycaemic control (GC) in critically ill patients. STAR provides safe, effective control to nearly all patients, using 1–3 hourly measurement and intervention intervals. However, the average 11–12 measurements per day required can be a clinical burden in many intensive care units. This study aims to significantly reduce workload by extending STAR 1–3 hourly intervals to 1 to 4-, 5-, and 6-hourly intervals, and evaluate the impact of these longer intervals on GC safety and efficacy, using validated in silico virtual patients and trials methods. A Standard STAR approach was used which allowed more hyperglycaemia over extended intervals, and a STAR Upper Limit Controlled approach limited nutrition to mitigate hyperglycaemia over longer intervention intervals.

Results

Extending STAR from 1–3 hourly to 1–6 hourly provided high safety and efficacy for nearly all patients in both approaches. For STAR Standard, virtual trial results showed lower % blood glucose (BG) in the safe 4.4–8.0 mmol/L target band (from 83 to 80%) as treatment intervals increased. Longer intervals resulted in increased risks of hyper- (15% to 18% BG > 8.0 mmol/L) and hypo- (2.1% to 2.8% of patients with min. BG < 2.2 mmol/L) glycaemia. These results were achieved with slightly reduced insulin (3.2 [2.0 5.0] to 2.5 [1.5 3.0] U/h) and nutrition (100 [85 100] to 90 [75 100] % goal feed) rates, but most importantly, with significantly reduced workload (12 to 8 measurements per day). The STAR Upper Limit Controlled approach mitigated hyperglycaemia and had lower insulin and significantly lower nutrition administration rates.

Conclusions

The modest increased risk of hyper- and hypo-glycaemia, and the reduction in nutrition delivery associated with longer treatment intervals represent a significant risk and reward trade-off in GC. However, STAR still provided highly safe, effective control for nearly all patients regardless of treatment intervals and approach, showing this unique risk-based dosing approach, modulating both insulin and nutrition, to be robust in its design. Clinical pilot trials using STAR with different measurement timeframes should be undertaken to confirm these results clinically.