1
|
Boughton CK, Hovorka R. The role of automated insulin delivery technology in diabetes. Diabetologia 2024:10.1007/s00125-024-06165-w. [PMID: 38740602 DOI: 10.1007/s00125-024-06165-w] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/04/2024] [Accepted: 03/21/2024] [Indexed: 05/16/2024]
Abstract
The role of automated insulin delivery systems in diabetes is expanding. Hybrid closed-loop systems are being used in routine clinical practice for treating people with type 1 diabetes. Encouragingly, real-world data reflects the performance and usability observed in clinical trials. We review the commercially available hybrid closed-loop systems, their distinctive features and the associated real-world data. We also consider emerging indications for closed-loop systems, including the treatment of type 2 diabetes where variability of day-to-day insulin requirements is high, and other challenging applications for this technology. We discuss issues around access and implementation of closed-loop technology, and consider the limitations of present closed-loop systems, as well as innovative approaches that are being evaluated to improve their performance.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Charlotte K Boughton
- Wellcome-Medical Research Council Institute of Metabolic Science, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
| | - Roman Hovorka
- Wellcome-Medical Research Council Institute of Metabolic Science, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Jafar A, Pasqua MR. Postprandial glucose-management strategies in type 1 diabetes: Current approaches and prospects with precision medicine and artificial intelligence. Diabetes Obes Metab 2024; 26:1555-1566. [PMID: 38263540 DOI: 10.1111/dom.15463] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/28/2023] [Revised: 01/01/2024] [Accepted: 01/05/2024] [Indexed: 01/25/2024]
Abstract
Postprandial glucose control can be challenging for individuals with type 1 diabetes, and this can be attributed to many factors, including suboptimal therapy parameters (carbohydrate ratios, correction factors, basal doses) because of physiological changes, meal macronutrients and engagement in postprandial physical activity. This narrative review aims to examine the current postprandial glucose-management strategies tested in clinical trials, including adjusting therapy settings, bolusing for meal macronutrients, adjusting pre-exercise and postexercise meal boluses for postprandial physical activity, and other therapeutic options, for individuals on open-loop and closed-loop therapies. Then we discuss their challenges and future avenues. Despite advancements in insulin delivery devices such as closed-loop systems and decision-support systems, many individuals with type 1 diabetes still struggle to manage their glucose levels. The main challenge is the lack of personalized recommendations, causing suboptimal postprandial glucose control. We suggest that postprandial glucose control can be improved by (i) providing personalized recommendations for meal macronutrients and postprandial activity; (ii) including behavioural recommendations; (iii) using other personalized therapeutic approaches (e.g. glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists, sodium-glucose co-transporter inhibitors, amylin analogues, inhaled insulin) in addition to insulin therapy; and (iv) integrating an interpretability report to explain to individuals about changes in treatment therapy and behavioural recommendations. In addition, we suggest a future avenue to implement precision recommendations for individuals with type 1 diabetes utilizing the potential of deep reinforcement learning and foundation models (such as GPT and BERT), employing different modalities of data including diabetes-related and external background factors (i.e. behavioural, environmental, biological and abnormal events).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Adnan Jafar
- Department of Biomedical Engineering, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
| | - Melissa-Rosina Pasqua
- Division of Endocrinology, Department of Medicine, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
O'Neal DN, Zaharieva DP, Morrison D, McCarthy O, Nørgaard K. Exercising Safely with the MiniMed™ 780G Automated Insulin Delivery System. Diabetes Technol Ther 2024; 26:84-96. [PMID: 38377316 DOI: 10.1089/dia.2023.0420] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/22/2024]
Abstract
The physical and psychological benefits of exercise are particularly pertinent to people with type 1 diabetes (T1D). The variability in subcutaneous insulin absorption and the delay in offset and onset in glucose lowering action impose limitations, given the rapidly varying insulin requirements with exercise. Simultaneously, there are challenges to glucose monitoring. Consequently, those with T1D are less likely to exercise because of concerns regarding glucose instability. While glucose control with exercise can be enhanced using automated insulin delivery (AID), all commercially available AID systems remain limited by the pharmacokinetics of subcutaneous insulin delivery. Although glycemic responses may vary with exercises of differing intensities and durations, the principles providing the foundation for guidelines include minimization of insulin on board before exercise commencement, judicious and timely carbohydrate supplementation, and when possible, a reduction in insulin delivered in anticipation of planned exercise. There is an increasing body of evidence in support of superior glucose control with AID over manual insulin dosing in people in T1D who wish to exercise. The MiniMed™ 780G AID system varies basal insulin delivery with superimposed automated correction boluses. It incorporates a temporary (elevated glucose) target of 8.3 mmol/L (150 mg/dL) and when it is functioning, the autocorrection boluses are stopped. As the device has recently become commercially available, there are limited data assessing glucose control with the MiniMed™ 780G under exercise conditions. Importantly, when exercise was planned and implemented within consensus guidelines, %time in range and %time below range targets were met. A practical approach to exercising with the device is provided with illustrative case studies. While there are limitations to spontaneity imposed on any AID device due to the pharmacokinetics associated with the subcutaneous delivery of current insulin formulations, the MiniMed™ 780G system provides people with T1D an excellent option for exercising safely if the appropriate strategies are implemented.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- David N O'Neal
- Department of Medicine, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, Australia
- Department of Endocrinology, St. Vincent's Hospital Melbourne, Fitzroy, Australia
- Australian Centre for Accelerating Diabetes Innovations, Parkville, Australia
| | - Dessi P Zaharieva
- Division of Endocrinology, Department of Pediatrics, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California, USA
| | - Dale Morrison
- Department of Medicine, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, Australia
- Department of Endocrinology, St. Vincent's Hospital Melbourne, Fitzroy, Australia
- Australian Centre for Accelerating Diabetes Innovations, Parkville, Australia
| | - Olivia McCarthy
- Copenhagen University Hospital-Steno Diabetes Center Copenhagen, Herlev, Denmark
- Technology, Exercise and Medicine Research Centre, Applied Sport, Swansea University, Swansea, United Kingdom
| | - Kirsten Nørgaard
- Copenhagen University Hospital-Steno Diabetes Center Copenhagen, Herlev, Denmark
- Department of Clinical Medicine, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Wilkinson T, Tomic D, Boyle E, Burren D, Elghattis Y, Jenkins A, Keesing C, Middleton S, Nanayakkara N, Williman J, de Bock M, Cohen ND. 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. BMJ Open 2024; 14:e078171. [PMID: 38382954 PMCID: PMC10882371 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2023-078171] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/26/2023] [Accepted: 11/20/2023] [Indexed: 02/23/2024] Open
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tom Wilkinson
- University of Otago Christchurch, Christchurch, New Zealand
| | - Dunya Tomic
- Baker Heart and Diabetes Institute, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
- School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Erin Boyle
- Baker Heart and Diabetes Institute, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - David Burren
- Baker Heart and Diabetes Institute, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Yasser Elghattis
- Baker Heart and Diabetes Institute, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Alicia Jenkins
- Baker Heart and Diabetes Institute, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | | | - Sonia Middleton
- Baker Heart and Diabetes Institute, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | | | | | - Martin de Bock
- University of Otago Christchurch, Christchurch, New Zealand
| | - Neale D Cohen
- Baker Heart and Diabetes Institute, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Giorgino F, Battelino T, Bergenstal RM, Forst T, Green JB, Mathieu C, Rodbard HW, Schnell O, Wilmot EG. The Role of Ultra-Rapid-Acting Insulin Analogs in Diabetes: An Expert Consensus. J Diabetes Sci Technol 2023:19322968231204584. [PMID: 37937585 DOI: 10.1177/19322968231204584] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/09/2023]
Abstract
Ultra-rapid-acting insulin analogs (URAA) are a further development and refinement of rapid-acting insulin analogs. Because of their adapted formulation, URAA provide an even faster pharmacokinetics and thus an accelerated onset of insulin action than conventional rapid-acting insulin analogs, allowing for a more physiologic delivery of exogenously applied insulin. Clinical trials have confirmed the superiority of URAA in controlling postprandial glucose excursions, with a safety profile that is comparable to the rapid-acting insulins. Consequently, many individuals with diabetes mellitus may benefit from URAA in terms of prandial glycemic control. Unfortunately, there are only few available recommendations from authoritative sources for use of URAA in clinical practice. Therefore, this expert consensus report aims to define populations of people with diabetes mellitus for whom URAA may be beneficial and to provide health care professionals with concrete, practical recommendations on how best to use URAA in this context.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Francesco Giorgino
- Section of Internal Medicine, Endocrinology, Andrology and Metabolic Diseases, Department of Precision and Regenerative Medicine and Ionian Area, University of Bari Aldo Moro, Bari, Italy
| | - Tadej Battelino
- Department of Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism, UCH-University Medical Center Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia
- Faculty of Medicine, University of Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia
| | | | - Thomas Forst
- Department of Endocrinology and Metabolic Diseases, Johannes Gutenberg University Medical Center, Mainz, Germany
- Clinical Research Services, Mannheim, Germany
| | - Jennifer B Green
- Division of Endocrinology and Duke Clinical Research Institute, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC, USA
| | - Chantal Mathieu
- Clinical and Experimental Endocrinology, University Hospital Gasthuisberg, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | | | - Oliver Schnell
- Forschergruppe Diabetes eV at the Helmholtz Centre, Munich-Neuherberg, Germany
| | - Emma G Wilmot
- Department of Diabetes & Endocrinology, University Hospitals of Derby and Burton NHS Foundation Trust, Derby, UK
- Academic Unit for Translational Medical Sciences, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, England, UK
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Boughton CK, Hartnell S, Lakshman R, Nwokolo M, Wilinska ME, Ware J, Allen JM, Evans ML, Hovorka R. Fully Closed-Loop Glucose Control Compared With Insulin Pump Therapy With Continuous Glucose Monitoring in Adults With Type 1 Diabetes and Suboptimal Glycemic Control: A Single-Center, Randomized, Crossover Study. Diabetes Care 2023; 46:1916-1922. [PMID: 37616583 DOI: 10.2337/dc23-0728] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/22/2023] [Accepted: 08/01/2023] [Indexed: 08/26/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE We evaluated the safety and efficacy of fully closed-loop with ultrarapid insulin lispro in adults with type 1 diabetes and suboptimal glycemic control compared with insulin pump therapy with continuous glucose monitoring (CGM). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS This single-center, randomized, crossover study enrolled 26 adults with type 1 diabetes using insulin pump therapy with suboptimal glycemic control (mean ± SD, age 41 ± 12 years, HbA1c 9.2 ± 1.1% [77 ± 12 mmol/mol]). Participants underwent two 8-week periods of unrestricted living to compare fully closed-loop with ultrarapid insulin lispro (CamAPS HX system) with insulin pump therapy with CGM in random order. RESULTS In an intention-to-treat analysis, the proportion of time glucose was in range (primary end point 3.9-10.0 mmol/L) was higher during closed-loop than during pump with CGM (mean ± SD 50.0 ± 9.6% vs. 36.2 ± 12.2%, mean difference 13.2 percentage points [95% CI 9.5, 16.9], P < 0.001). Time with glucose >10.0 mmol/L and mean glucose were lower during closed-loop than during pump with CGM (mean ± SD time >10.0 mmol/L: 49.0 ± 9.9 vs. 62.9 ± 12.6%, mean difference -13.3 percentage points [95% CI -17.2, -9.5], P < 0.001; mean ± SD glucose 10.7 ± 1.1 vs. 12.0 ± 1.6 mmol/L, mean difference -1.2 mmol/L [95% CI -1.8, -0.7], P < 0.001). The proportion of time with glucose <3.9 mmol/L was similar between periods (median [interquartile range (IQR)] closed-loop 0.88% [0.51-1.55] vs. pump with CGM 0.64% [0.28-1.10], P = 0.102). Total daily insulin requirements did not differ (median [IQR] closed-loop 51.9 units/day [35.7-91.2] vs. pump with CGM 50.7 units/day [34.0-70.0], P = 0.704). No severe hypoglycemia or ketoacidosis occurred. CONCLUSIONS Fully closed-loop insulin delivery with CamAPS HX improved glucose control compared with insulin pump therapy with CGM in adults with type 1 diabetes and suboptimal glycemic control.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Charlotte K Boughton
- Wellcome-MRC Institute of Metabolic Science, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge, U.K
- Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Wolfson Diabetes and Endocrine Clinic, Cambridge, U.K
| | - Sara Hartnell
- Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Wolfson Diabetes and Endocrine Clinic, Cambridge, U.K
| | - Rama Lakshman
- Wellcome-MRC Institute of Metabolic Science, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge, U.K
| | - Munachiso Nwokolo
- Wellcome-MRC Institute of Metabolic Science, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge, U.K
| | | | - Julia Ware
- Wellcome-MRC Institute of Metabolic Science, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge, U.K
- Department of Paediatrics, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, U.K
| | - Janet M Allen
- Wellcome-MRC Institute of Metabolic Science, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge, U.K
| | - Mark L Evans
- Wellcome-MRC Institute of Metabolic Science, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge, U.K
- Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Wolfson Diabetes and Endocrine Clinic, Cambridge, U.K
| | - Roman Hovorka
- Wellcome-MRC Institute of Metabolic Science, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge, U.K
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Garcia-Tirado J, Colmegna P, Villard O, Diaz JL, Esquivel-Zuniga R, Koravi CLK, Barnett CL, Oliveri MC, Fuller M, Brown SA, DeBoer MD, Breton MD. Assessment of Meal Anticipation for Improving Fully Automated Insulin Delivery in Adults With Type 1 Diabetes. Diabetes Care 2023; 46:1652-1658. [PMID: 37478323 PMCID: PMC10465820 DOI: 10.2337/dc23-0119] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/20/2023] [Accepted: 06/06/2023] [Indexed: 07/23/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Meals are a consistent challenge to glycemic control in type 1 diabetes (T1D). Our objective was to assess the glycemic impact of meal anticipation within a fully automated insulin delivery (AID) system among adults with T1D. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS We report the results of a randomized crossover clinical trial comparing three modalities of AID systems: hybrid closed loop (HCL), full closed loop (FCL), and full closed loop with meal anticipation (FCL+). Modalities were tested during three supervised 24-h admissions, where breakfast, lunch, and dinner were consumed per participant's home schedule, at a fixed time, and with a 1.5-h delay, respectively. Primary outcome was the percent time in range 70-180 mg/dL (TIR) during the breakfast postprandial period for FCL+ versus FCL. RESULTS Thirty-five adults with T1D (age 44.5 ± 15.4 years; HbA1c 6.7 ± 0.9%; n = 23 women and n = 12 men) were randomly assigned. TIR for the 5-h period after breakfast was 75 ± 23%, 58 ± 21%, and 63 ± 19% for HCL, FCL, and FCL+, respectively, with no significant difference between FCL+ and FCL. For the 2 h before dinner, time below range (TBR) was similar for FCL and FCL+. For the 5-h period after dinner, TIR was similar for FCL+ and FCL (71 ± 34% vs. 72 ± 29%; P = 1.0), whereas TBR was reduced in FCL+ (median 0% [0-0%] vs. 0% [0-0.8%]; P = 0.03). Overall, 24-h control for HCL, FCL, and FCL+ was 86 ± 10%, 77 ± 11%, and 77 ± 12%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS Although postprandial control remained optimal with hybrid AID, both fully AID solutions offered overall TIR >70% with similar or lower exposure to hypoglycemia. Anticipation did not significantly improve postprandial control in AID systems but also did not increase hypoglycemic risk when meals were delayed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jose Garcia-Tirado
- Center for Diabetes Technology, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA
- University Clinic for Diabetes, Endocrinology, Nutritional Medicine, and Metabolism, Inselspital–University Hospital Bern, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland
| | - Patricio Colmegna
- Center for Diabetes Technology, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA
| | - Orianne Villard
- Center for Diabetes Technology, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA
- Department of Diabetes Endocrinology and Metabolism, CHU Montpellier, Montpellier, France
| | - Jenny L. Diaz
- Center for Diabetes Technology, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA
| | | | | | | | - Mary C. Oliveri
- Center for Diabetes Technology, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA
| | - Morgan Fuller
- Center for Diabetes Technology, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA
| | - Sue A. Brown
- Center for Diabetes Technology, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA
- Division of Endocrinology and Metabolism, Department of Medicine, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA
| | - Mark D. DeBoer
- Center for Diabetes Technology, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA
- Department of Pediatrics, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA
| | - Marc D. Breton
- Center for Diabetes Technology, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Cardona-Hernandez R, Dôvc K, Biester T, Ekhlaspour L, Macedoni M, Tauschmann M, Mameli C. New therapies towards a better glycemic control in youths with type 1 diabetes. Pharmacol Res 2023; 195:106882. [PMID: 37543096 PMCID: PMC11073821 DOI: 10.1016/j.phrs.2023.106882] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/13/2023] [Revised: 07/10/2023] [Accepted: 08/02/2023] [Indexed: 08/07/2023]
Abstract
Type 1 diabetes (T1D) is the most frequent form of diabetes in pediatric age, affecting more than 1.5 million people younger than age 20 years worldwide. Early and intensive control of diabetes provides continued protection against both microvascular and macrovascular complications, enhances growth, and ensures normal pubertal development. In the absence of definitive reversal therapy for this disease, achieving and maintaining the recommended glycemic targets is crucial. In the last 30 years, enormous progress has been made using technology to better treat T1D. In spite of this progress, the majority of children, adolescents and young adults do not reach the recommended targets for glycemic control and assume a considerable burden each day. The development of promising new therapeutic advances, such as more physiologic insulin analogues, pioneering diabetes technology including continuous glucose monitoring and closed loop systems as well as new adjuvant drugs, anticipate a new paradigm in T1D management over the next few years. This review presents insights into current management of T1D in youths.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Klemen Dôvc
- Faculty of Medicine, University of Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia; Department of Pediatric Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolic Diseases, University Children's Hospital, Ljubljana, Slovenia
| | - Torben Biester
- AUF DER BULT, Diabetes Center for Children and Adolescents, Hannover, Germany
| | - Laya Ekhlaspour
- Department of Pediatrics, Division of Endocrinology. University of California, San Francisco, CA, United States
| | | | - Martin Tauschmann
- Department of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Chiara Mameli
- Department of Pediatrics, V. Buzzi Children's Hospital, Milan, Italy; Department of Biomedical and Clinical Sciences, University of Milan, Milan, Italy.
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Oktavian P, Budi DS, Wibowo IN, Rusuldi RCR, Kusumawardhani AD, Wafa IA, Rahman HR, Pratama NR, Mudjanarko SW. Automated glycemic control with a bionic pancreas for type 1 diabetes mellitus: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Diabetes Metab Syndr 2023; 17:102847. [PMID: 37639999 DOI: 10.1016/j.dsx.2023.102847] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/24/2023] [Revised: 08/17/2023] [Accepted: 08/20/2023] [Indexed: 08/31/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS The use of a bionic pancreas with automated insulin delivery systems to prevent complications of diabetes mellitus shows conflicting results. We aimed to comprehensively discuss the potential use of a bionic pancreas in patients with type 1 diabetes (T1D). METHODS A systematic database search was conducted on October 24, 2022, for articles investigating the use of a bionic pancreas in patients with T1D. The hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) level, mean glucose level, glucose coefficient of variability, time-in-range (TIR), and adverse events were investigated. RESULTS Nine studies were included in this review. The data from these studies suggested that the use of a bionic pancreas could reduce the HbA1c (mean difference [MD] = -0.40% [95% confidence interval {CI} = -0.59 to -0.21], I2 = 0%, p < 0.0001) and mean glucose levels (MD = -21.06 [95% CI = -24.66 to -17.46], I2 = 45%, p < 0.00001) and improve the TIR (MD = 14.41% [95% CI = 10.99 to 17.83], I2 = 60%, p < 0.00001). The most common adverse events reported were nausea and vomiting. CONCLUSIONS The use of a bionic pancreas shows potential in preventing complications of T1D by improving the TIR and decreasing the HbA1c and mean glucose levels. Furthermore, serious adverse events with the use of a bionic pancreas and standard of care show insignificant results, suggesting a good safety profile.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Puguh Oktavian
- Faculty of Medicine Universitas Airlangga, Surabaya, Indonesia
| | | | | | | | | | - Ifan Ali Wafa
- Faculty of Medicine Universitas Airlangga, Surabaya, Indonesia
| | | | | | - Sony Wibisono Mudjanarko
- Division of Endocrinology, Metabolism, and Diabetes, Department of Internal Medicine, Dr. Soetomo General Academic Hospital, Faculty of Medicine Universitas Airlangga, Surabaya, Indonesia.
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Davidson MB. Human Insulin as an Antidote to the High Cost of Insulin: Clinical Insignificance of Pharmacokinetic/Pharmacodynamic Differences. Clin Diabetes 2023; 41:438-441. [PMID: 37456099 PMCID: PMC10338278 DOI: 10.2337/cd22-0106] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 03/08/2023]
|
11
|
Nimri R, Phillip M, Kovatchev B. Closed-Loop and Artificial Intelligence-Based Decision Support Systems. Diabetes Technol Ther 2023; 25:S70-S89. [PMID: 36802182 DOI: 10.1089/dia.2023.2505] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/23/2023]
Affiliation(s)
- Revital Nimri
- Diabetes Technology Center, Jesse Z and Sara Lea Shafer Institute for Endocrinology and Diabetes, Schneider Children's Medical Center of Israel, Petah Tikva, Israel
- Sackler Faculty of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel
| | - Moshe Phillip
- Diabetes Technology Center, Jesse Z and Sara Lea Shafer Institute for Endocrinology and Diabetes, Schneider Children's Medical Center of Israel, Petah Tikva, Israel
- Sackler Faculty of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel
| | - Boris Kovatchev
- University of Virginia Center for Diabetes Technology, University of Virginia School of Medicine, Charlottesville, VA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Díaz-Balzac CA, Pillinger D, Wittlin SD. Continuous subcutaneous insulin infusions: Closing the loop. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2022; 108:1019-1033. [PMID: 36573281 DOI: 10.1210/clinem/dgac746] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/28/2022] [Indexed: 12/29/2022]
Abstract
CONTEXT Continuous subcutaneous insulin infusions (CSIIs) and continuous glucose monitors (CGMs) have revolutionized the management of diabetes mellitus (DM). Over the last two decades the development of advanced, small, and user-friendly technology has progressed substantially, essentially closing the loop in the fasting and post-absorptive state, nearing the promise of an artificial pancreas. The momentum was mostly driven by the diabetes community itself, to improve its health and quality of life. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION Literature regarding CSII and CGM was reviewed. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS Management of DM aims to regulate blood glucose to prevent long term micro and macrovascular complications. CSIIs combined with CGMs provide an integrated system to maintain tight glycemic control in a safe and uninterrupted fashion, while minimizing hypoglycemic events. Recent advances have allowed to 'close the loop' by better mimicking endogenous insulin secretion and glucose level regulation. Evidence supports sustained improvement in glycemic control with reduced episodes of hypoglycemia using these systems, while improving quality of life. Ongoing work in delivery algorithms with or without counterregulatory hormones will allow for further layers of regulation of the artificial pancreas. CONCLUSION Ongoing efforts to develop an artificial pancreas have created effective tools to improve the management of DM. CSIIs and CGMs are useful in diverse populations ranging from children to the elderly, as well as in various clinical contexts. Individually and more so together, these have had a tremendous impact in the management of DM, while avoiding treatment fatigue. However, cost and accessibility are still a hindrance to its wider application.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Carlos A Díaz-Balzac
- Division of Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism, University of Rochester Medical Center, 601 Elmwood Avenue, Box 693, Rochester, NY 14642, USA
| | - David Pillinger
- Division of Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism, University of Rochester Medical Center, 601 Elmwood Avenue, Box 693, Rochester, NY 14642, USA
| | - Steven D Wittlin
- Division of Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism, University of Rochester Medical Center, 601 Elmwood Avenue, Box 693, Rochester, NY 14642, USA
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Girsh YV, Kiyaev AV, Slovak MA, Korneva IV, Promin IA, Yusupova NA, Savelyev LI. Comparative assessment of modern parameters of glycemic control in children with type 1 diabetes after switching to fast-acting insulin aspart using Flash Glucose Monitoring in real clinical practice. DIABETES MELLITUS 2022. [DOI: 10.14341/dm12838] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/03/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Postprandial hyperglycaemia contributes significantly to the lack of glycaemic control in patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus (DM1). At least a quarter of patients forget to inject insulin before meals once a week, and more than 40% of them inject bolus insulin immediately before meals, which does not correspond to the pharmacokinetic effects of ultrashort insulins and determines the need to use insulins with better imitations of physiological insulin secretion.AIM: To assess the effect of fast acting insulin aspart (FIAsp) on the current parameters of glycaemic control in children with DM1 after switching from insulin Asp (iAsp) using continuous glucose monitoring.MATERIALS AND METHODS: A multicenter observational 12-week prospective open-label uncontrolled comparative study was initiated. A group of insufficiently controlled patients were identified (n = 48) including a group on multiple insulin injections therapy (MII) (insulin degludec and IAsp) and a group on continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) of iAsp. Three 14-day flash glucose monitoring (FMG) were performed: before transferring patients to FiAsp and after 2 and 12 weeks of the transfer. Key endpoints: HbA1c after 2 and 12 weeks on FiAsp relative to baseline, analysis of 5 FMG target glucose ranges, presented as an ambulatory glycemic profile. Additional indicators: dynamics of insulin daily dose, frequency of glucose self- monitoring, the number of severe hypoglycemia, adverse events that occurred during treatment.RESULTS: 2 weeks after the transfer from IAsp to FIAsp, TIR increased in the entire group of patients: from 53% [44.3; 66.5] to 57% [47.4; 71.0] (p-value = 0.010) and TAR decreased from 38% [24.8; 50.2] to 30.5% [22.0; 45, 0] (p-value = 0.0124). Maintaining and increase time spent in the target glucose ranges during a 12-week observation period, in parallel with a significant decrease in hypoglycemic episodes <3.9 mmol / L per week, on FIAsp therapy naturally leads to an improvement in diabetes control: a decrease in HbA1c from 8.15% up to 7.75% (p-value = 0.0224), more pronounced in the group of patients on CSII — from 7.9% to 7.5% (p-value = 0.028).CONCLUSION: Switching from IAsp to BDIAsp in routine clinical practice in the MII and CSII regimen in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes allows achieving better glycemic control compared to the previous generation prandial insulin analog Iasp. The better diabetes control is associated with an increase or a trend towards an increase in TIR and a decrease or a trend towards a decrease in TAR and TBR, as well as a significant decrease in episodes of hypoglycemia.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - A. V. Kiyaev
- Ural State Medical University; Regional Children’s Clinical Hospital
| | | | | | | | | | - L. I. Savelyev
- Ural State Medical University; Regional Children’s Clinical Hospital
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Beck RW, Russell SJ, Damiano ER, El-Khatib FH, Ruedy KJ, Balliro C, Li Z, Calhoun P. A Multicenter Randomized Trial Evaluating Fast-Acting Insulin Aspart in the Bionic Pancreas in Adults with Type 1 Diabetes. Diabetes Technol Ther 2022; 24:681-696. [PMID: 36173235 PMCID: PMC9529301 DOI: 10.1089/dia.2022.0167] [Citation(s) in RCA: 18] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/12/2022]
Abstract
Objective: To evaluate the insulin-only configuration of the iLet® bionic pancreas (BP) using fast-acting insulin aspart (Fiasp®) in adults with type 1 diabetes (T1D). Research Design and Methods: In this multicenter, randomized trial, 275 adults with T1D (18-83 years old, baseline HbA1c 5.3%-14.9%) were randomly assigned 2:2:1 to use the BP with fast-acting insulin aspart (BP-F group, N = 114), BP with aspart or lispro (BP-A/L group, N = 107), or a control group using their standard-care insulin delivery (SC group, N = 54) plus real-time continuous glucose monitoring (CGM). The primary outcome was HbA1c at 13 weeks. The BP-F versus SC comparison was considered primary and BP-F versus BP-A/L secondary. Results: Mean ± standard deviation (SD) HbA1c decreased from 7.8% ± 1.2% at baseline to 7.1% ± 0.6% at 13 weeks with BP-F versus 7.6% ± 1.2% to 7.5% ± 0.9% with SC (adjusted difference = -0.5%, 95% CI -0.7 to -0.3, P < 0.001). CGM-measured percent time <54 mg/dL over 13 weeks with BP-F was noninferior to SC (adjusted difference = 0.00%, 95% CI -0.07 to 0.05, P < 0.001 for noninferiority based on a prespecified noninferiority limit of 1%). Over 13 weeks, mean time in range 70-180 mg/dL (TIR) increased by 14% (3.4 h/day) and mean CGM glucose was reduced by 18 mg/dL with BP-F compared with SC (P < 0.001). Analyses of time >180 mg/dL, time >250 mg/dL, and the SD of CGM glucose all favored BP-F compared with SC (P < 0.001). Differences between BP-F and BP-A/L were minimal, with no difference in HbA1c at 13 weeks (adjusted difference = -0.0%, 95% CI -0.2 to 0.1, P = 0.67) or mean glucose (adjusted difference = -2.0 mg/dL, 95% CI -4.3 to 0.4, P = 0.10). Mean TIR was 2% greater with BP-F than BP-A/L (95% CI 1 to 4, P = 0.005), but the percentages of participants improving TIR by ≥5% were not significantly different (P = 0.49) and there were no significant differences comparing BP-F versus BP-A/L across nine patient-reported outcome surveys. The rate of severe hypoglycemia events did not differ among the three groups. Conclusions: In adults with T1D, HbA1c was improved with the BP using fast-acting insulin aspart compared with standard care without increasing CGM-measured hypoglycemia. However, the effect was no better than the reduction observed with the BP using aspart or lispro. Clinical Trial Registry: clinicaltrials.gov; NCT04200313.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Roy W. Beck
- JAEB Center for Health Research, Tampa, Florida, USA
| | | | - Edward R. Damiano
- Department of Biomedical Engineering, Boston University, Boston, Massachusetts
- Beta Bionics, Concord, Massachusetts, USA
| | | | | | | | - Zoey Li
- JAEB Center for Health Research, Tampa, Florida, USA
| | - Peter Calhoun
- JAEB Center for Health Research, Tampa, Florida, USA
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Weinzimer SA, Bailey RJ, Bergenstal RM, Nimri R, Beck RW, Schatz D, Ambler-Osborn L, Schweiger DS, von dem Berge T, Sibayan J, Johnson ML, Calhoun P, Phillip M. A Comparison of Postprandial Glucose Control in the Medtronic Advanced Hybrid Closed-Loop System Versus 670G. Diabetes Technol Ther 2022; 24:573-582. [PMID: 35363054 PMCID: PMC9353997 DOI: 10.1089/dia.2021.0568] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/16/2022]
Abstract
Background: We recently reported that use of an "advanced" hybrid closed-loop system reduced hyperglycemia without increasing hypoglycemia compared to a first-generation system. The aim of this analysis was to evaluate whether this improved performance was specifically related to better mealtime glycemic control. Methods: We conducted a secondary analysis of postprandial glycemic control in an open-label, multinational, randomized crossover trial of 112 participants with type 1 diabetes, aged 14-29, of the Medtronic MiniMed™ 670G hybrid closed-loop system (670G) versus the Medtronic advanced hybrid closed-loop (AHCL) system, for 12 weeks each. We compared glycemic and insulin delivery metrics over a 3 h horizon across all meals to assess system performance and outcomes. Results: Overall meal size and premeal insulin on board were similar during run-in and between 670G and AHCL arms. Compared with 670G arm, premeal, peak, and mean glucose levels were numerically lower in the AHCL arm (167 ± 23, 231 ± 23, and 177 ± 20 mg/dL vs. 175 ± 23, 235 ± 23, and 180 ± 19 mg/dL, respectively), with a trend to lower hyperglycemia level 2 in AHCL arm. Adjusting for premeal glucose level, all postmeal outcomes between 670G and AHCL were statistically similar. Prandial insulin delivery also was similar in both treatment arms (21 ± 9 vs. 23 ± 10 U), with a shift in basal/bolus ratio from 28%/71% in 670G arm to 20%/80% in AHCL arm. Conclusions: Reduced hyperglycemia with AHCL compared to 670G was not related to early postprandial glycemic excursions after adjusting for premeal glucose level (<3 h after meal), but likely to later (>3 h) postprandial or overnight improvements. Further refinements to mealtime bolus algorithms and strategies may more optimally control prandial glycemic excursions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Stuart A. Weinzimer
- Department of Pediatrics, Yale School of Medicine, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut, USA
| | - Ryan J. Bailey
- Jaeb Center for Health Research Foundation, Inc., Tampa, Florida, USA
| | - Richard M. Bergenstal
- International Diabetes Center, HealthPartners Institute, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA
| | - Revital Nimri
- Department of Pediatrics, College of Medicine, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL
- Sacker Faculty of Medicine, Tel-Aviv University, Tel-Aviv, Israel
| | - Roy W. Beck
- Jaeb Center for Health Research Foundation, Inc., Tampa, Florida, USA
| | - Desmond Schatz
- University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville, Florida, USA
| | | | - Darja Smigoc Schweiger
- University Medical Center Ljubljana, University Children's Hospital, Ljubljana, Slovenia
- Faculty of Medicine, University of Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia
| | | | - Judy Sibayan
- Jaeb Center for Health Research Foundation, Inc., Tampa, Florida, USA
| | - Mary L. Johnson
- International Diabetes Center, HealthPartners Institute, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA
| | - Peter Calhoun
- Jaeb Center for Health Research Foundation, Inc., Tampa, Florida, USA
| | - Moshe Phillip
- Department of Pediatrics, College of Medicine, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL
- Sacker Faculty of Medicine, Tel-Aviv University, Tel-Aviv, Israel
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Danne T, Heinemann L, Bolinder J. New Insulins, Biosimilars, and Insulin Therapy. Diabetes Technol Ther 2022; 24:S35-S57. [PMID: 35475698 DOI: 10.1089/dia.2022.2503] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/12/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Thomas Danne
- Diabetes-Zentrum für Kinder and Jugendliche, Kinder- und Jugendkrankenhaus AUF DER BULT, Hannover, Germany
| | | | - Jan Bolinder
- Department of Medicine, Karolinska University Hospital Huddinge, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
De Block CEM, Van Cauwenberghe J, Bochanen N, Dirinck E. Rapid-acting insulin analogues: Theory and best clinical practice in type 1 and type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Obes Metab 2022; 24 Suppl 1:63-74. [PMID: 35403348 DOI: 10.1111/dom.14713] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/28/2022] [Revised: 03/29/2022] [Accepted: 04/05/2022] [Indexed: 12/01/2022]
Abstract
Since the discovery of insulin 100 years ago, insulin preparations have improved significantly. Starting from purified animal insulins, evolving to human insulins produced by genetically modified organisms, and ultimately to insulin analogues, all in an attempt to mimic physiological insulin action profiles seen in individuals without diabetes. Achieving strict glucose control without hypoglycaemia and preventing chronic complications of diabetes while preserving quality of life remains a challenging goal, but the advent of newer ultra-rapid-acting insulin analogues may enable intensive insulin therapy without being too disruptive to daily life. Ultra-rapid-acting insulin analogues can be administered shortly before meals and give better coverage of mealtime-induced glucose excursions than conventional insulin preparations. They also increase convenience with timing of bolus dosing. In this review, we focus on the progress that has been made in rapid-acting insulins. We summarize pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic data, clinical trial data supporting the use of these new formulations as part of a basal-bolus regimen and continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion, and provide a clinical perspective to help guide healthcare professionals when and for whom to use ultra-fast-acting insulins.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Christophe E M De Block
- Department of Endocrinology, Diabetology & Metabolism, Antwerp University Hospital, University of Antwerp, Edegem, Belgium
- University of Antwerp, Faculty of Medicine & Health Sciences, Laboratory of Experimental Medicine and Paediatrics (LEMP), Wilrijk, Belgium
| | - Jolijn Van Cauwenberghe
- Department of Endocrinology, Diabetology & Metabolism, Antwerp University Hospital, University of Antwerp, Edegem, Belgium
- University of Antwerp, Faculty of Medicine & Health Sciences, Laboratory of Experimental Medicine and Paediatrics (LEMP), Wilrijk, Belgium
| | - Niels Bochanen
- Department of Endocrinology, Diabetology & Metabolism, Antwerp University Hospital, University of Antwerp, Edegem, Belgium
- University of Antwerp, Faculty of Medicine & Health Sciences, Laboratory of Experimental Medicine and Paediatrics (LEMP), Wilrijk, Belgium
| | - Eveline Dirinck
- Department of Endocrinology, Diabetology & Metabolism, Antwerp University Hospital, University of Antwerp, Edegem, Belgium
- University of Antwerp, Faculty of Medicine & Health Sciences, Laboratory of Experimental Medicine and Paediatrics (LEMP), Wilrijk, Belgium
| |
Collapse
|