Dataset Information

Multicenter closed-loop/hybrid meal bolus insulin delivery with type 1 diabetes.

ABSTRACT: This study evaluated meal bolus insulin delivery strategies and associated postprandial glucose control while using an artificial pancreas (AP) system.This study was a multicenter trial in 53 patients, 12-65 years of age, with type 1 diabetes for at least 1 year and use of continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion for at least 6 months. Four different insulin bolus strategies were assessed: standard bolus delivered with meal (n=51), standard bolus delivered 15 min prior to meal (n=40), over-bolus of 30% delivered with meal (n=40), and bolus purposely omitted (n=46). Meal carbohydrate (CHO) intake was 1 g of CHO/kg of body weight up to a maximum of 100 g for the first three strategies or up to a maximum of 50 g for strategy 4.Only three of 177 meals (two with over-bolus and one with standard bolus 15 min prior to meal) had postprandial blood glucose values of <60 mg/dL. Postprandial hyperglycemia (blood glucose level >180 mg/dL) was prolonged for all four bolus strategies but was shorter for the over-bolus (41% of the 4-h period) than the two standard bolus strategies (73% for each). Mean postprandial blood glucose level was 15.9 mg/dL higher for the standard bolus with meal compared with the prebolus (baseline-adjusted, P=0.07 for treatment effect over the 4-h period).The AP handled the four bolus situations safely, but at the expense of having elevated postprandial glucose levels in most subjects. This was most likely secondary to suboptimal performance of the algorithm.

SUBMITTER: Chase HP

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4183919 | biostudies-literature | 2014 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Multicenter closed-loop/hybrid meal bolus insulin delivery with type 1 diabetes.

Chase H Peter HP Doyle Francis J FJ Zisser Howard H Renard Eric E Nimri Revital R Cobelli Claudio C Buckingham Bruce A BA Maahs David M DM Anderson Stacey S Magni Lalo L Lum John J Calhoun Peter P Kollman Craig C Beck Roy W RW

Diabetes technology & therapeutics 20140904 10

<h4>Background</h4>This study evaluated meal bolus insulin delivery strategies and associated postprandial glucose control while using an artificial pancreas (AP) system.<h4>Subjects and methods</h4>This study was a multicenter trial in 53 patients, 12-65 years of age, with type 1 diabetes for at least 1 year and use of continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion for at least 6 months. Four different insulin bolus strategies were assessed: standard bolus delivered with meal (n=51), standard bolus d ...[more]

PMID: 25188375

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionManual determination of insulin dosing largely fails to optimise glucose control in type 1 diabetes. Automated insulin delivery via closed-loop systems has improved glucose control in short-term studies. The objective of the present study is to determine the effectiveness of 6 months' closed-loop compared with manually determined insulin dosing on time-in-target glucose range in adults with type 1 diabetes.Methods and analysisThis open-label, seven-centre, randomised controlled parallel group clinical trial will compare home-based hybrid closed-loop versus standard diabetes therapy in Australia. Adults aged ?25 years with type 1 diabetes using intensive insulin therapy (via multiple daily injections or insulin pump, total enrolment target n=120) will undertake a run-in period including diabetes and carbohydrate-counting education, clinical optimisation and baseline data collection. Participants will then be randomised 1:1 either to 26 weeks of MiniMed 670G hybrid closed-loop system therapy (Medtronic, Northridge, CA, USA) or continuation of their current diabetes therapy. The hybrid closed-loop system delivers insulin automatically to address basal requirements and correct to target glucose level, while bolus doses for meals require user initiation and carbohydrate estimation. Analysis will be intention to treat, with the primary outcome time in continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) target range (3.9-10.0?mmol/L) during the final 3 weeks of intervention. Secondary outcomes include: other CGM parameters, HbA1c, severe hypoglycaemia, psychosocial well-being, sleep, cognition, electrocardiography, costs, quality of life, biomarkers of vascular health and hybrid closed-loop system performance. Semistructured interviews will assess the expectations and experiences of a subgroup of hybrid closed-loop users.Ethics and disseminationThe study has Human Research Ethics Committee approval. The study will be conducted in accordance with the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki and Good Clinical Practice. Results will be disseminated at scientific conferences and via peer-reviewed publications.Trial registration numberACTRN12617000520336; Pre-results.

Project description:Nocturnal hypoglycemia is life threatening for individuals with type 1 diabetes (T1D) due to loss of hypoglycemia symptom recognition (hypoglycemia unawareness) and impaired glucose counter regulation. These individuals also show disturbed sleep, which may result from glycemic dysregulation. Whether use of a hybrid closed loop (HCL) insulin delivery system with integrated continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) designed for improving glycemic control, relates to better sleep across time in this population remains unknown. The purpose of this study was to describe long-term changes in glycemic control and objective sleep after initiating hybrid closed loop (HCL) insulin delivery in adults with type 1 diabetes and hypoglycemia unawareness. To accomplish this, six adults (median age = 58 y) participated in an 18-month ongoing trial assessing HCL effectiveness. Glycemic control and sleep were measured using continuous glucose monitoring and wrist accelerometers every 3 months. Paired sample t-tests and Cohen's d effect sizes modeled glycemic and sleep changes and the magnitude of these changes from baseline to 9 months. Reduced hypoglycemia (d = 0.47-0.79), reduced basal insulin requirements (d = 0.48), and a smaller glucose coefficient of variation (d = 0.47) occurred with medium-large effect sizes from baseline to 9 months. Hypoglycemia awareness improved from baseline to 6 months with medium-large effect sizes (Clarke score (d = 0.60), lability index (d = 0.50), HYPO score (d = 1.06)). Shorter sleep onset latency (d = 1.53; p < 0.01), shorter sleep duration (d = 0.79), fewer total activity counts (d = 1.32), shorter average awakening length (d = 0.46), and delays in sleep onset (d = 1.06) and sleep midpoint (d = 0.72) occurred with medium-large effect sizes from baseline to 9 months. HCL led to clinically significant reductions in hypoglycemia and improved hypoglycemia awareness. Sleep showed a delayed onset, reduced awakening length and onset latency, and maintenance of high sleep efficiency after initiating HCL. Our findings add to the limited evidence on the relationships between diabetes therapeutic technologies and sleep health. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03215914).

Project description:BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE:Current prototypes of closed-loop systems for glucose control in type 1 diabetes mellitus, also referred to as artificial pancreas systems, require a pre-meal insulin bolus to compensate for delays in subcutaneous insulin absorption in order to avoid initial post-prandial hyperglycemia. Computing such a meal bolus is a challenging task due to the high intra-subject variability of insulin requirements. Most closed-loop systems compute this pre-meal insulin dose by a standard bolus calculation, as is commonly found in insulin pumps. However, the performance of these calculators is limited due to a lack of adaptiveness in front of dynamic changes in insulin requirements. Despite some initial attempts to include adaptation within these calculators, challenges remain. METHODS:In this paper we present a new technique to automatically adapt the meal-priming bolus within an artificial pancreas. The technique consists of using a novel adaptive bolus calculator based on Case-Based Reasoning and Run-To-Run control, within a closed-loop controller. Coordination between the adaptive bolus calculator and the controller was required to achieve the desired performance. For testing purposes, the clinically validated Imperial College Artificial Pancreas controller was employed. The proposed system was evaluated against itself but without bolus adaptation. The UVa-Padova T1DM v3.2 system was used to carry out a three-month in silico study on 11 adult and 11 adolescent virtual subjects taking into account inter-and intra-subject variability of insulin requirements and uncertainty on carbohydrate intake. RESULTS:Overall, the closed-loop controller enhanced by an adaptive bolus calculator improves glycemic control when compared to its non-adaptive counterpart. In particular, the following statistically significant improvements were found (non-adaptive vs. adaptive). Adults: mean glucose 142.2?±?9.4vs. 131.8?±?4.2mg/dl; percentage time in target [70, 180]mg/dl, 82.0?±?7.0vs. 89.5?±?4.2; percentage time above target 17.7?±?7.0vs. 10.2?±?4.1. Adolescents: mean glucose 158.2?±?21.4vs. 140.5?±?13.0mg/dl; percentage time in target, 65.9?±?12.9vs. 77.5?±?12.2; percentage time above target, 31.7?±?13.1vs. 19.8?±?10.2. Note that no increase in percentage time in hypoglycemia was observed. CONCLUSION:Using an adaptive meal bolus calculator within a closed-loop control system has the potential to improve glycemic control in type 1 diabetes when compared to its non-adaptive counterpart.

Project description:BackgroundThe achievement of glycaemic control remains challenging for patients with type 1 diabetes. We assessed the effectiveness of day-and-night hybrid closed-loop insulin delivery compared with sensor-augmented pump therapy in people with suboptimally controlled type 1 diabetes aged 6 years and older.MethodsIn this open-label, multicentre, multinational, single-period, parallel randomised controlled trial, participants were recruited from diabetes outpatient clinics at four hospitals in the UK and two centres in the USA. We randomly assigned participants with type 1 diabetes aged 6 years and older treated with insulin pump and with suboptimal glycaemic control (glycated haemoglobin [HbA1c] 7·5-10·0%) to receive either hybrid closed-loop therapy or sensor-augmented pump therapy over 12 weeks of free living. Training on study insulin pump and continuous glucose monitoring took place over a 4-week run-in period. Eligible subjects were randomly assigned using central randomisation software. Allocation to the two study groups was unblinded, and randomisation was stratified within centre by low (<8·5%) or high (≥8·5%) HbA1c. The primary endpoint was the proportion of time that glucose concentration was within the target range of 3·9-10·0 mmol/L at 12 weeks post randomisation. Analyses of primary outcome and safety measures were done in all randomised patients. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02523131, and is closed to accrual.FindingsFrom May 12, 2016, to Nov 17, 2017, 114 individuals were screened, and 86 eligible patients were randomly assigned to receive hybrid closed-loop therapy (n=46) or sensor-augmented pump therapy (n=40; control group). The proportion of time that glucose concentration was within the target range was significantly higher in the closed-loop group (65%, SD 8) compared with the control group (54%, SD 9; mean difference in change 10·8 percentage points, 95% CI 8·2 to 13·5; p<0·0001). In the closed-loop group, HbA1c was reduced from a screening value of 8·3% (SD 0·6) to 8·0% (SD 0·6) after the 4-week run-in, and to 7·4% (SD 0·6) after the 12-week intervention period. In the control group, the HbA1c values were 8·2% (SD 0·5) at screening, 7·8% (SD 0·6) after run-in, and 7·7% (SD 0·5) after intervention; reductions in HbA1c percentages were significantly greater in the closed-loop group compared with the control group (mean difference in change 0·36%, 95% CI 0·19 to 0·53; p<0·0001). The time spent with glucose concentrations below 3·9 mmol/L (mean difference in change -0·83 percentage points, -1·40 to -0·16; p=0·0013) and above 10·0 mmol/L (mean difference in change -10·3 percentage points, -13·2 to -7·5; p<0·0001) was shorter in the closed-loop group than the control group. The coefficient of variation of sensor-measured glucose was not different between interventions (mean difference in change -0·4%, 95% CI -1·4% to 0·7%; p=0·50). Similarly, total daily insulin dose was not different (mean difference in change 0·031 U/kg per day, 95% CI -0·005 to 0·067; p=0·09) and bodyweight did not differ (mean difference in change 0·68 kg, 95% CI -0·34 to 1·69; p=0·19). No severe hypoglycaemia occurred. One diabetic ketoacidosis occurred in the closed-loop group due to infusion set failure. Two participants in each study group had significant hyperglycaemia, and there were 13 other adverse events in the closed-loop group and three in the control group.InterpretationHybrid closed-loop insulin delivery improves glucose control while reducing the risk of hypoglycaemia across a wide age range in patients with suboptimally controlled type 1 diabetes.FundingJDRF, NIHR, and Wellcome Trust.

Dataset Information

Multicenter closed-loop/hybrid meal bolus insulin delivery with type 1 diabetes.

Publications

Multicenter closed-loop/hybrid meal bolus insulin delivery with type 1 diabetes.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure