OBJECTIVE: Closed-loop insulin delivery offers a promising treatment option, but to date, it has only been evaluated in type 1 diabetes. Our aim was to evaluate the feasibility of fully closed-loop subcutaneous insulin delivery in insulin-naïve patients with type 2 diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Twelve subjects (seven males, age 57.2 years, BMI 30.5 kg/m2) with noninsulin-treated type 2 diabetes (HbA1c 8.4% [68 mmol/mol], diabetes duration 7.6 years) underwent two 24-h visits (closed-loop and control) in a randomized crossover design. During closed-loop visits, the subjects' routine diabetes therapy was replaced with model predictive control algorithm-driven subcutaneous insulin pump delivery based on real-time continuous glucose monitoring. Meals were unannounced, and no additional insulin was administered for carbohydrates consumed. During control visits, the usual diabetes regimen was continued (metformin 92%, sulfonylureas 58%, dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors 33%). On both visits, subjects consumed matched 50- to 80-g carbohydrate meals and optional 15-g carbohydrate snacks and remained largely sedentary. Plasma glucose measurements evaluated closed-loop performance. RESULTS: Compared with conventional therapy, 24 h of closed-loop insulin delivery increased overall the median time in target plasma glucose (3.9-8.0 mmol/L) from 24 to 40% (P = 0.016), despite sensor under-reading by a median of 1.2 mmol/L. The benefit of the closed-loop system was more prominent overnight, with greater time in target glucose (median 78 vs. 35%; P = 0.041) and less time in hyperglycemia (22 vs. 65%; P = 0.041). There was no hypoglycemia during either intervention. CONCLUSIONS: A closed-loop system without meal announcement and using subcutaneous insulin delivery in insulin-naïve patients with type 2 diabetes appears feasible and safe. Improvement in postprandial glucose control may require further optimization of system performance.
OBJECTIVE: Closed-loop insulin delivery offers a promising treatment option, but to date, it has only been evaluated in type 1 diabetes. Our aim was to evaluate the feasibility of fully closed-loop subcutaneous insulin delivery in insulin-naïve patients with type 2 diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Twelve subjects (seven males, age 57.2 years, BMI 30.5 kg/m2) with noninsulin-treated type 2 diabetes (HbA1c 8.4% [68 mmol/mol], diabetes duration 7.6 years) underwent two 24-h visits (closed-loop and control) in a randomized crossover design. During closed-loop visits, the subjects' routine diabetes therapy was replaced with model predictive control algorithm-driven subcutaneous insulin pump delivery based on real-time continuous glucose monitoring. Meals were unannounced, and no additional insulin was administered for carbohydrates consumed. During control visits, the usual diabetes regimen was continued (metformin 92%, sulfonylureas 58%, dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors 33%). On both visits, subjects consumed matched 50- to 80-g carbohydrate meals and optional 15-g carbohydrate snacks and remained largely sedentary. Plasma glucose measurements evaluated closed-loop performance. RESULTS: Compared with conventional therapy, 24 h of closed-loop insulin delivery increased overall the median time in target plasma glucose (3.9-8.0 mmol/L) from 24 to 40% (P = 0.016), despite sensor under-reading by a median of 1.2 mmol/L. The benefit of the closed-loop system was more prominent overnight, with greater time in target glucose (median 78 vs. 35%; P = 0.041) and less time in hyperglycemia (22 vs. 65%; P = 0.041). There was no hypoglycemia during either intervention. CONCLUSIONS: A closed-loop system without meal announcement and using subcutaneous insulin delivery in insulin-naïve patients with type 2 diabetes appears feasible and safe. Improvement in postprandial glucose control may require further optimization of system performance.
Authors: Stacey M Anderson; Eyal Dassau; Dan Raghinaru; John Lum; Sue A Brown; Jordan E Pinsker; Mei Mei Church; Carol Levy; David Lam; Yogish C Kudva; Bruce Buckingham; Gregory P Forlenza; R Paul Wadwa; Lori Laffel; Francis J Doyle; J Hans DeVries; Eric Renard; Claudio Cobelli; Federico Boscari; Simone Del Favero; Boris P Kovatchev Journal: Diabetes Technol Ther Date: 2019-01-16 Impact factor: 6.118