BACKGROUND: Closed-loop control clinical research trials have been considerably accelerated by in silico trials using the Food and Drug Administration-accepted type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) simulator. We have recently demonstrated that postprandial insulin sensitivity (SI) in T1DM subjects was lower at breakfast (B) than lunch (L) and dinner (D), but not significantly, because of the small population size. The goal of this study was therefore to incorporate this novel information into the University of Virginia/Padova T1DM simulator and to reproduce in silico the observed circadian variability. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Twenty T1DM subjects received an identical mixed meal at B, L, and D. SI was calculated for each meal using the oral glucose minimal model. Seven SI daily patterns were identified, and their probabilities were estimated. Each in silico subject was linked to a time-varying SI profile, while random deviations of up to 40% were allowed. RESULTS: Simulations were compared with experimental data. The integrated area above the basal glucose curve values were 2.60 ± 0.91 (B), 1.38 ± 0.91 (L), and 1.44 ± 1.07 (D) 10(4) min · mg/dL in silico versus 2.87 ± 1.65 (B), 1.98 ± 1.56 (L), and 2.16 ± 2.00 (D) 10(4) min · mg/dL in vivo. Incremental peak glucose values were 109 ± 33 (B), 80 ± 29 (L), and 81 ± 30 (D) mg/dL in silico versus 136 ± 39 (B), 126 ± 37 (L), and 125 ± 48 (D) mg/dL in vivo. CONCLUSIONS: The incorporation of a time-varying SI into the simulator makes this technology suitable for running multiple-meal scenarios, thus enabling a more robust design of artificial pancreas algorithms.
BACKGROUND: Closed-loop control clinical research trials have been considerably accelerated by in silico trials using the Food and Drug Administration-accepted type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) simulator. We have recently demonstrated that postprandial insulin sensitivity (SI) in T1DM subjects was lower at breakfast (B) than lunch (L) and dinner (D), but not significantly, because of the small population size. The goal of this study was therefore to incorporate this novel information into the University of Virginia/Padova T1DM simulator and to reproduce in silico the observed circadian variability. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Twenty T1DM subjects received an identical mixed meal at B, L, and D. SI was calculated for each meal using the oral glucose minimal model. Seven SI daily patterns were identified, and their probabilities were estimated. Each in silico subject was linked to a time-varying SI profile, while random deviations of up to 40% were allowed. RESULTS: Simulations were compared with experimental data. The integrated area above the basal glucose curve values were 2.60 ± 0.91 (B), 1.38 ± 0.91 (L), and 1.44 ± 1.07 (D) 10(4) min · mg/dL in silico versus 2.87 ± 1.65 (B), 1.98 ± 1.56 (L), and 2.16 ± 2.00 (D) 10(4) min · mg/dL in vivo. Incremental peak glucose values were 109 ± 33 (B), 80 ± 29 (L), and 81 ± 30 (D) mg/dL in silico versus 136 ± 39 (B), 126 ± 37 (L), and 125 ± 48 (D) mg/dL in vivo. CONCLUSIONS: The incorporation of a time-varying SI into the simulator makes this technology suitable for running multiple-meal scenarios, thus enabling a more robust design of artificial pancreas algorithms.
Authors: Boris Kovatchev; Claudio Cobelli; Eric Renard; Stacey Anderson; Marc Breton; Stephen Patek; William Clarke; Daniela Bruttomesso; Alberto Maran; Silvana Costa; Angelo Avogaro; Chiara Dalla Man; Andrea Facchinetti; Lalo Magni; Giuseppe De Nicolao; Jerome Place; Anne Farret Journal: J Diabetes Sci Technol Date: 2010-11-01
Authors: Firas H El-Khatib; Steven J Russell; David M Nathan; Robert G Sutherlin; Edward R Damiano Journal: Sci Transl Med Date: 2010-04-14 Impact factor: 17.956
Authors: Marc Breton; Anne Farret; Daniela Bruttomesso; Stacey Anderson; Lalo Magni; Stephen Patek; Chiara Dalla Man; Jerome Place; Susan Demartini; Simone Del Favero; Chiara Toffanin; Colleen Hughes-Karvetski; Eyal Dassau; Howard Zisser; Francis J Doyle; Giuseppe De Nicolao; Angelo Avogaro; Claudio Cobelli; Eric Renard; Boris Kovatchev Journal: Diabetes Date: 2012-06-11 Impact factor: 9.461
Authors: William V Tamborlane; Roy W Beck; Bruce W Bode; Bruce Buckingham; H Peter Chase; Robert Clemons; Rosanna Fiallo-Scharer; Larry A Fox; Lisa K Gilliam; Irl B Hirsch; Elbert S Huang; Craig Kollman; Aaron J Kowalski; Lori Laffel; Jean M Lawrence; Joyce Lee; Nelly Mauras; Michael O'Grady; Katrina J Ruedy; Michael Tansey; Eva Tsalikian; Stuart Weinzimer; Darrell M Wilson; Howard Wolpert; Tim Wysocki; Dongyuan Xing Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2008-09-08 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Stuart A Weinzimer; Garry M Steil; Karena L Swan; Jim Dziura; Natalie Kurtz; William V Tamborlane Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2008-02-05 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: Claudio Cobelli; Eric Renard; Boris P Kovatchev; Patrick Keith-Hynes; Najib Ben Brahim; Jérôme Place; Simone Del Favero; Marc Breton; Anne Farret; Daniela Bruttomesso; Eyal Dassau; Howard Zisser; Francis J Doyle; Stephen D Patek; Angelo Avogaro Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2012-09 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: Ling Hinshaw; Chiara Dalla Man; Debashis K Nandy; Ahmed Saad; Adil E Bharucha; James A Levine; Robert A Rizza; Rita Basu; Rickey E Carter; Claudio Cobelli; Yogish C Kudva; Ananda Basu Journal: Diabetes Date: 2013-02-27 Impact factor: 9.461
Authors: Peter G Jacobs; Navid Resalat; Joseph El Youssef; Ravi Reddy; Deborah Branigan; Nicholas Preiser; John Condon; Jessica Castle Journal: J Diabetes Sci Technol Date: 2015-10-05
Authors: Annabelle Ballesta; Pasquale F Innominato; Robert Dallmann; David A Rand; Francis A Lévi Journal: Pharmacol Rev Date: 2017-04 Impact factor: 25.468