Literature DB >> 26316630

Feasibility of Outpatient 24-Hour Closed-Loop Insulin Delivery.

Martin I de Bock1, Anirban Roy2, Matthew N Cooper3, Julie A Dart4, Carolyn L Berthold3, Adam J Retterath3, Kate E Freeman4, Benyamin Grosman2, Natalie Kurtz2, Fran Kaufman2, Timothy W Jones1, Elizabeth A Davis5.   

Abstract

Entities:  

Year:  2015        PMID: 26316630      PMCID: PMC4613919          DOI: 10.2337/dc15-1047

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Diabetes Care        ISSN: 0149-5992            Impact factor:   19.112


× No keyword cloud information.
Studies using outpatient closed-loop insulin delivery for type 1 diabetes have recently been published (1–5). We conducted a 5-day outpatient feasibility study comparing hybrid closed-loop (HCL) to sensor-augmented pump therapy with low-glucose suspend (SAPT + LGS) in eight patients with type 1 diabetes using an open-label randomized crossover trial design (ACTRN12614001005640). We used the Medtronic HCL system: MiniMed insulin pump, MiniMed Enlite II glucose sensor, MiniMed MiniLink REAL-time sensor, MiniMed Translator, and an Android mobile device with the algorithm (proportional integrative derivate with insulin feedback and additional safety parameters—primarily being an upper limit of allowable insulin delivery). Multiple algorithm parameters were individualized according to total daily insulin requirements in the preceding 48 h. Meals were announced by entering a capillary glucose value and meal carbohydrate content, for which bolus insulin was delivered according to the patient’s unique carbohydrate ratio. The Android mobile device sent data via the Internet, allowing for remote monitoring. During SAPT + LGS, the LGS threshold was set at 3.3 mmol/L. Sensor alarms were set at 3.9–18 mmol/L in both arms. Hyperglycemia was corrected according to the patient’s sensitivity factor during SAPT +LGS and HCL. The outpatient phase was preceded by a 48-h in-clinic training phase in both arms. Participants checked capillary blood glucose 6–8 times per day, including an overnight check. Participants were contacted by phone twice a day and electronically monitored remotely 24 h a day. A continuous glucose monitor change was scheduled during both study arms. Eight subjects (four adults aged 30–40 years and four adolescents aged 13–18 years, mean HbA1c 7.5 ± 0.6% [58 ± 5 mmol/mol]) were studied. Results are shown in Table 1. There was no difference in the median total time spent in target (4.0–9.9 mmol/L) glucose sensor range: 67.6% for HCL versus 58.7% for SAPT + LGS (P = 0.30). Median sensor glucose was 8.2 mmol/L (6.6, 10.6) for HCL versus 8.9 mmol/L (6.7, 11.3) for SAPT + LGS (P = 0.47). At night, time spent in target sensor glucose range was similar for HCL (68.9%) and SAPT + LGS (67.8%) (P = 0.76). During the day, time spent in target sensor glucose range was 66.7% for HCL versus 57.5% for SAPT + LGS (P = 0.18). During HCL, there were seven hypoglycemic events (capillary blood glucose <3.3 mmol/L). Of these, three events occurred within 2 h of a bolus and three events occurred during exercise. During the SAPT + LGS phase, there were 13 hypoglycemic events (<3.3 mmol/L): 6 events occurred within 2 h of a bolus and 1 event occurred during exercise. The insulin pump automatically suspended in 10 of these events, and in one case the pump had been manually suspended. Hypoglycemia <2.8 mmol/L was all but eliminated with HCL (1 vs. 9, P = 0.04) (one event occurring after an open-loop correction bolus for hyperglycemia secondary to insulin infusion site failure). No occasions of investigator intervention were indicated. There were no adverse events.
Table 1

Glucose control during HCL and SAPT + LGS over the 5-day phase in eight subjects with type 1 diabetes

HCLSAPT + LGSP*
Percent time spent at glucose level (mmol/L)
 <3.30.5 (0.0, 0.9); 0.54 ± 0.60.6 (0.0, 1.6); 1.13 ± 1.50.84
 3.3–3.91.0 (0.4, 1.5); 1.15 ± 1.01.4 (0.2, 3.8); 1.98 ± 2.00.89
 4.0–9.967.6 (61.4, 71.5); 67.41 ± 9.858.7 (52.7, 73.9); 60.97 ± 16.40.30
 10.0–14.927.5 (22.0, 32.1); 26.44 ± 9.130.9 (22.2, 38.8); 30.17 ± 12.90.50
 ≥154.5 (2.9, 6.1); 4.46 ± 3.15.0 (0.7, 6.9); 5.75 ± 6.20.34
Sensor glucose (mmol/L)8.2 (6.6, 10.6); 8.8 ± 3.18.9 (6.7, 11.3); 9.2 ± 3.40.47
Duration of observation (h)929926N/A
Hypoglycemic events
 <3.9 mmol/L18260.23§
 <3.3 mmol/L7130.19§
  <2.8 mmol/L190.04§

Data shown as median (interquartile range); mean ± SD or n.

P value from a generalized estimate equation of daily data adjusted for the within-person clustering; for 4–9.9 and 10–14.9 mmol/L, percent time in range per day was used; for <3.3, 3.3–3.9, and ≥15 mmol/L, a dichotomous variable per day was analyzed under the binomial distribution.

P value calculated via Poisson regression, with duration of observation as the offset variable.

Glucose control during HCL and SAPT + LGS over the 5-day phase in eight subjects with type 1 diabetes Data shown as median (interquartile range); mean ± SD or n. P value from a generalized estimate equation of daily data adjusted for the within-person clustering; for 4–9.9 and 10–14.9 mmol/L, percent time in range per day was used; for <3.3, 3.3–3.9, and ≥15 mmol/L, a dichotomous variable per day was analyzed under the binomial distribution. P value calculated via Poisson regression, with duration of observation as the offset variable. This study used a prototype algorithm and demonstrated feasibility for home use. In response to the data, the algorithm has been improved to be more adaptive and incorporated into insulin pump hardware (MiniMed 670G) in preparation for long-term home studies.
  5 in total

1.  Day and night home closed-loop insulin delivery in adults with type 1 diabetes: three-center randomized crossover study.

Authors:  Lalantha Leelarathna; Sibylle Dellweg; Julia K Mader; Janet M Allen; Carsten Benesch; Werner Doll; Martin Ellmerer; Sara Hartnell; Lutz Heinemann; Harald Kojzar; Lucy Michalewski; Marianna Nodale; Hood Thabit; Malgorzata E Wilinska; Thomas R Pieber; Sabine Arnolds; Mark L Evans; Roman Hovorka
Journal:  Diabetes Care       Date:  2014-07       Impact factor: 19.112

2.  Overnight closed-loop insulin delivery in young people with type 1 diabetes: a free-living, randomized clinical trial.

Authors:  Roman Hovorka; Daniela Elleri; Hood Thabit; Janet M Allen; Lalantha Leelarathna; Ranna El-Khairi; Kavita Kumareswaran; Karen Caldwell; Peter Calhoun; Craig Kollman; Helen R Murphy; Carlo L Acerini; Malgorzata E Wilinska; Marianna Nodale; David B Dunger
Journal:  Diabetes Care       Date:  2014       Impact factor: 19.112

3.  Outpatient glycemic control with a bionic pancreas in type 1 diabetes.

Authors:  Steven J Russell; Firas H El-Khatib; Manasi Sinha; Kendra L Magyar; Katherine McKeon; Laura G Goergen; Courtney Balliro; Mallory A Hillard; David M Nathan; Edward R Damiano
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2014-06-15       Impact factor: 91.245

4.  Feasibility of a portable bihormonal closed-loop system to control glucose excursions at home under free-living conditions for 48 hours.

Authors:  Arianne C van Bon; Yoeri M Luijf; Rob Koebrugge; Robin Koops; Joost B L Hoekstra; J Hans DeVries
Journal:  Diabetes Technol Ther       Date:  2013-11-13       Impact factor: 6.118

5.  Safety of outpatient closed-loop control: first randomized crossover trials of a wearable artificial pancreas.

Authors:  Boris P Kovatchev; Eric Renard; Claudio Cobelli; Howard C Zisser; Patrick Keith-Hynes; Stacey M Anderson; Sue A Brown; Daniel R Chernavvsky; Marc D Breton; Lloyd B Mize; Anne Farret; Jérôme Place; Daniela Bruttomesso; Simone Del Favero; Federico Boscari; Silvia Galasso; Angelo Avogaro; Lalo Magni; Federico Di Palma; Chiara Toffanin; Mirko Messori; Eyal Dassau; Francis J Doyle
Journal:  Diabetes Care       Date:  2014-06-14       Impact factor: 19.112

  5 in total
  10 in total

1.  Feasibility Studies of an Insulin-Only Bionic Pancreas in a Home-Use Setting.

Authors:  Laya Ekhlaspour; Laura M Nally; Firas H El-Khatib; Trang T Ly; Paula Clinton; Eliana Frank; Molly L Tanenbaum; Sarah J Hanes; Rajendranath R Selagamsetty; Korey Hood; Edward R Damiano; Bruce A Buckingham
Journal:  J Diabetes Sci Technol       Date:  2019-08-30

2.  Realizing a Closed-Loop (Artificial Pancreas) System for the Treatment of Type 1 Diabetes.

Authors:  Rayhan A Lal; Laya Ekhlaspour; Korey Hood; Bruce Buckingham
Journal:  Endocr Rev       Date:  2019-12-01       Impact factor: 19.871

3.  Enhanced Model Predictive Control (eMPC) Strategy for Automated Glucose Control.

Authors:  Joon Bok Lee; Eyal Dassau; Ravi Gondhalekar; Dale E Seborg; Jordan E Pinsker; Francis J Doyle
Journal:  Ind Eng Chem Res       Date:  2016-10-27       Impact factor: 3.720

4.  Artificial Pancreas: Clinical Study in Latin America Without Premeal Insulin Boluses.

Authors:  Ricardo Sánchez-Peña; Patricio Colmegna; Fabricio Garelli; Hernán De Battista; Demián García-Violini; Marcela Moscoso-Vásquez; Nicolás Rosales; Emilia Fushimi; Enrique Campos-Náñez; Marc Breton; Valeria Beruto; Paula Scibona; Cintia Rodriguez; Javier Giunta; Ventura Simonovich; Waldo H Belloso; Daniel Cherñavvsky; Luis Grosembacher
Journal:  J Diabetes Sci Technol       Date:  2018-07-12

Review 5.  A Review of the Current Challenges Associated with the Development of an Artificial Pancreas by a Double Subcutaneous Approach.

Authors:  Sverre Christian Christiansen; Anders Lyngvi Fougner; Øyvind Stavdahl; Konstanze Kölle; Reinold Ellingsen; Sven Magnus Carlsen
Journal:  Diabetes Ther       Date:  2017-05-13       Impact factor: 2.945

6.  Glucose Outcomes with the In-Home Use of a Hybrid Closed-Loop Insulin Delivery System in Adolescents and Adults with Type 1 Diabetes.

Authors:  Satish K Garg; Stuart A Weinzimer; William V Tamborlane; Bruce A Buckingham; Bruce W Bode; Timothy S Bailey; Ronald L Brazg; Jacob Ilany; Robert H Slover; Stacey M Anderson; Richard M Bergenstal; Benyamin Grosman; Anirban Roy; Toni L Cordero; John Shin; Scott W Lee; Francine R Kaufman
Journal:  Diabetes Technol Ther       Date:  2017-01-30       Impact factor: 6.118

Review 7.  Artificial pancreas treatment for outpatients with type 1 diabetes: systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Eleni Bekiari; Konstantinos Kitsios; Hood Thabit; Martin Tauschmann; Eleni Athanasiadou; Thomas Karagiannis; Anna-Bettina Haidich; Roman Hovorka; Apostolos Tsapas
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2018-04-18

Review 8.  Efficacy and safety of the artificial pancreas in the paediatric population with type 1 diabetes.

Authors:  Susanna Esposito; Elisa Santi; Giulia Mancini; Francesco Rogari; Giorgia Tascini; Giada Toni; Alberto Argentiero; Maria Giulia Berioli
Journal:  J Transl Med       Date:  2018-06-28       Impact factor: 5.531

9.  Effectiveness of Automated Insulin Management Features of the MiniMed® 640G Sensor-Augmented Insulin Pump.

Authors:  Alex Zhong; Pratik Choudhary; Chantal McMahon; Pratik Agrawal; John B Welsh; Toni L Cordero; Francine R Kaufman
Journal:  Diabetes Technol Ther       Date:  2016-09-27       Impact factor: 6.118

10.  Antihyperglycemic drugs use and new-onset atrial fibrillation: A population-based nested case control study.

Authors:  Yi-Sheng Liou; Fu-Yu Yang; Hung-Yi Chen; Gwo-Ping Jong
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-08-30       Impact factor: 3.240

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.