Firas H. El-Khatib

A Bihormonal Closed-Loop Artificial Pancreas for Type 1 Diabetes

An algorithm continuously delivers appropriate insulin and glucagon doses to diabetic patients, maintaining their blood glucose at near-normal values, even after high-carbohydrate meals. Using Math to Treat Diabetes: Automated Blood Glucose Control People with Type 1 diabetes become experts at monitoring their own blood glucose levels, self-injecting insulin daily to compensate for the loss of their pancreatic islet cells. This lifelong vigilance is difficult, and stable blood glucose can often be elusive. An artificial pancreas would be a welcome development. El-Khatib and colleagues have now taken the first steps toward developing such a device and have shown that their system can keep blood glucose within an acceptable range, even after carbohydrate-rich meals. Their artificial “pancreas,” really a closed-loop control system, is composed of a continuous blood sugar monitor, hormone pumps, and a laptop running a computer program that allows the two pumps to communicate and calculate how much hormone the patient needs at any given time. As in a real pancreas, two hormones with opposing actions on blood sugar—insulin and glucagon—were delivered into the subjects’ bloodstream. The computer algorithm incorporated a pharmacokinetic model for insulin so that it could accurately account for the decay of insulin levels in the blood. Of the 11 subjects, who were followed for 27 hours, six maintained a desirable mean blood glucose concentration of 140 mg/dl with no decreases. For the other five subjects, their slower insulin absorption required adjustment of the pharmacokinetic model to maintain stable a blood glucose concentration, but once this was done, they too showed no hypoglycemia. Although in these experiments the algorithm was executed on a laptop computer, the device could eventually run on a computer chip as part of a fully wearable, portable artificial pancreas system. Such a device would provide better control of diabetics’ blood glucose concentrations and improve their quality of life. Automated control of blood glucose (BG) concentration is a long-sought goal for type 1 diabetes therapy. We have developed a closed-loop control system that uses frequent measurements of BG concentration along with subcutaneous delivery of both the fast-acting insulin analog lispro and glucagon (to imitate normal physiology) as directed by a computer algorithm. The algorithm responded only to BG concentrations and incorporated a pharmacokinetic model for lispro. Eleven subjects with type 1 diabetes and no endogenous insulin secretion were studied in 27-hour experiments, which included three carbohydrate-rich meals. In six subjects, the closed-loop system achieved a mean BG concentration of 140 mg/dl, which is below the mean BG concentration target of ≤154 mg/dl recommended by the American Diabetes Association. There were no instances of treatment-requiring hypoglycemia. Five other subjects exhibited hypoglycemia that required treatment; however, these individuals had slower lispro absorption kinetics than the six subjects that did not become hypoglycemic. The time-to-peak plasma lispro concentrations of subjects that exhibited hypoglycemia ranged from 71 to 191 min (mean, 117 ± 48 min) versus 56 to 72 min (mean, 64 ± 6 min) in the group that did not become hypoglycemic (aggregate mean of 84 min versus 31 min longer than the algorithm’s assumption of 33 min, P = 0.07). In an additional set of experiments, adjustment of the algorithm’s pharmacokinetic parameters (time-to-peak plasma lispro concentration set to 65 min) prevented hypoglycemia in both groups while achieving an aggregate mean BG concentration of 164 mg/dl. These results demonstrate the feasibility of safe BG control by a bihormonal artificial endocrine pancreas.

Blood Glucose Control in Type 1 Diabetes With a Bihormonal Bionic Endocrine Pancreas

OBJECTIVE To test whether safe and effective glycemic control could be achieved in type 1 diabetes using a bihormonal bionic endocrine pancreas driven by a continuous glucose monitor in experiments lasting more than two days and including six high-carbohydrate meals and exercise as challenges to glycemic control. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS Six subjects with type 1 diabetes and no endogenous insulin secretion participated in two 51-h experiments. Blood glucose was managed with a bionic endocrine pancreas controlling subcutaneous delivery of insulin and glucagon with insulin pumps. A partial meal-priming bolus of insulin (0.035 units/kg/meal, then 0.05 units/kg/meal in repeat experiments) was administered at the beginning of each meal (on average 78 ± 12 g of carbohydrates per meal were consumed). Plasma glucose (PG) control was evaluated with a reference quality measurement on venous blood every 15 min. RESULTS The overall mean PG was 158 mg/dL, with 68% of PG values in the range of 70–180 mg/dL. There were no significant differences in mean PG between larger and smaller meal-priming bolus experiments. Hypoglycemia (PG <70 mg/dL) was rare, with eight incidents during 576 h of closed-loop control (0.7% of total time). During 192 h of nighttime control, mean PG was 123 mg/dL, with 93% of PG values in the range of 70–180 mg/dL and only one episode of mild hypoglycemia (minimum PG 62 mg/dL). CONCLUSIONS A bihormonal bionic endocrine pancreas achieved excellent glycemic control with minimal hypoglycemia over the course of two days of continuous use despite high-carbohydrate meals and exercise. A trial testing a wearable version of the system under free-living conditions is justified.

Adaptive Closed-Loop Control Provides Blood-Glucose Regulation Using Dual Subcutaneous Insulin and Glucagon Infusion in Diabetic Swine

Background: In order to stave off deleterious complications of the disease, the ultimate task for people with diabetes is to maintain their blood glucose in euglycemic range. Despite technological advancements, conventional open-loop therapy often results in prolonged hyperglycemia and episodic hypoglycemia, in addition to necessitating carbohydrate counting, frequent glucose monitoring, and drug administration. The logical conclusion in the evolution of exogenous insulin therapy is to develop an automated closed-loop control system. Methods: Eleven closed-loop control experiments were conducted in four anesthetized diabetic pigs, with carbohydrate loads simulated by intravenous glucose administration through ear-vein catheters. Type 1 diabetes-like pathology was induced using intravenous administration of cytotoxin streptozotocin. The augmented model-predictive control algorithm accounts for the accumulation of subcutaneous insulin, which is critical in avoiding excessive insulin dosing. Results: Control results consistently showed successful blood-glucose regulation to euglycemic range within 80–120 minutes after intravenous glucose loads, with no incidence of hypoglycemia. This is consistent with a negative oral glucose tolerance test for diabetes and is the optimal postprandial regulation that can be achieved with subcutaneous insulin administration. Results also demonstrated the potency of subcutaneous glucagon in staving off episodic hypoglycemia and revealed efficacy of the control algorithm in coping with a twofold variation in subject weights, while simultaneously overlooking erratic blood-glucose fluctuations. Conclusions: Using an automated adaptive glucose-control system, we show successful blood-glucose regulation in vivo and establish, definitively, the plausibility and practicality of closed-loop blood-glucose control using subcutaneous insulin and glucagon infusion in type 1 diabetes. The control system strikes an intricate balance between tight blood-glucose control and optimal drug consumption, while simultaneously maintaining emphasis on simplicity and reliability.

A Comparative Effectiveness Analysis of Three Continuous Glucose Monitors

OBJECTIVE To compare three continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) devices in subjects with type 1 diabetes under closed-loop blood glucose (BG) control. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS Six subjects with type 1 diabetes (age 52 ± 14 years, diabetes duration 32 ± 14 years) each participated in two 51-h closed-loop BG control experiments in the hospital. Venous plasma glucose (PG) measurements (GlucoScout, International Biomedical) obtained every 15 min (2,360 values) were paired in time with corresponding CGM glucose (CGMG) measurements obtained from three CGM devices, the Navigator (Abbott Diabetes Care), the Seven Plus (DexCom), and the Guardian (Medtronic), worn simultaneously by each subject. Errors in paired PG–CGMG measurements and data reporting percentages were obtained for each CGM device. RESULTS The Navigator had the best overall accuracy, with an aggregate mean absolute relative difference (MARD) of all paired points of 11.8 ± 11.1% and an average MARD across all 12 experiments of 11.8 ± 3.8%. The Seven Plus and Guardian produced aggregate MARDs of all paired points of 16.5 ± 17.8% and 20.3 ± 18.0%, respectively, and average MARDs across all 12 experiments of 16.5 ± 6.7% and 20.2 ± 6.8%, respectively. Data reporting percentages, a measure of reliability, were 76% for the Seven Plus and nearly 100% for the Navigator and Guardian. CONCLUSIONS A comprehensive head-to-head-to-head comparison of three CGM devices for BG values from 36 to 563 mg/dL revealed marked differences in performance characteristics that include accuracy, precision, and reliability. The Navigator outperformed the other two in these areas.

A Comparative Effectiveness Analysis of Three Continuous Glucose Monitors The Navigator, G4 Platinum, and Enlite

Background: The effectiveness and safety of continuous glucose monitors (CGMs) is dependent on their accuracy and reliability. The objective of this study was to compare 3 CGMs in adult and pediatric subjects with type 1 diabetes under closed-loop blood-glucose (BG) control. Twenty-four subjects (12 adults) with type 1 diabetes each participated in one 48-hour closed-loop BG control experiment. Methods: Venous plasma glucose (PG) measurements obtained every 15 minutes (4657 values) were paired in time with corresponding CGM glucose (CGMG) measurements obtained from 3 CGMs (FreeStyle Navigator, Abbott Diabetes Care; G4 Platinum, Dexcom; Enlite, Medtronic) worn simultaneously by each subject. Results: The Navigator and G4 Platinum (G4) had the best overall accuracy, with an aggregate mean absolute relative difference (MARD) of all paired points of 12.3 ± 12.1% and 10.8 ± 9.9%, respectively. Both had lower MARDs of all paired points than Enlite (17.9 ± 15.8%, P < .005). Very large errors (MARD > 50%) were less common with the G4 (0.5%) than with the Enlite (4.3%, P = .0001) while the number of very large errors with the Navigator (1.4%) was intermediate between the G4 and Enlite (P = .1 and P = .06, respectively). The average MARD for experiments in adolescent subjects were lower than in adult subjects for the Navigator and G4, while there was no difference for Enlite. All 3 devices had similar reliability. Conclusions: A comprehensive head-to-head-to-head comparison of 3 CGMs revealed marked differences in both accuracy and precision. The Navigator and G4 were found to outperform the Enlite in these areas.

Autonomous and Continuous Adaptation of a Bihormonal Bionic Pancreas in Adults and Adolescents With Type 1 Diabetes

CONTEXT A challenge for automated glycemic control in type 1 diabetes (T1D) is the large variation in insulin needs between individuals and within individuals at different times in their lives. OBJECTIVES The objectives of the study was to test the ability of a third-generation bihormonal bionic pancreas algorithm, initialized with only subject weight; to adapt automatically to the different insulin needs of adults and adolescents; and to evaluate the impact of optional, automatically adaptive meal-priming boluses. DESIGN This was a randomized controlled trial. SETTING The study was conducted at an inpatient clinical research center. PATIENTS Twelve adults and 12 adolescents with T1D participated in the study. INTERVENTIONS Subjects in each age group were randomized to automated glycemic control for 48 hours with or without automatically adaptive meal-priming boluses. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Mean plasma glucose (PG), time with PG less than 60 mg/dL, and insulin total daily dose were measured. RESULTS The 48-hour mean PG values with and without adaptive meal-priming boluses were 132 ± 9 vs 146 ± 9 mg/dL (P = .03) in adults and 162 ± 6 vs 175 ± 9 mg/dL (P = .01) in adolescents. Adaptive meal-priming boluses improved mean PG without increasing time spent with PG less than 60 mg/dL: 1.4% vs 2.3% (P = .6) in adults and 0.1% vs 0.1% (P = 1.0) in adolescents. Large increases in adaptive meal-priming boluses and shifts in the timing and size of automatic insulin doses occurred in adolescents. Much less adaptation occurred in adults. There was nearly a 4-fold variation in the total daily insulin dose across all cohorts (0.36-1.41 U/kg · d). CONCLUSIONS A single control algorithm, initialized only with subject weight, can quickly adapt to regulate glycemia in patients with TID and highly variable insulin requirements.

Day and night glycaemic control with a bionic pancreas versus conventional insulin pump therapy in preadolescent children with type 1 diabetes: a randomised crossover trial

BACKGROUND The safety and efficacy of continuous, multiday, automated glycaemic management has not been tested in outpatient studies of preadolescent children with type 1 diabetes. We aimed to compare the safety and efficacy of a bihormonal bionic pancreas versus conventional insulin pump therapy in this population of patients in an outpatient setting. METHODS In this randomised, open-label, crossover study, we enrolled preadolescent children (aged 6-11 years) with type 1 diabetes (diagnosed for ≥1 year) who were on insulin pump therapy, from two diabetes camps in the USA. With the use of sealed envelopes, participants were randomly assigned in blocks of two to either 5 days with the bionic pancreas or conventional insulin pump therapy (control) as the first intervention, followed by a 3 day washout period and then 5 days with the other intervention. Study allocation was not masked. The autonomously adaptive algorithm of the bionic pancreas received data from a continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) device to control subcutaneous delivery of insulin and glucagon. Conventional insulin pump therapy was administered by the camp physicians and other clinical staff in accordance with their established protocols; participants also wore a CGM device during the control period. The coprimary outcomes, analysed by intention to treat, were mean CGM-measured glucose concentration and the proportion of time with a CGM-measured glucose concentration below 3·3 mmol/L, on days 2-5. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02105324. FINDINGS Between July 20, and Aug 19, 2014, 19 children with a mean age of 9·8 years (SD 1·6) participated in and completed the study. The bionic pancreas period was associated with a lower mean CGM-measured glucose concentration on days 2-5 than was the control period (7·6 mmol/L [SD 0·6] vs 9·3 mmol/L [1·7]; p=0·00037) and a lower proportion of time with a CGM-measured glucose concentration below 3·3 mmol/L on days 2-5 (1·2% [SD 1·1] vs 2·8% [1·2]; p<0·0001). The median number of carbohydrate interventions given per participant for hypoglycaemia on days 1-5 (ie, glucose <3·9 mmol/L) was lower during the bionic pancreas period than during the control period (three [range 0-8] vs five [0-14]; p=0·037). No episodes of severe hypoglycaemia were recorded. Medium-to-large concentrations of ketones (range 0·6-3·6 mmol/dL) were reported on seven occasions in five participants during the control period and on no occasion during the bionic pancreas period (p=0·063). INTERPRETATION The improved mean glycaemia and reduced hypoglycaemia with the bionic pancreas relative to insulin pump therapy in preadolescent children with type 1 diabetes in a diabetes camp setting is a promising finding. Studies of a longer duration during which children use the bionic pancreas during their normal routines at home and school should be done to investigate the potential for use of the bionic pancreas in real-world settings. FUNDING The Leona M and Harry B Helmsley Charitable Trust and the US National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases.

Home use of a bihormonal bionic pancreas versus insulin pump therapy in adults with type 1 diabetes: a multicentre randomised crossover trial

BACKGROUND The safety and effectiveness of a continuous, day-and-night automated glycaemic control system using insulin and glucagon has not been shown in a free-living, home-use setting. We aimed to assess whether bihormonal bionic pancreas initialised only with body mass can safely reduce mean glycaemia and hypoglycaemia in adults with type 1 diabetes who were living at home and participating in their normal daily routines without restrictions on diet or physical activity. METHODS We did a random-order crossover study in volunteers at least 18 years old who had type 1 diabetes and lived within a 30 min drive of four sites in the USA. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) in blocks of two using sequentially numbered sealed envelopes to glycaemic regulation with a bihormonal bionic pancreas or usual care (conventional or sensor-augmented insulin pump therapy) first, followed by the opposite intervention. Both study periods were 11 days in length, during which time participants continued all normal activities, including athletics and driving. The bionic pancreas was initialised with only the participants body mass. Autonomously adaptive dosing algorithms used data from a continuous glucose monitor to control subcutaneous delivery of insulin and glucagon. The coprimary outcomes were the mean glucose concentration and time with continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) glucose concentration less than 3·3 mmol/L, analysed over days 2-11 in participants who completed both periods of the study. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02092220. FINDINGS We randomly assigned 43 participants between May 6, 2014, and July 3, 2015, 39 of whom completed the study: 20 who were assigned to bionic pancreas first and 19 who were assigned to the comparator first. The mean CGM glucose concentration was 7·8 mmol/L (SD 0·6) in the bionic pancreas period versus 9·0 mmol/L (1·6) in the comparator period (difference 1·1 mmol/L, 95% CI 0·7-1·6; p<0·0001), and the mean time with CGM glucose concentration less than 3·3 mmol/L was 0·6% (0·6) in the bionic pancreas period versus 1·9% (1·7) in the comparator period (difference 1·3%, 95% CI 0·8-1·8; p<0·0001). The mean nausea score on the Visual Analogue Scale (score 0-10) was greater during the bionic pancreas period (0·52 [SD 0·83]) than in the comparator period (0·05 [0·17]; difference 0·47, 95% CI 0·21-0·73; p=0·0024). Body mass and laboratory parameters did not differ between periods. There were no serious or unexpected adverse events in the bionic pancreas period of the study. INTERPRETATION Relative to conventional and sensor-augmented insulin pump therapy, the bihormonal bionic pancreas, initialised only with participant weight, was able to achieve superior glycaemic regulation without the need for carbohydrate counting. Larger and longer studies are needed to establish the long-term benefits and risks of automated glycaemic management with a bihormonal bionic pancreas. FUNDING National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases of the National Institutes of Health, and National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences.

A feasibility study of bihormonal closed-loop blood glucose control using dual subcutaneous infusion of insulin and glucagon in ambulatory diabetic swine.

Background: We sought to test the feasibility and efficacy of bihormonal closed-loop blood glucose (BG) control that utilizes subcutaneous (SC) infusion of insulin and glucagon, a model-predictive control algorithm for determining insulin dosing, and a proportional-derivative control algorithm for determining glucagon dosing. Methods: Thirteen closed-loop experiments (∼7–27 h in length) were conducted in six ambulatory diabetic pigs weighing 26–50 kg. In all experiments, venous BG was sampled through a central line in the vena cava. Efficacy was evaluated in terms of the controllers ability to regulate BG in response to large meal disturbances (∼5 g of carbohydrate per kilogram of body mass per meal) based only on regular frequent venous BG sampling and requiring only the subjects weight for initialization. Results: Closed-loop results demonstrated successful BG regulation to normoglycemic range, with average insulin-to-carbohydrate ratios between ∼1:20 and 1:40 U/g. The total insulin bolus doses averaged ∼6 U for a meal containing ∼6 g per kilogram body mass. Mean BG values in two 24 h experiments were ∼142 and ∼155 mg/dl, with the total daily dose (TDD) of insulin being ∼0.8–1.0 U per kilogram of body mass and the TDD of glucagon being ∼0.02–0.05 mg. Results also affirmed the efficacy of SC doses of glucagon in staving off episodic hypoglycemia. Conclusions: We demonstrate the feasibility of bihormonal closed-loop BG regulation using a control system that employs SC infusion of insulin and glucagon as governed by an algorithm that reacts only to BG without any feedforward information regarding carbohydrate consumption or physical activity. As such, this study can reasonably be regarded as the first practical implementation of an artificial endocrine pancreas that has a hormonally derived counterregulatory capability.

Efficacy determinants of subcutaneous microdose glucagon during closed-loop control.

Background: During a previous clinical trial of a closed-loop blood glucose (BG) control system that administered insulin and microdose glucagon subcutaneously, glucagon was not uniformly effective in preventing hypoglycemia (BG <70 mg/dl). After a global adjustment of control algorithm parameters used to model insulin absorption and clearance to more closely match insulin pharmacokinetic (PK) parameters observed in the study cohort, administration of glucagon by the control system was more effective in preventing hypoglycemia. We evaluated the role of plasma insulin and plasma glucagon levels in determining whether glucagon was effective in preventing hypoglycemia. Methods: We identified and analyzed 36 episodes during which glucagon was given and categorized them as either successful or unsuccessful in preventing hypoglycemia. Results: In 20 of the 36 episodes, glucagon administration prevented hypoglycemia. In the remaining 16, BG fell below 70 mg/dl (12 of the 16 occurred during experiments performed before PK parameters were adjusted). The (dimensionless) levels of plasma insulin (normalized relative to each subjects baseline insulin level) were significantly higher during episodes ending in hypoglycemia (5.2 versus 3.7 times the baseline insulin level, p = .01). The relative error in the control algorithms online estimate of the instantaneous plasma insulin level was also higher during episodes ending in hypoglycemia (50 versus 30%, p = .003), as were the peak plasma glucagon levels (183 versus 116 pg/ml, p = .007, normal range 50–150 pg/ml) and mean plasma glucagon levels (142 versus 75 pg/ml, p = .02). Relative to mean plasma insulin levels, mean plasma glucagon levels tended to be 59% higher during episodes ending in hypoglycemia, although this result was not found to be statistically significant (p = .14). The rate of BG descent was also significantly greater during episodes ending in hypoglycemia (1.5 versus 1.0 mg/dl/min, p = .02). Conclusions: Microdose glucagon administration was relatively ineffective in preventing hypoglycemia when plasma insulin levels exceeded the controllers online estimate by >60%. After the algorithm PK parameters were globally adjusted, insulin dosing was more conservative and microdose glucagon administration was very effective in reducing hypoglycemia while maintaining normal plasma glucagon levels. Improvements in the accuracy of the controllers online estimate of plasma insulin levels could be achieved if ultrarapid-acting insulin formulations could be developed with faster absorption and less intra- and intersubject variability than the current insulin analogs available today.