Karen Caldwell

Overnight Closed-Loop Insulin Delivery in Young People With Type 1 Diabetes: A Free-Living, Randomized Clinical Trial

OBJECTIVE To evaluate feasibility, safety, and efficacy of overnight closed-loop insulin delivery in free-living youth with type 1 diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS Overnight closed loop was evaluated at home by 16 pump-treated adolescents with type 1 diabetes aged 12–18 years. Over a 3-week period, overnight insulin delivery was directed by a closed-loop system, and on another 3-week period sensor-augmented therapy was applied. The order of interventions was random. The primary end point was time when adjusted sensor glucose was between 3.9 and 8.0 mmol/L from 2300 to 0700 h. RESULTS Closed loop was constantly applied over at least 4 h on 269 nights (80%); sensor data were collected over at least 4 h on 282 control nights (84%). Closed loop increased time spent with glucose in target by a median 15% (interquartile range −9 to 43; P < 0.001). Mean overnight glucose was reduced by a mean 14 (SD 58) mg/dL (P < 0.001). Time when glucose was <70 mg/dL was low in both groups, but nights with glucose <63 mg/dL for at least 20 min were less frequent during closed loop (10 vs. 17%; P = 0.01). Despite lower total daily insulin doses by a median 2.3 (interquartile range −4.7 to 9.3) units (P = 0.009), overall 24-h glucose was reduced by a mean 9 (SD 41) mg/dL (P = 0.006) during closed loop. CONCLUSIONS Unsupervised home use of overnight closed loop in adolescents with type 1 diabetes is safe and feasible. Glucose control was improved during the day and night with fewer episodes of nocturnal hypoglycemia.

Closed-Loop Basal Insulin Delivery Over 36 Hours in Adolescents With Type 1 Diabetes: Randomized clinical trial

OBJECTIVE We evaluated the safety and efficacy of closed-loop basal insulin delivery during sleep and after regular meals and unannounced periods of exercise. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS Twelve adolescents with type 1 diabetes (five males; mean age 15.0 [SD 1.4] years; HbA1c 7.9 [0.7]%; BMI 21.4 [2.6] kg/m2) were studied at a clinical research facility on two occasions and received, in random order, either closed-loop basal insulin delivery or conventional pump therapy for 36 h. During closed-loop insulin delivery, pump basal rates were adjusted every 15 min according to a model predictive control algorithm informed by subcutaneous sensor glucose levels. During control visits, subjects’ standard infusion rates were applied. Prandial insulin boluses were given before main meals (50–80 g carbohydrates) but not before snacks (15–30 g carbohydrates). Subjects undertook moderate-intensity exercise, not announced to the algorithm, on a stationary bicycle at a 140 bpm heart rate in the morning (40 min) and afternoon (20 min). Primary outcome was time when plasma glucose was in the target range (71–180 mg/dL). RESULTS Closed-loop basal insulin delivery increased percentage time when glucose was in the target range (median 84% [interquartile range 78–88%] vs. 49% [26–79%], P = 0.02) and reduced mean plasma glucose levels (128 [19] vs. 165 [55] mg/dL, P = 0.02). Plasma glucose levels were in the target range 100% of the time on 17 of 24 nights during closed-loop insulin delivery. Hypoglycemia occurred on 10 occasions during control visits and 9 occasions during closed-loop delivery (5 episodes were exercise related, and 4 occurred within 2.5 h of prandial bolus). CONCLUSIONS Day-and-night closed-loop basal insulin delivery can improve glucose control in adolescents. However, unannounced moderate-intensity exercise and excessive prandial boluses pose challenges to hypoglycemia-free closed-loop basal insulin delivery.

Safety and Efficacy of 24-H Closed-Loop Insulin Delivery in Well-Controlled Pregnant Women With Type 1 Diabetes A randomized crossover case series

OBJECTIVE To evaluate the safety and efficacy of closed-loop insulin delivery in well-controlled pregnant women with type 1 diabetes treated with continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS A total of 12 women with type 1 diabetes (aged 32.9 years, diabetes duration 17.6 years, BMI 27.1 kg/m2, and HbA1c 6.4%) were randomly allocated to closed-loop or conventional CSII. They performed normal daily activities (standardized meals, snacks, and exercise) for 24 h on two occasions at 19 and 23 weeks’ gestation. Plasma glucose time in target (63–140 mg/dL) and time spent hypoglycemic were calculated. RESULTS Plasma glucose time in target was comparable for closed-loop and conventional CSII (median [interquartile range]: 81 [59–87] vs. 81% [54–90]; P = 0.75). Less time was spent hypoglycemic (<45 mg/dL [0.0 vs. 0.3%]; P = 0.04), with a lower low blood glucose index (2.4 [0.9–3.5] vs. 3.3 [1.9–5.1]; P = 0.03), during closed-loop insulin delivery. CONCLUSIONS Closed-loop insulin delivery was as effective as conventional CSII, with less time spent in extreme hypoglycemia.

Day and Night Closed-Loop Control in Adults With Type 1 Diabetes: A comparison of two closed-loop algorithms driving continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion versus patient self-management

OBJECTIVE To compare two validated closed-loop (CL) algorithms versus patient self-control with CSII in terms of glycemic control. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS This study was a multicenter, randomized, three-way crossover, open-label trial in 48 patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus for at least 6 months, treated with continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion. Blood glucose was controlled for 23 h by the algorithm of the Universities of Pavia and Padova with a Safety Supervision Module developed at the Universities of Virginia and California at Santa Barbara (international artificial pancreas [iAP]), by the algorithm of University of Cambridge (CAM), or by patients themselves in open loop (OL) during three hospital admissions including meals and exercise. The main analysis was on an intention-to-treat basis. Main outcome measures included time spent in target (glucose levels between 3.9 and 8.0 mmol/L or between 3.9 and 10.0 mmol/L after meals). RESULTS Time spent in the target range was similar in CL and OL: 62.6% for OL, 59.2% for iAP, and 58.3% for CAM. While mean glucose level was significantly lower in OL (7.19, 8.15, and 8.26 mmol/L, respectively) (overall P = 0.001), percentage of time spent in hypoglycemia (<3.9 mmol/L) was almost threefold reduced during CL (6.4%, 2.1%, and 2.0%) (overall P = 0.001) with less time ≤2.8 mmol/L (overall P = 0.038). There were no significant differences in outcomes between algorithms. CONCLUSIONS Both CAM and iAP algorithms provide safe glycemic control.

Day and Night Closed-Loop Control in Adults With Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus

OBJECTIVE To compare two validated closed-loop (CL) algorithms versus patient self-control with CSII in terms of glycemic control. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS This study was a multicenter, randomized, three-way crossover, open-label trial in 48 patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus for at least 6 months, treated with continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion. Blood glucose was controlled for 23 h by the algorithm of the Universities of Pavia and Padova with a Safety Supervision Module developed at the Universities of Virginia and California at Santa Barbara (international artificial pancreas [iAP]), by the algorithm of University of Cambridge (CAM), or by patients themselves in open loop (OL) during three hospital admissions including meals and exercise. The main analysis was on an intention-to-treat basis. Main outcome measures included time spent in target (glucose levels between 3.9 and 8.0 mmol/L or between 3.9 and 10.0 mmol/L after meals). RESULTS Time spent in the target range was similar in CL and OL: 62.6% for OL, 59.2% for iAP, and 58.3% for CAM. While mean glucose level was significantly lower in OL (7.19, 8.15, and 8.26 mmol/L, respectively) (overall P = 0.001), percentage of time spent in hypoglycemia (<3.9 mmol/L) was almost threefold reduced during CL (6.4%, 2.1%, and 2.0%) (overall P = 0.001) with less time ≤2.8 mmol/L (overall P = 0.038). There were no significant differences in outcomes between algorithms. CONCLUSIONS Both CAM and iAP algorithms provide safe glycemic control.

Feasibility of fully automated closed-loop glucose control using continuous subcutaneous glucose measurements in critical illness: a randomized controlled trial

IntroductionClosed-loop (CL) systems modulate insulin delivery according to glucose levels without nurse input. In a prospective randomized controlled trial, we evaluated the feasibility of an automated closed-loop approach based on subcutaneous glucose measurements in comparison with a local sliding-scale insulin-therapy protocol.MethodsTwenty-four critically ill adults (predominantly trauma and neuroscience patients) with hyperglycemia (glucose, ≥10 mM) or already receiving insulin therapy, were randomized to receive either fully automated closed-loop therapy (model predictive control algorithm directing insulin and 20% dextrose infusion based on FreeStyle Navigator continuous subcutaneous glucose values, n = 12) or a local protocol (n = 12) with intravenous sliding-scale insulin, over a 48-hour period. The primary end point was percentage of time when arterial blood glucose was between 6.0 and 8.0 mM.ResultsThe time when glucose was in the target range was significantly increased during closed-loop therapy (54.3% (44.1 to 72.8) versus 18.5% (0.1 to 39.9), P = 0.001; median (interquartile range)), and so was time in wider targets, 5.6 to 10.0 mM and 4.0 to 10.0 mM (P ≤ 0.002), reflecting a reduced glucose exposure >8 and >10 mM (P ≤ 0.002). Mean glucose was significantly lower during CL (7.8 (7.4 to 8.2) versus 9.1 (8.3 to 13.0] mM; P = 0.001) without hypoglycemia (<4 mM) during either therapy.ConclusionsFully automated closed-loop control based on subcutaneous glucose measurements is feasible and may provide efficacious and hypoglycemia-free glucose control in critically ill adults.Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier, NCT01440842.

Evaluation of a portable ambulatory prototype for automated overnight closed‐loop insulin delivery in young people with type 1 diabetes

To evaluate an ambulatory, portable prototype, overnight automated closed‐loop (CL) system and to explore optimal time of CL initiation.

Evaluating the accuracy and large inaccuracy of two continuous glucose monitoring systems.

OBJECTIVE This study evaluated the accuracy and large inaccuracy of the Freestyle Navigator (FSN) (Abbott Diabetes Care, Alameda, CA) and Dexcom SEVEN PLUS (DSP) (Dexcom, Inc., San Diego, CA) continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) systems during closed-loop studies. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS Paired CGM and plasma glucose values (7,182 data pairs) were collected, every 15-60 min, from 32 adults (36.2±9.3 years) and 20 adolescents (15.3±1.5 years) with type 1 diabetes who participated in closed-loop studies. Levels 1, 2, and 3 of large sensor error with increasing severity were defined according to absolute relative deviation greater than or equal to ±40%, ±50%, and ±60% at a reference glucose level of ≥6 mmol/L or absolute deviation greater than or equal to ±2.4 mmol/L,±3.0 mmol/L, and ±3.6 mmol/L at a reference glucose level of <6 mmol/L. RESULTS Median absolute relative deviation was 9.9% for FSN and 12.6% for DSP. Proportions of data points in Zones A and B of Clarke error grid analysis were similar (96.4% for FSN vs. 97.8% for DSP). Large sensor over-reading, which increases risk of insulin over-delivery and hypoglycemia, occurred two- to threefold more frequently with DSP than FSN (once every 2.5, 4.6, and 10.7 days of FSN use vs. 1.2, 2.0, and 3.7 days of DSP use for Level 1-3 errors, respectively). At levels 2 and 3, large sensor errors lasting 1 h or longer were absent with FSN but persisted with DSP. CONCLUSIONS FSN and DSP differ substantially in the frequency and duration of large inaccuracy despite only modest differences in conventional measures of numerical and clinical accuracy. Further evaluations are required to confirm that FSN is more suitable for integration into closed-loop delivery systems.

Accuracy of Subcutaneous Continuous Glucose Monitoring in Critically Ill Adults: Improved Sensor Performance with Enhanced Calibrations

OBJECTIVE Accurate real-time continuous glucose measurements may improve glucose control in the critical care unit. We evaluated the accuracy of the FreeStyle(®) Navigator(®) (Abbott Diabetes Care, Alameda, CA) subcutaneous continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) device in critically ill adults using two methods of calibration. SUBJECTS AND METHODS In a randomized trial, paired CGM and reference glucose (hourly arterial blood glucose [ABG]) were collected over a 48-h period from 24 adults with critical illness (mean±SD age, 60±14 years; mean±SD body mass index, 29.6±9.3 kg/m(2); mean±SD Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation score, 12±4 [range, 6-19]) and hyperglycemia. In 12 subjects, the CGM device was calibrated at variable intervals of 1-6 h using ABG. In the other 12 subjects, the sensor was calibrated according to the manufacturers instructions (1, 2, 10, and 24 h) using arterial blood and the built-in point-of-care glucometer. RESULTS In total, 1,060 CGM-ABG pairs were analyzed over the glucose range from 4.3 to 18.8 mmol/L. Using enhanced calibration median (interquartile range) every 169 (122-213) min, the absolute relative deviation was lower (7.0% [3.5, 13.0] vs. 12.8% [6.3, 21.8], P<0.001), and the percentage of points in the Clarke error grid Zone A was higher (87.8% vs. 70.2%). CONCLUSIONS Accuracy of the Navigator CGM device during critical illness was comparable to that observed in non-critical care settings. Further significant improvements in accuracy may be obtained by frequent calibrations with ABG measurements.

Pharmacokinetics of Insulin Aspart in Pump-Treated Subjects With Type 1 Diabetes: Reproducibility and Effect of Age, Weight, and Duration of Diabetes

Insulin aspart, lispro, or glulisine are recommended in pump-treated type 1 diabetes (T1D). Aspart pharmacokinetics has been studied (1), but little is known about its reproducibility and associations with anthropometric and clinical factors. We analyzed retrospectively data collected in 70 pump-treated subjects with T1D, comprising 39 females, 46 young, with mean (SD) BMI 22.7 (4.2) kg/m2, A1C 8.1% (1.3) (65.3 [14.4] mmol/mol), and total daily insulin 0.8 (0.3) units/kg/day, who were undergoing investigations, with ethical approval, of closed-loop insulin delivery. Participants/guardians signed consent/assent as appropriate. Participants were admitted twice to the research facility, 1–6 weeks apart, for 15–37 h, and consumed 1–4 meals accompanied by prandial insulin aspart. Basal aspart was delivered using closed-loop insulin delivery or conventional pump therapy. Venous blood samples were collected every 30–60 min to measure plasma insulin (Invitron, Monmouth, U.K.). From 5,804 plasma insulin measurements, we estimated, using a two-compartment model, the time-to-peak plasma insulin concentration ( t max [min]), the metabolic clearance rate of insulin (MCR in mL/kg/min), and the background residual plasma insulin concentration (mU/L). Results are …