Continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion therapy and multiple daily insulin injections in type 1 diabetes mellitus: a comparative overview and future horizons.

INTRODUCTION: Continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) therapy is currently accepted as a treatment strategy for type 1 diabetes. Transition from multiple daily injection therapy (MDI; including basal-bolus regimens) to CSII is based on expectations of better metabolic control and fewer hypoglycaemic events. Evidence to date has not been always conclusive. AREAS COVERED: Evidence for CSII and MDI in terms of glycaemic control, hypoglycaemia and psychosocial outcomes is reviewed in the adult and paediatric population with type 1 diabetes. Findings from studies on threshold-based insulin pump suspension and predictive low glucose management (PLGM) are outlined. Limitations of current CSII application and future technological developments are discussed. EXPERT OPINION: Glycaemic control and quality of life (QOL) may be improved by CSII compared to MDI depending on baseline HbA1c and hypoglycaemia rates. Future studies are expected to provide evidence on clinical and cost effectiveness in those who will benefit the most. Training, structured education and support are important to benefit from CSII. Novel technological approaches linking continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) and CSII may help mitigate against frequent hypoglycaemia in those at risk. Development of glucose-responsive automated closed-loop insulin delivery systems may reduce the burden of disease management and improve outcomes in type 1 diabetes.Support for the research work by JDRF, Seventh Framework Programme of the European Union, Diabetes UK, National Institute for Health Research Cambridge Biomedical Research Centre

Therapeutics of Diabetes Mellitus: Focus on Insulin Analogues and Insulin Pumps

Aim. Inadequately controlled diabetes accounts for chronic complications and increases mortality. Its therapeutic management aims in normal HbA1C, prandial and postprandial glucose levels. This review discusses diabetes management focusing on the latest insulin analogues, alternative insulin delivery systems and the artificial pancreas. Results. Intensive insulin therapy with multiple daily injections (MDI) allows better imitation of the physiological rhythm of insulin secretion. Longer-acting, basal insulin analogues provide concomitant improvements in safety, efficacy and variability of glycaemic control, followed by low risks of hypoglycaemia. Continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) provides long-term glycaemic control especially in type 1 diabetic patients, while reducing hypoglycaemic episodes and glycaemic variability. Continuous subcutaneous glucose monitoring (CGM) systems provide information on postprandial glucose excursions and nocturnal hypo- and/or hyperglycemias. This information enhances treatment options, provides a useful tool for self-monitoring and allows safer achievement of treatment targets. In the absence of a cure-like pancreas or islets transplants, artificial “closed-loop” systems mimicking the pancreatic activity have been also developed. Conclusions. Individualized treatment plans for insulin initiation and administration mode are critical in achieving target glycaemic levels. Progress in these fields is expected to facilitate and improve the quality of life of diabetic patients

Modelling endogenous insulin concentration in type 2 diabetes during closed loop insulin delivery

This is the final published version. It first appeared at http://www.biomedical-engineering-online.com/content/14/1/19.Background: Closed-loop insulin delivery is an emerging treatment for type 1 diabetes (T1D) evaluated clinically and using computer simulations during pre-clinical testing. Efforts to make closed-loop systems available to people with type 2 diabetes (T2D) calls for the development of a new type of simulators to accommodate differences between T1D and T2D. Presented here is the development of a model of posthepatic endogenous insulin concentration, a component omitted in T1D simulators but key for simulating T2D physiology. Methods: We evaluated six competing models to describe the time course of endogenous insulin concentration as a function of the plasma glucose concentration and time. The models were fitted to data collected in insulin-naive subjects with T2D who underwent two 24-h visits and were treated, in a random order, by either closed-loop insulin delivery or glucose-lowering oral agents. The model parameters were estimated using a Bayesian approach, as implemented in the WinBUGS software. Model selection criteria were used to identify the best model describing our clinical data. Results: The selected model successfully described endogenous insulin concentration over 24 h in both study periods and provided plausible parameter estimates. Model-derived results were in concordance with a clinical finding which revealed increased posthepatic endogenous insulin concentration during the control study period (P < 0.05). The modelling results indicated that the excess amount of insulin can be attributed to the glucose-independent effect as the glucose-dependent effect was similar between visits (P > 0.05). Conclusions: A model to describe endogenous insulin concentration in T2D including components of posthepatic glucose-dependent and glucose-independent insulin secretion was identified and validated. The model is suitable to be incorporated in a simulation environment for evaluating closed-loop insulin delivery in T2D.This work was funded in part by a National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Cambridge Biomedical Research Centre Grant, Diabetes UK (BDA07/0003549), and Wellcome Strategic Award (100574/Z/12/Z). The research was conducted with support from Addenbrooke’s Clinical Research Facility (Cambridge, UK). We gratefully acknowledge laboratory support from Angie Watts (University of Cambridge, Cambridge UK), Dr Stephen Luzio and Mr Gareth Dunseath (University of Swansea, Swansea, UK), and Dr Keith Burling (University of Cambridge, UK)

Insulin Estimation and Prediction A REVIEW OF THE ESTIMATION AND PREDICTION OF SUBCUTANEOUS INSULIN PHARMACOKINETICS IN CLOSED-LOOP GLUCOSE CONTROL

This work was supported by the Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness (MINECO) through grant DPI2013-46982-C2-1-R and the EU through FEDER funds.Bondía Company, J.; Romero Vivó, S.; Ricarte Benedito, B.; Diez, J. (2018). Insulin Estimation and Prediction A REVIEW OF THE ESTIMATION AND PREDICTION OF SUBCUTANEOUS INSULIN PHARMACOKINETICS IN CLOSED-LOOP GLUCOSE CONTROL. IEEE Control Systems. 38(1):47-66. https://doi.org/10.1109/MCS.2017.2766312S476638

In vivo investigation of the tissue response to commercial Teflon insulin infusion sets in large swine for 14 days: the effect of angle of insertion on tissue histology and insulin spread within the subcutaneous tissue.

Objective: This study investigated the effects of the inflammatory tissue response (ITR) to an insulin infusion set (IIS) on insulin bolus spread over wear time, as well as the effect of cannula insertion angle on the ITR, bolus shape, and pump tubing pressure. Research design and methods: Angled or straight IISs were inserted every other day for 14 days into the subcutaneous tissue of 11 swine and insulin was delivered continuously. Prior to euthanasia, a 70 µL bolus of insulin/X-ray contrast agent was infused while recording a pressure profile (peak tubing pressure, pmax; area under the pressure curve, AUC), followed by the excision of the tissue-catheter specimen. Bolus surface area (SA) and volume (V) were assessed via micro-CT. Tissue was stained to analyze total area of inflammation (TAI) and inflammatory layer thickness (ILT) surrounding the cannula. Results: A bolus delivered through an angled IIS had a larger mean SA than a bolus delivered through a straight cannula (314.0±84.2 mm2 vs 229.0±99.7 mm2, p\u3c0.001) and a larger volume (198.7±66.9 mm3 vs 145.0±65.9 mm3, p=0.001). Both decreased significantly over wear time, independent of angle. There was a significant difference in TAI (angled, 9.1±4.0 mm2 vs straight, 14.3±8.6 mm2, p\u3c0.001) and ILT (angled, 0.7±0.4 vs straight, 1.2±0.7 mm, p\u3c0.001). pmax (p=0.005) and AUC (p=0.014) were lower using angled IIS. As ILT increased, pmax increased, while SA and V decreased. Conclusions: The progression of the ITR directly affected bolus shape and tubing pressure. Although straight insertion is clinically preferred, our data suggest that an angled IIS elicits lower grades of ITR and delivers a bolus with lower tubing pressure and greater SA and V. The subcutaneous environment plays a crucial role in IIS longevity, and the insertion angle needs to be considered in future IIS designs and clinical trials

Pharmacokinetics of diluted (U20) insulin aspart compared with standard (U100) in children aged 3-6 years with type 1 diabetes during closed-loop insulin delivery: a randomised clinical trial.

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: The aim of this study was to compare the pharmacokinetics of two different concentrations of insulin aspart (B28Asp human insulin) in children aged 3-6 years with type 1 diabetes. METHODS: Young children with type 1 diabetes underwent an open-label, randomised, two-period crossover study in a clinical research facility, 2-6 weeks apart. In random order, diluted (1:5 dilution with saline [154 mmol/l NaCl]; 20 U/ml) or standard strength (100 U/ml) insulin aspart was administered via an insulin pump as a meal bolus and then overnight by closed-loop insulin delivery as determined by a model predictive algorithm. Plasma insulin was measured every 30-60 min from 17:00 hours on day 1 to 8:00 hours on day 2. We measured the time-to-peak insulin concentration (tmax), insulin metabolic clearance rate (MCR(I)) and background insulin concentration (ins(c)) using compartmental modelling. RESULTS: Eleven children (six male; age range 3.75-6.96 years, HbA1c 7.6% ± 1.3% [60 ± 14 mmol/mol], BMI standard deviation score 1.0 ± 0.8, duration of diabetes 2.2 ± 1.0 years, total daily dose 12.9 [10.6-16.5] U, fasting C-peptide concentration 5 [5-17.1] pmol/l; mean ± SD or median [interquartile range]) participated in the study. No differences between standard and diluted insulin were observed in terms of t max (59.2 ± 14.4 vs 61.6 ± 8.7) min for standard vs diluted, p = 0.59; MCR I (1.98 × 10(-2) ± 0.99 × 10(-2) vs 1.89 × 10(-2) ± 0.82 × 10(-2) 1/kg/min, p = 0.47), and ins c (34 [1-72] vs 23 [3-65] pmol/l, p = 0.66). However, t max showed less intersubject variability following administration of diluted aspart (SD 14.4 vs 8.7 min, p = 0.047). CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: Diluting insulin aspart does not change its pharmacokinetics. However, it may result in less variable absorption and could be used in young children with type 1 diabetes undergoing closed-loop insulin delivery. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT01557634. FUNDING: FUNDING was provided by the JDRF, 7th Framework Programme of the European Union, Wellcome Trust Strategic Award and the National Institute for Health Research Cambridge Biomedical Research Centre.Funding was provided by the JDRF (grant number 22-2011- 668), 7th Framework Programme of the European Union (Spidiman project; grant agreement number 305343), Wellcome Trust Strategic Award (100574/Z/12/Z) and the National Institute for Health Research Cambridge Biomedical Research Centre.This is the final published version. It first appeared at http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs00125-014-3483-6