Prediction-Coherent LSTM-based Recurrent Neural Network for Safer Glucose Predictions in Diabetic People

In the context of time-series forecasting, we propose a LSTM-based recurrent neural network architecture and loss function that enhance the stability of the predictions. In particular, the loss function penalizes the model, not only on the prediction error (mean-squared error), but also on the predicted variation error. We apply this idea to the prediction of future glucose values in diabetes, which is a delicate task as unstable predictions can leave the patient in doubt and make him/her take the wrong action, threatening his/her life. The study is conducted on type 1 and type 2 diabetic people, with a focus on predictions made 30-minutes ahead of time. First, we confirm the superiority, in the context of glucose prediction, of the LSTM model by comparing it to other state-of-the-art models (Extreme Learning Machine, Gaussian Process regressor, Support Vector Regressor). Then, we show the importance of making stable predictions by smoothing the predictions made by the models, resulting in an overall improvement of the clinical acceptability of the models at the cost in a slight loss in prediction accuracy. Finally, we show that the proposed approach, outperforms all baseline results. More precisely, it trades a loss of 4.3\% in the prediction accuracy for an improvement of the clinical acceptability of 27.1\%. When compared to the moving average post-processing method, we show that the trade-off is more efficient with our approach

Flash Glucose-Sensing Technology as a Replacement for Blood Glucose Monitoring for the Management of Insulin-Treated Type 2 Diabetes: a Multicenter, Open-Label Randomized Controlled Trial

Introduction Glycemic control in participants with insulin-treated diabetes remains challenging. We assessed safety and efficacy of new flash glucose-sensing technology to replace self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG). Methods This open-label randomized controlled study (ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02082184) enrolled adults with type 2 diabetes on intensive insulin therapy from 26 European diabetes centers. Following 2 weeks of blinded sensor wear, 2:1 (intervention/control) randomization (centrally, using biased-coin minimization dependant on study center and insulin administration) was to control (SMBG) or intervention (glucose-sensing technology). Participants and investigators were not masked to group allocation. Primary outcome was difference in HbA1c at 6 months in the full analysis set. Prespecified secondary outcomes included time in hypoglycemia, effect of age, and patient satisfaction. Results Participants (n = 224) were randomized (149 intervention, 75 controls). At 6 months, there was no difference in the change in HbA1c between intervention and controls: −3.1 ± 0.75 mmol/mol, [−0.29 ± 0.07% (mean ± SE)] and −3.4 ± 1.04 mmol/mol (−0.31 ± 0.09%) respectively; p = 0.8222. A difference was detected in participants aged <65 years [−5.7 ± 0.96 mmol/mol (−0.53 ± 0.09%) and −2.2 ± 1.31 mmol/mol (−0.20 ± 0.12%), respectively; p = 0.0301]. Time in hypoglycemia <3.9 mmol/L (70 mg/dL) reduced by 0.47 ± 0.13 h/day [mean ± SE (p = 0.0006)], and <3.1 mmol/L (55 mg/dL) reduced by 0.22 ± 0.07 h/day (p = 0.0014) for intervention participants compared with controls; reductions of 43% and 53%, respectively. SMBG frequency, similar at baseline, decreased in intervention participants from 3.8 ± 1.4 tests/day (mean ± SD) to 0.3 ± 0.7, remaining unchanged in controls. Treatment satisfaction was higher in intervention compared with controls (DTSQ 13.1 ± 0.50 (mean ± SE) and 9.0 ± 0.72, respectively; p < 0.0001). No serious adverse events or severe hypoglycemic events were reported related to sensor data use. Forty-two serious events [16 (10.7%) intervention participants, 12 (16.0%) controls] were not device-related. Six intervention participants reported nine adverse events for sensor-wear reactions (two severe, six moderate, one mild). Conclusion Flash glucose-sensing technology use in type 2 diabetes with intensive insulin therapy results in no difference in HbA1c change and reduced hypoglycemia, thus offering a safe, effective replacement for SMBG

In silico assessment of biomedical products: the conundrum of rare but not so rare events in two case studies

In silico clinical trials, defined as “The use of individualized computer simulation in the development or regulatory evaluation of a medicinal product, medical device, or medical intervention,” have been proposed as a possible strategy to reduce the regulatory costs of innovation and the time to market for biomedical products. We review some of the the literature on this topic, focusing in particular on those applications where the current practice is recognized as inadequate, as for example, the detection of unexpected severe adverse events too rare to be detected in a clinical trial, but still likely enough to be of concern. We then describe with more details two case studies, two successful applications of in silico clinical trial approaches, one relative to the University of Virginia/Padova simulator that the Food and Drug Administration has accepted as possible replacement for animal testing in the preclinical assessment of artificial pancreas technologies, and the second, an investigation of the probability of cardiac lead fracture, where a Bayesian network was used to combine in vivo and in silico observations, suggesting a whole new strategy of in silico-augmented clinical trials, to be used to increase the numerosity where recruitment is impossible, or to explore patients’ phenotypes that are unlikely to appear in the trial cohort, but are still frequent enough to be of concern

Physiological modeling, tight glycemic control, and the ICU clinician: what are models and how can they affect practice?

Critically ill patients are highly variable in their response to care and treatment. This variability and the search for improved outcomes have led to a significant increase in the use of protocolized care to reduce variability in care. However, protocolized care does not address the variability of outcome due to inter- and intra-patient variability, both in physiological state, and the response to disease and treatment. This lack of patient-specificity defines the opportunity for patient-specific approaches to diagnosis, care, and patient management, which are complementary to, and fit within, protocolized approaches

Closed-loop insulin delivery for treatment of type 1 diabetes

Type 1 diabetes is one of the most common endocrine problems in childhood and adolescence, and remains a serious chronic disorder with increased morbidity and mortality, and reduced quality of life. Technological innovations positively affect the management of type 1 diabetes. Closed-loop insulin delivery (artificial pancreas) is a recent medical innovation, aiming to reduce the risk of hypoglycemia while achieving tight control of glucose. Characterized by real-time glucose-responsive insulin administration, closed-loop systems combine glucose-sensing and insulin-delivery components. In the most viable and researched configuration, a disposable sensor measures interstitial glucose levels, which are fed into a control algorithm controlling delivery of a rapid-acting insulin analog into the subcutaneous tissue by an insulin pump. Research progress builds on an increasing use of insulin pumps and availability of glucose monitors. We review the current status of insulin delivery, focusing on clinical evaluations of closed-loop systems. Future goals are outlined, and benefits and limitations of closed-loop therapy contrasted. The clinical utility of these systems is constrained by inaccuracies in glucose sensing, inter- and intra-patient variability, and delays due to absorption of insulin from the subcutaneous tissue, all of which are being gradually addressed.Supported by the Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation (#22-2006-1113, #22-2007-1801, #22-2009-801), Diabetes UK (BDA07/0003549, BDA07/0003551), European Commission Framework Programme 7 (247138), NIDDK (DK085621), and NIHR Cambridge Biomedical Research Centre