Coming of age: the artificial pancreas for type 1 diabetes.

The artificial pancreas (closed-loop system) addresses the unmet clinical need for improved glucose control whilst reducing the burden of diabetes self-care in type 1 diabetes. Glucose-responsive insulin delivery above and below a preset insulin amount informed by sensor glucose readings differentiates closed-loop systems from conventional, threshold-suspend and predictive-suspend insulin pump therapy. Insulin requirements in type 1 diabetes can vary between one-third-threefold on a daily basis. Closed-loop systems accommodate these variations and mitigate the risk of hypoglycaemia associated with tight glucose control. In this review we focus on the progress being made in the development and evaluation of closed-loop systems in outpatient settings. Randomised transitional studies have shown feasibility and efficacy of closed-loop systems under supervision or remote monitoring. Closed-loop application during free-living, unsupervised conditions by children, adolescents and adults compared with sensor-augmented pumps have shown improved glucose outcomes, reduced hypoglycaemia and positive user acceptance. Innovative approaches to enhance closed-loop performance are discussed and we also present the outlook and strategies used to ease clinical adoption of closed-loop systems.Supported by National Institute of Health Research Cambridge Biomedical Research Centre, Efficacy and Mechanism Evaluation National Institute for Health Research (#14/23/09), The Leona M. & Harry B. Helmsley Charitable Trust (#2016PG-T1D045), JDRF (#2-SRA-2014-256-M-R), National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (1UC4DK108520-01), and Diabetes UK (#14/0004878).This is the final version of the article. It first appeared from Springer via http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00125-016-4022-

Basal insulin delivery reduction for exercise in type 1 diabetes: finding the sweet spot

Exercise poses significant challenges to glucose management in type 1 diabetes. In spite of careful planning and manipulation of subcutaneous insulin administration, increased risk of hypoglycaemia and glycaemic variability during and after exercise may occur as a result of inherent delays in insulin action and impaired counter-regulatory hormone responses. Various strategies to mitigate this issue have been advocated in clinical practice, including ingestion of supplementary carbohydrate prior to exercise, reducing background and pre-meal insulin bolus and performing bouts of resistance/high intensity exercise before aerobic exercise. Insulin pump therapy, considered the most physiological form of insulin replacement for type 1 diabetes allows modulation of basal insulin delivery before, during and after exercise. However uncertainty remains regarding the optimal strategy to reduce basal insulin delivery and its efficacy. In this issue of Diabetologia, McAuley and colleagues (DOI: 10.1007/s00125-016-3981-9) report on the impact of a 50% reduction of basal insulin delivery before, during and after moderate-intensity aerobic exercise. Results from this study may contribute to a better understanding of the effects of basal insulin delivery manipulation and may aid in devising therapeutic approaches for glucose management during exercise

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)

Closed-loop for type 1 diabetes – an introduction and appraisal for the generalist

BACKGROUND: Rapid progress over the past decade has been made with the development of the 'Artificial Pancreas', also known as the closed-loop system, which emulates the feedback glucose-responsive functionality of the pancreatic beta cell. The recent FDA approval of the first hybrid closed-loop system makes the Artificial Pancreas a realistic therapeutic option for people with type 1 diabetes. In anticipation of its advent into clinical care, we provide a primer and appraisal of this novel therapeutic approach in type 1 diabetes for healthcare professionals and non-specialists in the field. DISCUSSION: Randomised clinical studies in outpatient and home settings have shown improved glycaemic outcomes, reduced risk of hypoglycaemia and positive user attitudes. User input and interaction with existing closed-loop systems, however, are still required. Therefore, management of user expectations, as well as training and support by healthcare providers are key to ensure optimal uptake, satisfaction and acceptance of the technology. An overview of closed-loop technology and its clinical implications are discussed, complemented by our extensive hands-on experience with closed-loop system use during free daily living. CONCLUSIONS: The introduction of the artificial pancreas into clinical practice represents a milestone towards the goal of improving the care of people with type 1 diabetes. There remains a need to understand the impact of user interaction with the technology, and its implication on current diabetes management and care

Finding the right route for insulin delivery - an overview of implantable pump therapy.

Implantable pump therapy adopting the intraperitoneal route of insulin delivery has been available for the past three decades. The key rationale for implantable pump therapy is the restoration of the portal-peripheral insulin gradient of the normal physiology. Uptake in clinical practice is limited to specialized centers and selected patient populations. Areas covered: Implantable pump therapy is discussed, including technical aspects, rationale for its use, and glycemic and non-glycemic effects. Target populations, summaries of clinical studies and issues related to implantable pump therapy are highlighted. Limitations of implantable pump therapy and its future outlook in clinical practice are presented. Expert opinion: Although intraperitoneal insulin delivery appears closer to the normal physiology, technical, pharmacological, and costs barriers prevent a wider adoption. Evidence from clinical studies remains scarce and inconclusive. As a consequence, the use of implantable pump therapy will be confined to a small population unless considerable technological progress is made and well-conducted studies can demonstrate glycemic and/or non-glycemic benefits justifying wider application.Supported by National Institute of Health Research Cambridge Biomedical Research Centre, Efficacy and Mechanism Evaluation National Institute for Health Research (#14/23/09), The Leona M. & Harry B. Helmsley Charitable Trust (#2016PG-T1D045), JDRF (#2-SRA-2014-256-M-R), National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (1UC4DK108520-01), and Diabetes UK (#14/0004878). LB receives support from the Swiss National Science Foundation (P1BEP3_165297)

Available at a flash: a new way to check glucose.

Type 1 diabetes accounts for 5–10% of diabetes cases diagnosed worldwide.1 Hypoglycaemia is common and can limit efforts to tighten glucose control, lower quality of life,2 and increase mortality.3 Insulin analogues, structured education, insulin pump therapy, and continuous glucose monitoring have helped to decrease the burden of hypoglycaemia,4, 5 but it remains considerable.National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, JDRF, Diabetes UK, Helmsley Trust, National Institute for Health Research, Cambridge Biomedical Research Centre, Wellcome Trust (Strategic Award

Modelling Day-to-Day Variability of Glucose-Insulin Regulation over 12-Week Home Use of Closed-Loop Insulin Delivery.

Parameters of physiological models of glucose-insulin regulation in type 1 diabetes have previously been estimated using data collected over short periods of time and lack the quantification of day-to-day variability. We developed a new hierarchical model to relate subcutaneous insulin delivery and carbohydrate intake to continuous glucose monitoring over 12 weeks while describing day-to-day variability. Sensor glucose data sampled every 10 min, insulin aspart delivery and meal intake were analyzed from 8 adults with type 1 diabetes (male/female 5/3, age 39.9±9.5 years, BMI 25.4±4.4 kg/m2, HbA1c 8.4±0.6%) who underwent a 12-week home study of closed-loop insulin delivery. A compartment model comprised five linear differential equations; model parameters were estimated using the Markov chain Monte Carlo approach within a hierarchical Bayesian model framework. Physiologically plausible a posteriori distributions of model parameters including insulin sensitivity, time-to-peak insulin action, time-to-peak gut absorption, and carbohydrate bioavailability, and good model fit were observed. Day-to-day variability of model parameters was estimated in the range of 38 to 79% for insulin sensitivity and 27 to 48% for time-to-peak of insulin action. In conclusion, a linear Bayesian hierarchical approach is feasible to describe a 12-week glucose-insulin relationship using conventional clinical data. The model may facilitate in silico testing to aid the development of closed-loop insulin delivery systems.This work was supported in part by the European Community Framework Programme 7 FP7-ICT- 2009–4 under Grant 247138, in part by JDRF (22– 2011–668), the National Institute for Health Research Cambridge Biomedical Research Centre, and Wellcome Strategic Award (100574/Z/12/Z).This is the author accepted manuscript. It is currently under an indefinite embargo pending publication by IEEE

Home Use of Day-and-Night Hybrid Closed-Loop Insulin Delivery in Suboptimally Controlled Adolescents With Type 1 Diabetes: A 3-Week, Free-Living, Randomized Crossover Trial.

OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated the feasibility, safety, and efficacy of day-and-night hybrid closed-loop insulin delivery in adolescents with type 1 diabetes under free-living conditions. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: In an open-label randomized crossover study, 12 suboptimally controlled adolescents on insulin pump therapy (mean ± SD age 14.6 ± 3.1 years; HbA1c 69 ± 8 mmol/mol [8.5 ± 0.7%]; duration of diabetes 7.8 ± 3.5 years) underwent two 21-day periods in which hybrid closed-loop insulin delivery was compared with sensor-augmented insulin pump therapy in random order. During the closed-loop intervention, a model predictive algorithm automatically directed insulin delivery between meals and overnight. Participants used a bolus calculator to administer prandial boluses. RESULTS: The proportion of time that sensor glucose was in the target range (3.9-10 mmol/L; primary end point) was increased during the closed-loop intervention compared with sensor-augmented insulin pump therapy by 18.8 ± 9.8 percentage points (mean ± SD; P < 0.001), the mean sensor glucose level was reduced by 1.8 ± 1.3 mmol/L (P = 0.001), and the time spent above target was reduced by 19.3 ± 11.3 percentage points (P < 0.001). The time spent with sensor glucose levels below 3.9 mmol/L was low and comparable between interventions (median difference 0.4 [interquartile range -2.2 to 1.3] percentage points; P = 0.33). Improved glucose control during closed-loop was associated with increased variability of basal insulin delivery (P < 0.001) and an increase in the total daily insulin dose (53.5 [39.5-72.1] vs. 51.5 [37.6-64.3] units/day; P = 0.006). Participants expressed positive attitudes and experience with the closed-loop system. CONCLUSIONS: Free-living home use of day-and-night closed-loop in suboptimally controlled adolescents with type 1 diabetes is safe, feasible, and improves glucose control without increasing the risk of hypoglycemia. Larger and longer studies are warranted.National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (Grant ID: 1R01DK085621-01), JDRF, National Institute for Health Research Cambridge Biomedical Research Centre, Wellcome Trust (Strategic Award: 100574/Z/12/Z)This is the author accepted manuscript. The final version is available from American Diabetes Association via http://dx.doi.org/10.2337/dc16-109

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

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of artificial pancreas treatment in non-pregnant outpatients with type 1 diabetes. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. DATA SOURCES: Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, and grey literature up to 2 February 2018. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES: Randomised controlled trials in non-pregnant outpatients with type 1 diabetes that compared the use of any artificial pancreas system with any type of insulin based treatment. Primary outcome was proportion (%) of time that sensor glucose level was within the near normoglycaemic range (3.9-10 mmol/L). Secondary outcomes included proportion (%) of time that sensor glucose level was above 10 mmol/L or below 3.9 mmol/L, low blood glucose index overnight, mean sensor glucose level, total daily insulin needs, and glycated haemoglobin. The Cochrane Collaboration risk of bias tool was used to assess study quality. RESULTS: 40 studies (1027 participants with data for 44 comparisons) were included in the meta-analysis. 35 comparisons assessed a single hormone artificial pancreas system, whereas nine comparisons assessed a dual hormone system. Only nine studies were at low risk of bias. Proportion of time in the near normoglycaemic range (3.9-10.0 mmol/L) was significantly higher with artificial pancreas use, both overnight (weighted mean difference 15.15%, 95% confidence interval 12.21% to 18.09%) and over a 24 hour period (9.62%, 7.54% to 11.7%). Artificial pancreas systems had a favourable effect on the proportion of time with sensor glucose level above 10 mmol/L (-8.52%, -11.14% to -5.9%) or below 3.9 mmol/L (-1.49%, -1.86% to -1.11%) over 24 hours, compared with control treatment. Robustness of findings for the primary outcome was verified in sensitivity analyses, by including only trials at low risk of bias (11.64%, 9.1% to 14.18%) or trials under unsupervised, normal living conditions (10.42%, 8.63% to 12.2%). Results were consistent in a subgroup analysis both for single hormone and dual hormone artificial pancreas systems. CONCLUSIONS: Artificial pancreas systems are an efficacious and safe approach for treating outpatients with type 1 diabetes. The main limitations of current research evidence on artificial pancreas systems are related to inconsistency in outcome reporting, small sample size, and short follow-up duration of individual trials