Adjusting insulin doses in patients with type 1 diabetes who use insulin pump and continuous glucose monitoring: Variations among countries and physicians

Recent advances in the precision control strategy of artificial pancreas

The scientific diagnosis and treatment of patients with diabetes require frequent blood glucose testing and insulin delivery to normoglycemia. Therefore, an artificial pancreas with a continuous blood glucose (BG) monitoring function is an urgent research target in the medical industry. The problem of closed-loop algorithmic control of the BG with a time delay is a key and difficult issue that needs to be overcome in the development of an artificial pancreas. Firstly, the composition, structure, and control characteristics of the artificial pancreas are introduced. Subsequently, the research progress of artificial pancreas control algorithms is reviewed, and the characteristics, advantages, and disadvantages of proportional-integral-differential control, model predictive control, and artificial intelligence control are compared and analyzed to determine whether they are suitable for the practical application of the artificial pancreas. Additionally, key advancements in areas such as blood glucose data monitoring, adaptive models, wearable devices, and fully automated artificial pancreas systems are also reviewed. Finally, this review highlights that meal prediction, control safety, integration, streamlining the optimization of control algorithms, constant temperature preservation of insulin, and dual-hormone artificial pancreas are issues that require further attention in the future.

Postprandial glucose-management strategies in type 1 diabetes: Current approaches and prospects with precision medicine and artificial intelligence

Postprandial glucose control can be challenging for individuals with type 1 diabetes, and this can be attributed to many factors, including suboptimal therapy parameters (carbohydrate ratios, correction factors, basal doses) because of physiological changes, meal macronutrients and engagement in postprandial physical activity. This narrative review aims to examine the current postprandial glucose-management strategies tested in clinical trials, including adjusting therapy settings, bolusing for meal macronutrients, adjusting pre-exercise and postexercise meal boluses for postprandial physical activity, and other therapeutic options, for individuals on open-loop and closed-loop therapies. Then we discuss their challenges and future avenues. Despite advancements in insulin delivery devices such as closed-loop systems and decision-support systems, many individuals with type 1 diabetes still struggle to manage their glucose levels. The main challenge is the lack of personalized recommendations, causing suboptimal postprandial glucose control. We suggest that postprandial glucose control can be improved by (i) providing personalized recommendations for meal macronutrients and postprandial activity; (ii) including behavioural recommendations; (iii) using other personalized therapeutic approaches (e.g. glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists, sodium-glucose co-transporter inhibitors, amylin analogues, inhaled insulin) in addition to insulin therapy; and (iv) integrating an interpretability report to explain to individuals about changes in treatment therapy and behavioural recommendations. In addition, we suggest a future avenue to implement precision recommendations for individuals with type 1 diabetes utilizing the potential of deep reinforcement learning and foundation models (such as GPT and BERT), employing different modalities of data including diabetes-related and external background factors (i.e. behavioural, environmental, biological and abnormal events).

Leveraging Large Language Models to Analyze Continuous Glucose Monitoring Data: A Case Study

Continuous glucose monitors (CGM) provide patients and clinicians with valuable insights about glycemic control that aid in diabetes management. The advent of large language models (LLMs), such as GPT-4, has enabled real-time text generation and summarization of medical data. Further, recent advancements have enabled the integration of data analysis features in chatbots, such that raw data can be uploaded and analyzed when prompted. Studying both the accuracy and suitability of LLM-derived data analysis performed on medical time series data, such as CGM data, is an important area of research. The objective of this study was to assess the strengths and limitations of using an LLM to analyze raw CGM data and produce summaries of 14 days of data for patients with type 1 diabetes. This study used simulated CGM data from 10 different cases. We first evaluated the ability of GPT-4 to compute quantitative metrics specific to diabetes found in an Ambulatory Glucose Profile (AGP). Then, using two independent clinician graders, we evaluated the accuracy, completeness, safety, and suitability of qualitative descriptions produced by GPT-4 across five different CGM analysis tasks. We demonstrated that GPT-4 performs well across measures of accuracy, completeness, and safety when producing summaries of CGM data across all tasks. These results highlight the capabilities of using an LLM to produce accurate and safe narrative summaries of medical time series data. We highlight several limitations of the work, including concerns related to how GPT-4 may misprioritize highlighting instances of hypoglycemia and hyperglycemia. Our work serves as a preliminary study on how generative language models can be integrated into diabetes care through CGM analysis, and more broadly, the potential to leverage LLMs for streamlined medical time series analysis.

Telemedicine maintains good glucose control in children with type 1 diabetes but is not time saving for healthcare professionals: KITES randomized study

AIMS

To evaluate glucose control non-inferiority and time benefits of telemedicine follow-up in children with type 1 diabetes (CwD).

METHODS

In a single-center 9-month-long randomized controlled study (clinicaltrials.gov NCT05484427), 50 children were randomized to either telemedicine group (TG) followed-up distantly by e-mail, or to face-to-face group (FFG) attending standard personal visits. The primary endpoint was non-inferiority of HbA1c at final visit (level of non-inferiority was set at 5 mmol/mol). The secondary endpoints were subcutaneous glucose monitoring parameters and time consumption from both study subjects' and the physicians' point of view.

RESULTS

Non-inferiority of HbA1c in the TG was proven (mean HbA1C 45.8 ± 7.3 [TG] vs. 50.0 ± 12.6 [FFG] mmol/mol, 6.3 vs. 6.7 % DCCT, p = 0.17; between groups HbA1C difference 95 % CI -10.2 to 1.9 mmol/mol). Telemedicine saved time for participants (mean visit duration [MVD] 50 [TG] vs. 247 min [FFG], p < 0.001). There were no other differences between groups neither in CGM parameters nor physician's time consumption (MVD 19 [TG] vs. 20 min [FFG], p = 0.58).

CONCLUSIONS

Nine-month telemedicine follow-up of the children with well-controlled T1D is not inferior to standard face-to-face visits. Telemedicine visits saved time for the participants but not for their diabetologists.

Adaptive bolus calculators for people with type 1 diabetes: A systematic review

AIM

To conduct a systematic review of studies assessing adaptive insulin bolus calculators for people with type 1 diabetes (T1D).

METHODS

Electronic databases (Medline, Embase and Web of Science) were systematically searched from date of inception to 13 October 2022 for single-arm or randomized controlled studies assessing adaptive bolus calculators only, in children or adults with T1D on multiple daily injections or insulin pumps with glycaemic outcomes reported. The Clinicaltrials.gov registry was searched for recently completed studies evaluating decision support in T1D. The quality of extracted studies was assessed using the Standard Quality Assessment criteria and the Cochrane Risk of Bias assessment tool.

RESULTS

Six studies were identified. Extracted data were synthesized in a descriptive review because of heterogeneity. All the studies were small feasibility studies or were not suitably powered, and all were deemed to be at a high risk of performance and detection bias because they were unblinded. Overall, these studies did not show a significant glycaemic improvement. Two studies showed a reduction in postprandial time below range or an incremental change in blood glucose concentration; however, these were in controlled environments over a short duration.

CONCLUSIONS

There are limited clinical trials evaluating adaptive bolus calculators. Although results from small trials or in-silico data are promising, further studies are required to support personalized and adaptive management of T1D.

Diabetes Specialists Value Continuous Glucose Monitoring Despite Challenges in Prescribing and Data Review Process

BACKGROUND

Diabetes clinicians are key facilitators of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) provision, but data on provider behavior related to CGM use and CGM generated data are limited.

METHODS

We conducted a national survey of providers caring for people with diabetes on CGM-related opinions, facilitators and barriers to prescription, and data review practices.

RESULTS

Of 182 survey respondents, 73.2% worked at academic centers, 70.6% were endocrinologists, and 70.7% practiced in urban settings. Nearly 70% of providers reported CGM use in the majority of their patients with type 1 diabetes. Half of the providers reported CGM use in 10% to 50% of their patients with type 2 diabetes. All respondents believed CGM improved quality of life and could optimize diabetes control. We found no differences in reported rates of CGM use based on providers' years of experience, patient volume, practice setting, or clinic type. Most providers reviewed CGM data each visit (97.7%) and actively involved patients in the data interpretation (98.8%). Only 14.1% of clinicians reported reviewing CGM data without any prompting from patients or their family members outside of visits. Most providers (80.7%) reported their CGM data review was valued by patients although only half reported having adequate time (45.1%) or an efficient process (56.1%) to do so.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite uniform support for CGM by providers, ongoing challenges related to cost, insurance coverage, and difficulties with prescription were major barriers to CGM use. Increased use of CGM in appropriate populations will necessitate improvements in data access and integration, clearly defined workflows, and decreased administrative burden to obtain CGM.

Addendum 1: Forum for Injection Technique and Therapy Expert Recommendations, India

With the emerging complexities in chronic diseases and people's lifestyles, healthcare professionals (HCPs) need to update their methods to manage and educate patients with chronic lifestyle disorders, particularly diabetes. The insulin injection technique (IIT), along with various parameters, must also be updated with newer methods. Forum for Injection Technique and Therapy Expert Recommendations (FITTER), India, has updated its recommendations to cover newer ways of detecting hypoglycaemia and lipohypertrophy, preventing needlestick injuries (NSIs), discouraging the reuse of insulin needles and encouraging good disposal. FITTER, India, is also introducing recommendations to calculate insulin bolus dose. These updated recommendations will help HCPs better manage patients with diabetes and achieve improved outcomes.

Transforming Evidence Generation for Drug Label Changes: A Case Study

Computer Modeling and Simulation (CM&S) provides the opportunity to drastically reduce clinical trial patient burden and advance regulatory decision making. At the suggestion of the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), MannKind Corporation and Nudge BG submitted an application to the FDA Model-Informed Drug Development (MIDD) pilot program to support a label change for the initial dose of Afrezza® (insulin human), a novel inhalable insulin with a rapid pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic profile. The MIDD pilot program demonstrates the FDA's commitment to advancing regulatory science through the adoption of evidence generated by CM&S. A simulation framework was developed based on empirical data. It was used to generate evidence to support the label change. Briefing packages and presentations were prepared for two meetings with the FDA, over a period of four months. The model was thoroughly characterized, determined to be low risk for the question of interest, and submitted along with additional clinical evidence for validation. The FDA found the simulation framework to be helpful in providing insights into the question of interest and provides reasonable glycemic outcome predictions. At the conclusion of the MIDD paired meetings, FDA personnel from the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research review team accepted the simulation and requested additional, traditional clinical evidence to support the proposed label change. In the post-meeting comments, the FDA invited MannKind to submit a proposal for a data package including the CM&S evidence in a Type C meeting for further discussion on the label change. This MIDD pilot experience suggests that CM&S is a credible method for evidence generation. Collaboration between sponsor organizations as well as all stakeholders in the FDA, including proponents of CM&S, can further support regulatory decision-making. The learnings from early participants will allow the program to reach its full potential and thereby ultimately benefit patients, sponsors, and FDA.

Comparison of Insulin Dose Adjustments Made by Artificial Intelligence-Based Decision Support Systems and by Physicians in People with Type 1 Diabetes Using Multiple Daily Injections Therapy

Objective: Artificial intelligence-based decision support systems (DSS) need to provide decisions that are not inferior to those given by experts in the field. Recommended insulin dose adjustments on the same individual data set were compared among multinational physicians, and with recommendations made by automated Endo.Digital DSS (ED-DSS). Research Design and Methods: This was a noninterventional study surveying 20 physicians from multinational academic centers. The survey included 17 data cases of individuals with type 1 diabetes who are treated with multiple daily insulin injections. Participating physicians were asked to recommend insulin dose adjustments based on glucose and insulin data. Insulin dose adjustments recommendations were compared among physicians and with the automated ED-DSS. The primary endpoints were the percentage of comparison points for which there was agreement on the trend of insulin dose adjustments. Results: The proportion of agreement and disagreement in the direction of insulin dose adjustment among physicians was statistically noninferior to the proportion of agreement and disagreement observed between ED-DSS and physicians for basal rate, carbohydrate-to insulin ratio, and correction factor (P < 0.001 and P ≤ 0.004 for all three parameters for agreement and disagreement, respectively). The ED-DSS magnitude of insulin dose change was consistently lower than that proposed by the physicians. Conclusions: Recommendations for insulin dose adjustments made by automatization did not differ significantly from recommendations given by expert physicians regarding the direction of change. These results highlight the potential utilization of ED-DSS as a useful clinical tool to manage insulin titration and dose adjustments.

Diabetes Technology Meeting 2021

Diabetes Technology Society hosted its annual Diabetes Technology Meeting on November 4 to November 6, 2021. This meeting brought together speakers to discuss various developments within the field of diabetes technology. Meeting topics included blood glucose monitoring, continuous glucose monitoring, novel sensors, direct-to-consumer telehealth, metrics for glycemia, software for diabetes, regulation of diabetes technology, diabetes data science, artificial pancreas, novel insulins, insulin delivery, skin trauma, metabesity, precision diabetes, diversity in diabetes technology, use of diabetes technology in pregnancy, and green diabetes. A live demonstration on a mobile app to monitor diabetic foot wounds was presented.

Smart Insulin Pens: Advancing Digital Transformation and a Connected Diabetes Care Ecosystem

With the first commercially available smart insulin pens, the predominant insulin delivery device for millions of people living with diabetes is now coming into the digital age. Smart insulin pens (SIPs) have the potential to reshape a connected diabetes care ecosystem for patients, providers, and health systems. Existing SIPs are enhanced with real-time wireless connectivity, digital dose capture, and integration with personalized dosing decision support. Automatic dose capture can promote effective retrospective review of insulin dose data, particularly when paired with glucose data. Patients, providers, and diabetes care teams will be able to make increasingly data-driven decisions and recommendations, in real time, during scheduled visits, and in a more continuous, asynchronous care model. As SIPs continue to progress along the path of digital transformation, we can expect additional benefits: iteratively improving software, machine learning, and advanced decision support. Both these technological advances, and future care delivery models with asynchronous interactions, will depend on easy, open, and continuous data exchange between the growing number of diabetes devices. SIPs have a key role in modernizing diabetes care for a large population of people living with diabetes.

Artificial intelligence in critically ill diabetic patients: current status and future prospects

Recent years have witnessed increasing numbers of artificial intelligence (AI) based applications and devices being tested and approved for medical care. Diabetes is arguably the most common chronic disorder worldwide and AI is now being used for making an early diagnosis, to predict and diagnose early complications, increase adherence to therapy, and even motivate patients to manage diabetes and maintain glycemic control. However, these AI applications have largely been tested in non-critically ill patients and aid in managing chronic problems. Intensive care units (ICUs) have a dynamic environment generating huge data, which AI can extract and organize simultaneously, thus analysing many variables for diagnostic and/or therapeutic purposes in order to predict outcomes of interest. Even non-diabetic ICU patients are at risk of developing hypo or hyperglycemia, complicating their ICU course and affecting outcomes. In addition, to maintain glycemic control frequent blood sampling and insulin dose adjustments are required, increasing nursing workload and chances of error. AI has the potential to improve glycemic control while reducing the nursing workload and errors. Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) devices, which are Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved for use in non-critically ill patients, are now being recommended for use in specific ICU populations with increased accuracy. AI based devices including artificial pancreas and CGM regulated insulin infusion system have shown promise as comprehensive glycemic control solutions in critically ill patients. Even though many of these AI applications have shown potential, these devices need to be tested in larger number of ICU patients, have wider availability, show favorable cost-benefit ratio and be amenable for easy integration into the existing healthcare systems, before they become acceptable to ICU physicians for routine use.

Artificial Intelligence in Perioperative Medicine: A Proposed Common Language With Applications to FDA-Approved Devices

As implementation of artificial intelligence grows more prevalent in perioperative medicine, a clinician's ability to distinguish differentiating aspects of these algorithms is critical. There are currently numerous marketing and technical terms to describe these algorithms with little standardization. Additionally, the need to communicate with algorithm developers is paramount to actualize effective and practical implementation. Of particular interest in these discussions is the extent to which the output or predictions of algorithms and tools are understandable by medical practitioners. This work proposes a simple nomenclature that is intelligible to both clinicians and developers for quickly describing the interpretability of model results. There are three high-level categories: transparent, translucent, and opaque. To demonstrate the applicability and utility of this terminology, these terms were applied to the artificial intelligence and machine-learning-based products that have gained Food and Drug Administration approval. During this review and categorization process, 22 algorithms were found with perioperative utility (in a database of 70 total algorithms), and 12 of these had publicly available citations. The primary aim of this work is to establish a common nomenclature that will expedite and simplify descriptions of algorithm requirements from clinicians to developers and explanations of appropriate model use and limitations from developers to clinicians.

Insulin Titration Guidelines for Patients With Type 1 Diabetes: It Is About Time!

PURPOSE

A proposal that an Insulin Advisory Committee develop insulin titration guidelines 100 years after its discovery.

FINDINGS

Glucose control metrics remain poor despite significant advances in diabetes technology.

SUMMARY

A century after the introduction of insulin, health care providers and patients with type 1 diabetes have worldwide access to a variety of insulin delivery devices (IDDs), glucose monitors, bolus calculators (BCs), continuous glucose monitors (CGMs), and automated insulin delivery (AID) systems. However, these advances have not enabled most patients to achieve today's clear A1c and time-in-range goals. Much of this failure arises from the lack of clear insulin titration guidelines for determining appropriate insulin doses. The lack of dosing clarity results in local physicians, clinics, and individual patients managing insulin titrations as they see fit, creating significant inefficiencies for reaching recommended glycemic goals. This review (1) details the widespread problems generated by nonphysiological dose settings in today's BCs, insulin pumps, and AID systems; (2) presents a method to develop and implement optimized total daily doses of insulin to correct the most common problem of hyperglycemia; (3) discusses using large device databases to provide clear insulin titration guidelines that optimize BC settings from an optimized total daily dose (TDD) of insulin for patients with T1D; and (4) recommends the formation of an Insulin Advisory Committee to clarify the steps to take toward universal insulin titration guidelines, optimized BC settings, and a systematic logic for their use in insulin delivery devices.

Adjustment of Insulin Pump Settings in Type 1 Diabetes Management: Advisor Pro Device Compared to Physicians' Recommendations

AIMS

To compare insulin dose adjustments made by physicians to those made by an artificial intelligence-based decision support system, the Advisor Pro, in people with type 1 diabetes (T1D) using an insulin pump and self-monitoring blood glucose (SMBG).

METHODS

This was a multinational, non-interventional study surveying 17 physicians from 11 countries. Each physician was asked to provide insulin dose adjustments for the settings of the pump including basal rate, carbohydrate-to-insulin ratios (CRs), and correction factors (CFs) for 15 data sets of pumps and SMBG of people with T1D (mean age 18.4 ± 4.8 years; eight females; mean glycated hemoglobin 8.2% ± 1.4% [66 ± 11mmol/mol]). The recommendations were compared among the physicians and between the physicians and the Advisor Pro. The study endpoint was the percentage of comparison points for which there was an agreement on the direction of insulin dose adjustments.

RESULTS

The percentage (mean ± SD) of agreement among the physicians on the direction of insulin pump dose adjustments was 51.8% ± 9.2%, 54.2% ± 6.4%, and 49.8% ± 11.6% for the basal, CR, and CF, respectively. The automated recommendations of the Advisor Pro on the direction of insulin dose adjustments were comparable )49.5% ± 6.4%, 55.3% ± 8.7%, and 47.6% ± 14.4% for the basal rate, CR, and CF, respectively( and noninferior to those provided by physicians. The mean absolute difference in magnitude of change between physicians was 17.1% ± 13.1%, 14.6% ± 8.4%, and 23.9% ± 18.6% for the basal, CR, and CF, respectively, and comparable to the Advisor Pro 11.7% ± 9.7%, 10.1% ± 4.5%, and 25.5% ± 19.5%, respectively, significant for basal and CR.

CONCLUSIONS

Considerable differences in the recommendations for changes in insulin dosing were observed among physicians. Since automated recommendations by the Advisor Pro were similar to those given by physicians, it could be considered a useful tool to manage T1D.

Advancing pharmacy and healthcare with virtual digital technologies

Digitalisation of the healthcare sector promises to revolutionise patient healthcare globally. From the different technologies, virtual tools including artificial intelligence, blockchain, virtual, and augmented reality, to name but a few, are providing significant benefits to patients and the pharmaceutical sector alike, ranging from improving access to clinicians and medicines, as well as improving real-time diagnoses and treatments. Indeed, it is envisioned that such technologies will communicate together in real-time, as well as with their physical counterparts, to create a large-scale, cyber healthcare system. Despite the significant benefits that virtual-based digital health technologies can bring to patient care, a number of challenges still remain, ranging from data security to acceptance within the healthcare sector. This review provides a timely account of the benefits and challenges of virtual health interventions, as well an outlook on how such technologies can be transitioned from research-focused towards real-world healthcare and pharmaceutical applications to transform treatment pathways for patients worldwide.

Population-level management of type 1 diabetes via continuous glucose monitoring and algorithm-enabled patient prioritization: Precision health meets population health

OBJECTIVE

To develop and scale algorithm-enabled patient prioritization to improve population-level management of type 1 diabetes (T1D) in a pediatric clinic with fixed resources, using telemedicine and remote monitoring of patients via continuous glucose monitor (CGM) data review.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

We adapted consensus glucose targets for T1D patients using CGM to identify interpretable clinical criteria to prioritize patients for weekly provider review. The criteria were constructed to manage the number of patients reviewed weekly and identify patients who most needed provider contact. We developed an interactive dashboard to display CGM data relevant for the patients prioritized for review.

RESULTS

The introduction of the new criteria and interactive dashboard was associated with a 60% reduction in the mean time spent by diabetes team members who remotely and asynchronously reviewed patient data and contacted patients, from 3.2 ± 0.20 to 1.3 ± 0.24 min per patient per week. Given fixed resources for review, this corresponded to an estimated 147% increase in weekly clinic capacity. Patients who qualified for and received remote review (n = 58) have associated 8.8 percentage points (pp) (95% CI = 0.6-16.9 pp) greater time-in-range (70-180 mg/dl) glucoses compared to 25 control patients who did not qualify at 12 months after T1D onset.

CONCLUSIONS

An algorithm-enabled prioritization of T1D patients with CGM for asynchronous remote review reduced provider time spent per patient and was associated with improved time-in-range.

Poor guideline adherence in type 1 diabetes education in real-world clinical practice: Evidence from a multicentre, national survey

OBJECTIVE

To examine how physicians implement guidelines to deliver insulin dosing education for type 1 diabetes patients in real-world settings.

METHODS

A nationally representative sample of endocrinologists from top tertiary hospitals in China was obtained by a multistage random sampling method (n = 385). Knowledge, perceptions and practices of insulin dosing were assessed by validated questionnaires. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify independent determinants of clinical practice and knowledge.

RESULTS

Only 20.5% of endocrinologists correctly answered> 75% of the items regarding insulin dosing knowledge. Only 37.7% of endocrinologists reported often teaching insulin-to-carbohydrate ratio and insulin sensitivity factor. Practice behaviours were independently associated with guideline familiarity (OR: 5.92, 95% CI: 3.36-10.41), receiving standardized training (OR: 2.00, 95% CI:1.23-3.25), self-reported lack of time (OR: 0.58, 95% CI:0.34-0.99) and insufficient teaching approaches (OR: 0.57, 95% CI:0.33-0.97) CONCLUSIONS: There was a large gap between guidelines and clinical practice in insulin dosing education. Modifiable factors, including self-reported lack of time, unfamiliarity with guidelines, the shortage of medical training and educational tools hinder insulin dosing education.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Sufficient medical training and educational tools are important to optimize insulin dosing education. The current care paradigm should also be modified to relieve the burden of physicians.

A Pilot Study of Flat and Circadian Insulin Infusion Rates in Continuous Subcutaneous Insulin Infusion (CSII) in Adults with Type 1 Diabetes (FIRST1D)

BACKGROUND

Initiation of continuous subcutaneous insulin therapy (CSII) in type 1 diabetes requires conversion of a basal insulin dose into a continuous infusion regimen. There are limited data to guide the optimal insulin profile to rapidly achieve target glucose and minimize healthcare professional input. The aim of this pilot study was to compare circadian and flat insulin infusion rates in CSII naïve adults with type 1 diabetes.

METHODS

Adults with type 1 diabetes commencing CSII were recruited. Participants were randomized to circadian or flat basal profile calculated from the total daily dose. Basal rate testing was undertaken on days 7, 14 and 28 and basal rates were adjusted. The primary outcome was the between-group difference in absolute change in insulin basal rate over 24 hours following three rounds of basal testing. Secondary outcomes included the number of basal rate changes and the time blocks.

RESULTS

Seventeen participants (mean age 33.3 (SD 8.6) years) were recruited. There was no significant difference in absolute change in insulin basal rates between groups (P = .85). The circadian group experienced significant variation in the number of changes made with the most changes in the morning and evening (P = .005). The circadian group received a greater reduction in total insulin (-14.1 (interquartile range (IQR) -22.5-12.95) units) than the flat group (-7.48 (IQR -11.90-1.23) units) (P = .021).

CONCLUSION

The initial insulin profile does not impact on the magnitude of basal rate changes during optimization. The circadian profile requires changes at specific time points. Further development of the circadian profile may be the optimal strategy.

Safety and Feasibility of the PEPPER Adaptive Bolus Advisor and Safety System: A Randomized Control Study

Background: The Patient Empowerment through Predictive Personalized Decision Support (PEPPER) system provides personalized bolus advice for people with type 1 diabetes. The system incorporates an adaptive insulin recommender system (based on case-based reasoning, an artificial intelligence methodology), coupled with a safety system, which includes predictive glucose alerts and alarms, predictive low-glucose suspend, personalized carbohydrate recommendations, and dynamic bolus insulin constraint. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of the PEPPER system compared to a standard bolus calculator. Methods: This was an open-labeled multicenter randomized controlled crossover study. Following 4-week run-in, participants were randomized to PEPPER/Control or Control/PEPPER in a 1:1 ratio for 12 weeks. Participants then crossed over after a washout period. The primary end-point was percentage time in range (TIR, 3.9-10.0 mmol/L [70-180 mg/dL]). Secondary outcomes included glycemic variability, quality of life, and outcomes on the safety system and insulin recommender. Results: Fifty-four participants on multiple daily injections (MDI) or insulin pump completed the run-in period, making up the intention-to-treat analysis. Median (interquartile range) age was 41.5 (32.3-49.8) years, diabetes duration 21.0 (11.5-26.0) years, and HbA1c 61.0 (58.0-66.1) mmol/mol. No significant difference was observed for percentage TIR between the PEPPER and Control groups (62.5 [52.1-67.8] % vs. 58.4 [49.6-64.3] %, respectively, P = 0.27). For quality of life, participants reported higher perceived hypoglycemia with the PEPPER system despite no objective difference in time spent in hypoglycemia. Conclusions: The PEPPER system was safe, but did not change glycemic outcomes, compared to control. There is wide scope for integrating PEPPER into routine diabetes management for pump and MDI users. Further studies are required to confirm overall effectiveness. Clinical trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03849755.

New and Emerging Technologies in Type 1 Diabetes

There has been a rapid advancement in the pace of development of new diabetes technologies and therapies for the management of type 1 diabetes over the past decade. The Diabetes Control and Complications Trial conclusively established that tight glycemic control with intensive insulin therapy decreases the rates of diabetes complications in proportion to glycemic control, and diabetes technologies have accordingly been developed to help patients reach these goals. In this review, the authors discuss new diabetes therapeutics and technologies, including new insulin analogues, insulin pumps, continuous glucose monitoring systems, and automated insulin delivery systems."

A Model-Based Insulin Dose Optimization Algorithm for People With Type 1 Diabetes on Multiple Daily Injections Therapy

OBJECTIVE

Multiple daily injections (MDI) therapy is the most common treatment for type 1 diabetes (T1D) including basal insulin doses to keep glucose levels constant during fasting conditions and bolus insulin doses with meals. Optimal insulin dosing is critical to achieving satisfactory glycemia but is challenging due to inter- and intra-individual variability. Here, we present a novel model-based iterative algorithm that optimizes insulin doses using previous-day glucose, insulin, and meal data.

METHODS

Our algorithm employs a maximum-a-posteriori method to estimate parameters of a model describing the effects of changes in basal-bolus insulin doses. Then, parameter estimates, their confidence intervals, and the goodness of fit, are combined to generate new recommendations. We assessed our algorithm in three ways. First, a clinical data set of 150 days (15 participants) were used to evaluate the proposed model and the estimation method. Second, 60-day simulations were performed to demonstrate the efficacy of the algorithm. Third, a sample 6-day clinical experiment is presented and discussed.

RESULTS

The model fitted the clinical data well with a root-mean-square-error of 1.75 mmol/L. Simulation results showed an improvement in the time in target (3.9-10 mmol/L) from 64% to 77% and a decrease in the time in hypoglycemia (< 3.9 mmol/L) from 8.1% to 3.8%. The clinical experiment demonstrated the feasibility of the algorithm.

CONCLUSION

Our algorithm has the potential to improve glycemic control in people with T1D using MDI.

SIGNIFICANCE

This work is a step forward towards a decision support system that improves their quality of life.

A pilot non-inferiority randomized controlled trial to assess automatic adjustments of insulin doses in adolescents with type 1 diabetes on multiple daily injections therapy

BACKGROUND

Multiple daily injections (MDI) therapy for type 1 diabetes involves basal and bolus insulin doses. Non-optimal insulin doses contribute to the lack of satisfactory glycemic control. We aimed to evaluate the feasibility of an algorithm that optimizes daily basal and bolus doses using glucose monitoring systems for MDI therapy users.

METHODS

We performed a pilot, non-inferiority, randomized, parallel study at a diabetes camp comparing basal-bolus insulin dose adjustments made by camp physicians (PA) and a learning algorithm (LA), in children and adolescents on MDI therapy. Participants wore a glucose sensor and underwent 11 days of daily dose adjustments in either arm. Algorithm adjustments were reviewed and approved by a physician. The last 7 days were examined for outcomes.

RESULTS

Twenty-one youths (age 13.3 [SD, 3.7] years; 13 females; HbA1c 8.6% [SD, 1.8]) were randomized to either group (LA [n = 10] or PA [n = 11]). The algorithm made 293 adjustments with a 92% acceptance rate from the camp physicians. In the last 7 days, the time in target glucose (3.9-10 mmol/L) in LA (39.5%, SD, 20.7) was similar to PA (38.4%, SD, 15.6) (P = .89). The number of hypoglycemic events per day in LA (0.3, IQR, [0.1-0.6]) was similar to PA (0.2, IQR, [0.0-0.4]) (P = .42). There was no incidence of severe hypoglycemia nor ketoacidosis.

CONCLUSIONS

In this pilot study, glycemic outcomes in the LA group were similar to the PA group. This algorithm has the potential to facilitate MDI therapy, and longer and larger studies are warranted.

An artificial intelligence decision support system for the management of type 1 diabetes

Type 1 diabetes (T1D) is characterized by pancreatic beta cell dysfunction and insulin depletion. Over 40% of people with T1D manage their glucose through multiple injections of long-acting basal and short-acting bolus insulin, so-called multiple daily injections (MDI)^1,2. Errors in dosing can lead to life-threatening hypoglycaemia events (<70 mg dl^-1) and hyperglycaemia (>180 mg dl^-1), increasing the risk of retinopathy, neuropathy, and nephropathy. Machine learning (artificial intelligence) approaches are being harnessed to incorporate decision support into many medical specialties. Here, we report an algorithm that provides weekly insulin dosage recommendations to adults with T1D using MDI therapy. We employ a unique virtual platform³ to generate over 50,000 glucose observations to train a k-nearest neighbours⁴ decision support system (KNN-DSS) to identify causes of hyperglycaemia or hypoglycaemia and determine necessary insulin adjustments from a set of 12 potential recommendations. The KNN-DSS algorithm achieves an overall agreement with board-certified endocrinologists of 67.9% when validated on real-world human data, and delivers safe recommendations, per endocrinologist review. A comparison of inter-physician-recommended adjustments to insulin pump therapy indicates full agreement of 41.2% among endocrinologists, which is consistent with previous measures of inter-physician agreement (41-45%)⁵. In silico^3,6 benchmarking using a platform accepted by the United States Food and Drug Administration for evaluation of artificial pancreas technologies indicates substantial improvement in glycaemic outcomes after 12 weeks of KNN-DSS use. Our data indicate that the KNN-DSS allows for early identification of dangerous insulin regimens and may be used to improve glycaemic outcomes and prevent life-threatening complications in people with T1D.

Insulin Pump Therapy

BACKGROUND

Advances in pump technology have increased the popularity of this treatment modality among patients with type 1 diabetes and recently also among patients with type 2 diabetes.

AREAS OF UNCERTAINTY

Four decades after the incorporation of the insulin pump in clinical use, questions regarding its efficacy, occurrence rate of short-term complications as hypoglycemia and diabetes ketoacidosis, timing of pump initiation, and selected populations for use remain unanswered.

DATA SOURCES

A review of the literature was performed using the PubMed database to identify all articles published up till December 2018, with the search terms including insulin pump therapy/continuous subcutaneous insulin delivery. The Cochrane database was searched for meta-analysis evaluating controlled randomized trials. Consensuses guidelines published by the International Society for Pediatric and Adolescent Diabetes, American Diabetes Association, and Advanced Technologies and Treatments for Diabetes year books were additionally reviewed for relevant cited articles.

THERAPEUTIC ADVANCES

Insulin pump therapy offers flexible management of diabetes. It enables adjustment of basal insulin to daily requirements and circadian needs, offers more precise treatment for meals and physical activity, and, when integrated with continuous glucose monitoring, allows glucose responsive insulin delivery. The ability to download and transmit data for analysis allow for treatment optimization. Newer pumps are simple to operate and increase user experience. Studies support the efficacy of pump therapy in improving glycemic control and reducing the occurrence of hypoglycemia without increasing episodes of diabetes ketoacidosis. They also improve quality of life. Recent evidence suggests a role for pump therapy in reducing microvascular and macrovascular diabetes-related complications.

CONCLUSIONS

Insulin pump therapy appears to be effective and safe in people with T1D regardless of age. Future advancements will include incorporation of closed loop and various decision support systems to aid and improve metabolic control and quality of life.

Artificial Intelligence in Decision Support Systems for Type 1 Diabetes

Type 1 diabetes (T1D) is a chronic health condition resulting from pancreatic beta cell dysfunction and insulin depletion. While automated insulin delivery systems are now available, many people choose to manage insulin delivery manually through insulin pumps or through multiple daily injections. Frequent insulin titrations are needed to adequately manage glucose, however, provider adjustments are typically made every several months. Recent automated decision support systems incorporate artificial intelligence algorithms to deliver personalized recommendations regarding insulin doses and daily behaviors. This paper presents a comprehensive review of computational and artificial intelligence-based decision support systems to manage T1D. Articles were obtained from PubMed, IEEE Xplore, and ScienceDirect databases. No time period restrictions were imposed on the search. After removing off-topic articles and duplicates, 562 articles were left to review. Of those articles, we identified 61 articles for comprehensive review based on algorithm evaluation using real-world human data, in silico trials, or clinical studies. We grouped decision support systems into general categories of (1) those which recommend adjustments to insulin and (2) those which predict and help avoid hypoglycemia. We review the artificial intelligence methods used for each type of decision support system, and discuss the performance and potential applications of these systems.

New technical approach to the diabetes therapy

Optimal glycemic control remains challenging in individuals with type 1 diabetes. With the comprehensive clinical evidence on safety and efficiency, the adoption of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM), insulin pumps, and control algorithms merging the two into closed-loop systems is rapidly increasing. Particularly the CGM and intermittently scanned CGM improved diabetes management outcomes in large populations. A meaningful translation from clinical trials in highly controlled settings to numerous evaluations of closed-loop technology in the unrestricted home environment ended with its commercialization and use in routine clinical practice. Although it is still not a cure, the closed-loop currently seems to be the most promising advancement in the treatment of diabetes, with promising results also reported from routine clinical practice in children and adults with type 1 diabetes. We summarize different aspects of a technological approach to diabetes care, list currently available devices and systems in the pipeline, and the key supporting clinical evidence for their use. We consider human factors associated with technology use and the importance of health economics to support implementation and reimbursement.

Evolution of Diabetes Technology

Technological innovations have fundamentally changed diabetes care. Insulin pump use and continuous glucose monitoring are associated with improved glycemic control along with a better quality of life; automated insulin-dosing advisors facilitate and improve decision making. Glucose-responsive automated insulin delivery enables the highest targets for time in range, lowest rate and duration of hypoglycemia, and favorable quality of life. Clear targets for time in ranges and a standard visualization of the data will help the diabetes technology to be used more efficiently. Decision support systems within and integrated cloud environment will further simplify, unify, and improve modern routine diabetes care.

Diabetes Healthcare Professionals Use Multiple Continuous Glucose Monitoring Data Indicators to Assess Glucose Management

BACKGROUND

Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) offers multiple data features that can be leveraged to assess glucose management. However, how diabetes healthcare professionals (HCPs) actually assess CGM data and the extent to which they agree in assessing glycemic management are not well understood.

METHODS

We asked HCPs to assess ten de-identified CGM datasets (each spanning seven days) and rank order each day by relative glycemic management (from "best" to "worst"). We also asked HCPs to endorse features of CGM data that were important in making such assessments.

RESULTS

In the study, 57 HCPs (29 endocrinologists; 28 diabetes educators) participated. Hypoglycemia and glycemic variance were endorsed by nearly all HCPs to be important (91% and 88%, respectively). Time in range and daily lows and highs were endorsed more frequently by educators (all Ps < .05). On average, HCPs endorsed 3.7 of eight data features. Overall, HCPs demonstrated agreement in ranking days by relative glycemic control (Kendall's W = .52, P < .001). Rankings were similar between endocrinologists and educators (R² = .90, Cohen's kappa = .95, mean absolute error = .4 [all Ps < .05]; Mann-Whitney U = 41, P = .53).

CONCLUSIONS

Consensus in the endorsement of certain data features and agreement in assessing glycemic management were observed. While some practice-specific differences in feature endorsement were found, no differences between educators and endocrinologists were observed in assessing glycemic management. Overall, HCPs tended to consider CGM data holistically, in alignment with published recommendations, and made converging assessments regardless of practice.

The Efficacy of Basal Rate and Carbohydrate Ratio Learning Algorithm for Closed-Loop Insulin Delivery (Artificial Pancreas) in Youth with Type 1 Diabetes in a Diabetes Camp

Background: Optimizing programmed basal rates and carbohydrate ratios may improve the performance of the artificial pancreas. We tested, in a diabetes camp, the efficacy of a learning algorithm that updates daily basal rates and carbohydrate ratios in the artificial pancreas. Materials and Methods: We conducted a randomized crossover trial in campers and counselors aged 8-21 years with type 1 diabetes on pump therapy. Participants underwent 2 days of artificial pancreas alone and 6 days of artificial pancreas with learning. During the artificial pancreas with learning, programmed basal rates and carbohydrate ratios were updated daily based on the learning algorithm's recommendations. All algorithm recommendations were reviewed for safety by camp physicians. The primary outcome was the time in target range (3.9-10 mmol/L) of the last 2 days of each intervention. Results: Thirty-four campers (age 13.9 ± 3.9, hemoglobin A1c 8.3% ± 0.2%) were included. Ninety-six percent of algorithm recommendations were approved by the camp physicians. Participants were in closed-loop mode 74% of the time. There was no difference between interventions in time in target (55%-55%; P = 0.71) nor in hypoglycemia events (0.8-0.9 events per day; P = 0.63). This was despite changes in programmed basal rate ranging from -21% to +117%, and changes in breakfast, lunch, and supper carbohydrate ratios from -17% to +40%, -36% to +37%, and -35% to +63%, respectively. Morever, postprandial hyperglycemia and hypoglycemia did not decrease in participants whose carbohydrate ratios were decreased (more insulin boluses) and increased (less insulin boluses), respectively. Conclusions: In camp settings, despite adjustments to programmed basal rates and carbohydrate ratios, the learning algorithm did not change glycemia, which may point toward limited effect of these adjustments in environments with large day-to-day variability in insulin needs. Longer randomized studies in real-world settings are required to further assess the efficacy of automatic adjustments of programmed basal rates and carbohydrate ratios.

Application of Artificial Intelligence Techniques for the Estimation of Basal Insulin in Patients with Type I Diabetes

Artificial intelligence techniques have been positioned in the resolution of problems in various areas of healthcare. Clinical decision support systems developed from this technology have optimized the healthcare of patients with chronic diseases through mobile applications. In this study, several models based on this methodology have been developed to calculate the basal insulin dose in patients with type I diabetes using subcutaneous insulin infusion pumps. Methods. A pilot experimental study was performed with data from 56 patients with type 1 diabetes who used insulin infusion pumps and underwent continuous glucose monitoring. Several models based on artificial intelligence techniques were developed to analyze glycemic patterns based on continuous glucose monitoring and clinical variables in order to estimate the basal insulin dose. We used neural networks (NNs), Bayesian networks (BNs), support vector machines (SVMs), and random forests (RF). We then evaluated the agreement between predicted and actual values using several statistical error measurements: mean absolute error (MAE), mean square error (MSE), root-mean-square error (RMSE), Pearson's correlation coefficient (R), and determination coefficient (R ²). Results. Twenty-four different models were obtained, one for each hour of the day, with each chosen technique. Correlation coefficients obtained with RF, SVMs, NNs, and BNs were 0.9999, 0.9921, 0.0303, and 0.7754, respectively. The error increased between 06:00 and 07:00 and between 13:00 and 17:00. Conclusions. The performance of the RF technique was excellent and got very close to the actual values. Intelligence techniques could be used to predict basal insulin dose. However, it is necessary to explore the validity of the results and select the target population. Models that allow for more accurate levels of prediction should be further explored.

Improving Clinical Outcomes in Newly Diagnosed Pediatric Type 1 Diabetes: Teamwork, Targets, Technology, and Tight Control-The 4T Study

Many youth with type 1 diabetes (T1D) do not achieve hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) targets. The mean HbA1c of youth in the USA is higher than much of the developed world. Mean HbA1c in other nations has been successfully modified following benchmarking and quality improvement methods. In this review, we describe the novel 4T approach-teamwork, targets, technology, and tight control-to diabetes management in youth with new-onset T1D. In this program, the diabetes care team (physicians, nurse practitioners, certified diabetes educators, dieticians, social workers, psychologists, and exercise physiologists) work closely to deliver diabetes education from diagnosis. Part of the education curriculum involves early integration of technology, specifically continuous glucose monitoring (CGM), and developing a curriculum around using the CGM to maintain tight control and optimize quality of life.

Technological advances shaping diabetes care

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To emphasize the current unmet needs for patients with diabetes and evaluate the recent technological advances in the diabetes field and summarize upcoming technologies in diabetes care. This review highlights emerging diabetes technologies and patient-centered diabetes management.

RECENT FINDINGS

A review of the literature showed that there is a clear benefit of using diabetes technologies in diabetes care. Recently, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) created a new category of Class II integrated continuous glucose monitoring (iCGM) devices and announced new guidelines to accelerate the approval of future products. With the first-generation hybrid-closed loop, a new era opened in automated insulin delivery systems. Diabetes coaching, apps, and remote monitoring technologies eased access to the providers and increased patient's self-confidence for diabetes management.

SUMMARY

Improvements in diabetes technologies will hopefully overcome unmet needs for patients with diabetes and improve health outcomes. Patients will benefit from the upcoming technologies in their day-to-day diabetes management while providers may monitor patients remotely with ease and efficiently. These developments will decrease diabetes burden, improve quality of life, and open a new era of personalized diabetes care.