Multinational study of subcutaneous model-predictive closed-loop control in type 1 diabetes mellitus: summary of the results

Boris Kovatchev, Claudio Cobelli, Eric Renard, Stacey Anderson, Marc Breton, Stephen Patek, William Clarke, Daniela Bruttomesso, Alberto Maran, Silvana Costa, Angelo Avogaro, Chiara Dalla Man, Andrea Facchinetti, Lalo Magni, Giuseppe De Nicolao, Jerome Place, Anne Farret, Boris Kovatchev, Claudio Cobelli, Eric Renard, Stacey Anderson, Marc Breton, Stephen Patek, William Clarke, Daniela Bruttomesso, Alberto Maran, Silvana Costa, Angelo Avogaro, Chiara Dalla Man, Andrea Facchinetti, Lalo Magni, Giuseppe De Nicolao, Jerome Place, Anne Farret

Abstract

Background: In 2008-2009, the first multinational study was completed comparing closed-loop control (artificial pancreas) to state-of-the-art open-loop therapy in adults with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM).

Methods: The design of the control algorithm was done entirely in silico, i.e., using computer simulation experiments with N=300 synthetic "subjects" with T1DM instead of traditional animal trials. The clinical experiments recruited 20 adults with T1DM at the Universities of Virginia (11); Padova, Italy (6); and Montpellier, France (3). Open-loop and closed-loop admission was scheduled 3-4 weeks apart, continued for 22 h (14.5 h of which were in closed loop), and used a continuous glucose monitor and an insulin pump. The only difference between the two sessions was that insulin dosing was performed by the patient under a physician's supervision during open loop, whereas insulin dosing was performed by a control algorithm during closed loop.

Results: In silico design resulted in rapid (less than 6 months compared to years of animal trials) and cost-effective system development, testing, and regulatory approvals in the United States, Italy, and France. In the clinic, compared to open-loop, closed-loop control reduced nocturnal hypoglycemia (blood glucose below 3.9 mmol/liter) from 23 to 5 episodes (p<.01) and increased the amount of time spent overnight within the target range (3.9 to 7.8 mmol/liter) from 64% to 78% (p=.03).

Conclusions: In silico experiments can be used as viable alternatives to animal trials for the preclinical testing of insulin treatment strategies. Compared to open-loop treatment under identical conditions, closed-loop control improves the overnight regulation of diabetes.

© 2010 Diabetes Technology Society.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Illustration of open-loop versus closed-loop control in one study participant. The grey curve represents primary CGM data. The grey squares represent reference blood glucose data during admission 1 (open-loop control). The black curve shows primary CGM data, and the black triangles show reference blood glucose data during admission 2 (closed-loop control). The bars on the x axis display insulin delivery prior to initiation of closed-loop control before 21:30 and display insulin boluses suggested by the control algorithm during closed-loop control after 21:30. Despite much higher glucose excursions after dinner immediately prior to initiation of closed-loop control, the control algorithm brings the subject within target and avoids any nocturnal hypoglycemia afterward. At 06:00 during closed-loop control, the sensor lost sensitivity for approximately 30 min; nevertheless, the control algorithm (which uses only sensor but not reference blood glucose data) was robust, canceling one insulin bolus until the sensor stabilized. BG, blood glucose; CHO, carbohydrate.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Summary outcome data. Key parameters of glucose control overnight (upper panels) and following breakfast (lower panels) during open-loop (gray bars) and closed-loop control (black bars). Panel A: percentage of time within the target range (3.9–7.8 mmol/liter) overnight was 64% on open-loop control and 78% on closed-loop control. With N = 20 matched pairs, a Wilcoxon nonparametric test was significant, p = .029, for a directional hypothesis: closed-loop > open-loop. Panel B: the number of hypoglycemic episodes overnight decreased from 23 on open-loop control to 5 on closed-loop control. With N = 20 matched pairs, Wilcoxon nonparametric test was significant, p = .01. Panel C: percentage of time within the target range (3.9–10 mmol/liter) after breakfast was not significantly different between open- and closed-loop control. Panel D: the mean of the maximal blood glucose values following breakfast was not different between open- and closed-loop control. SD, standard deviation.

Source: PubMed

3
Sottoscrivi