Battelino, Tadej

The development of automated insulin delivery systems has seen tremendous improvements from individual components to interoperable system combinations of devices and new drugs besides insulin. The components have become progressively smaller, more accurate, and more user friendly. This article summarizes the history of the artificial pancreas from the earliest concepts to fully functional systems to research into further improvements in the future. The authors include many of the developers of this technology who received research support from the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases at various stages to develop these systems.

The development of automated insulin delivery systems has seen tremendous improvements from individual components to interoperable system combinations of devices and new drugs besides insulin. The components have become progressively smaller, more accurate, and more user friendly. This article summarizes the history of the artificial pancreas from the earliest concepts to fully functional systems to research into further improvements in the future. The authors include many of the developers of this technology who received research support from the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases at various stages to develop these systems.

Background: A composite metric for the quality of glycemia from continuous glucose monitor (CGM) tracings could be useful for assisting with basic clinical interpretation of CGM data. Methods: We assembled a data set of 14-day CGM tracings from 225 insulin-treated adults with diabetes. Using a balanced incomplete block design, 330 clinicians who were highly experienced with CGM analysis and interpretation ranked the CGM tracings from best to worst quality of glycemia. We used principal component analysis and multiple regressions to develop a model to predict the clinician ranking based on seven standard metrics in an Ambulatory Glucose Profile: very low–glucose and low-glucose hypoglycemia; very high–glucose and high-glucose hyperglycemia; time in range; mean glucose; and coefficient of variation. Results: The analysis showed that clinician rankings depend on two components, one related to hypoglycemia that gives more weight to very low-glucose than to low-glucose and the other related to hyperglycemia that likewise gives greater weight to very high-glucose than to high-glucose. These two components should be calculated and displayed separately, but they can also be combined into a single Glycemia Risk Index (GRI) that corresponds closely to the clinician rankings of the overall quality of glycemia (r = 0.95). The GRI can be displayed graphically on a GRI Grid with the hypoglycemia component on the horizontal axis and the hyperglycemia component on the vertical axis. Diagonal lines divide the graph into five zones (quintiles) corresponding to the best (0th to 20th percentile) to worst (81st to 100th percentile) overall quality of glycemia. The GRI Grid enables users to track sequential changes within an individual over time and compare groups of individuals. Conclusion: The GRI is a single-number summary of the quality of glycemia. Its hypoglycemia and hyperglycemia components provide actionable scores and a graphical display (the GRI Grid) that can be used by clinicians and researchers to determine the glycemic effects of prescribed and investigational treatments.

Background: Compared with multiple daily injections (MDI), sensor-augmented pump (SAP) insulin therapy may reduce glycemic variability and oxidative stress in type 1 diabetes in a glycosylated hemoglobin (A1C)-independent manner. Subjects and Methods: The STAR 3 study compared SAP with MDI therapy for 1 year. Week-long continuous glucose monitoring studies were conducted at baseline and 1 year for assessment of glycemic variability in both groups. Soluble CD40 ligand (CD40L), a biomarker of inflammation and thrombocyte function, was measured at baseline and 1 year. Subjects were classified according to treatment group and 1-year A1C levels (<6.5%, 6.5–6.9%, 7–7.9%, ≥8%). Glycemic parameters were compared between SAP and MDI subjects in each A1C cohort. Results: At 1 year, sensor glucose values at A1C levels ≥6.5% were similar in the SAP and MDI groups. However, sensor glucose SD and coefficient of variation (CV) values were lower at A1C levels <8% among SAP than among MDI subjects; the overall between-group difference was significant for both SD ( P <0.01) and CV ( P =0.01). The overall mean amplitude of glycemic excursion was similar in MDI and SAP groups ( P =0.23). CD40L levels fell over the course of the study in both groups, but the between-group difference was not significant ( P =0.18). CD40L concentrations were unrelated to A1C, change in A1C from baseline, or glycemic variability. Conclusions: At comparable A1C levels of <8%, SAP reduced glycemic variability as measured by SD and CV compared with MDI. SAP may provide beneficial reductions in the number and severity of glycemic excursions.