Automated Insulin Delivery Systems Research Articles

Efficacy of automated insulin delivery in pregnant women with type 1 diabetes: a meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Automated insulin delivery (AID) devices have shown to be a promising treatment to improve glycemic control in patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM). However, its efficacy in pregnant women with T1DM remains uncertain. PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane Central and ClinicalTrials.gov were systematically searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing AID to standard care (SC), defined as use of sensor-augmented pump and multiple daily insulin injections. Outcomes included time in range (TIR), nocturnal TIR, time in hypoglycemic and hyperglycemic ranges, among others. Sensitivity and trial sequential analyses (TSA) were performed. CRD42023474398. We included five RCTs with a total of 236 pregnant women, of whom 117 (50.6%) received AID. There was a significant increase in nocturnal TIR (mean difference [MD] 12.69%; 95% CI 8.74-16.64; p < 0.01; I2 = 0%) and a decrease in glucose variability (standard deviation of glucose; MD -2.91; 95% CI -5.13 to -0.69; p = 0.01; I2 = 0%). No significant differences were observed for TIR, HBGI, LGBI, mean glucose and time spent in hyperglycemia and hypoglycemia. Regarding TSA, the statistical significance obtained in nocturnal TIR was conclusive and with minimal risk of a type I error. Our findings suggest that AID systems can significantly improve nocturnal glycemic control and potentially reduce glycemic variability in pregnant women with T1DM, with no effect in the risk of hypoglycemia and hyperglycemia compared with current insulin treatments.

Adaptive bio-behavioral control: A pilot analysis of human-machine co-adaptation in type 1 diabetes.

While it is well recognized that an automated insulin delivery (AID) algorithm should adapt to changes in physiology, it is less understood that the individual would also have to adapt to the AID system. The adaptive bio-behavioral control (ABC) method presented here attempts to compensate for this deficiency by including AID into an information cloud-based ecosystem. The Web Information Tool (WIT) implements the ABC concept via: (1) A Physiological Adaptation Module (PAM) that tracks metabolic changes and adapts AID parameters accordingly, and (2) a Behavioral Adaptation Module (BAM) that provides information feedback. The safety of WIT (primary outcome) was assessed in an 8-week randomized, two-arm parallel pilot study. All participants used the Control-IQ® AID system enhanced with PAM, but only those in the Experimental group had access to BAM. Secondary glycemic outcomes were computed using the 2-week baseline period and the last 2 weeks of treatment. Thirty participants with type 1 diabetes (T1D) completed all study procedures (17F/13M; age: 40±14y; HbA1c: 6.6%±0.5%). No severe hypoglycemia, DKA, or other serious adverse events were reported. Comparing Experimental and Control groups, no significant difference was observed in time in range (70-180 mg/dL): 74.6% vs 73.8%, adjusted mean difference: 2.65%, 95%¬¬¬¬¬CI (-1.12%,6.41%), P=0.161. Time in 70-140 mg/dL was significantly higher in the Experimental group: 50.7% vs 49.2%, 5.71% (0.44%,10.97%), P=0.035, without increased time below range: 0.54% (-0.09%,1.17%), P=0.089. The results demonstrate it is safe to integrate an AID system into the WIT ecosystem. Validation in a full-scale study is ongoing.

Mitigating Severe Hypoglycemia in Users of Advanced Diabetes Technologies: Impaired Awareness of Hypoglycemia and Unhelpful Hypoglycemia Beliefs as Targets for Interventions.

Objective: A subgroup analysis of the Hypoglycemia Awareness Restoration Programme for people with type 1 diabetes and problematic hypoglycemia persisting despite optimized care (HARPdoc) trial was conducted to explore the impact of Blood Glucose Awareness Training (BGAT, a hypoglycemia awareness training program) and the HARPdoc (a psychoeducation addressing unhelpful hypoglycemia beliefs) in reducing severe hypoglycemia (SH) in individuals using advanced diabetes technologies (ADTs). Methods: Data from trial participants who utilized ADTs, including continuous glucose monitors or automated insulin delivery systems, were extracted. Generalized linear mixed-effects models with Poisson distribution or linear mixed-effects models were used to evaluate SH incidence, and Gold questionnaire, Attitudes to Awareness of Hypoglycemia (A2A), Problem Areas in Diabetes (PAID), Hospital Anxiety and Depress Scale (HADS)-anxiety, and HADS-depression scores as measures of hypoglycemia awareness, unhelpful hypoglycemia beliefs, diabetes distress, and anxiety and depression symptoms, respectively. Results: In the 45 participants using ADTs, the BGAT and HARPdoc interventions both reduced SH incidence by more than 50% (P < 0.0001) and yielded improvements in hypoglycemia awareness (P < 0.05). HARPdoc outperformed BGAT in reducing SH at month 24 (P = 0.01). HARPdoc also mitigated unhelpful hypoglycemia beliefs (P < 0.0001), diabetes distress (P < 0.05), and anxiety symptoms (P < 0.05); BGAT demonstrated no significant impacts in these respects. Neither HARPdoc nor BGAT had significant effects on depression symptoms. Conclusion: Psychoeducation (BGAT and HARPdoc) was effective in reducing SH in people using ADTs. HARPdoc may also provide greater long-term SH reduction and improves psychological well-being in this patient group.

Predicting Blood Glucose Levels with Organic Neuromorphic Micro-Networks.

Accurate glucose prediction is vital for diabetes management. Artificial intelligence and artificial neural networks (ANNs) are showing promising results for reliable glucose predictions, offering timely warnings for glucose fluctuations. The translation of these software-based ANNs into dedicated computing hardware opens a route toward automated insulin delivery systems ultimately enhancing the quality of life for diabetic patients. ANNs are transforming this field, potentially leading to implantable smart prediction devices and ultimately to a fully artificial pancreas. However, this transition presents several challenges, including the need for specialized, compact, lightweight, and low-power hardware. Organic polymer-based electronics are a promising solution as they have the ability to implement the behavior of neural networks, operate at low voltage, and possess key attributes like flexibility, stretchability, and biocompatibility. Here, the study focuses on implementing software-based neural networks for glucose prediction into hardware systems. How to minimize network requirements, downscale the architecture, and integrate the neural network with electrochemical neuromorphic organic devices, meeting the strict demands of smart implants for in-body computation of glucose prediction is investigated.

Point-Counterpoint: The Need for Do-It-Yourself (DIY) Open Source (OS) AID Systems in Type 1 Diabetes Management.

In the last decade, technology developed by people with diabetes and their loved ones has added to the options for diabetes management. One such example is that of automated insulin delivery (AID) algorithms, which were created and shared as open source by people living with type 1 diabetes (T1D) years before commercial systems were first available. Now, numerous options for commercial systems exist in some countries, yet tens of thousands of people with diabetes are still choosing Open-Source AID (OS-AID), previously called "do-it-yourself" (DIY) systems, which are non-commercial versions of these open-source AID systems. In this article, we provide point and counterpoint perspectives regarding 1) safety and efficacy; 2) regulation and support; 3) user choice and flexibility; 4) access and affordability, and 5) patient and provider education, for open source and commercial AID systems. The perspectives reflected here include that of a person living with T1D who uses and has developed OS-AID systems, a physician-researcher based in the US who conducts clinical trials to support development of commercial AID systems and supports people with diabetes using all types of AID, and an endocrinologist with T1D who uses both systems and treats people with diabetes using all types of AID.

Technology for the Management of Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus in Saudi Arabia and MENA Region: A Systematic Review.

Diabetes technology in the form of digital health or medical devices holds a promise for improving the quality of life and glycemic outcomes. A comprehensive insight into diabetes technology and its impact in Saudi Arabia and the MENA region may improve type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) management. This study aimed to assess the impact of different DM-specific technologies: insulin pump therapy, continuous glucose monitoring (CGM), and automated insulin delivery system in terms of glycemic control and QoL among T1DM patients in Saudi Arabia and the MENA region. A systematic literature search was performed in PubMed and Scopus from 2005 until August 2023. The search was based on the PICO strategy, focusing on T1DM patients, diabetes technology, and QoL. The inclusion criteria were studies illustrating the effect of diabetes technologies on glycemic control or quality of life or both among T1DM patients. Systematic reviews, books, letters, or studies, including type 2 diabetes mellitus, were excluded. From 101 articles, eighteen studies were duplicated, and thirty-three studies were excluded after reading the title and abstract. Of the 50 articles analyzed, twenty-five articles did not meet the inclusion criteria. Therefore, 25 articles involving a total of 3088 participants were enrolled in the study. It was shown that a continuous glucose monitoring system and continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion improved the glycemic control and the QoL of T1DM patients. There was a positive impact of insulin pumps, continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) systems, and telemedicine in achieving optimal glucose control and better QoL. Further studies are recommended to clarify the significant role of advanced diabetes technologies.

Comparison between a tubeless, on-body automated insulin delivery system and a tubeless, on-body sensor-augmented pump in type 1 diabetes: a multicentre randomised controlled trial.

This study compares the efficacy and safety of a tubeless, on-body automated insulin delivery (AID) system with that of a tubeless, on-body sensor-augmented pump (SAP). This multicentre, parallel-group, RCT was conducted at 13 tertiary medical centres in South Korea. Adults aged 19-69 years with type 1 diabetes who had HbA1c levels of <85.8 mmol/mol (<10.0%) were eligible. The participants were assigned at a 1:1 ratio to receive a tubeless, on-body AID system (intervention group) or a tubeless, on-body SAP (control group) for 12 weeks. Stratified block randomisation was conducted by an independent statistician. Blinding was not possible due to the nature of the intervention. The primary outcome was the percentage of time in range (TIR), blood glucose between 3.9 and 10.0 mmol/l, as measured by continuous glucose monitoring. ANCOVAs were conducted with baseline values and study centres as covariates. A total of 104 participants underwent randomisation, with 53 in the intervention group and 51 in the control group. The mean (±SD) age of the participants was 40±11 years. The mean (±SD) TIR increased from 62.1±17.1% at baseline to 71.5±10.7% over the 12 week trial period in the intervention group and from 64.7±17.0% to 66.9±15.0% in the control group (difference between the adjusted means: 6.5% [95% CI 3.6%, 9.4%], p<0.001). Time below range, time above range, CV and mean glucose levels were also significantly better in the intervention group compared with the control group. HbA1c decreased from 50.9±9.9 mmol/mol (6.8±0.9%) at baseline to 45.9±7.4 mmol/mol (6.4±0.7%) after 12 weeks in the intervention group and from 48.7±9.1 mmol/mol (6.6±0.8%) to 45.7±7.5 mmol/mol (6.3±0.7%) in the control group (difference between the adjusted means: -0.7 mmol/mol [95% CI -2.0, 0.8 mmol/mol] (-0.1% [95% CI -0.2%, 0.1%]), p=0.366). No diabetic ketoacidosis or severe hypoglycaemia events occurred in either group. The use of a tubeless, on-body AID system was safe and associated with superior glycaemic profiles, including TIR, time below range, time above range and CV, than the use of a tubeless, on-body SAP. Clinical Research Information Service (CRIS) KCT0008398 FUNDING: The study was funded by a grant from the Korea Medical Device Development Fund supported by the Ministry of Science and ICT; the Ministry of Trade, Industry and Energy; the Ministry of Health and Welfare; and the Ministry of Food and Drug Safety (grant number: RS-2020-KD000056).

Automated Insulin Delivery in Adults With Type 1 Diabetes and Suboptimal HbA1c During Prior Use of Insulin Pump and Continuous Glucose Monitoring: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

Automated insulin delivery (AID) systems offer promise in improving glycemic outcomes for individuals with type 1 diabetes. However, data on those who struggle with suboptimal glycemic levels despite insulin pump and continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) are limited. We conducted a randomized controlled trial to assess the effects of an AID system in this population. Participants with hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) ≥ 58 mmol/mol (7.5%) were allocated 1:1 to 14 weeks of treatment with the MiniMed 780G system (AID) or continuation of usual care (UC). The primary endpoint was change in time in range (TIR: 3·9-10·0 mmol/L) from baseline to week 14. After this trial period, the UC group switched to AID treatment while the AID group continued using the system. Both groups were monitored for a total of 28 weeks. Forty adults (mean ± SD: age 52 ± 11 years, HbA1c 67 ± 7 mmol/mol [8.3% ± 0.6%], diabetes duration 29 ±13 years) were included. After 14 weeks, TIR increased by 18.7% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 14.5, 22.9%) in the AID group and remained unchanged in the UC group (P < .0001). Hemoglobin A1c decreased by 10.0 mmol/mol (95% CI = 7.0, 13.0 mmol/mol) (0.9% [95% CI = 0.6%, 1.2%]) in the AID group but remained unchanged in the UC group (P < .0001). The glycemic benefits of AID treatment were reproduced after the 14-week extension phase. There were no episodes of severe hypoglycemia or diabetic ketoacidosis during the study. For adults with type 1 diabetes not meeting glycemic targets despite use of insulin pump and CGM, transitioning to an AID system confers considerable glycemic benefits.

Parent, child, and adolescent lived experience using the insulin-only iLet Bionic Pancreas.

Automated insulin delivery (AID) systems show great promise for improving glycemic outcomes and reducing disease burden for youth with type 1 diabetes (T1D). The current study examined youth and parent perspectives after using the insulin-only iLet Bionic Pancreas (BP) during the 13-week pivotal trial. Parents and youth participated in focus group interviews, with questions assessing participants' experiences in a variety of settings and were grounded in the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology. Qualitative analysis was completed by 3 authors using a hybrid thematic analysis approach. Qualitative analysis of focus groups revealed a total of 19 sub-themes falling into 5 major themes (Diabetes Burden, Freedom and Flexibility, Daily Routine, Managing Glucose Levels, and User Experience). Participants' overall experience was positive, with decreased burden and improved freedom and flexibility. Some participants reported challenges in learning to trust the system, adjusting to the user interface, and the system learning their body. This study adds to the growing literature on patient perspectives on using AID systems and was among the first to assess caregiver and youth experiences with the BP system over an extended period (13 weeks). Patient feedback on physical experiences with the device and experiences trusting the device to manage glucose should inform future development of technologies as well as approaches to education for patients and their families.

Concordance of Blood Glucose and CGM During a Pilot Trial of Automated Insulin Delivery in Type 1 Diabetes Pregnancies.

Customized and standard automated insulin delivery (AID) systems for use in pregnancies of women with preexisting type 1 diabetes (T1D) are being developed and tested to achieve pregnancy appropriate continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) targets. Guidance on the use of CGM for treatment decisions during pregnancy in the United States is limited. Ten pregnant women with preexisting T1D participated in a trial evaluating at-home use of a pregnancy-specific AID system. Seven-point self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) was compared to the closest sensor glucose (Dexcom G6 CGM) value biweekly to assess safety and reliability based on the 20%/20 mg/dL criteria. All participants completed the study with 7 participants satisfying the safety and reliability criteria with a mean absolute relative difference of 10.3%. Three participants did not fulfill the criteria, mainly because the frequency of SMBG did not meet the requirements. Dexcom G6 CGM is safe and accurate in the real-world setting for use in pregnant women with preexisting T1D with reduced SMBG testing as part of a pregnancy-specific AID system.

Reducing Inequity in the Use of Automated Insulin Delivery Systems by Adults With Type 1 Diabetes: Key Learnings From a Safety Net Diabetes Clinic Program

BackgroundRecent advancements in diabetes technology have significantly improved Type 1 diabetes (T1D) management, but disparities persist, particularly in the adoption of automated insulin delivery (AID) systems within minoritized communities. We aimed to improve patient access to AID system training and overcome clinical inertia to referral. MethodsWe report on a transformative program implemented at Boston Medical Center, the largest safety-net hospital in New England, aimed at reducing disparities in AID system utilization. We employed a multidisciplinary team and quality improvement principles to identify barriers and develop solutions. Strategies included increasing access to diabetes educators, creating a referral system, and developing telemedicine education classes. We also made efforts to raise clinician awareness and confidence in recommending AID therapy. ResultsAt baseline, 13.5% of our clinic T1D population was using an insulin pump. The population referred included 97 people with T1D (49% female, mean A1c 8.7%, 68% public insurance beneficiaries, 25% Hispanic and 25% non-Hispanic Black). Results from the first year showed a 166% increase in AID system use rates, with 64% of referred patients starting on AID. Notably, 78% of patients with A1c >8.5% adopted AID systems, addressing a gap in representation observed in clinical efficacy trials. The initiative successfully narrowed disparities in AID use among minoritized populations. ConclusionsThe program's success among minoritized patients underscores the significance of tailored, collaborative, team-based care and targeted educational initiatives. Our experience provides a foundation for future efforts to ensure equitable access to diabetes technologies, emphasizing the potential of local quality improvement interventions.

Comparative Effectiveness of Hybrid Closed-Loop Automated Insulin Delivery Systems Among Patients with Type 1 Diabetes.

Clinical trials have demonstrated the efficacy and safety of hybrid closed-loop (HCL) systems, yet few studies have compared outcomes in the real-world setting. This retrospective study analyzed patients from an academic endocrinology practice between January 1, 2018, and November 18, 2022. The inclusion criteria were diagnosis code for type I diabetes (T1D), >18 years of age, new to any HCL system [Medtronic 670G/770G (MT), Tandem Control IQ (CIQ), or Omnipod 5 (OP5)], and availability of a pump download within three months. The outcomes included %time in range (TIR) of 70 to 180 mg/dL, %time below range (TBR) <70 mg/dL at 90 days, and HbA1c for 91 to 180 days. Of the 176 participants, 47 were MT, 74 CIQ, and 55 OP5. Median (25%, 75%) change in HbA1c was -0.1 (-0.8, 0.3), -0.6 (-1.1, -0.15), and -0.55 (-0.98, 0)% for MT, CIQ, and OP5, respectively, (P = .04). TIR was 70 (57, 76), 67 (59, 75), and 68 (60, 76)% (P = .95) at 90 days while TBR was 2 (1, 3), 1 (0, 2), and 1 (0, 1)%, respectively, (P = .002). The %time in automated delivery was associated with TIR and change in HbA1c. After controlling other factors including %time in automated delivery, HCL type was not an independent predictor of change in HbA1c nor TIR but remained a significant predictor of TBR. There were significant reductions in HbA1c in CIQ and OP5. TIR was similar across pumps, but TBR was highest with MT. The %time in automated delivery likely explains differences in change in HbA1c but not TBR between HCL systems.

Prevalence, Safety, and Metabolic Control Among Danish Children and Adolescents with Type 1 Diabetes Using Open-Source Automated Insulin Delivery Systems.

Background: Treatment of type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) has become increasingly technical with rapid developments in integration of pumps and sensors to regulate insulin dosage, and patient-initiated solutions as open-source automated insulin delivery (OS-AID) systems, have gained popularity in people with diabetes. Studies have shown increased glycemic control and mental wellbeing in users of OS-AID systems. The aim of this study was to estimate the prevalence, the effect on metabolic control, the risk, and the effect on everyday life for users and their parents of OS-AID systems in Danish children and adolescents with T1DM. Methods: This retrospective cohort study recruited participants through pediatric diabetes outpatient clinics and social media. Surveys were distributed and current and retrospective data on glycemic control (HbA1c, time in range [TIR] etc.) were collected. Results: Fifty-six users of OS-AID systems out of 2950 Danish children and adolescents with T1DM were identified from all outpatient clinics in Denmark. Thirty-one responded on contact and were included (55% of the identified), median age 12 [interquartile range: 11-14] years, 51% females, and mean duration of use of OS-AID systems 2.37 ± 0.86 years. Glycemic control increased significantly with TIR increasing from mean 62.29% ± 13.68% to 70.12% ± 10.08%, *P < 0.01, and HbA1c decreasing from mean 50.13 ± 5.76 mmol/mol (6.7% ± 2.7%) to 47.86 ± 6.24 mmol/mol (6.5% ± 2.7%), **P < 0.05. No changes were found in safety parameters. Parents reported better quality of sleep evaluated by Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index. Conclusion: This study is the first to provide knowledge on pediatric users of OS-AID systems in Denmark and found a prevalence of 1.89% for OS-AID systems, improved TIR, and no increased risk associated with use of OS-AID systems.

During an 18-month course of automated insulin delivery treatment, children aged 2 to 6 years achieve and maintain a higher time in tight range.

To investigate whether the positive effects on glycaemic outcomes of 3-month automated insulin delivery (AID) achieved in 2- to 6-year-old children endure over an extended duration and how AID treatment affects time in tight range (TITR), defined as 3.9-7.8 mmol/L. We analysed 18 months of follow-up data from a non-randomized, prospective, single-arm clinical trial (n = 35) conducted between 2021 and 2023. The main outcome measures were changes in time in range (TIR), glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c), time above range (TAR), TITR, and mean sensor glucose (SG) value during follow-up visits (at 0, 6, 12 and 18 months). The MiniMed 780G AID system in SmartGuard Mode was used for 18 months. Parental diabetes distress was evaluated at 3 and 18 months with the validated Problem Areas in Diabetes-Parent, revised (PAID-PR) survey. Between 0 and 6 months, TIR and TITR increased, and HbA1c, mean SG value and TAR decreased significantly (p < 0.001); the favourable effect persisted through 18 months of follow-up. Between 3 and 18 months, PAID-PR score declined significantly (0 months: mean score 37.5; 3 months: mean score 28.6 [p = 0.06]; 18 months: mean score 24.6 [p < 0.001]). Treatment with AID significantly increased TITR and TIR in young children. The positive effect of AID on glycaemic control observed after 6 months persisted throughout the 18 months of follow-up. Similarly, parental diabetes distress remained reduced during 18 months follow-up. These findings are reassuring and suggest that AID treatment improves glycaemic control and reduces parental diabetes distress in young children over an extended 18-month follow-up.

Characteristics Associated With Elevated Time Below Range in Elderly Patients With Type 1 Diabetes Using an Automated Insulin Delivery System.

This study investigated the characteristics associated with an increased risk of hypoglycemia, in elderly patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1D) using automated insulin delivery (AID) systems. Cross-sectional observational study including patients >60 years, using sensor-augmented insulin pump therapy with predictive low-glucose management (SAPT-PLGM), hybrid closed-loop (HCL), and advanced hybrid closed-loop (AHCL), for more than three months. A geriatric assessment was performed, and body composition was determined to investigate its association with achieving time below range (TBR) <70 mg/dL goals. The study included 59 patients (47.5% of men, mean age of 67.6 years, glycated hemoglobin [HbA1c] of 7.5 ± 0.6%, time in range (TIR) 77.8 ± 9.9%). Time below range <70 and <54 mg/dL were 2.2 ± 2.3% and 0.4 ± 0.81%, respectively. Patients with elevated TBR <70 mg/dL (>1%) had higher HbA1c levels, lower TIR, elevated time above range (TAR), and high glycemic variability. Regarding body composition, greater muscle mass, grip strength, and visceral fat were associated with a lower TBR <70 mg/dL. These factors were independent of the type of technology used, but TIR was higher when using AHCL systems compared with SAPT-PLGM and HCL systems. In elderly patients treated with AID systems with good functional status, lower lean mass, lower grip strength, and lower visceral fat percentage were associated with TBR greater than 1%, regardless of the device used. A similar finding along was found with CGM indicators such as higher HbA1c levels, lower TIR, higher TAR, and higher CV. Geriatric assessment is crucial for personalizing patient management.

Glucometrics and device satisfaction in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes using different treatment modalities: A multicenter real-world observational study

AimsTo analyze metabolic outcomes, diabetes impact and device satisfaction in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes in Italy who used different treatment modalities for diabetes care in a real-life context. MethodsIn this multicenter, nationwide, cross-sectional study, 1464 participants were enrolled at a routine visit. The following treatment modalities were considered MDI + SMBG; MDI + CGM; Sensor Augmented Pump Therapy; predictive management of low glucose; Hybrid Closed Loop (HCL); Advanced Hybrid Closed Loop (AHCL). Health related quality of life was evaluated by the Italian version of the Diabetes Impact and Device Satisfaction Scale (DIDS) questionnaire. ResultsPatients treated with AID systems were more likely to have HbA1c ≤ 6.5 %, higher percentage of time with glucose levels between 70 and 180 mg/dL, lower percentage of time with glucose levels above 180 mg/dL, higher device satisfaction, and reduced impact of diabetes. All the therapeutic modalities with respect to MDI + CGM, except for MDI + SMBG, contributed to increase the device satisfaction. HCL and AHCL respect to MDI + CGM were associated with lower diabetes impact. ConclusionReal-life use of automated insulin delivery systems is associated with reduced type 1 diabetes impact, increased device satisfaction, and achievement of glycemic goals.

Insulin's Legacy: A Century of Breakthroughs and Innovation.

The clinical use of insulin to treat diabetes started just over 100 years ago. The past century has witnessed remarkable innovations in insulin therapy, evolving from animal organ extracts to bioengineered human insulins with ultra-rapid onset or prolonged action. Insulin delivery systems have also progressed to current automated insulin delivery systems. In this review, we discuss the history of insulin and the pharmacology and therapeutic indications for a variety of available insulins, especially newer analog insulins. We highlight recent advances in insulin pump therapy and review evidence on the therapeutic benefits of automated insulin delivery. As with any form of progress, there have been setbacks, and insulin has recently faced an affordability crisis. We address the challenges of insulin accessibility, along with recent progress to improve insulin affordability. Finally, we mention research on glucose-responsive insulins and hepato-preferential insulins that are likely to shape the future of insulin therapy.

An Automated Insulin Delivery System with Automatic Meal Bolus Based on a Hand-Gesturing Algorithm.

Background: Carbohydrate counting (CC) and meal announcements, before eating, introduce a significant burden for individuals managing type 1 diabetes (T1D). An automated insulin delivery system with automatic bolusing that eliminates the need for CC and premeal bolusing (i.e., a hands-free closed-loop [HFCL] system) was assessed in a feasibility trial of adults with T1D. Methods: The system included the MiniMed™ 780G pump and a smartphone-paired smartwatch with the Klue application (Klue, Inc.) that detects eating and drinking gestures. A smartphone algorithm converted gestures into carb amounts that were transmitted to the pump for automatic bolusing. For 5 days, participants (N = 17, 18-75 years of age) used the system at home with meal announcements based on traditional CC, with the Klue application disabled (Home-stay phase). Thereafter, participants moved to a supervised hotel setting, where the Klue application was enabled for 5 days and meals were not announced (Hotel-stay phase). Participants consumed the same eight test meals (six solid and two liquid) of varying caloric and carb size at the same time and day of the week for both phases, and glycemic metrics were compared. Otherwise, there were no other meal restrictions. Results: The overall time in range (70-180 mg/dL) was 83.4% ± 7.0% and 80.6% ± 6.7% for the Home-stay and Hotel-stay, respectively (P = 0.08). The average time at <70 mg/dL was 3.1% and 3.0% (P = 0.9144), respectively, and the average time at >180 mg/dL was 13.5% and 16.3% (P = 0.1046), respectively. Postprandial glycemia following low-carb test meals was similar between the two phases. The system's ability to accommodate high-carb meals was somewhat limited. There were no episodes of severe hypoglycemia or diabetic ketoacidosis. Conclusion: Preliminary findings show that a HFCL system was safe and maintained overall glycemic control, similar to that observed with traditional CC and manual meal bolusing. By eliminating these daily T1D burdens, a HFCL system may improve quality of life for individuals with T1D. ClinicalTrials.gov number: NCT04964128.

Removing Barriers, Bridging the Gap, and the Changing Role of the Health Care Professional with Automated Insulin Delivery Systems.

As all people with type 1 diabetes (T1D) and some with type 2 diabetes (T2D) require insulin, there is a need to develop management methods that not only achieve glycemic targets but also reduce the burden of living with diabetes. After insulin pumps and continuous glucose monitors, the next step in the evolution of diabetes technology is automated insulin delivery (AID) systems, which have transformed intensive insulin management over the past decade, as these systems address the shortcomings of previous management options. However, AID use remains fairly limited, and access represents a major barrier to use for many people with diabetes, despite these systems being standard of care. Therefore, the future of AID will necessitate addressing barriers related to social determinants of health, finances, and an expansion of the number and type of health care professionals (HCPs) prescribing AID systems. These crucial steps will be essential to ensure that everyone with intensively managed diabetes can use AID systems. The impact of implementing these changes will create a shift in the future of diabetes care that will result in achievement of more targeted glycemia and psychosocial outcomes for all people with diabetes and an expansion of the role of all HCPs in AID-related diabetes care. Even more importantly, by addressing social determinants of health and clinical inertia related to AID, the field can address disparities in outcomes across countries, race, gender, socioeconomic status, and insurance status. Furthermore, the increased use of AID system will provide more time during appointments for a shift in the discussion away from fine tuning insulin dosing and toward a focus on more topics related to behavior and conversations about general health. This will include psychosocial outcomes, and quality of life. In addition, these changes can hopefully allow for time to discuss more general issues, such as cardiovascular health, obesity prevention, diabetes-related complications, and other health-related concerns.

Reducing Diabetes Burden in Medtronic's Automated Insulin Delivery Systems.

Background: The MiniMed™ 780G advanced hybrid closed-loop system (MM780G) builds on the basal automation and low-glucose protection features of the MiniMed™ 670G and 770G systems. While previous publications have focused on glycemic control improvements with MM780G, burden reduction has not been fully described. Methods: Data from two 3-month pivotal trials for the MM670G with Guardian™ Sensor 3 (GS3) (104 adults; 125 children) and MM780G with Guardian™ 4 Sensor (G4S) (67 adults;109 children) were compared. Real-world data (RWD) from United States users (N = 3851) transitioning from MM770G+GS3 to MM780G+G4S were also analyzed. Analyses included a new metric for diabetes management burden (i.e., pentagon composite metric), glycemic outcomes and system burden (e.g., closed-loop exits and fingersticks per day). Results: Diabetes burden metric (-22.8% and -28.5%), time in range (+3.1% [*P = 0.035] and +6.4% [P < 0.001]) and time below range (-1.8% [*P < 0.001] and -0.7% [*P < 0.001]) significantly improved, compared to MM670G for adult and pediatric participants, respectively. The pediatric mean sensor glucose (SG) reduced by -8.6 mg/dL (*P < 0.001), while the adults' saw no change. Closed-loop use significantly increased for both cohorts (+17.1% [*P < 0.001] and +20.5% [*P < 0.001]). Closed-loop exits were significantly reduced to about 1 per week (-0.5 [*P < 0.001] and -0.7 [*P < 0.001]); fingerstick tests were also reduced (-6.2 [*P < 0.001] and -6.9 [*P < 0.001]). Similar outcomes were observed from U.S. RWD. Conclusions: MiniMed™ 780G with G4S use was associated with significant reduction in diabetes management burden with fewer closed-loop exits, fingersticks and other interactions, and improvements in glycemic control when compared to the MiniMed™ 670G with GS3.