Conventional Insulin Pump Therapy Research Articles

Treatment Satisfaction With Omnipod DASH in Adults With Type 1 Diabetes: A Nonblinded 1:1 Randomized Controlled Trial.

Omnipod DASH Insulin Management System is a tubeless insulin pump that overcomes the physical inconveniences of conventional tubed insulin pump therapy (IPT). We compared treatment satisfaction with Omnipod DASH System to usual care (multiple daily injections [MDIs] or tubed IPT) in adults with type 1 diabetes using self-monitoring blood glucose (SMBG). Adults with type 1 diabetes on MDI (n = 40) or IPT (n = 25) from 4 diabetes centers in Australia were randomly assigned in a 1:1 nonblinded manner to Omnipod DASH System (Omnipod group) or continue usual care (Usual Care group) for 12 weeks, followed by a further 12-week extension during which all participants used the device. The primary outcome was treatment satisfaction assessed by change in Diabetes Technology Questionnaire "current" (ΔDTQ-current) score at 12 weeks (study end). Secondary outcomes included ΔDTQ-current following extension and other participant-reported outcomes (PROs) measuring quality of life, burden of disease treatment, and glycemic and device-related outcomes at 12 weeks (study end) and 24 weeks (end extension). Treatment satisfaction improved more in the Omnipod group vs the Usual Care group (ΔDTQ-current score of 16.4 [21.2] vs 0.0 [12.8]; P < .001) at study end. Significantly greater improvements in other PROs and glycated hemoglobin A1c were also observed. Improvements in DTQ-current and other PROs comparing study end and end extension were similar. While percentage in time in range change from baseline did not differ at study end (-2.0 [12.7] %), it was significantly greater at end extension (5.6 [10.9] %; P = .016). The Omnipod DASH System resulted in greater treatment satisfaction at 12 weeks in adults with type 1 diabetes using SMBG that was sustained after 24 weeks of device use without compromising sleep quality and fear of hypoglycemia. Improvements in glycemia were also observed.

Dual-hormone artificial pancreas for management of type 1 diabetes: Recent progress and future directions.

Over the last few years, technological advances have led to tremendous improvement in the management of type 1 diabetes (T1D). Artificial pancreas systems have been shown to improve glucose control compared with conventional insulin pump therapy. However, clinically significant hypoglycemic and hyperglycemic episodes still occur with the artificial pancreas. Postprandial glucose excursions and exercise-induced hypoglycemia represent major hurdles in improving glucose control and glucose variability in many patients with T1D. In this regard, dual-hormone artificial pancreas systems delivering other hormones in addition to insulin (glucagon or amylin) may better reproduce the physiology of the endocrine pancreas and have been suggested as an alternative tool to overcome these limitations in clinical practice. In addition, novel ultra-rapid-acting insulin analogs with a more physiological time-action profile are currently under investigation for use in artificial pancreas devices, aiming to address the unmet need for further improvements in postprandial glucose control. This review article aims to discuss the current progress and future outlook in the development of novel ultra-rapid insulin analogs and dual-hormone closed-loop systems, which offer the next steps to fully closing the loop in the artificial pancreas.

Closed-loop systems - Update 2020

Closed-loop systems - Update 2020 Abstract. The artificial pancreas (also referred to as a Closed-loop system) represents the latest development in diabetes therapy. Closed-loop systems autonomously direct subcutaneous insulin infusion via a control algorithm based on real-time continuous glucose monitoring. Closed-loop systems have been tested in clinical studies since 2011, and were shown to improve glucose control by reducing hyper- and hypoglycaemia as well as glucose variability when compared with conventional insulin pump therapy. In 2016, the US regulatory authority approved the first hybrid-closed-loop system for the treatment of type 1 diabetes. Hybrid-closed loop systems are not yet fully automated and still require the user to be actively involved for insulin dosing at mealtimes. In spite of the remarkable progress, the delayed action profile of subcutaneously administered insulin and the need to wear multiple devices on the body remain challenging. The present review article summarizes the current state of the art of closed-loop systems in diabetes care and will address technical aspects, evidence from clinical studies as well as future developments in the field.

The Use of Technology in Managing Diabetes in Youth Part 3-Special Considerations: Integration Into the School Setting.

The advantages of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) and insulin pump systems have increased the popularity of these devices among students in the school setting. The use of diabetes technology at school and school-sponsored activities strengthens the student's consistent use of the technology and increases the overall beneficial effects. The school nurse has many considerations when supporting the student with diabetes technology. Integrating this technology into diabetes care at school can be complex with collaboration and safety considerations fundamental to success. This is the third article in a three-part series on the use of technology in managing diabetes in youth. The first article described CGM devices and provided tips for the school nurse in incorporating CGM into the student's individualized healthcare plan. The second article summarized insulin pump technologies, from conventional insulin pump therapy to advance automated insulin delivery systems and described keys to success with insulin pump technologies. The purpose of this article is to address some special considerations for facilitating the use of diabetes technology in the school setting. Topics to be discussed are tips on including insulin pump therapy in the student's individualized healthcare plan, safe use of diabetes technology during physical activity, and implications for school nursing practice.

The Use of Technology in Managing Diabetes in Youth Part 2-Insulin Pump Technologies: Information and Tips for the School Nurse.

Insulin pump technologies are commonly used by youth with type 1 diabetes (T1D) for intensive insulin therapy, the gold standard for T1D care. Insulin pump technologies are advancing rapidly, with new insulin pumps becoming available every year offering improvements in glycemic control. School nurses must understand the basics of insulin pump therapy and distinguish between advanced pump technologies to best support their students with T1D. This is the second article in a three-part series on the use of technology in managing diabetes in youth. The first article described continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) devices and provided tips for the school nurses in incorporating CGM into the student's individualized healthcare plan. The purpose of this article is to summarize insulin pump technologies, from conventional insulin pump therapy to advanced automated insulin delivery systems and to describe keys to success with insulin pump technologies. Part 3 will focus on special considerations and problem solving related to technology use in the school setting.

1077-P: Treatment of Post-pancreatectomy Diabetes in Individuals with Congenital Hyperinsulinism Using a Bihormonal Bionic Pancreas

Congenital Hyperinsulinism (HI) is a disorder of beta-cell function that results in severe hypoglycemia. Near-total pancreatectomy (Ppx) is necessary for intractable hypoglycemia in the most severe cases, which results in diabetes later in life. The evolution of diabetes after Ppx is characterized by marked hypo- and hyper-glycemia due to residual dysregulated insulin secretion and glucagon deficiency. We aim to evaluate the safety and efficacy of a bihormonal bionic pancreas (BHBP) in individuals with HI and post-Ppx diabetes. Autonomously adaptive dosing algorithms in the BHBP use data from an integrated continuous glucose monitor (CGM) to control subcutaneous delivery of insulin and glucagon. Our hypothesis is that the BHBP will result in improved glycemic control compared to conventional insulin pump (CIP) therapy. This is an open-label, random-order, crossover, pilot study. Subjects with HI and post-Ppx diabetes are randomly assigned to BHBP therapy or CIP therapy during a 4-day inpatient stay, followed by the opposite intervention at least 1 week later. The BHBP was initialized with only the subject’s body weight. The coprimary outcomes are mean glucose and time with CGM glucose &amp;lt; 60 mg/dL analyzed over days 2-4. Seven subjects age 7-25 years (4 F) with mean A1C of 7.5% (SD 0.57) have completed the study to date. Mean CGM glucose was 148 mg/dL (SD 14) during the BHBP period vs. 156 mg/dL (SD 28) during the CIP period. All subjects had mean glucose during their BHBP period at or below 169 mg/dL (corresponding to A1C of 7.5%), whereas only 57% of subjects met this goal during their CIP period. Mean time with CGM glucose &amp;lt; 60 mg/dL was 0.07% (SD 0.60%) during the BHBP period vs. 1.71% (SD 3.48) during the CIP period. The BHBP was well tolerated. Relative to CIP therapy, the BHBP was able to produce, with greater ease of use, comparable, if not superior, results in terms of mean glucose and reduced frequency of hypoglycemia in individuals with HI and post-Ppx diabetes. Disclosure A. Rayannavar: None. L.M. Mitteer: None. K. Lord: None. C.P. Hawkes: None. C.A. Balliro: None. F. El-Khatib: Employee; Self; Beta Bionics. Stock/Shareholder; Self; Beta Bionics. E. Damiano: Advisory Panel; Self; Novo Nordisk A/S. Board Member; Self; Beta Bionics. Employee; Self; Beta Bionics. Stock/Shareholder; Self; Beta Bionics. Stock/Shareholder; Spouse/Partner; Beta Bionics. Other Relationship; Self; Ascensia Diabetes Care, Senseonics. S.J. Russell: Advisory Panel; Self; Companion Medical, Unomedical a/s. Consultant; Self; Flexion Therapeutics. Research Support; Self; Beta Bionics, MITRE Corporation, Novo Nordisk A/S, Zealand Pharma A/S. Other Relationship; Self; ADOCIA, Ascensia Diabetes Care, Ascensia Diabetes Care, Lilly Diabetes, Roche Diabetes Care, Senseonics. D. De Leon: Consultant; Self; Crinetics, Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation, ProSciento, Soleno Therapeutics, Zealand Pharma A/S. Employee; Spouse/Partner; Merck &amp; Co., Inc. Research Support; Self; Crinetics, Dexcom, Inc., Zealand Pharma A/S. Stock/Shareholder; Self; Merck &amp; Co., Inc. Funding Zealand Pharma A/S; Dexcom, Inc.; University of Pennsylvania; Children's Hospital of Philadelphia Women's Committee; National Institutes of Health (T32DK06368-14 to A.R.); Pediatric Endocrine Society

Differential Effects of the Insulin-Only and Bihormonal Configurations of the Bionic Pancreas on Mean Glucose and Hypoglycemia during the Daytime and Nighttime

The bihormonal bionic pancreas (BP) reduced both mean CGM glucose (CGMG) and time in the hypoglycemic range relative to usual care in outpatient studies. We recently performed an outpatient study in which we compared insulin-only (IOBP) and bihormonal (BHBP) configurations of the BP with usual care (UC; conventional or sensor-augmented insulin pump therapy) both with and without remote monitoring. We previously reported that monitoring did not affect the mean CGMG or hypoglycemia with either configuration of the BP. The current analysis focuses on the data collected from arms without remote monitoring (how the BP is eventually meant to be used) to determine how the effects of the BP differ between the day and night. As shown in the Table, both the IOBP (with glucose target of 110 mg/dl) and BHBP (with glucose target of 100 mg/dl) significantly reduced mean CGMG vs. UC during both the daytime and nighttime. In contrast, only the BHBP significantly reduced the percent of time spent with CGMG &amp;lt;60 mg/dl vs. UC. The BHBP similarly reduced percent of time &amp;lt;60 mg/dl vs. IOBP. The significant reductions in hypogycemia associated with the BHBP were driven primarily by reductions in hypoglycemia at night. Disclosure J. Sherwood: None. C.A. Balliro: None. R.Z. Jafri: None. F. El-Khatib: Stock/Shareholder; Self; Beta Bionics. Employee; Self; Beta Bionics. M. Maheno: None. M.A. Hillard: None. A.J. O'Donovan: None. R. Selagamsetty: None. H. Zheng: None. E. Damiano: Other Relationship; Self; Beta Bionics. S.J. Russell: Other Relationship; Self; Beta Bionics, Novo Nordisk Inc.. Advisory Panel; Self; Companion Medical, Tandem Diabetes Care, Inc., Unomedical a/s. Research Support; Self; Beta Bionics, Zealand Pharma A/S, MITRE Corporation.

Day-and-night glycaemic control with closed-loop insulin delivery versus conventional insulin pump therapy in free-living adults with well controlled type 1 diabetes: an open-label, randomised, crossover study

SummaryBackgroundTight control of blood glucose concentration in people with type 1 diabetes predisposes to hypoglycaemia. We aimed to investigate whether day-and-night hybrid closed-loop insulin delivery can improve glucose control while alleviating the risk of hypoglycaemia in adults with HbA1c below 7·5% (58 mmol/mol).MethodsIn this open-label, randomised, crossover study, we recruited adults (aged ≥18 years) with type 1 diabetes and HbA1c below 7·5% from Addenbrooke's Hospital (Cambridge, UK) and Medical University of Graz (Graz, Austria). After a 2–4 week run-in period, participants were randomly assigned (1:1), using web-based randomly permuted blocks of four, to receive insulin via the day-and-night hybrid closed-loop system or usual pump therapy for 4 weeks, followed by a 2–4 week washout period and then the other intervention for 4 weeks. Treatment interventions were unsupervised and done under free-living conditions. During the closed-loop period, a model-predictive control algorithm directed insulin delivery, and prandial insulin delivery was calculated with a standard bolus wizard. The primary outcome was the proportion of time when sensor glucose concentration was in target range (3·9–10·0 mmol/L) over the 4 week study period. Analyses were by intention to treat. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02727231, and is completed.FindingsBetween March 21 and June 24, 2016, we recruited 31 participants, of whom 29 were randomised. One participant withdrew during the first closed-loop period because of dissatisfaction with study devices and glucose control. The proportion of time when sensor glucose concentration was in target range was 10·5 percentage points higher (95% CI 7·6–13·4; p<0·0001) during closed-loop delivery compared with usual pump therapy (65·6% [SD 8·1] when participants used usual pump therapy vs 76·2% [6·4] when they used closed-loop). Compared with usual pump therapy, closed-loop delivery also reduced the proportion of time spent in hypoglycaemia: the proportion of time with glucose concentration below 3·5 mmol/L was reduced by 65% (53–74, p<0·0001) and below 2·8 mmol/L by 76% (59–86, p<0·0001). No episodes of serious hypoglycaemia or other serious adverse events occurred.InterpretationUse of day-and-night hybrid closed-loop insulin delivery under unsupervised, free-living conditions for 4 weeks in adults with type 1 diabetes and HbA1c below 7·5% is safe and well tolerated, improves glucose control, and reduces hypoglycaemia burden. Larger and longer studies are warranted.FundingSwiss National Science Foundation (P1BEP3_165297), JDRF, UK National Institute for Health Research Cambridge Biomedical Research Centre, and Wellcome Strategic Award (100574/Z/12/Z).

Conventional insulin pump therapy in two neonatal diabetes patients harboring the homozygous PTF1A enhancer mutation: Need for a novel approach for the management of neonatal diabetes

Kurnaz E, Aycan Z, Yıldırım N, Çetinkaya S. Conventional insulin pump therapy in two neonatal diabetes patients harboring the homozygous PTF1A enhancer mutation: Need for a novel approach for the management of neonatal diabetes. Turk J Pediatr 2017; 59: 458-462. The enhancer of PTF1A mutation causes developmental defects of the pancreas. This condition can result in insulin-requiring diabetes and exocrine pancreatic insufficiency. We report two patients with diabetes mellitus harboring the homozygous PTF1A enhancer mutation. The patients had hyperglycemia in the first month of life and were started with subcutaneous insulin injections with NPH insulin. When blood glucose (BG) exceeded 250 mg/dl, a conservative dose of rapid-acting insulin was administered to restore BG to the target range. In cases with documented poor control (persistent hypoglycemia and rebound hyperglycemia), it was decided that the baby would benefit from a continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion pump. But our experience shows that wide fluctuations in BG concentrations despite the strict follow-up was probably due to the absence of circulating glucagon. Further treatment options would overcome this problem, especially for children with pancreas agenesis. We could say theoretically that using diluted insulin, a sensor-augmented insulin pump system and single-hormone (insulin alone) and dual-hormone (insulin and glucagon) artificial pancreas systems may mitigate the severity of hypogylcemia.

Home use of a bihormonal bionic pancreas versus insulin pump therapy in adults with type 1 diabetes: a multicentre randomised crossover trial

The safety and effectiveness of a continuous, day-and-night automated glycaemic control system using insulin and glucagon has not been shown in a free-living, home-use setting. We aimed to assess whether bihormonal bionic pancreas initialised only with body mass can safely reduce mean glycaemia and hypoglycaemia in adults with type 1 diabetes who were living at home and participating in their normal daily routines without restrictions on diet or physical activity. We did a random-order crossover study in volunteers at least 18 years old who had type 1 diabetes and lived within a 30 min drive of four sites in the USA. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) in blocks of two using sequentially numbered sealed envelopes to glycaemic regulation with a bihormonal bionic pancreas or usual care (conventional or sensor-augmented insulin pump therapy) first, followed by the opposite intervention. Both study periods were 11 days in length, during which time participants continued all normal activities, including athletics and driving. The bionic pancreas was initialised with only the participant's body mass. Autonomously adaptive dosing algorithms used data from a continuous glucose monitor to control subcutaneous delivery of insulin and glucagon. The coprimary outcomes were the mean glucose concentration and time with continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) glucose concentration less than 3·3 mmol/L, analysed over days 2-11 in participants who completed both periods of the study. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02092220. We randomly assigned 43 participants between May 6, 2014, and July 3, 2015, 39 of whom completed the study: 20 who were assigned to bionic pancreas first and 19 who were assigned to the comparator first. The mean CGM glucose concentration was 7·8 mmol/L (SD 0·6) in the bionic pancreas period versus 9·0 mmol/L (1·6) in the comparator period (difference 1·1 mmol/L, 95% CI 0·7-1·6; p<0·0001), and the mean time with CGM glucose concentration less than 3·3 mmol/L was 0·6% (0·6) in the bionic pancreas period versus 1·9% (1·7) in the comparator period (difference 1·3%, 95% CI 0·8-1·8; p<0·0001). The mean nausea score on the Visual Analogue Scale (score 0-10) was greater during the bionic pancreas period (0·52 [SD 0·83]) than in the comparator period (0·05 [0·17]; difference 0·47, 95% CI 0·21-0·73; p=0·0024). Body mass and laboratory parameters did not differ between periods. There were no serious or unexpected adverse events in the bionic pancreas period of the study. Relative to conventional and sensor-augmented insulin pump therapy, the bihormonal bionic pancreas, initialised only with participant weight, was able to achieve superior glycaemic regulation without the need for carbohydrate counting. Larger and longer studies are needed to establish the long-term benefits and risks of automated glycaemic management with a bihormonal bionic pancreas. National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases of the National Institutes of Health, and National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences.

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

The artificial pancreas (closed-loop system) addresses the unmet clinical need for improved glucose control whilst reducing the burden of diabetes self-care in type 1 diabetes. Glucose-responsive insulin delivery above and below a preset insulin amount informed by sensor glucose readings differentiates closed-loop systems from conventional, threshold-suspend and predictive-suspend insulin pump therapy. Insulin requirements in type 1 diabetes can vary between one-third–threefold on a daily basis. Closed-loop systems accommodate these variations and mitigate the risk of hypoglycaemia associated with tight glucose control. In this review we focus on the progress being made in the development and evaluation of closed-loop systems in outpatient settings. Randomised transitional studies have shown feasibility and efficacy of closed-loop systems under supervision or remote monitoring. Closed-loop application during free-living, unsupervised conditions by children, adolescents and adults compared with sensor-augmented pumps have shown improved glucose outcomes, reduced hypoglycaemia and positive user acceptance. Innovative approaches to enhance closed-loop performance are discussed and we also present the outlook and strategies used to ease clinical adoption of closed-loop systems.

Day and night glycaemic control with a bionic pancreas versus conventional insulin pump therapy in preadolescent children with type 1 diabetes: a randomised crossover trial

The safety and efficacy of continuous, multiday, automated glycaemic management has not been tested in outpatient studies of preadolescent children with type 1 diabetes. We aimed to compare the safety and efficacy of a bihormonal bionic pancreas versus conventional insulin pump therapy in this population of patients in an outpatient setting. In this randomised, open-label, crossover study, we enrolled preadolescent children (aged 6-11 years) with type 1 diabetes (diagnosed for ≥1 year) who were on insulin pump therapy, from two diabetes camps in the USA. With the use of sealed envelopes, participants were randomly assigned in blocks of two to either 5 days with the bionic pancreas or conventional insulin pump therapy (control) as the first intervention, followed by a 3 day washout period and then 5 days with the other intervention. Study allocation was not masked. The autonomously adaptive algorithm of the bionic pancreas received data from a continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) device to control subcutaneous delivery of insulin and glucagon. Conventional insulin pump therapy was administered by the camp physicians and other clinical staff in accordance with their established protocols; participants also wore a CGM device during the control period. The coprimary outcomes, analysed by intention to treat, were mean CGM-measured glucose concentration and the proportion of time with a CGM-measured glucose concentration below 3·3 mmol/L, on days 2-5. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02105324. Between July 20, and Aug 19, 2014, 19 children with a mean age of 9·8 years (SD 1·6) participated in and completed the study. The bionic pancreas period was associated with a lower mean CGM-measured glucose concentration on days 2-5 than was the control period (7·6 mmol/L [SD 0·6] vs 9·3 mmol/L [1·7]; p=0·00037) and a lower proportion of time with a CGM-measured glucose concentration below 3·3 mmol/L on days 2-5 (1·2% [SD 1·1] vs 2·8% [1·2]; p<0·0001). The median number of carbohydrate interventions given per participant for hypoglycaemia on days 1-5 (ie, glucose <3·9 mmol/L) was lower during the bionic pancreas period than during the control period (three [range 0-8] vs five [0-14]; p=0·037). No episodes of severe hypoglycaemia were recorded. Medium-to-large concentrations of ketones (range 0·6-3·6 mmol/dL) were reported on seven occasions in five participants during the control period and on no occasion during the bionic pancreas period (p=0·063). The improved mean glycaemia and reduced hypoglycaemia with the bionic pancreas relative to insulin pump therapy in preadolescent children with type 1 diabetes in a diabetes camp setting is a promising finding. Studies of a longer duration during which children use the bionic pancreas during their normal routines at home and school should be done to investigate the potential for use of the bionic pancreas in real-world settings. The Leona M and Harry B Helmsley Charitable Trust and the US National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases.

Single- and Dual-Hormone Artificial Pancreas for Overnight Glucose Control in Type 1 Diabetes.

The added benefit of glucagon in artificial pancreas systems for overnight glucose control in type 1 diabetes has not been fully explored. The objective of the study was to compare the efficacy of dual-hormone (insulin and glucagon) artificial pancreas, single-hormone (insulin alone) artificial pancreas, and conventional insulin pump therapy. This study was a three-center, three-arm, open-label, randomized, crossover controlled trial involving three interventions, each applied over a night after a high carbohydrate/high fat meal and a second after exercise to mimic real-life glycemic excursions. The study was conducted in a home setting. Twenty-eight type 1 diabetes participants (21 adults and seven adolescents) participated in the study. Dual-hormone artificial pancreas, single-hormone artificial pancreas, and conventional pump therapy was activated from 9:00 PM to 7:00 AM. The main outcome was a proportion of time in target (4-8 mmol/L) by continuous glucose monitoring from 11:00 PM to 7:00 AM. Analysis was by intention to treat. The median (interquartile range) percentage of time-in-target glucose range was 47% (36%-71%) for conventional therapy, higher on both single-hormone (76% [65%-91%], P < .001) and dual-hormone artificial pancreas (81 [68%-93%], P < .001). The median (interquartile range) time spent below 4 mmol/L was 14% (4%-28%) for conventional therapy, lower on both single-hormone (5% [0%-13%], P = .004) and dual-hormone artificial pancreas (1% [0%-8%], P < .001). There were 14 hypoglycemic events on conventional therapy compared with six incidences on the single-hormone artificial pancreas (P = .059) and three incidences on the dual-hormone artificial pancreas (P = .017). None of these outcomes differed significantly between single- and dual-hormone configurations. Single- and dual-hormone artificial pancreas systems both provided better glucose control than conventional therapy. Although the dual-hormone configuration did not increase overnight time-in-target glucose levels, an effect on lowering hypoglycemia risk cannot be ruled out.

Outpatient overnight glucose control with dual-hormone artificial pancreas, single-hormone artificial pancreas, or conventional insulin pump therapy in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes: an open-label, randomised controlled trial

Additional benefits of the dual-hormone (insulin and glucagon) artificial pancreas compared with the single-hormone (insulin alone) artificial pancreas have not been assessed in young people in outpatient unrestricted conditions. We evaluated the efficacy of three systems for nocturnal glucose control in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes. We did a randomised, three-way, crossover trial in children aged 9-17 years with type 1 diabetes attending a diabetes camp in Canada. With use of sealed envelopes, children were randomly assigned in a 1:1:1:1:1:1 ratio with blocks of six to different sequences of the three interventions (single-hormone artificial pancreas, dual-hormone artificial pancreas, and conventional continuous subcutaneous insulin pump therapy). Each intervention was applied for 3 consecutive nights. Participants, study staff, and endpoint assessors were not masked. The primary outcome was the percentage of time spent with glucose concentrations lower than 4·0 mmol/L from 2300 h to 0700 h. Analysis was by intention to treat. A p value of less than 0·0167 was regarded as significant. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02189694. Between June 30, 2014, and Aug 9, 2014, we enrolled 33 children of mean age 13·3 years (SD 2·3; range 9-17). The time spent at a glucose concentration lower than 4·0 mmol/L was median 0% (IQR 0·0-2·4) during nights with the dual-hormone artificial pancreas, 3·1% (0·0-6·9) during nights with the single-hormone artificial pancreas (p=0·032), and 3·4% (0-11·0) during nights with conventional pump therapy (p=0·0048 compared with dual-hormone artificial pancreas and p=0·32 compared with single-hormone artificial pancreas). 15 hypoglycaemic events (<3·1 mmol/L for 20 min measured by sensor then confirmed with capillary glucose <4·0 mmol/L) were noted during nights with conventional pump therapy compared with four events with the single-hormone system and no events with the dual-hormone system. None of the assessed outcomes varied with the order in which children and young adults were assigned interventions. The dual-hormone artificial pancreas could improve nocturnal glucose control in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes. Longer and larger outpatient studies are now needed. Canadian Diabetes Association, Fondation J A De Sève.

Comparison of dual-hormone artificial pancreas, single-hormone artificial pancreas, and conventional insulin pump therapy for glycaemic control in patients with type 1 diabetes: an open-label randomised controlled crossover trial

The artificial pancreas is an emerging technology for the treatment of type 1 diabetes and two configurations have been proposed: single-hormone (insulin alone) and dual-hormone (insulin and glucagon). We aimed to delineate the usefulness of glucagon in the artificial pancreas system. We did a randomised crossover trial of dual-hormone artificial pancreas, single-hormone artificial pancreas, and conventional insulin pump therapy (continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion) in participants aged 12 years or older with type 1 diabetes. Participants were assigned in a 1:1:1:1:1:1 ratio with blocked randomisation to the three interventions and attended a research facility for three 24-h study visits. During visits when the patient used the single-hormone artificial pancreas, insulin was delivered based on glucose sensor readings and a predictive dosing algorithm. During dual-hormone artificial pancreas visits, glucagon was also delivered during low or falling glucose. During conventional insulin pump therapy visits, patients received continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion. The study was not masked. The primary outcome was the time for which plasma glucose concentrations were in the target range (4·0-10·0 mmol/L for 2 h postprandially and 4·0-8·0 mmol/L otherwise). Hypoglycaemic events were defined as plasma glucose concentration of less than 3·3 mmol/L with symptoms or less than 3·0 mmol/L irrespective of symptoms. Analysis was by modified intention to treat, in which we included data for all patients who completed at least two visits. A p value of less than 0·0167 (0·05/3) was regarded as significant. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01754337. The mean proportion of time spent in the plasma glucose target range over 24 h was 62% (SD 18), 63% (18), and 51% (19) with single-hormone artificial pancreas, dual-hormone artificial pancreas, and conventional insulin pump therapy, respectively. The mean difference in time spent in the target range between single-hormone artificial pancreas and conventional insulin pump therapy was 11% (17; p=0·002) and between dual-hormone artificial pancreas and conventional insulin pump therapy was 12% (21; p=0·00011). There was no difference (15; p=0·75) in the proportion of time spent in the target range between the single-hormone and dual-hormone artificial pancreas systems. There were 52 hypoglycaemic events with conventional insulin pump therapy (12 of which were symptomatic), 13 with the single-hormone artificial pancreas (five of which were symptomatic), and nine with the dual-hormone artificial pancreas (0 of which were symptomatic); the number of nocturnal hypoglycaemic events was 13 (0 symptomatic), 0, and 0, respectively. Single-hormone and dual-hormone artificial pancreas systems both provided better glycaemic control than did conventional insulin pump therapy. The single-hormone artificial pancreas might be sufficient for hypoglycaemia-free overnight glycaemic control. Canadian Diabetes Association; Fondation J A De Sève; Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation; and Medtronic.

Sensor augmented pump therapy from onset of type 1 diabetes: late follow-up results of the Pediatric Onset Study

To evaluate the metabolic control and β-cell function 1 yr after the end of the European multicentre randomized Pediatric Onset Study. Of 154 study patients, 131 were re-examined 24 months after type 1 diabetes onset (49.6% boys, age at onset 8.9 ± 4.3 yrs). Of which, 62 patients belonged to the primary group of the main study applying a sensor-augmented pump system during the first yr and 69 patients to the control group performing conventional insulin pump therapy with self-monitoring blood glucose. HbA1c, fasting blood glucose, and C-peptide were centrally measured (Clinical Trail Registration Number: ISRCTN05450731). At 24 months, i.e., 1 yr after the end of the interventional study, 52.4% of the patients used the sensor-augmented pump system, 46.0% conventional pump, and 1.6% multiple daily injections. HbA1c was 7.6 ± 1.3% in the primary and 7.7 ± 1.2% in the control group (p = 0.493). Frequent sensor use during the first yr was associated with statistically insignificant lowering of the HbA1c at 24 months (p = 0.236) as compared with irregular or no sensor use (7.4 ± 1.0% vs. 7.7 ± 1.3%). Although fasting C-peptide was not clearly different between the primary and control group (0.13 ± 0.17 vs. 0.09 ± 0.10 nmol/L, p = 0.121), patients with frequent sensor use had significantly less C-peptide loss within 24 months (C-peptide reduction 0.02 ± 0.18 vs. 0.07 ± 0.11 nmol/L, p = 0.046). There was no difference between the groups regarding daily insulin requirements. Sensor-augmented pump therapy from onset of diabetes may lead to better long-term glycemic control and help to preserve endogenous β-cell function, if patients comply with frequent use of continuous glucose monitoring.

Closing the loop

Closing the loop

Use of Integrated Real-Time Continuous Glucose Monitoring/Insulin Pump System in Children and Adolescents with Type 1 Diabetes: A 3-Year Follow-Up Study

Insulin pumps and real-time continuous glucose monitoring devices have recently been combined into the sensor-augmented pump (SAP) system. The objective of this study was the evaluation of the clinical use of SAP in a large series of children with type 1 diabetes using insulin pump therapy. A questionnaire was administered in all pediatric diabetologic centers in Italy; data were analyzed only regarding patients 18 years old or younger and using SAP for 6 months or more. Among all patients using an insulin pump, 129 (13.5 ± 3.8 years old, with a disease duration of 6.3 ± 3.4 years) have been using SAP for 1.4 ± 0.7 years. Four hundred ninety-three patients (12.9 ± 3.4 years old, with a disease duration of 6.2 ± 3.3 years) using conventional insulin pump therapy for 1.7 ± 0.5 years have been evaluated as the control group. After 0.5-3 years of using SAP or conventional insulin pump therapy, glycosylated hemoglobin significantly improved (8.0 ± 1.5% vs. 7.4 ± 0.8% [P = 0.002] and 8.0 ± 1.6% vs. 7.7 ± 1.1% [P = 0.006], respectively); the improvement was higher with SAP (P = 0.005). Insulin requirement showed a significant decrease only in SAP patients (0.88 ± 0.25 vs. 0.7 ± 0.23 U/kg/day, P = 0.003). Body mass index did not change during the observation period. No diabetic ketoacidosis episodes were observed during the follow-up, and severe hypoglycemia significantly decreased in SAP patients (P = 0.04). The increased availability of continuous glucose sensors is likely to have a significant impact on pediatric diabetes therapy and education in the near future. In daily settings, patients using SAP can achieve a better control than patients using conventional insulin pump.

Overnight closed loop insulin delivery (artificial pancreas) in adults with type 1 diabetes: crossover randomised controlled studies

Objective To compare the safety and efficacy of overnight closed loop delivery of insulin (artificial pancreas) with conventional insulin pump therapy in adults with type 1 diabetes.Design Two sequential, open...

Incremental Value of Continuous Glucose Monitoring When Starting Pump Therapy in Patients With Poorly Controlled Type 1 Diabetes

OBJECTIVETo compare the improvements in glycemic control associated with transitioning to insulin pump therapy in patients using continuous glucose monitoring versus standard blood glucose self-monitoring.RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODSThe RealTrend study was a 6-month, randomized, parallel-group, two-arm, open-label study of 132 adults and children with uncontrolled type 1 diabetes (A1C ≥8%) being treated with multiple daily injections. One group was fitted with the Medtronic MiniMed Paradigm REAL-Time system (PRT group), an insulin pump with integrated continuous subcutaneous glucose monitoring (CGM) capability, with instructions to wear CGM sensors at least 70% of the time. Conventional insulin pump therapy was initiated in the other group (continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion [CSII] group). Outcome measures included A1C and glycemic variability.RESULTSA total of 115 patients completed the study. Between baseline and trial end, A1C improved significantly in both groups (PRT group −0.81 ± 1.09%, P < 0.001; CSII group −0.57 ± 0.94%, P < 0.001), with no significant difference between groups. When the 91 patients who were fully protocol-compliant (including CGM sensor wear ≥70% of the time) were considered, A1C improvement was significantly greater in the PRT group (P = 0.004) (PRT group −0.96 ± 0.93%, P < 0.001; CSII group −0.55 ± 0.93%, P < 0.001). Hyperglycemia parameters decreased in line with improvements in A1C with no impact on hypoglycemia.CONCLUSIONSCGM-enabled insulin pump therapy improves glycemia more than conventional pump therapy during the first 6 months of pump use in patients who wear CGM sensors at least 70% of the time.