ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Managing glucose levels during exercise is challenging for individuals with type 1 diabetes (T1D) since multiple factors including activity type, duration, intensity and other factors must be considered. Current decision support tools lack personalized recommendations and fail to distinguish between aerobic and resistance exercise. We propose an exercise-aware decision support system (exDSS) that uses digital twins to deliver personalized recommendations to help people with T1D maintain safe glucose levels (70-180 mg/dL) and avoid low glucose (<70 mg/dL) during and after exercise. METHODS: We evaluated exDSS using various exercise and meal scenarios recorded from a large, free-living study of aerobic and resistance exercise. The model inputs were heart rate, insulin, and meal data. Glucose responses were simulated during and after 30-minute exercise sessions (676 aerobic, 631 resistance) from 247 participants. Glucose outcomes were compared when participants followed exDSS recommendations, clinical guidelines, or did not modify behavior (no intervention). RESULTS: exDSS significantly improved mean time in range for aerobic (80.2% to 92.3%, P < .0001) and resistance (72.3% to 87.3%, P < .0001) exercises compared with no intervention, and versus clinical guidelines (aerobic: 82.2%, P < .0001; resistance: 80.3%, P < .0001). exDSS reduced time spent in low glucose for both exercise types compared with no intervention (aerobic: 15.1% to 5.1%, P < .0001; resistance: 18.2% to 6.6%, P < .0001) and was comparable with following clinical guidelines (aerobic: 4.5%, resistance: 8.1%, P = N.S.). CONCLUSIONS: The exDSS tool significantly improved glucose outcomes during and after exercise versus following clinical guidelines and no intervention providing motivation for clinical evaluation of the exDSS system.
Subject(s)
Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1 , Humans , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1/therapy , Exercise , Exercise Therapy , Awareness , GlucoseABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Exercise can rapidly drop glucose in people with type 1 diabetes. Ubiquitous wearable fitness sensors are not integrated into automated insulin delivery (AID) systems. We hypothesised that an AID can automate insulin adjustments using real-time wearable fitness data to reduce hypoglycaemia during exercise and free-living conditions compared with an AID not automating use of fitness data. METHODS: Our study population comprised of individuals (aged 21-50 years) with type 1 diabetes from from the Harold Schnitzer Diabetes Health Center clinic at Oregon Health and Science University, OR, USA, who were enrolled into a 76 h single-centre, two-arm randomised (4-block randomisation), non-blinded crossover study to use (1) an AID that detects exercise, prompts the user, and shuts off insulin during exercise using an exercise-aware adaptive proportional derivative (exAPD) algorithm or (2) an AID that automates insulin adjustments using fitness data in real-time through an exercise-aware model predictive control (exMPC) algorithm. Both algorithms ran on iPancreas comprising commercial glucose sensors, insulin pumps, and smartwatches. Participants executed 1 week run-in on usual therapy followed by exAPD or exMPC for one 12 h primary in-clinic session involving meals, exercise, and activities of daily living, and 2 free-living out-patient days. Primary outcome was time below range (<3·9 mmol/L) during the primary in-clinic session. Secondary outcome measures included mean glucose and time in range (3·9-10 mmol/L). This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04771403. FINDINGS: Between April 13, 2021, and Oct 3, 2022, 27 participants (18 females) were enrolled into the study. There was no significant difference between exMPC (n=24) versus exAPD (n=22) in time below range (mean [SD] 1·3% [2·9] vs 2·5% [7·0]) or time in range (63·2% [23·9] vs 59·4% [23·1]) during the primary in-clinic session. In the 2 h period after start of in-clinic exercise, exMPC had significantly lower mean glucose (7·3 [1·6] vs 8·0 [1·7] mmol/L, p=0·023) and comparable time below range (1·4% [4·2] vs 4·9% [14·4]). Across the 76 h study, both algorithms achieved clinical time in range targets (71·2% [16] and 75·5% [11]) and time below range (1·0% [1·2] and 1·3% [2·2]), significantly lower than run-in period (2·4% [2·4], p=0·0004 vs exMPC; p=0·012 vs exAPD). No adverse events occurred. INTERPRETATION: AIDs can integrate exercise data from smartwatches to inform insulin dosing and limit hypoglycaemia while improving glucose outcomes. Future AID systems that integrate exercise metrics from wearable fitness sensors may help people living with type 1 diabetes exercise safely by limiting hypoglycaemia. FUNDING: JDRF Foundation and the Leona M and Harry B Helmsley Charitable Trust, National Institutes of Health, National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases.
Subject(s)
Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1 , Hypoglycemia , Wearable Electronic Devices , Female , Humans , Activities of Daily Living , Artificial Intelligence , Cross-Over Studies , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1/drug therapy , Glucose/therapeutic use , Health Expenditures , Hypoglycemic Agents/therapeutic use , Insulin , United States , MaleABSTRACT
Exercise can cause dangerous fluctuations in blood glucose in people living with type 1 diabetes (T1D). Aerobic exercise, for example, can cause acute hypoglycemia secondary to increased insulin-mediated and noninsulin-mediated glucose utilization. Less is known about how resistance exercise (RE) impacts glucose dynamics. Twenty-five people with T1D underwent three sessions of either moderate or high-intensity RE at three insulin infusion rates during a glucose tracer clamp. We calculated time-varying rates of endogenous glucose production (EGP) and glucose disposal (Rd) across all sessions and used linear regression and extrapolation to estimate insulin- and noninsulin-mediated components of glucose utilization. Blood glucose did not change on average during exercise. The area under the curve (AUC) for EGP increased by 1.04 mM during RE (95% CI: 0.65-1.43, P < 0.001) and decreased proportionally to insulin infusion rate (0.003 mM per percent above basal rate, 95% CI: 0.001-0.006, P = 0.003). The AUC for Rd rose by 1.26 mM during RE (95% CI: 0.41-2.10, P = 0.004) and increased proportionally with insulin infusion rate (0.04 mM per percent above basal rate, CI: 0.03-0.04, P < 0.001). No differences were observed between the moderate and high resistance groups. Noninsulin-mediated glucose utilization rose significantly during exercise before returning to baseline roughly 30-min postexercise. Insulin-mediated glucose utilization remained unchanged during exercise sessions. Circulating catecholamines and lactate rose during exercise despite relatively small changes observed in Rd. Results provide an explanation of why RE may pose a lower overall risk for hypoglycemia.NEW & NOTEWORTHY Aerobic exercise is known to cause decreases in blood glucose secondary to increased glucose utilization in people living with type 1 diabetes (T1D). However, less is known about how resistance-type exercise impacts glucose dynamics. Twenty-five participants with T1D performed in-clinic weight-bearing exercises under a glucose clamp. Mathematical modeling of infused glucose tracer allowed for quantification of the rate of hepatic glucose production as well as rates of insulin-mediated and noninsulin-mediated glucose uptake experienced during resistance exercise.
Subject(s)
Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1 , Hypoglycemia , Resistance Training , Humans , Glucose , Insulin , Blood Glucose , Exercise , Lactic AcidABSTRACT
We present a robust insulin delivery system that includes automated meal detection and carbohydrate content estimation using machine learning for meal insulin dosing called robust artificial pancreas (RAP). We conducted a randomized, single-center crossover trial to compare postprandial glucose control in the four hours following unannounced meals using a hybrid model predictive control (MPC) algorithm and the RAP system. The RAP system includes a neural network model to automatically detect meals and deliver a recommended meal insulin dose. The meal detection algorithm has a sensitivity of 83.3%, false discovery rate of 16.6%, and mean detection time of 25.9 minutes. While there is no significant difference in incremental area under the curve of glucose, RAP significantly reduces time above range (glucose >180 mg/dL) by 10.8% (P = 0.04) and trends toward increasing time in range (70-180 mg/dL) by 9.1% compared with MPC. Time below range (glucose <70 mg/dL) is not significantly different between RAP and MPC.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The relationship between sleeve gastrectomy (SG) morphology and long-term weight-loss and gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) outcomes is unknown. METHODS: All patients (n = 268) undergoing SG performed by 3 surgeons at a single academic institution from January 1, 2010 to December 31, 2012 were included. Long-term weight-loss and GERD outcomes were available for 90 patients which were incorporated in analyses. SG morphology was determined from postoperative day 1 upper gastrointestinal series (UGIS) available from 50 patients. Images were independently categorized using previously published methodology as Dumbbell (38%), Lower Pouch (22%), Tubular (26%), or Upper Pouch (14%) by Radiologist and Surgeon. Radiologist categorization was used when disagreement occurred (8%). Univariable analyses were conducted to explore potential associations between SG morphology, weight loss, and GERD outcomes. RESULTS: Follow-up was 8.2 ± 0.9 years. Population characteristics included age of 45.1 ± 10.8 years, female sex in 83.3%, and hiatal hernia repair (HHR) performed at index SG in 17.8%. Surgeons did not preferentially achieve a specific SG morphology. Changes from preoperative obesity and associated diseases comprised body mass index (BMI) (49.5 ± 7.6 vs. 39.2 ± 9.4 kg/m2; p < 0.0001), diabetes mellitus (30.0 vs. 12.2%; p = 0.0006), hypertension (70.0 vs. 54.4%; p = 0.0028), hyperlipidemia (42.2 vs. 24.2%;p = 0.0017), obstructive sleep apnea (41.1 vs. 15.6%; p < 0.0001), osteoarthritis (48.9 vs. 13.3%; p < 0.0001), back pain (46.5 vs. 28.9%; p = 0.0035), and medications (4.8 ± 3.3 vs. 3.7 ± 3.5; p < 0.0001). Dumbbell SG morphology was associated with lesser reduction in BMI at follow-up (--6.8 ± 7.2 vs. -12.4 ± 8.3 kg/m2; p = 0.0196) while greater BMI change was appreciated with Lower Pouch SG shape (-16.9 ± 9.9 vs. -8.4 ± 6.8 kg/m2; p = 0.0017). GERD was more prevalent at follow-up than baseline (67.8 vs. 47.8%; p < 0.0001). GERD-specific outcomes included de novo (51.1%), persistent (27.9%), worsened (58.1%), and resolved (14.0%) disease. Ten patients underwent reoperation for refractory GERD with SG morphology corresponding to Dumbbell (n = 5) and Upper Pouch (n = 1) for those with available UGIS. Univariable analyses showed that patients with GERD experienced a larger reduction in BMI compared with patients without GERD (-11.8 ± 7.7 vs. -7.0 ± 5.1 kg/m2; p = 0.0007). Patient age, surgeon, morphology category, and whether a HHR was done at index SG were not associated with the presence of any, de novo, or worsened GERD. Female sex was associated with worsened GERD (96.0 vs. 4.0%; p = 0.0455). Type of calibration device, distance from staple line to pylorus, and whether staple line reinforcement was used were not associated with SG morphology classification. CONCLUSION: This is the first study assessing the impact of SG morphology on long-term weight loss and GERD. Our data suggest an association between SG morphology and long-term weight loss but not with GERD outcomes. Current technical standards may be limited in reproducing the same SG morphology. This information may help guide the technical optimization and standardization of SG. Surgeons did not favor a specific SG morphology (1). Our results signal to a relationship between radiographic assessment of SG morphology and long-term weight-loss outcomes with Dumbbell classification correlated with lesser reduction in BMI (2a) and Lower Pouch morphology associated with superior weight loss (2b). SG, sleeve gastrectomy; BMI, body mass index.
Subject(s)
Gastroesophageal Reflux , Laparoscopy , Obesity, Morbid , Humans , Female , Adult , Middle Aged , Obesity, Morbid/surgery , Obesity, Morbid/complications , Laparoscopy/methods , Gastroesophageal Reflux/surgery , Gastrectomy/methods , Weight Loss , Retrospective Studies , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
Introduction: DailyDose is a decision support system designed to provide real-time dosing advice and weekly insulin dose adjustments for adults living with type 1 diabetes using multiple daily insulin injections. Materials and Methods: Twenty-five adults were enrolled in this single-arm study. All participants used Dexcom G6 for continuous glucose monitoring, InPen for short-acting insulin doses, and Clipsulin to track long-acting insulin doses. Participants used DailyDose on an iPhone for 8 weeks. The primary endpoint was % time in range (TIR) comparing the 2-week baseline to the final 2-week period of DailyDose use. Results: There were no significant differences between TIR or other glycemic metrics between the baseline period compared to final 2-week period of DailyDose use. TIR significantly improved by 6.3% when more than half of recommendations were accepted and followed compared with 50% or fewer recommendations (95% CI 2.5%-10.1%, P = 0.001). Conclusions: Use of DailyDose did not improve glycemic outcomes compared to the baseline period. In a post hoc analysis, accepting and following recommendations from DailyDose was associated with improved TIR. Clinical Trial Registration Number: NCT04428645.
Subject(s)
Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1 , Insulin , Adult , Humans , Insulin/therapeutic use , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1/drug therapy , Blood Glucose Self-Monitoring , Blood Glucose , Hypoglycemic Agents/therapeutic use , Glycated Hemoglobin/analysisABSTRACT
Prevention of hypoglycemia (glucose <70 mg/dL) during aerobic exercise is a major challenge in type 1 diabetes. Providing predictions of glycemic changes during and following exercise can help people with type 1 diabetes avoid hypoglycemia. A unique dataset representing 320 days and 50,000 + time points of glycemic measurements was collected in adults with type 1 diabetes who participated in a 4-arm crossover study evaluating insulin-pump therapies, whereby each participant performed eight identically designed in-clinic exercise studies. We demonstrate that even under highly controlled conditions, there is considerable intra-participant and inter-participant variability in glucose outcomes during and following exercise. Participants with higher aerobic fitness exhibited significantly lower minimum glucose and steeper glucose declines during exercise. Adaptive, personalized machine learning (ML) algorithms were designed to predict exercise-related glucose changes. These algorithms achieved high accuracy in predicting the minimum glucose and hypoglycemia during and following exercise sessions, for all fitness levels.
ABSTRACT
Aerobic exercise in type 1 diabetes (T1D) causes rapid increase in glucose utilization due to muscle work during exercise, followed by increased insulin sensitivity after exercise. Better understanding of these changes is necessary for models of exercise in T1D. Twenty-six individuals with T1D underwent three sessions at three insulin rates (100%, 150%, 300% of basal). After 3-h run-in, participants performed 45 min aerobic exercise (moderate or intense). We determined area under the curve for endogenous glucose production (AUCEGP) and rate of glucose disappearance (AUCRd) over 45 min from exercise start. A novel application of linear regression of Rd across the three insulin sessions allowed separation of insulin-mediated from non-insulin-mediated glucose uptake before, during, and after exercise. AUCRd increased 12.45 mmol/L (CI = 10.33-14.58, P < 0.001) and 13.13 mmol/L (CI = 11.01-15.26, P < 0.001) whereas AUCEGP increased 1.66 mmol/L (CI = 1.01-2.31, P < 0.001) and 3.46 mmol/L (CI = 2.81-4.11, P < 0.001) above baseline during moderate and intense exercise, respectively. AUCEGP increased during intense exercise by 2.14 mmol/L (CI = 0.91-3.37, P < 0.001) compared with moderate exercise. There was significant effect of insulin infusion rate on AUCRd equal to 0.06 mmol/L per % above basal rate (CI = 0.05-0.07, P < 0.001). Insulin-mediated glucose uptake rose during exercise and persisted hours afterward, whereas non-insulin-mediated effect was limited to the exercise period. To our knowledge, this method of isolating dynamic insulin- and non-insulin-mediated uptake has not been previously employed during exercise. These results will be useful in informing glucoregulatory models of T1D. The study has been registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as NCT03090451.NEW & NOTEWORTHY Separating insulin and non-insulin glucose uptake dynamically during exercise in type 1 diabetes has not been done before. We use a multistep process, including a previously described linear regression method, over three insulin infusion sessions, to perform this separation and can graph these components before, during, and after exercise for the first time.
Subject(s)
Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1/metabolism , Exercise/physiology , Glucose/pharmacokinetics , Insulin/physiology , Adolescent , Adult , Blood Glucose/metabolism , Female , Humans , Hyperinsulinism/metabolism , Hypoglycemia/metabolism , Insulin/administration & dosage , Insulin/metabolism , Insulin Resistance/physiology , Male , Middle Aged , Physical Exertion/physiology , Young AdultABSTRACT
The accuracy of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) sensors may be significantly impacted by exercise. We evaluated the impact of three different types of exercise on the accuracy of the Dexcom G6 sensor. Twenty-four adults with type 1 diabetes on multiple daily injections wore a G6 sensor. Participants were randomized to aerobic, resistance, or high intensity interval training (HIIT) exercise. Each participant completed two in-clinic 30-min exercise sessions. The sensors were applied on average 5.3 days prior to the in-clinic visits (range 0.6-9.9). Capillary blood glucose (CBG) measurements with a Contour Next meter were performed before and after exercise as well as every 10 min during exercise. No CGM calibrations were performed. The median absolute relative difference (MARD) and median relative difference (MRD) of the CGM as compared with the reference CBG did not differ significantly from the start of exercise to the end exercise across all exercise types (ranges for aerobic MARD: 8.9 to 13.9% and MRD: -6.4 to 0.5%, resistance MARD: 7.7 to 14.5% and MRD: -8.3 to -2.9%, HIIT MARD: 12.1 to 16.8% and MRD: -14.3 to -9.1%). The accuracy of the no-calibration Dexcom G6 CGM was not significantly impacted by aerobic, resistance, or HIIT exercise.
Subject(s)
Blood Glucose Self-Monitoring , Blood Glucose , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1 , Calibration , Exercise , HumansABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy and feasibility of a dual-hormone (DH) closed-loop system with insulin and a novel liquid stable glucagon formulation compared with an insulin-only closed-loop system and a predictive low glucose suspend (PLGS) system. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: In a 76-h, randomized, crossover, outpatient study, 23 participants with type 1 diabetes used three modes of the Oregon Artificial Pancreas system: 1) dual-hormone (DH) closed-loop control, 2) insulin-only single-hormone (SH) closed-loop control, and 3) PLGS system. The primary end point was percentage time in hypoglycemia (<70 mg/dL) from the start of in-clinic aerobic exercise (45 min at 60% VO2max) to 4 h after. RESULTS: DH reduced hypoglycemia compared with SH during and after exercise (DH 0.0% [interquartile range 0.0-4.2], SH 8.3% [0.0-12.5], P = 0.025). There was an increased time in hyperglycemia (>180 mg/dL) during and after exercise for DH versus SH (20.8% DH vs. 6.3% SH, P = 0.038). Mean glucose during the entire study duration was DH, 159.2; SH, 151.6; and PLGS, 163.6 mg/dL. Across the entire study duration, DH resulted in 7.5% more time in target range (70-180 mg/dL) compared with the PLGS system (71.0% vs. 63.4%, P = 0.044). For the entire study duration, DH had 28.2% time in hyperglycemia vs. 25.1% for SH (P = 0.044) and 34.7% for PLGS (P = 0.140). Four participants experienced nausea related to glucagon, leading three to withdraw from the study. CONCLUSIONS: The glucagon formulation demonstrated feasibility in a closed-loop system. The DH system reduced hypoglycemia during and after exercise, with some increase in hyperglycemia.
Subject(s)
Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1/drug therapy , Glucagon/administration & dosage , Insulin Infusion Systems , Insulin/administration & dosage , Pancreas, Artificial , Adult , Blood Glucose/analysis , Blood Glucose/drug effects , Blood Glucose/metabolism , Cross-Over Studies , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1/blood , Exercise/physiology , Feasibility Studies , Female , Glucagon/adverse effects , Humans , Hyperglycemia/chemically induced , Hyperglycemia/drug therapy , Hypoglycemia/chemically induced , Hypoglycemia/drug therapy , Hypoglycemic Agents/administration & dosage , Hypoglycemic Agents/adverse effects , Insulin/adverse effects , Male , Middle Aged , Oregon , Outpatients , Young AdultABSTRACT
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 silico3,6 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.
Subject(s)
Artificial Intelligence , Decision Support Systems, Clinical , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1/drug therapy , Adult , Algorithms , Blood Glucose/analysis , Computer Simulation , Disease Management , Glycemic Control , Humans , Hyperglycemia/blood , Hypoglycemia/blood , Hypoglycemic Agents/administration & dosage , Hypoglycemic Agents/blood , Hypoglycemic Agents/therapeutic use , Insulin/administration & dosage , Insulin/blood , Insulin/therapeutic use , Insulin Infusion Systems , Reproducibility of ResultsABSTRACT
PURPOSE: Propofol and fentanyl can cause airway obstruction and respiratory depression when used together for intravenous sedation. This study investigated whether dexmedetomidine and midazolam would decrease respiratory events requiring intervention during deep sedation compared with propofol, fentanyl, and midazolam. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A prospective, randomized, double-blinded, controlled trial was designed to assess 2 intravenous treatment groups during third molar surgery. Patients were randomized into 2 groups. The control group (group P) received 0.8 µg/kg of fentanyl followed by propofol infusion at 125 µg/kg per minute over a 10-minute period with intraoperative boluses of 0.1 µg/kg. The study group (group D) received dexmedetomidine bolus infusion of 1 µg/kg over a 10-minute period followed by maintenance infusion at 0.5 µg/kg per hour. Both groups were given 0.03 mg/kg of midazolam before infusion. Scorers, masked to group, viewed the procedure remotely and evaluated the primary outcome variable of respiratory events requiring intervention. Secondary outcome variables evaluated by the scorers included the Behavioral Pain Scale for non-intubated patients at initial injection, cooperation score at 5 and 15 minutes, and time to ambulation and discharge. Patient satisfaction and hemodynamic stability were measured. The difference between groups regarding the occurrence of respiratory events was tested using the Fisher exact test, and mixed-effects models were used to compare repeated vital signs. RESULTS: The sample was composed of 141 patients randomly assigned to either group P (n = 67) or group D (n = 74). No statistically significant differences in the distribution of study variables were found between groups at baseline. A statistically significant difference in respiratory events requiring deliberate intervention existed between group P (25.4%) and group D (2.7%) (P < .0001). No statistically significant difference was found between groups for Behavioral Pain Scale score, cooperation score, time to ambulation or discharge, and patient satisfaction. CONCLUSIONS: Using dexmedetomidine and midazolam for outpatient surgery resulted in fewer respiratory events requiring deliberate intervention compared with propofol, fentanyl, and midazolam. Ambulation and discharge times were not prolonged using dexmedetomidine.
Subject(s)
Dexmedetomidine , Propofol , Fentanyl , Humans , Hypnotics and Sedatives , Molar, Third/surgery , Prospective StudiesABSTRACT
Background: Despite new glucose sensing technologies, nocturnal hypoglycemia is still a problem for people with type 1 diabetes (T1D) as symptoms and sensor alarms may not be detected while sleeping. Accurately predicting nocturnal hypoglycemia before sleep may help minimize nighttime hypoglycemia. Methods: A support vector regression (SVR) model was trained to predict, before bedtime, the overnight minimum glucose and overnight nocturnal hypoglycemia for people with T1D. The algorithm was trained on continuous glucose measurements and insulin data collected from 124 people (22,804 valid nights of data) with T1D. The minimum glucose threshold for announcing nocturnal hypoglycemia risk was derived by applying a decision theoretic criterion to maximize expected net benefit. Accuracy was evaluated on a validation set from 10 people with T1D during a 4-week trial under free-living sensor-augmented insulin-pump therapy. The primary outcome measures were sensitivity and specificity of prediction, the correlation between predicted and actual minimum nocturnal glucose, and root-mean-square error. The impact of using the algorithm to prevent nocturnal hypoglycemia is shown in-silico. Results: The algorithm predicted 94.1% of nocturnal hypoglycemia events (<3.9 mmol/L, 95% confidence interval [CI], 71.3-99.9) with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.86 (95% CI, 0.75-0.98). Correlation between actual and predicted minimum glucose was high (R = 0.71, P < 0.001). In-silico simulations showed that the algorithm could reduce nocturnal hypoglycemia by 77.0% (P = 0.006) without impacting time in target range (3.9-10 mmol/L). Conclusion: An SVR model trained on a big data set and optimized using decision theoretic criterion can accurately predict at bedtime if overnight nocturnal hypoglycemia will occur and may help reduce nocturnal hypoglycemia.
Subject(s)
Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1 , Hypoglycemia , Adult , Blood Glucose , Data Science , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1/complications , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1/drug therapy , Female , Humans , Hypoglycemia/diagnosis , Hypoglycemia/prevention & control , Insulin Infusion Systems , Male , Sleep , TimeABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: People with type 1 diabetes (T1D) have varying sensitivities to insulin and also varying responses to meals and exercise. We introduce a new adaptive run-to-run model predictive control (MPC) algorithm that can be used to help people with T1D better manage their glucose levels using an artificial pancreas (AP). The algorithm adapts to individuals' different insulin sensitivities, glycemic response to meals, and adjustment during exercise as a continuous input during free-living conditions. METHODS: A new insulin sensitivity adaptation (ISA) algorithm is presented that updates each patient's insulin sensitivity during nonmeal periods to reduce the error between the actual glucose levels and the process model. We further demonstrate how an adaptive learning postprandial hypoglycemia prevention algorithm (ALPHA) presented in the previous work can complement the ISA algorithm, and the algorithm can adapt in several days. We further show that if physical activity is incorporated as a continuous input (heart rate and accelerometry), performance is improved. The contribution of this work is the description of the ISA algorithm and the evaluation of how ISA, ALPHA, and incorporation of exercise metrics as a continuous input can impact glycemic control. RESULTS: Incorporating ALPHA, ISA, and physical activity into the MPC improved glycemic outcome measures. The adaptive learning postprandial hypoglycemia prevention algorithm combined with ISA significantly reduced time spent in hypoglycemia by 71.7% and the total number of rescue carbs by 67.8% to 0.37% events/day/patient. Insulin sensitivity adaptation significantly reduced model-actual mismatch by 12.2% compared to an AP without ISA. Incorporating physical activity as a continuous input modestly improved time in the range 70 to 180 mg/dL during high physical activity days from 84.4% to 84.9% and reduced the percentage time in hypoglycemia by 23.8% from 2.1% to 1.6%. CONCLUSION: Adapting postprandial insulin delivery, insulin sensitivity, and adapting to physical exercise in an MPC-based AP systems can improve glycemic outcomes.
Subject(s)
Blood Glucose/analysis , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1/drug therapy , Heart Rate/physiology , Hypoglycemic Agents/therapeutic use , Insulin/therapeutic use , Pancreas, Artificial , Accelerometry , Algorithms , Computer Simulation , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1/blood , Exercise/physiology , Humans , Hypoglycemic Agents/administration & dosage , Insulin/administration & dosage , Models, Biological , Postprandial PeriodABSTRACT
PURPOSE: We introduce two validated single (SH) and dual hormone (DH) mathematical models that represent an in-silico virtual patient population (VPP) for type 1 diabetes (T1D). The VPP can be used to evaluate automated insulin and glucagon delivery algorithms, so-called artificial pancreas (AP) algorithms that are currently being used to help people with T1D better manage their glucose levels. We present validation results comparing these virtual patients with true clinical patients undergoing AP control and demonstrate that the virtual patients behave similarly to people with T1D. METHODS: A single hormone virtual patient population (SH-VPP) was created that is comprised of eight differential equations that describe insulin kinetics, insulin dynamics and carbohydrate absorption. The parameters in this model that represent insulin sensitivity were statistically sampled from a normal distribution to create a population of virtual patients with different levels of insulin sensitivity. A dual hormone virtual patient population (DH-VPP) extended this SH-VPP by incorporating additional equations to represent glucagon kinetics and glucagon dynamics. The DH-VPP is comprised of thirteen differential equations and a parameter representing glucagon sensitivity, which was statistically sampled from a normal distribution to create virtual patients with different levels of glucagon sensitivity. We evaluated the SH-VPP and DH-VPP on a clinical data set of 20 people with T1D who participated in a 3.5-day outpatient AP study. Twenty virtual patients were matched with the 20 clinical patients by total daily insulin requirements and body weight. The identical meals given during the AP study were given to the virtual patients and the identical AP control algorithm that was used to control the glucose of the virtual patients was used on the clinical patients. We compared percent time in target range (70-180 mg/dL), time in hypoglycemia (<70 mg/dL) and time in hyperglycemia (>180 mg/dL) for both the virtual patients and the actual patients. RESULTS: The subjects in the SH-VPP performed similarly vs. the actual patients (time in range: 78.1 ± 5.1% vs. 74.3 ± 8.1%, p = 0.11; time in hypoglycemia: 3.4 ± 1.3% vs. 2.8 ± 1.7%, p = 0.23). The subjects in the DH-VPP also performed similarly vs. the actual patients (time in range: 75.6 ± 5.5% vs. 71.9 ± 10.9%, p = 0.13; time in hypoglycemia: 0.9 ± 0.8% vs. 1.3 ± 1%, p = 0.19). While the VPPs tended to over-estimate the time in range relative to actual patients, the difference was not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: We have verified that a SH-VPP and a DH-VPP performed comparably with actual patients undergoing AP control using an identical control algorithm. The SH-VPP and DH-VPP may be used as a simulator for pre-evaluation of T1D control algorithms.
Subject(s)
Blood Glucose/metabolism , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1 , Glucagon/blood , Insulin , Models, Biological , Adult , Aged , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1/blood , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1/drug therapy , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1/physiopathology , Female , Humans , Insulin/blood , Insulin/therapeutic use , Kinetics , Male , Middle AgedABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Fear of exercise related hypoglycemia is a major reason why people with type 1 diabetes (T1D) do not exercise. There is no validated prediction algorithm that can predict hypoglycemia at the start of aerobic exercise. METHODS: We have developed and evaluated two separate algorithms to predict hypoglycemia at the start of exercise. Model 1 is a decision tree and model 2 is a random forest model. Both models were trained using a meta-data set based on 154 observations of in-clinic aerobic exercise in 43 adults with T1D from 3 different studies that included participants using sensor augmented pump therapy, automated insulin delivery therapy, and automated insulin and glucagon therapy. Both models were validated using an entirely new validation data set with 90 exercise observations collected from 12 new adults with T1D. RESULTS: Model 1 identified two critical features predictive of hypoglycemia during exercise: heart rate and glucose at the start of exercise. If heart rate was greater than 121 bpm during the first 5 min of exercise and glucose at the start of exercise was less than 182 mg/dL, it predicted hypoglycemia with 79.55% accuracy. Model 2 achieved a higher accuracy of 86.7% using additional features and higher complexity. CONCLUSIONS: Models presented here can assist people with T1D to avoid exercise related hypoglycemia. The simple model 1 heuristic can be easily remembered (the 180/120 rule) and model 2 is more complex requiring computational resources, making it suitable for automated artificial pancreas or decision support systems.
Subject(s)
Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1/blood , Exercise/physiology , Hypoglycemia , Machine Learning , Adult , Blood Glucose , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1/drug therapy , Female , Heart Rate , Humans , Hypoglycemia/blood , Hypoglycemia/physiopathology , Male , Pancreas, ArtificialABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: Physical exercise is recommended for individuals with type 1 diabetes, yet the effects of exercise on glycemic control are not well established. We evaluated the impact of different modes of exercise on glycemic control in people with type 1 diabetes. METHODS: In a 3-week randomized crossover trial, 10 adults with type 1 diabetes (4 men and 6 women, aged 33±6 years; duration of diabetes, 18±10 years; glycated hemoglobin level, 7.4%±1%) were assigned to 3 weeks of intervention: aerobic exercise (treadmill at 60% of maximum volume of oxygen utilization), resistance training (8 to 12 repetitions of 5 upper and lower body exercises at 60% to 80% of 1 repetition maximum) or no exercise (control). During each exercise week, participants completed 2 monitored 45 min exercise sessions. For each week of the study, we analyzed participants' insulin pump data, sensor glucose data and meal intake using a custom smart-phone application. The primary outcome was the percentage of time in range (glucose >3.9 mmol/L and ≤10 mmol/L) for the 24 h after each bout of exercise or rest during the control week. The study was registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT:02687893). RESULTS: Aerobic exercise caused a mean glucose reduction during exercise of 3.94±2.67 mmol/L, whereas the reduction during resistance training was 1.33±1.78 mmol/L (p=0.007). The mean percentage time in range for the 24 h after resistance training was significantly greater than that during the control period (70% vs. 56%, p=0.013) but not after aerobic exercise (60%). CONCLUSIONS: The results indicate that when various confounders are considered, resistance training could improve glycemic control in this population.
Subject(s)
Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1/therapy , Exercise , Hyperglycemia/prevention & control , Hypoglycemia/prevention & control , Patient Compliance/statistics & numerical data , Resistance Training , Adult , Cross-Over Studies , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Male , PrognosisABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Wrist-worn activity monitors are often used to monitor heart rate (HR) and energy expenditure (EE) in a variety of settings including more recently in medical applications. The use of real-time physiological signals to inform medical systems including drug delivery systems and decision support systems will depend on the accuracy of the signals being measured, including accuracy of HR and EE. Prior studies assessed accuracy of wearables only during steady-state aerobic exercise. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to validate the accuracy of both HR and EE for 2 common wrist-worn devices during a variety of dynamic activities that represent various physical activities associated with daily living including structured exercise. METHODS: We assessed the accuracy of both HR and EE for two common wrist-worn devices (Fitbit Charge 2 and Garmin vívosmart HR+) during dynamic activities. Over a 2-day period, 20 healthy adults (age: mean 27.5 [SD 6.0] years; body mass index: mean 22.5 [SD 2.3] kg/m2; 11 females) performed a maximal oxygen uptake test, free-weight resistance circuit, interval training session, and activities of daily living. Validity was assessed using an HR chest strap (Polar) and portable indirect calorimetry (Cosmed). Accuracy of the commercial wearables versus research-grade standards was determined using Bland-Altman analysis, correlational analysis, and error bias. RESULTS: Fitbit and Garmin were reasonably accurate at measuring HR but with an overall negative bias. There was more error observed during high-intensity activities when there was a lack of repetitive wrist motion and when the exercise mode indicator was not used. The Garmin estimated HR with a mean relative error (RE, %) of -3.3% (SD 16.7), whereas Fitbit estimated HR with an RE of -4.7% (SD 19.6) across all activities. The highest error was observed during high-intensity intervals on bike (Fitbit: -11.4% [SD 35.7]; Garmin: -14.3% [SD 20.5]) and lowest error during high-intensity intervals on treadmill (Fitbit: -1.7% [SD 11.5]; Garmin: -0.5% [SD 9.4]). Fitbit and Garmin EE estimates differed significantly, with Garmin having less negative bias (Fitbit: -19.3% [SD 28.9], Garmin: -1.6% [SD 30.6], P<.001) across all activities, and with both correlating poorly with indirect calorimetry measures. CONCLUSIONS: Two common wrist-worn devices (Fitbit Charge 2 and Garmin vívosmart HR+) show good HR accuracy, with a small negative bias, and reasonable EE estimates during low to moderate-intensity exercise and during a variety of common daily activities and exercise. Accuracy was compromised markedly when the activity indicator was not used on the watch or when activities involving less wrist motion such as cycle ergometry were done.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: Automated insulin delivery is the new standard for type 1 diabetes, but exercise-related hypoglycemia remains a challenge. Our aim was to determine whether a dual-hormone closed-loop system using wearable sensors to detect exercise and adjust dosing to reduce exercise-related hypoglycemia would outperform other forms of closed-loop and open-loop therapy. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Participants underwent four arms in randomized order: dual-hormone, single-hormone, predictive low glucose suspend, and continuation of current care over 4 outpatient days. Each arm included three moderate-intensity aerobic exercise sessions. The two primary outcomes were percentage of time in hypoglycemia (<70 mg/dL) and in a target range (70-180 mg/dL) assessed across the entire study and from the start of the in-clinic exercise until the next meal. RESULTS: The analysis included 20 adults with type 1 diabetes who completed all arms. The mean time (SD) in hypoglycemia was the lowest with dual-hormone during the exercise period: 3.4% (4.5) vs. 8.3% (12.6) single-hormone (P = 0.009) vs. 7.6% (8.0) predictive low glucose suspend (P < 0.001) vs. 4.3% (6.8) current care where pre-exercise insulin adjustments were allowed (P = 0.49). Time in hypoglycemia was also the lowest with dual-hormone during the entire 4-day study: 1.3% (1.0) vs. 2.8% (1.7) single-hormone (P < 0.001) vs. 2.0% (1.5) predictive low glucose suspend (P = 0.04) vs. 3.1% (3.2) current care (P = 0.007). Time in range during the entire study was the highest with single-hormone: 74.3% (8.0) vs. 72.0% (10.8) dual-hormone (P = 0.44). CONCLUSIONS: The addition of glucagon delivery to a closed-loop system with automated exercise detection reduces hypoglycemia in physically active adults with type 1 diabetes.
Subject(s)
Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1/drug therapy , Exercise/physiology , Glucagon/administration & dosage , Hypoglycemic Agents/administration & dosage , Insulin Infusion Systems , Insulin/administration & dosage , Wearable Electronic Devices , Adult , Blood Glucose/analysis , Blood Glucose/drug effects , Blood Glucose/metabolism , Blood Glucose Self-Monitoring/instrumentation , Blood Glucose Self-Monitoring/methods , Cross-Over Studies , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1/blood , Female , Humans , Insulin Infusion Systems/standards , Male , Meals , Middle Aged , Outpatients , Pancreas, Artificial , Young AdultABSTRACT
The aim of this pilot study was to investigate the effect of exercise on sleep and nocturnal hypoglycaemia in adults with type 1 diabetes (T1D). In a 3-week crossover trial, 10 adults with T1D were randomized to perform aerobic, resistance or no exercise. During each exercise week, participants completed 2 separate 45-minutes exercise sessions at an academic medical center. Participants returned home and wore a continuous glucose monitor and a wrist-based activity monitor to estimate sleep duration. Participants on average lost 70 (±49) minutes of sleep (P = .0015) on nights following aerobic exercise and 27 (±78) minutes (P = .3) following resistance exercise relative to control nights. The odds ratio with confidence intervals of nocturnal hypoglycaemia occurring on nights following aerobic and resistance exercise was 5.4 (1.3, 27.2) and 7.0 (1.7, 37.3), respectively. Aerobic exercise can cause sleep loss in T1D possibly from increased hypoglycaemia.