Multicenter, Randomized Trial of a Bionic Pancreas in Type 1 Diabetes.

BACKGROUND: Currently available semiautomated insulin-delivery systems require individualized insulin regimens for the initialization of therapy and meal doses based on carbohydrate counting for routine operation. In contrast, the bionic pancreas is initialized only on the basis of body weight, makes all dose decisions and delivers insulin autonomously, and uses meal announcements without carbohydrate counting. METHODS: In this 13-week, multicenter, randomized trial, we randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio persons at least 6 years of age with type 1 diabetes either to receive bionic pancreas treatment with insulin aspart or insulin lispro or to receive standard care (defined as any insulin-delivery method with unblinded, real-time continuous glucose monitoring). The primary outcome was the glycated hemoglobin level at 13 weeks. The key secondary outcome was the percentage of time that the glucose level as assessed by continuous glucose monitoring was below 54 mg per deciliter; the prespecified noninferiority limit for this outcome was 1 percentage point. Safety was also assessed. RESULTS: A total of 219 participants 6 to 79 years of age were assigned to the bionic-pancreas group, and 107 to the standard-care group. The glycated hemoglobin level decreased from 7.9% to 7.3% in the bionic-pancreas group and did not change (was at 7.7% at both time points) in the standard-care group (mean adjusted difference at 13 weeks, -0.5 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.6 to -0.3; P<0.001). The percentage of time that the glucose level as assessed by continuous glucose monitoring was below 54 mg per deciliter did not differ significantly between the two groups (13-week adjusted difference, 0.0 percentage points; 95% CI, -0.1 to 0.04; P<0.001 for noninferiority). The rate of severe hypoglycemia was 17.7 events per 100 participant-years in the bionic-pancreas group and 10.8 events per 100 participant-years in the standard-care group (P = 0.39). No episodes of diabetic ketoacidosis occurred in either group. CONCLUSIONS: In this 13-week, randomized trial involving adults and children with type 1 diabetes, use of a bionic pancreas was associated with a greater reduction than standard care in the glycated hemoglobin level. (Funded by the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04200313.).

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

BACKGROUND: 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. METHODS: 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. FINDINGS: 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. INTERPRETATION: 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. FUNDING: National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases of the National Institutes of Health, and National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences.

Outpatient glycemic control with a bionic pancreas in type 1 diabetes.

BACKGROUND: The safety and effectiveness of automated glycemic management have not been tested in multiday studies under unrestricted outpatient conditions. METHODS: In two random-order, crossover studies with similar but distinct designs, we compared glycemic control with a wearable, bihormonal, automated, "bionic" pancreas (bionic-pancreas period) with glycemic control with an insulin pump (control period) for 5 days in 20 adults and 32 adolescents with type 1 diabetes mellitus. The automatically adaptive algorithm of the bionic pancreas received data from a continuous glucose monitor to control subcutaneous delivery of insulin and glucagon. RESULTS: Among the adults, the mean plasma glucose level over the 5-day bionic-pancreas period was 138 mg per deciliter (7.7 mmol per liter), and the mean percentage of time with a low glucose level (<70 mg per deciliter [3.9 mmol per liter]) was 4.8%. After 1 day of automatic adaptation by the bionic pancreas, the mean (±SD) glucose level on continuous monitoring was lower than the mean level during the control period (133±13 vs. 159±30 mg per deciliter [7.4±0.7 vs. 8.8±1.7 mmol per liter], P<0.001) and the percentage of time with a low glucose reading was lower (4.1% vs. 7.3%, P=0.01). Among the adolescents, the mean plasma glucose level was also lower during the bionic-pancreas period than during the control period (138±18 vs. 157±27 mg per deciliter [7.7±1.0 vs. 8.7±1.5 mmol per liter], P=0.004), but the percentage of time with a low plasma glucose reading was similar during the two periods (6.1% and 7.6%, respectively; P=0.23). The mean frequency of interventions for hypoglycemia among the adolescents was lower during the bionic-pancreas period than during the control period (one per 1.6 days vs. one per 0.8 days, P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: As compared with an insulin pump, a wearable, automated, bihormonal, bionic pancreas improved mean glycemic levels, with less frequent hypoglycemic episodes, among both adults and adolescents with type 1 diabetes mellitus. (Funded by the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases and others; ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT01762059 and NCT01833988.).

Randomized Trial of the Insulin-Only iLet Bionic Pancreas for the Treatment of Cystic Fibrosis- Related Diabetes.

OBJECTIVE: Cystic fibrosis-related diabetes (CFRD) affects up to 50% of adults with cystic fibrosis and adds significant morbidity and treatment burden. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of automated insulin delivery with the iLet bionic pancreas (BP) in adults with CFRD in a single-center, open-label, random-order, crossover trial. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Twenty participants with CFRD were assigned in random order to 14 days each on the BP or their usual care (UC). No restrictions were placed on diet or activity. The primary outcome was the percent time sensor-measured glucose was in target range 70-180 mg/dL (time in range [TIR]) on days 3-14 of each arm, and key secondary outcomes included mean continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) glucose and the percent time sensor-measured glucose was in hypoglycemic range <54 mg/dL. RESULTS: TIR was significantly higher in the BP arm than the UC arm (75 ± 11% vs. 62 ± 22%, P = 0.001). Mean CGM glucose was lower in the BP arm than in the UC arm (150 ± 19 vs. 171 ± 45 mg/dL, P = 0.007). There was no significant difference in percent time with sensor-measured glucose <54 mg/dL (0.27% vs. 0.36%, P = 1.0), although self-reported symptomatic hypoglycemia episodes were higher during the BP arm than the UC arm (0.7 vs. 0.4 median episodes per day, P = 0.01). No episodes of diabetic ketoacidosis or severe hypoglycemia occurred in either arm. CONCLUSIONS: Adults with CFRD had improved glucose control without an increase in CGM-measured hypoglycemia with the BP compared with their UC, suggesting that this may be an important therapeutic option for this patient population.

Psychosocial Impact of the Insulin-Only iLet Bionic Pancreas for Adults, Youth, and Caregivers of Youth with Type 1 Diabetes.

Objective: To evaluate the psychosocial impact and user experience for the insulin-only configuration of iLet bionic pancreas (BP) in persons 6-83 years years of age with type 1 diabetes. Research Design and Methods: In this multicenter, randomized controlled, 13-week trial, 275 adults (221 randomly assigned to the BP group and 54 to the standard of care [SC] group) and 165 youth and their caregivers (112 randomly assigned to the BP group and 53 to the SC group) completed psychosocial questionnaires at baseline, mid-study, and the end of the trial. Results: In all age groups, most participants would recommend using the BP, including those with previous experience using automated insulin delivery devices. Similarly, the vast majority of participants reported a high level of perceived benefits and a low number of perceived burdens. Adult participants reported significant decreases in the fear of hypoglycemia and in diabetes-specific emotional distress, as well as improvements in their perceived well-being. Conclusion: Findings demonstrate acceptability, reduced burden, and positive psychosocial outcomes for adults. Children and teenagers also report high acceptability and reduced burden, but less clear improvements in psychosocial outcomes. Clinical Trial Registration Number: NCT04200313.

Utility and Safety of Backup Insulin Regimens Generated by the Bionic Pancreas: A Randomized Study.

The bionic pancreas (BP) is initialized with body weight only and doses insulin autonomously without carbohydrate counting, instead using qualitative meal announcements. In case of device malfunction, the BP generates and continuously updates backup insulin doses for injection or pump users, including long-acting insulin dose, a four-period basal insulin profile, short-acting meal doses, and a glucose correction factor. Following a 13-week trial in type 1 diabetes, participants using the BP (6-83 years) completed 2-4 days, in which they were randomly assigned to their prestudy insulin regimen (N = 147) or to follow BP-provided guidance (N = 148). Glycemic outcomes with BP guidance were similar to those reinstituting their prestudy insulin regimen, with both groups having higher mean glucose and lower time-in-range than while using the BP during the 13-week trial. In conclusion, a backup insulin regimen automatically generated by the BP can be safely implemented if need arises to discontinue use of the BP. Clinical Trial Registry: clinicaltrials.gov; NCT04200313.

A Multicenter Randomized Trial Evaluating Fast-Acting Insulin Aspart in the Bionic Pancreas in Adults with Type 1 Diabetes.

Objective: To evaluate the insulin-only configuration of the iLet® bionic pancreas (BP) using fast-acting insulin aspart (Fiasp®) in adults with type 1 diabetes (T1D). Research Design and Methods: In this multicenter, randomized trial, 275 adults with T1D (18-83 years old, baseline HbA1c 5.3%-14.9%) were randomly assigned 2:2:1 to use the BP with fast-acting insulin aspart (BP-F group, N = 114), BP with aspart or lispro (BP-A/L group, N = 107), or a control group using their standard-care insulin delivery (SC group, N = 54) plus real-time continuous glucose monitoring (CGM). The primary outcome was HbA1c at 13 weeks. The BP-F versus SC comparison was considered primary and BP-F versus BP-A/L secondary. Results: Mean ± standard deviation (SD) HbA1c decreased from 7.8% ± 1.2% at baseline to 7.1% ± 0.6% at 13 weeks with BP-F versus 7.6% ± 1.2% to 7.5% ± 0.9% with SC (adjusted difference = -0.5%, 95% CI -0.7 to -0.3, P < 0.001). CGM-measured percent time <54 mg/dL over 13 weeks with BP-F was noninferior to SC (adjusted difference = 0.00%, 95% CI -0.07 to 0.05, P < 0.001 for noninferiority based on a prespecified noninferiority limit of 1%). Over 13 weeks, mean time in range 70-180 mg/dL (TIR) increased by 14% (3.4 h/day) and mean CGM glucose was reduced by 18 mg/dL with BP-F compared with SC (P < 0.001). Analyses of time >180 mg/dL, time >250 mg/dL, and the SD of CGM glucose all favored BP-F compared with SC (P < 0.001). Differences between BP-F and BP-A/L were minimal, with no difference in HbA1c at 13 weeks (adjusted difference = -0.0%, 95% CI -0.2 to 0.1, P = 0.67) or mean glucose (adjusted difference = -2.0 mg/dL, 95% CI -4.3 to 0.4, P = 0.10). Mean TIR was 2% greater with BP-F than BP-A/L (95% CI 1 to 4, P = 0.005), but the percentages of participants improving TIR by ≥5% were not significantly different (P = 0.49) and there were no significant differences comparing BP-F versus BP-A/L across nine patient-reported outcome surveys. The rate of severe hypoglycemia events did not differ among the three groups. Conclusions: In adults with T1D, HbA1c was improved with the BP using fast-acting insulin aspart compared with standard care without increasing CGM-measured hypoglycemia. However, the effect was no better than the reduction observed with the BP using aspart or lispro. Clinical Trial Registry: clinicaltrials.gov; NCT04200313.

The Insulin-Only Bionic Pancreas Pivotal Trial Extension Study: A Multi-Center Single-Arm Evaluation of the Insulin-Only Configuration of the Bionic Pancreas in Adults and Youth with Type 1 Diabetes.

Objective: To evaluate a transition from standard-of-care (SC) management of type 1 diabetes (any insulin delivery method including hybrid closed-loop systems plus real-time continuous glucose monitoring [CGM]) to use of the insulin-only configuration of the iLet® bionic pancreas (BP) in 90 adults and children (age 6-71 years). Research Design and Methods: After the SC group completed the randomized controlled trial (RCT) portion of the Insulin-Only BP Pivotal Trial, 90 of the 107 participants participated in a 13-week study using the BP. The key outcomes were change from baseline in HbA1c and CGM metrics after 13 weeks on the BP. Results: Using the BP, mean HbA1c decreased from 7.7% ± 1.0% (61 ± 10.9 mmol/mol) at baseline to 7.1% ± 0.6% (54 ± 6.6 mmol/mol) at 13 weeks (mean change -0.55% ± 0.72% [-6 ± 7.9 mmol/mol], P < 0.001), time in range 70-180 mg/dL increased by 12.0% ± 12.5% (from 53% ± 17% to 65% ± 9%, P < 0.001), and mean glucose decreased by -18 ± 23 mg/dL (from 182 ± 32 to 164 ± 15 mg/dL, P < 0.001). The higher the baseline HbA1c level, the greater the change in HbA1c. Results were similar in the adult (N = 42) and pediatric (N = 48) cohorts. Time <70 mg/dL decreased from baseline over the 13 weeks by -0.50% ± 1.86% (P = 0.02), and time <54 mg/dL was similar (change from baseline -0.08% ± 0.59%, P = 0.24). Two severe hypoglycemia events (in same participant) and one diabetic ketoacidosis event occurred. Conclusions: Glycemic control improved after adult and pediatric participants in the SC arm in the Insulin-Only BP Pivotal Trial transitioned to use of the BP. Improvement using the BP was of similar magnitude to that observed during the RCT. ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04200313.

WITHDRAWN: Positive Impact of the Bionic Pancreas on Diabetes Control in Youth 6-17 Years Old with Type 1 Diabetes: A Multicenter Randomized Trial.

The publisher of Diabetes Technologies & Therapeutics officially withdraws the Just Accepted version of the article entitled, "Positive Impact of the Bionic Pancreas on Diabetes Control in Youth 6-17 Years Old with Type 1 Diabetes: A Multicenter Randomized Trial," by Laurel H Messer, et al. (epub 28 Jun 2022; DOI: 10.1089/dia.2022.0201) due to its erroneous release before being finalized. The correct version will be republished in due course. The publisher extends its sincerest apologies to the authors of the article and to the journal's readership for this regrettable mishap.

A Multicenter Randomized Trial Evaluating the Insulin-Only Configuration of the Bionic Pancreas in Adults with Type 1 Diabetes.

Objective: To evaluate the insulin-only configuration of the iLet® bionic pancreas (BP) using insulin aspart or insulin lispro in adults with type 1 diabetes (T1D). Methods: In this multicenter, randomized, controlled trial, 161 adults with T1D (18-79 years old, baseline HbA1c 5.5%-13.1%, 32% using multiple daily injections, 27% using a pump without automation, 5% using a pump with predictive low glucose suspend, and 36% using a hybrid closed loop system before the study) were randomly assigned 2:1 to use the BP (N = 107) with insulin aspart or insulin lispro (BP group) or a standard-of-care (SC) control group (N = 54) using their usual insulin delivery plus continuous glucose monitoring (CGM). The primary outcome was HbA1c at 13 weeks. Results: Mean HbA1c decreased from 7.6% ± 1.2% at baseline to 7.1% ± 0.6% at 13 weeks with BP versus 7.6% ± 1.2% to 7.5% ± 0.9% with SC (adjusted difference = -0.5%, 95% confidence interval -0.6% to -0.3%, P < 0.001). Over 13 weeks, mean time in range 70-180 mg/dL (TIR) increased by 11% (2.6 h/d) and mean CGM glucose was reduced by 16 mg/dL with BP compared with SC (P < 0.001). Improvement in these metrics was seen during the first day of BP use and by the end of the first week reached levels that remained relatively stable through 13 weeks. Analyses of time >180 mg/dL, time >250 mg/dL, and standard deviation of CGM glucose all favored the BP group (P < 0.001). The CGM-measured hypoglycemia was low at baseline (median time <54 mg/dL of 0.21% [3 min/d] for the BP group and 0.11% [1.6 min/d] for the SC group) and not significantly different between groups over the 13 weeks (P = 0.51 for time <70 mg/dL and 0.33 for time <54 mg/dL). There were 7 (6.5% of 107 participants) severe hypoglycemic events in the BP group and 2 events in the SC group (1.9% of 54 participants, P = 0.40). Conclusions: In adults with T1D, use of the BP with insulin aspart or insulin lispro improved HbA1c, TIR, and hyperglycemic metrics without increasing CGM-measured hypoglycemia compared with standard of care. Clinical Trial Registry: clinicaltrials.gov; NCT04200313.

Positive Impact of the Bionic Pancreas on Diabetes Control in Youth 6-17 Years Old with Type 1 Diabetes: A Multicenter Randomized Trial.

Objective: To evaluate the insulin-only configuration of the iLet® bionic pancreas (BP) in youth 6-17 years old with type 1 diabetes (T1D). Research Design and Methods: In this multicenter, randomized, controlled trial, 165 youth with T1D (6-17 years old; baseline HbA1c 5.8%-12.2%; 35% using multiple daily injections, 36% using an insulin pump without automation, 4% using an insulin pump with low glucose suspend, and 25% using a hybrid closed-loop system before the study) were randomly assigned 2:1 to use BP (n = 112) with insulin aspart or insulin lispro (BP group) or to a control group (n = 53) using their personal standard care insulin delivery (SC group) plus real-time continuous glucose monitoring (CGM). The primary outcome was HbA1c at 13 weeks. Results: Mean HbA1c decreased from 8.1% ± 1.2% at baseline to 7.5% ± 0.7% at 13 weeks with BP versus 7.8% ± 1.1% at both baseline and 13 weeks with SC (adjusted difference = -0.5%, 95% CI -0.7% to -0.2%, P < 0.001). Participants with baseline HbA1c ≥9.0% (n = 34) decreased mean HbA1c from 9.7% ± 0.8% to 7.9% ± 0.6% after 13 weeks with BP compared with 9.7% ± 0.5% to 9.8% ± 0.8% with SC. Over 13 weeks, mean time in range (TIR) 70-180 mg/dL increased by 10% (2.4 h per day) and mean CGM glucose was reduced by 15 mg/dL with BP compared with SC (P < 0.001). Analyses of time >180 mg/dL, time >250 mg/dL, and standard deviation of CGM glucose favored BP (P < 0.001). Time <54 mg/dL was low at baseline (median 0.2%) and not significantly different between groups over 13 weeks (P = 0.24). A severe hypoglycemia event occurred in 3 (2.7%) participants in the BP group and in 1 (1.9%) in the SC group. Conclusions: In youth 6-17 years old with T1D, use of insulin-only configuration of BP improved HbA1c, TIR, and hyperglycemic metrics without increasing CGM-measured hypoglycemia compared with standard of care. Improvement in glycemic metrics was most pronounced in participants with high baseline HbA1c levels. Clinical Trial Registry: clinicaltrials.gov; NCT04200313.

Improvements in Glycemic Control Achieved by Altering the tmax Setting in the iLet® Bionic Pancreas When Using Fast-Acting Insulin Aspart: A Randomized Trial.

INTRODUCTION: We investigated the safety of, and glucose control by, the insulin-only configuration of the iLet® bionic pancreas delivering fast-acting insulin aspart (faster aspart), using the same insulin-dosing algorithm but different time to maximal serum drug concentration (tmax) settings, in adults with type 1 diabetes. METHODS: We performed a single-center, single-blinded, crossover (two 7-day treatment periods) escalation trial over three sequential cohorts. Participants from each cohort were randomized to a default tmax setting (t65 [tmax = 65 min]) followed by a non-default tmax setting (t50 [tmax = 50 min; cohort 1], t40 [tmax = 40 min; cohort 2], t30 [tmax = 30 min; cohort 3]), or vice versa, all with faster aspart. Each cohort randomized eight new participants if escalation-stopping criteria were not met in the previous cohort. RESULTS: Overall, 24 participants were randomized into three cohorts. Two participants discontinued treatment, one due to reported 'low blood glucose' during the first treatment period of cohort 3 (t30). Mean time in low sensor glucose (< 54 mg/dl, primary endpoint) was < 1.0% for all tmax settings. Mean sensor glucose in cohorts 1 and 2 was significantly lower at non-default versus default tmax settings, with comparable insulin dosing. The mean time sensor glucose was in range (70-180 mg/dl) was > 70% for all cohorts, except the default tmax setting in cohort 1. No severe hypoglycemic episodes were reported. Furthermore, there were no clinically significant differences in adverse events between the groups. CONCLUSION: There were no safety concerns with faster aspart in the iLet at non-default tmax settings. Improvements were observed in mean sensor glucose without increases in low sensor glucose at non-default tmax settings. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03816761.

One way to give insulin is to use an insulin delivery system. The iLet^® is a new type of insulin delivery system that works together with a continuous sugar monitoring tool (CGM). The CGM shows the blood sugar level in the body throughout the day. Based on this, the iLet automatically gives the insulin that is needed to control the blood sugar. Fast-acting insulin aspart (faster aspart) is a type of insulin that doctors can prescribe for use with insulin pens and insulin pumps. The researchers wanted to test the safety of faster aspart when given to people at different delivery settings in the iLet. Twenty-four men and women with type 1 diabetes from the USA took part. The different insulin delivery settings were the standard setting (t_max65 = 65 min) and new settings (t_max50 = 50 min; t_max40 = 40 min; t_max30 = 30 min). The shorter the t_max setting, the faster the insulin was assumed to be absorbed into the body by the iLet. People had good blood sugar control with faster aspart delivered using the iLet. The time with low blood sugar (i.e., < 54 mg/dl) was low for both the standard setting and the new settings. The average blood sugar was lower with the shorter, non-standard t_max settings. No people had serious side effects. No severe hypoglycemic episodes were reported. In this study, researchers found that it was safe to use faster aspart with the different settings in the iLet.

The Bihormonal Bionic Pancreas Improves Glycemic Control in Individuals With Hyperinsulinism and Postpancreatectomy Diabetes: A Pilot Study.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the bihormonal bionic pancreas (BHBP) improves glycemic control and reduces hypoglycemia in individuals with congenital hyperinsulinism (HI) and postpancreatectomy diabetes (PPD) compared with usual care (UC). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Ten subjects with HI and PPD completed this open-label, crossover pilot study. Coprimary outcomes were mean glucose concentration and time with continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) glucose concentration <3.3 mmol/L. RESULTS: Mean (SD) CGM glucose concentration was 8.3 (0.7) mmol/L in the BHBP period versus 9 (1.8) mmol/L in the UC period (P = 0.13). Mean (SD) time with CGM glucose concentration <3.3 mmol/L was 0% (0.002) in the BHBP period vs. 1.3% (0.018) in the UC period (P = 0.11). CONCLUSIONS: Relative to UC, the BHBP resulted in comparable glycemic control in our population.

Automated glycemic control with the bionic pancreas in cystic fibrosis-related diabetes: A pilot study.

Cystic fibrosis-related diabetes (CFRD) is the most common extrapulmonary manifestation of cystic fibrosis. The current standard of care for CFRD involves treatment with insulin, typically via multiple daily injections. We conducted a small pilot study comparing usual care with automated glycemic control using the bihormonal (insulin and glucagon) and insulin-only configurations of the bionic pancreas. Both configurations of the bionic pancreas achieved good glycemic control, with mean glucose levels <150 mg/dl and minimal hypoglycemia. Subjects reported improved treatment satisfaction and reduced burden of diabetes management with the bionic pancreas. Further investigation of automated glycemic control in the treatment of CFRD is warranted.

A Three-Way Accuracy Comparison of the Dexcom G5, Abbott Freestyle Libre Pro, and Senseonics Eversense Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices in a Home-Use Study of Subjects with Type 1 Diabetes.

Background: There is a dearth of comparative accuracy studies of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) devices in the home-use setting, and none with the Eversense implantable CGM. Methods: We evaluated the accuracy of the Dexcom G5, Abbott Freestyle Libre Pro, and Senseonics Eversense during a 6-week free-living home-use bionic pancreas study involving 23 subjects with type 1 diabetes who wore all three devices concurrently. The primary outcome was the mean absolute relative difference (MARD) between CGM readings and point-of-care (POC) plasma-glucose (PG) values obtained approximately twice daily by the subjects. We compared PG values with CGM readings when available from all three CGMs in the 5 min preceding the PG values (n = 829 sets). Since the Libre Pro records readings every 15 min, we also did a two-way comparison between the G5 and the Eversense with a higher number of comparisons (n = 2277 sets). Results: All three CGM systems produced higher average MARDs than during in-clinic studies. However, since all three CGM systems were worn by the same individuals and used the same meter for comparator PG measurements, we could directly compare their performances. In the three-way comparison, Eversense achieved the lowest nominal MARD (14.8%) followed by Dexcom G5 (16.3%) and Libre Pro (18.0%) (Eversense vs. Libre Pro P = 0.004, other comparisons P = NS). There was a statistically significant difference (P = 0.008) in the two-way comparison of the MARDs for Eversense (15.1%) and G5 (16.9%). Conclusions: The point accuracy of the Eversense was better than two other CGMs when compared with POC PG values.

Comparative Accuracy of 17 Point-of-Care Glucose Meters.

BACKGROUND: The accuracy of point-of-care blood glucose (BG) meters is important for the detection of dysglycemia, calculation of insulin doses, and the calibration of continuous glucose monitors. The objective of this study was to compare the accuracy of commercially available glucose meters in a challenging laboratory study using samples with a wide range of reference BG and hemoglobin values. METHODS: Fresh, discarded blood samples from a hospital STAT laboratory were either used without modification, spiked with a glucose solution, or incubated at 37°C to produce 347 samples with an even distribution across reference BG levels from 20 to 440 mg/dl and hemoglobin values from 9 to 16 g/dl. We measured the BG of each sample with 17 different commercially available glucose meters and the reference method (YSI 2300) at the same time. We determined the mean absolute relative difference (MARD) for each glucose meter, overall and stratified by reference BG and by hemoglobin level. RESULTS: The accuracy of different meters widely, exhibiting a range of MARDs from 5.6% to 20.8%. Accuracy was lower in the hypoglycemic range, but was not consistently lower in samples with anemic blood hemoglobin levels. CONCLUSIONS: The accuracy of commercially available glucose meters varies widely. Although the sample mix in this study was much more challenging than those that would be collected under most use conditions, some meters were robust to these challenges and exhibited high accuracy in this setting. These data on relative accuracy and robustness to challenging samples may be useful in informing the choice of a glucose meter.

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.

BACKGROUND: 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. METHODS: 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. FINDINGS: 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). INTERPRETATION: 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. FUNDING: The Leona M and Harry B Helmsley Charitable Trust and the US National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases.