Use of an artificial pancreas among adolescents for a missed snack bolus and an underestimated meal bolus.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to evaluate the safety and performance of the artificial pancreas (AP) in adolescents with type 1 diabetes (T1D) following insulin omission for food. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: In a randomized, cross-over trial, adolescents with T1D aged 13-18 yr were enrolled in a randomized, cross-over trial. On separate days, received either usual care (UC) through their home insulin pump or used an AP system (Diabetes Assistant platform, continuous glucose monitor, and insulin pump). Approximately 1 h after admission, participants in both groups received an unannounced snack of 30 g carbohydrate, and 4 h later they received an 80 g lunch, for which both groups only received 75% of the calculated insulin dose to cover carbohydrates. On the UC day (but not the AP day), they received their full high blood glucose (BG) correction factor at lunch. Each admission lasted approximately 8 h. RESULTS: A total of 16 participants completed the trial. On the AP day (compared to UC), mean BG was lower (197 ± 10 vs. 235 ± 14 mg/dL) and time in range 70-180 mg/dL was higher (43% ± 7 vs. 19% ± 7) (both p < 0.05) overall; these results held in the time following the snack and meal (also p < 0.05). During the trial, there were no differences between groups in the rate of hypoglycemia <70 mg/dL. CONCLUSIONS: The AP provided improvements in short-term glycemic control without increases in hypoglycemia following missed insulin for food in adolescents. Thus, the AP partly compensates for missed insulin boluses for food, a common occurrence in adolescent diabetes care. Further testing is needed in longer-term settings.

Overnight glucose control with an automated, unified safety system in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes at diabetes camp.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the safety and efficacy of an automated unified safety system (USS) in providing overnight closed-loop (OCL) control in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes attending diabetes summer camps. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: The Diabetes Assistant (DIAS) USS used the Dexcom G4 Platinum glucose sensor (Dexcom) and t:slim insulin pump (Tandem Diabetes Care). An initial inpatient study was completed for 12 participants to evaluate safety. For the main camp study, 20 participants with type 1 diabetes were randomized to either OCL or sensor-augmented therapy (control conditions) per night over the course of a 5- to 6-day diabetes camp. RESULTS: Subjects completed 54 OCL nights and 52 control nights. On an intention-to-treat basis, with glucose data analyzed regardless of system status, the median percent time in range, from 70-150 mg/dL, was 62% (29, 87) for OCL nights versus 55% (25, 80) for sensor-augmented pump therapy (P = 0.233). A per-protocol analysis allowed for assessment of algorithm performance. The median percent time in range, from 70-150 mg/dL, was 73% (50, 89) for OCL nights (n = 41) versus 52% (24, 83) for control conditions (n = 39) (P = 0.037). There was less time spent in the hypoglycemic range <50, <60, and <70 mg/dL during OCL compared with the control period (P = 0.019, P = 0.009, and P = 0.023, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: The DIAS USS algorithm is effective in improving time spent in range as well as reducing nocturnal hypoglycemia during the overnight period in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes in a diabetes camp setting.

DiAs user interface: a patient-centric interface for mobile artificial pancreas systems.

BACKGROUND: Recent in-hospital studies of artificial pancreas (AP) systems have shown promising results in improving glycemic control in patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus. The next logical step in AP development is to conduct transitional outpatient clinical trials with a mobile system that is controlled by the patient. In this article, we present the user interface (UI) of the Diabetes Assistant (DiAs), an experimental smartphone-based mobile AP system, and describe the reactions of a round of focus groups to the UI. This work is an initial inquiry involving a relatively small number of potential users, many of whom had never seen an AP system before, and the results should be understood in that light. METHODS: We began by considering how the UI of an AP system could be designed to make use of the familiar touch-based graphical UI of a consumer smartphone. After developing a working prototype UI, we enlisted a human factors specialist to perform a heuristic expert analysis. Next we conducted a formative evaluation of the UI through a series of three focus groups with N = 13 potential end users as participants. The UI was modified based upon the results of these studies, and the resulting DiAs system was used in transitional outpatient AP studies of adults in the United States and Europe. RESULTS: The DiAs UI was modified based on focus group feedback from potential users. The DiAs was subsequently used in JDRF- and AP@Home-sponsored transitional outpatient AP studies in the United States and Europe by 40 subjects for 2400 h with no adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Adult patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus are able to control an AP system successfully using a patient-centric UI on a commercial smartphone in a transitional outpatient environment.