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.

[1]  G. Steil,et al.  Effect of Age of Infusion Site and Type of Rapid-Acting Analog on Pharmacodynamic Parameters of Insulin Boluses in Youth With Type 1 Diabetes Receiving Insulin Pump Therapy , 2009, Diabetes Care.

[2]  J. Leahy,et al.  Fully Automated Closed-Loop Insulin Delivery Versus Semiautomated Hybrid Control in Pediatric Patients With Type 1 Diabetes Using an Artificial Pancreas , 2008 .

[3]  Malgorzata E. Wilinska,et al.  Safety and efficacy of 24-h closed-loop insulin delivery in well-controlled pregnant women with type 1 diabetes: A randomized crossover case series (Diabetes Care (2011) 34, (2527-2529)) , 2012 .

[4]  Howard C. Zisser,et al.  Feasibility of Outpatient Fully Integrated Closed-Loop Control , 2013, Diabetes Care.

[5]  Darrell M. Wilson,et al.  Remote glucose monitoring in cAMP setting reduces the risk of prolonged nocturnal hypoglycemia. , 2014, Diabetes technology & therapeutics.

[6]  Howard C. Zisser,et al.  Fully Integrated Artificial Pancreas in Type 1 Diabetes , 2012, Diabetes.

[7]  Janet M. Allen,et al.  Manual closed-loop insulin delivery in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes: a phase 2 randomised crossover trial , 2010, The Lancet.

[8]  Lora Kleis,et al.  Basal and bolus insulin requirements in children, adolescents, and young adults with type 1 diabetes mellitus on continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII): effects of age and puberty. , 2013, Endocrine practice : official journal of the American College of Endocrinology and the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists.

[9]  Eyal Dassau,et al.  Zone Model Predictive Control: A Strategy to Minimize Hyper- and Hypoglycemic Events , 2010, Journal of diabetes science and technology.

[10]  Malgorzata E. Wilinska,et al.  Safety and Efficacy of 24-h Closed-Loop Insulin Delivery in Well-Controlled Pregnant Women With Type 1 Diabetes , 2011, Diabetes Care.

[11]  Janet M. Allen,et al.  Overnight closed loop insulin delivery (artificial pancreas) in adults with type 1 diabetes: crossover randomised controlled studies , 2011, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[12]  E. Atlas,et al.  Nocturnal glucose control with an artificial pancreas at a diabetes camp. , 2013, The New England journal of medicine.

[13]  Boris Kovatchev,et al.  DiAs Web Monitoring: A Real-Time Remote Monitoring System Designed for Artificial Pancreas Outpatient Trials , 2013, Journal of diabetes science and technology.

[14]  D. B. Keenan,et al.  The Use of an Automated, Portable Glucose Control System for Overnight Glucose Control in Adolescents and Young Adults With Type 1 Diabetes , 2012, Diabetes Care.

[15]  A BuckinghamBruce,et al.  Remote Glucose Monitoring in Camp Setting Reduces the Risk of Prolonged Nocturnal Hypoglycemia , 2014 .

[16]  Y. Z. Ider,et al.  Quantitative estimation of insulin sensitivity. , 1979, The American journal of physiology.

[17]  L. Magni,et al.  Multinational Study of Subcutaneous Model-Predictive Closed-Loop Control in Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus: Summary of the Results , 2010, Journal of diabetes science and technology.

[18]  Stephen D Patek,et al.  Hypoglycemia Prevention via Pump Attenuation and Red-Yellow-Green “Traffic” Lights Using Continuous Glucose Monitoring and Insulin Pump Data , 2010, Journal of diabetes science and technology.

[19]  Ahmad Haidar,et al.  Closed-Loop Basal Insulin Delivery Over 36 Hours in Adolescents With Type 1 Diabetes , 2013, Diabetes Care.

[20]  M. Kabbani,et al.  Mini-dose glucagon is effective at diabetes camp. , 2004, The Journal of pediatrics.