Enhanced Model Predictive Control (eMPC) Strategy for Automated Glucose Control.

Development of an effective artificial pancreas (AP) controller to deliver insulin autonomously to people with type 1 diabetes mellitus is a difficult task. In this paper, three enhancements to a clinically validated AP model predictive controller (MPC) are proposed that address major challenges facing automated blood glucose control, and are then evaluated by both in silico tests and clinical trials. First, the core model of insulin-blood glucose dynamics utilized in the MPC is expanded with a medically inspired personalization scheme to improve controller responses in the face of inter- and intra-individual variations in insulin sensitivity. Next, the asymmetric nature of the short-term consequences of hypoglycemia versus hyperglycemia is incorporated in an asymmetric weighting of the MPC cost function. Finally, an enhanced dynamic insulin-on-board algorithm is proposed to minimize the likelihood of controller-induced hypoglycemia following a rapid rise of blood glucose due to rescue carbohydrate load with accompanying insulin suspension. Each advancement is evaluated separately and in unison through in silico trials based on a new clinical protocol, which incorporates induced hyper- and hypoglycemia to test robustness. The advancements are also evaluated in an advisory mode (simulated) testing of clinical data. The combination of the three proposed advancements show statistically significantly improved performance over the nonpersonalized controller without any enhancements across all metrics, displaying increased time in the 70-180 mg/dL safe glycemic range (76.9 versus 68.8%) and the 80-140 mg/dL euglycemic range (48.1 versus 44.5%), without a statistically significant increase in instances of hypoglycemia. The proposed advancements provide safe control action for AP applications, personalizing and improving controller performance without the need for extensive model identification processes.

[1]  Claudio Cobelli,et al.  Quantitative Estimation of Insulin Sensitivity in Type 1 Diabetic Subjects Wearing a Sensor-Augmented Insulin Pump , 2014, Diabetes Care.

[2]  Daniel J Cox,et al.  Methods for quantifying self-monitoring blood glucose profiles exemplified by an examination of blood glucose patterns in patients with type 1 and type 2 diabetes. , 2002, Diabetes technology & therapeutics.

[3]  Dale E. Seborg,et al.  Randomized Crossover Comparison of Personalized MPC and PID Control Algorithms for the Artificial Pancreas , 2016, Diabetes Care.

[4]  R. DeFronzo,et al.  Glucose clamp technique: a method for quantifying insulin secretion and resistance. , 1979, The American journal of physiology.

[5]  Howard C. Zisser,et al.  Clinical Evaluation of a Personalized Artificial Pancreas , 2013, Diabetes Care.

[6]  David M Nathan,et al.  Outpatient glycemic control with a bionic pancreas in type 1 diabetes. , 2014, The New England journal of medicine.

[7]  C. Cobelli,et al.  In Silico Preclinical Trials: A Proof of Concept in Closed-Loop Control of Type 1 Diabetes , 2009, Journal of diabetes science and technology.

[8]  Eyal Dassau,et al.  Adjustment of Open-Loop Settings to Improve Closed-Loop Results in Type 1 Diabetes: A Multicenter Randomized Trial. , 2015, The Journal of clinical endocrinology and metabolism.

[9]  W Zingg,et al.  Clinical Control of Diabetes by the Artificial Pancreas , 1974, Diabetes.

[10]  Claudio Cobelli,et al.  2 month evening and night closed-loop glucose control in patients with type 1 diabetes under free-living conditions: a randomised crossover trial. , 2015, The lancet. Diabetes & endocrinology.

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

[12]  Benyamin Grosman,et al.  Feasibility of Outpatient 24-Hour Closed-Loop Insulin Delivery , 2015, Diabetes Care.

[13]  S. Genuth,et al.  The effect of intensive treatment of diabetes on the development and progression of long-term complications in insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus. , 1993, The New England journal of medicine.

[14]  Ahmad Haidar,et al.  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. , 2015, The lancet. Diabetes & endocrinology.

[15]  F. Doyle,et al.  Design of the Health Monitoring System for the Artificial Pancreas: Low Glucose Prediction Module , 2012, Journal of diabetes science and technology.

[16]  Lauren M. Huyett,et al.  Closed-Loop Artificial Pancreas Systems: Engineering the Algorithms , 2014, Diabetes Care.

[17]  D. Dunger,et al.  Safety, efficacy and glucose turnover of reduced prandial boluses during closed‐loop therapy in adolescents with type 1 diabetes: a randomized clinical trial , 2015, Diabetes, obesity & metabolism.

[18]  Eyal Dassau,et al.  Shaping the MPC Cost Function for Superior Automated Glucose Control , 2016 .

[19]  Denis Daneman,et al.  Type 1 diabetes , 2018, The Lancet.

[20]  P. Lucidi,et al.  Thirty Years of Research on the Dawn Phenomenon: Lessons to Optimize Blood Glucose Control in Diabetes , 2013, Diabetes Care.

[21]  Irl B Hirsch,et al.  Stress Testing of an Artificial Pancreas System With Pizza and Exercise Leads to Improvements in the System’s Fuzzy Logic Controller , 2015, Journal of diabetes science and technology.

[22]  Eyal Dassau,et al.  Safety Constraints in an Artificial Pancreatic β Cell: An Implementation of Model Predictive Control with Insulin on Board , 2009, Journal of diabetes science and technology.

[23]  Howard Zisser,et al.  Glucose Estimation and Prediction through Meal Responses Using Ambulatory Subject Data for Advisory Mode Model Predictive Control , 2007, Journal of diabetes science and technology.

[24]  Marc D. Breton,et al.  Overnight Glucose Control With an Automated, Unified Safety System in Children and Adolescents With Type 1 Diabetes at Diabetes Camp , 2014, Diabetes Care.

[25]  Eyal Dassau,et al.  Periodic zone-MPC with asymmetric costs for outpatient-ready safety of an artificial pancreas to treat type 1 diabetes , 2016, Autom..

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

[27]  Anirban Roy,et al.  The effect of insulin feedback on closed loop glucose control. , 2011, The Journal of clinical endocrinology and metabolism.

[28]  Marc D. Breton,et al.  Safety of Outpatient Closed-Loop Control: First Randomized Crossover Trials of a Wearable Artificial Pancreas , 2014, Diabetes Care.

[29]  C. Cobelli,et al.  The university of Virginia/Padova type 1 diabetes simulator matches the glucose traces of a clinical trial. , 2014 .

[30]  Dale E. Seborg,et al.  Model-based personalization scheme of an artificial pancreas for Type 1 diabetes applications , 2013, 2013 American Control Conference.

[31]  Tadej Battelino,et al.  MD-Logic Overnight Control for 6 Weeks of Home Use in Patients With Type 1 Diabetes: Randomized Crossover Trial , 2014, Diabetes Care.

[32]  W. Kenneth Ward,et al.  Automated Control of an Adaptive Bihormonal, Dual-Sensor Artificial Pancreas and Evaluation During Inpatient Studies , 2014, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.

[33]  Thomas J. Songer,et al.  Improvements in the Life Expectancy of Type 1 Diabetes , 2012, Diabetes.

[34]  Benyamin Grosman,et al.  Day and Night Closed-Loop Control Using the Integrated Medtronic Hybrid Closed-Loop System in Type 1 Diabetes at Diabetes Camp , 2015, Diabetes Care.

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

[36]  Dale E. Seborg,et al.  Control-Relevant Models for Glucose Control Using A Priori Patient Characteristics , 2012, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.

[37]  Roman Hovorka,et al.  Home Use of an Artificial Beta Cell in Type 1 Diabetes. , 2015, The New England journal of medicine.