Computing the Risk of Postprandial Hypo- and Hyperglycemia in Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus considering Intrapatient Variability and other Sources of Uncertainty

Objective: The objective of this article was to develop a methodology to quantify the risk of suffering different grades of hypo- and hyperglycemia episodes in the postprandial state. Methods: Interval predictions of patient postprandial glucose were performed during a 5-hour period after a meal for a set of 3315 scenarios. Uncertainty in the patient's insulin sensitivities and carbohydrate (CHO) contents of the planned meal was considered. A normalized area under the curve of the worst-case predicted glucose excursion for severe and mild hypo- and hyperglycemia glucose ranges was obtained and weighted accordingly to their importance. As a result, a comprehensive risk measure was obtained. A reference model of preprandial glucose values representing the behavior in different ranges was chosen by a X 2 test. The relationship between the computed risk index and the probability of occurrence of events was analyzed for these reference models through 19,500 Monte Carlo simulations. Results: The obtained reference models for each preprandial glucose range were 100, 160, and 220 mg/dl. A relationship between the risk index ranges <10, 10–60, 60–120, and >120 and the probability of occurrence of mild and severe postprandial hyper- and hypoglycemia can be derived. Conclusions: When intrapatient variability and uncertainty in the CHO content of the meal are considered, a safer prediction of possible hyper- and hypoglycemia episodes induced by the tested insulin therapy can be calculated.

[1]  R. Calm,et al.  Prediction of glucose excursions under uncertain parameters and food intake in intensive insulin therapy for type 1 diabetes mellitus , 2007, 2007 29th Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society.

[2]  E. Moberg,et al.  Estimation of blood-glucose variability in patients with insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus. , 1993, Scandinavian journal of clinical and laboratory investigation.

[3]  D. Bruttomesso,et al.  In Type 1 diabetic patients with good glycaemic control, blood glucose variability is lower during continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion than during multiple daily injections with insulin glargine , 2008, Diabetic medicine : a journal of the British Diabetic Association.

[4]  Richard M Hoffman,et al.  A probabilistic model for predicting hypoglycemia in type 2 diabetes mellitus: The Diabetes Outcomes in Veterans Study (DOVES). , 2004, Archives of internal medicine.

[5]  C. McDonnell,et al.  A novel approach to continuous glucose analysis utilizing glycemic variation. , 2005, Diabetes technology & therapeutics.

[6]  R. Hovorka,et al.  Partitioning glucose distribution/transport, disposal, and endogenous production during IVGTT. , 2002, American journal of physiology. Endocrinology and metabolism.

[7]  R. Hovorka,et al.  Nonlinear model predictive control of glucose concentration in subjects with type 1 diabetes. , 2004, Physiological measurement.

[8]  W. F. Taylor,et al.  Day-to-day variation of continuously monitored glycaemia: A further measure of diabetic instability , 1972, Diabetologia.

[9]  Jesús Picó,et al.  Comprehensive pharmacokinetic model of insulin Glargine and other insulin formulations , 2005, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.

[10]  W. F. Taylor,et al.  Mean Amplitude of Glycemic Excursions, a Measure of Diabetic Instability , 1970, Diabetes.

[11]  J. Schlichtkrull,et al.  [M-VALUE, AN INDEX FOR BLOOD SUGAR CONTROL IN DIABETICS]. , 1964, Ugeskrift for laeger.