Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34861786›Full record

ArticleJournal of diabetes science and technology2022

Using an Online Disturbance Rejection and Anticipation System to Reduce Hyperglycemia in a Fully Closed-Loop Artificial Pancreas System.

John P Corbett, Jose Garcia-Tirado, Patricio Colmegna, Jenny L Diaz Castaneda, Marc D Breton

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of diabetes science and technology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

John P CorbettCenter for Diabetes Technology, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-5674-3696
Jose Garcia-TiradoCenter for Diabetes Technology, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-9970-2162
Patricio ColmegnaCenter for Diabetes Technology, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-9074-8634
Jenny L Diaz CastanedaCenter for Diabetes Technology, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA, USA.
Marc D BretonCenter for Diabetes Technology, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-7645-2693

Funding

Clinical Acceptance of the Artificial Pancreas: the International Diabetes Closed Loop (iDCL) TrialUC4DK108483 · NIDDK · UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA · PI ANDERSON, STACEY, DOYLE, FRANCIS J · 2016 to 2016
$12.7M
Advanced Artificial Pancreas Systems to Enable Fully Automated Glycemic Control in Type 1 Diabetes MellitusR01DK129553 · NIDDK · UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA · PI BRETON, MARC D, BROWN, SUE A · 2021 to 2025
$3.1M
NIDDK NIH HHS R01 DK129553NIDDK NIH HHS UC4 DK108483
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionHyperglycemia following meals is a recurring challenge for people with type 1 diabetes, and even the most advanced available automated systems currently require manual input of carbohydrate amounts. To progress toward fully automated systems, we present a novel control system that can automatically deliver priming boluses and/or anticipate eating behaviors to improve postprandial full closed-loop control.

methodsA model predictive control (MPC) system was enhanced by an automated bolus system reacting to early glucose rise and/or a multistage MPC (MS-MPC) framework to anticipate historical patterns. Priming was achieved by detecting large glycemic disturbances, such as meals, and delivering a fraction of the patient's total daily insulin (TDI) modulated by the disturbance's likelihood (bolus priming system [BPS]). In the anticipatory module, glycemic disturbance profiles were generated from historical data using clustering to group days with similar behaviors; the probability of each cluster is then evaluated at every controller step and informs the MS-MPC framework to anticipate each profile. We tested four configurations: MPC, MPC + BPS, MS-MPC, and MS-MPC + BPS in simulation to contrast the effect of each controller module.

resultsPostprandial time in range was highest for MS-MPC + BPS: 60.73 ± 25.39%, but improved with each module: MPC + BPS: 56.95±25.83 and MS-MPC: 54.83 ± 26.00%, compared with MPC: 51.79 ± 26.12%. Exposure to hypoglycemia was maintained for all controllers (time below 70 mg/dL <0.5%), and improvement came primarily from a reduction in postprandial time above range (MS-MPC + BPS: 39.10 ± 25.32%, MPC + BPS: 42.99 ± 25.81%, MS-MPC: 45.09 ± 25.96%, MPC: 48.18 ± 26.09%).

conclusionsThe BPS and anticipatory disturbance profiles improved blood glucose control and were most efficient when combined.

Indexed as

Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1HyperglycemiaPancreas, ArtificialAlgorithmsBlood GlucoseHumansHypoglycemic AgentsInsulinInsulin Infusion SystemsBlood GlucoseHypoglycemic AgentsInsulinartificial pancreasautomated insulin deliverybehavioral patternsdisturbance mitigationmeal detection

Identifiers

PMID34861786
PMCPMC8875044

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.