Upload
others
View
3
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Bruce W. Bode, MD, FACE
Atlanta Diabetes Associates
Atlanta, Georgia
Technology Update in DiabetesPumps, Sensors, and Progress Toward Closed Loop Systems
Disclosures
� Research and Grant Support to Employer: Abbott, Biodel, DexCom, Halozyme, Lilly, MannKind, Medtronic, Novo Nordisk, Sanofi, Valeritas
� Consultant: Abbott, Halozyme, Medtronic, Novo Nordisk, Sanofi, Valeritas
� Speaker’s Bureau: DexCom, Lilly, Medtronic, Novo Nordisk, Sanofi, Valeritas
1
3
5
7
9
11
13
15
6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Eye disease
Kidney disease
Nerve damage
HbA1c
Relative Riskof
Complications
Skyler, J: Endo Met Cl N Am, vol 25, 2, p.243- 254, June 1996 Adapted from DCCT Research Group: NEJM 1993;329:977-986Minshall M, et al. Clin Ther. 2005;27:940–950.
DCCT ResultsHbA1c and Relative Risk of Diabetic Complications
6.5*
Average US HbA1c Range
7.8-8.6%
AACE recommendation is
6.5%
DCCT Research Group, 1993
Trade-off between: Reducing Long-term Complications & Minimizing Hypoglycemia
Patients used:
• Regular insulin/ Intensive therapy via injections or insulin
pump
• Self monitoring blood glucose (SMBG)
DCCT ResultsP
rogression of Retinopathy
(per 100 patient years)
10
8
6
4
2
0Rat
e of
Sev
ere
Hyp
ogly
cem
ia(p
er 1
00 p
atie
nt-y
ears
)
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
Percentage of A1C Level
Published 1993
Risk of Death Over a Range of Average A1c
Riddle et al. Diabetes Care 2010
Average A1c %
Adjusted log (HR) by Treatment StrategyRelative to standard at A1c of 6%
Standard strategy
6 8 97
Steady increase of risk from 6 to 9% A1c with intensive strategy
Excess risk with intensive strategy vs standard occurred above A1c 7%
Intensive strategy1
0
–1
HR = hazard ratio
Hypoglycemia and Cardiovascular Events
� Tachycardia and high blood pressure
� Myocardial ischemia
– Silent ischemia, angina, infarction� Cardiac arrhythmias
– Transiently prolonged corrected QT interval,
– Increased QT dispersion� Sudden death
Wright RJ, Frier BM, Diabetes Metab Res Rev 2008; 24: 353–363.
Mean Glucose & In-Hospital Mortalityin 16,871 Patients with AMI
(Reference: Mean BG 100-110 mg/dl)
Kosiborod M et al. Circulation 2008:117:1018
2005 Blinded CGM Study
� 101 people with diabetes were placed on a blinded CGM and were told to do 10 finger stick blood tests a day; they averaged 9 tests per day
- < 30% of day was 90-130 mg/dL
- 30% of the day was >180 mg/dL
- two hours a day was <60 mg/dL
� New technology is needed to help patients get to goal
Bode BW et al. Diabetes Care 2005 Oct. 28(10):2361-6.
Status of Diabetes Care: Therapy Advances Needed
The Type 1 Exchange, n=25,000 subjects, 67 sites2
Not at Goal Excess Hypoglycemia
The average type-1 patient has:• Two symptomatic hypoglycemic events per week1
• One or more episodes of severe, temporally disabling hypoglycemia per year• Nocturnal hypoglycemia occurs ~ 8.5% of nights2
Indications for Basal Bolus Therapy (MDI or Insulin Pump)
� All Type 1 DM patients
� All Type 2 DM patients not at goal (>6.5 to 7%)
� All Hospital patients not at goal (>140 mg/dL)
� All Pregnancy patients not at goal (Fasting >90 mg/dL; 1 hr PC >120 mg/dL)
4:00 16:00 20:00 24:00 4:00
Breakfast Lunch Dinner
8:0012:008:00
Time
Glargineor
Detemir
RAI RAI RAI
Plas
ma
insu
linBasal/Bolus Treatment Program withRapid-acting and Long-acting Analogs
RAI: Rapid Acting Insulin(Aspart, Glulisine, Lispro)
Initiating SC Basal Bolus
Starting total dose (TDD) = 0.5 x wgt. in kgWt. is 100 kg; 0.5 x 100 = 50 units
Basal dose (basal analog) = 50% of TDD at HS 0.5 x 50 = 25 units at HS
Bolus doses (rapid analog) = 50% of TDD 0.5 x 50 = 25 divided by 3 = ~8 units pc (tid)
Correction bolus = (BG - 100)/ CF, where CF = 1700/total daily dose; CF = 30
The pump delivers basal and bolus insulin precisely and can be easily customized as needed to meet individual requirements.
0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
12am 4am 8am 12pm 4pm 8pm 12am
Bolus insulin delivery
Basal insulin delivery
Basal programmedto help preventdawn phenomenon
Dual Wave™Bolus for brunch
Temporary basalduring walkingto help preventhypoglycemia
Dinnerbolus
Basal reducedto help prevent
nocturnalhypoglycemia
Uni
ts o
f ins
ulin
Insulin Pump Therapy
Photograph reproduced with permission of manufacturer.
Current Durable Insulin Pumps
– Durable light aluminum case
– Shatter-resistant glass
– Rechargeable battery
Touch Screen Insulin Delivery System
Combo system• Offers an easy, quick* & discreet way to manage
insulin pump therapy
• “smart meter”
Intelligent communication in both directions using Bluetooth® technology
Snap Pump with Insulin Cartridge
Snap Pump with Prefilled Insulin Cartridges� Uses prefilled 300 unit insulin cartridges that take seconds to drop in.
� Automatically fills your tubing (autoprime) – saving you time.
� Is 25% lighter than the leading pump.†
� Never needs to have the battery changed or charged. Dispose post 300 units is used
� Never requires an insulin reservoir to be filled
Infusion Sets
• Subcutaneous indwelling catheters• Teflon cannula or steel needle• Must be changed every 2-3 days• pump and tubing may be disconnected without removing insertion
site
Crimped soft canulae
Pump infusion sets: perpendicular vs oblique
Perpendicular (Sof-set™, Quick-set™, Ultraflex™)
- Easier insertion
- Prone to kink
Oblique (Silouette™, Tender™, Comfort™)
- More difficultinsertion
- Less kinking
Patch Pump platform Just two simple parts
�Fully integrated two-part design
• Built-in FreeStyle® BG meter that automatically incorporates BG levels into suggested bolus calculations and history records
• Integrated infusion set, insulin reservoir, automated inserter, and batteries
�Automated processes• Cannula insertion
• Priming
� Intuitive user interface• Full text navigation
• Set-up wizard
• Easy to teach, easy to learn
� Waterproof Pod22
Simple Patch Pump for Type 2 DM
23
– Continuous preset basal insulin rate (20, 30 or 40 units/24 hrs)
– On-demand mealtime insulin via 2 unit clicks (Max 18 clicks/36 units)
– Uses only RAI – Easy to fill, apply, use, and
remove every 24 hours– No electronics, batteries, infusion sets,
or programming– Fully disposable
Metabolic Advantages with CSII
� Improved glycemic control
� Better pharmacokinetic delivery of insulin
– Less hypoglycemia than NPH based therapy
– Less insulin required
� Improved quality of life
Current Pump Therapy Indications� Need to normalize blood glucose (BG)
–A1C > 6.5% or 7%
–Glycemic excursions
� Hypoglycemia or Hypoglycemia unawareness
� Need for a flexible insulin regimen
Medicare requires: Fasting C-peptide to be ≤110% lower limit of normal or ≤200% lower limit of normal if CrCl ≤50 ml/min with concurrent FPG ≤225 mg/dL;or Beta Cell autoantibody positive (+ICA or +GAD antibodies)
US Pump Usage: Patients Using Insulin Pumps
Industry estimates
Insulin Therapy Segmentation (US) – 2008
T2 Conventional3,080,160(69%)
T1 Conventional368,160 (48%)
T1 MDI398,840 (52%)
T1 Pump Therapy361,000
T2 Pump Therapy37,000
T2 MDI1,383,840 (31%)
4.5 Million Type 2 (T2)>5.6 Million = 1.2 Million Type 1 (T1)
>31% Penetrationin Type 1
<1% Penetrationin Type 2
Source: Medtronic with 78% of the market
Insulin Therapy:
� Monitoring– A1C = 8.3 - (0.21 x BG per day)
CSIIFactors Affecting A1C
Bode et al. Diabetes 1999;48 Suppl 1:264
Bode et al. Diabetes Care 2002;25 439
Correlation between HbA1c levels and number of SMBG measurements
6.006.256.506.757.007.257.507.75
8.50
8.008.25
HbA
1c(%
)
≤1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 10Number of BG measurements per day
Mean 0.95 CIn = 12,725
Hammond P, et al. Prim Care Diabetes 2007;1:143–6.
� Monitoring– A1C = 8.3 - (0.21 x BG per day)
� Recording 7.4% vs 7.8%
� Diet practiced– CHO: 7.2%– Fixed: 7.5%– WAG: 8.0%
CSIIFactors Affecting A1C
Bode et al. Diabetes 1999;48 Suppl 1:264
Bode et al. Diabetes Care 2002;25 439
� Monitor sends BG value to pump via radio waves : No transcribing error
� Enter carbohydrate intake into pump
� “Bolus Wizard” calculates suggested dose
Paradigm Link™
Paradigm 512™
Bolus Calculator: meter-entered
Estimate DetailsEst total:
Food intake:
BG:
Food:
Correction:
Active ins:
ACT to proceed
ESC to back up
Automatically calculates insulin bolus for the patient
7.0 U
20060 gr
2.0 U
ICR 1:10 gr
200 - 100 = 2.0 u 50 (SF)
6.0 U
1.0 U
Bolus Calculator: Example
Active insulin is subtracted from correction
Wizard: OnCarb Units: GramsCarb Ratios: 10BG Units: mg/dlSensitivity: 40BG Target: 90-100Active Insulin Time: 5 hours
Bolus Calculator Set Up Screen
If on Smart Pumps and not at Goal
� Post meal too high
Lower CIR (Carb to Insulin Ratio)
� All BGs too high
Lower target and / or change CF (ISF)
� Fasting or pre meal too high
Increase basal
Case 1: Type 1 DM on pump at goal
� 28-year-old male with type 1 DM since age 17
� On pump since age 22
� No complaints; No assisted hypoglycemia
� A1C 6.7%
� Current insulin: 62 +/- 8 units/day (0.6 units/kg) with 59% basal; 41% Bolus
� SMBG 3.9/day; mean BG 155 +/- 118 mg/dL
Do Smart Pumps Enable Others To Go To CSII?
� YES
� All patients with diabetes not at goal are candidates for Insulin Pump Therapy
- Type 1 any age
- Type 2
- Diabetes in Pregnancy
If A1C is Not to Goal
� SMBG frequency and recording
� Diet practiced– Do they know what they
are eating?– Do they bolus for all
food and snacks?
� Infusion site areas– Are they in areas of
lipohypertrophy?
� Other factors:– Bolus % <50% TDD– Fear of low BG– Overtreatment of low BG
Must look at:
Traditional glucose monitoring looks at only one point in time.
It doesn’t tell you where you’ve really been, or where you’re going.
Limitations of SMBG
mg/dL
What action should a patient take?
CGM Provides Patient with Live Bio-Feedback
mg/dL
What action should be taken now?
• In 30 minutes, what might patient’s glucose be?• What if patient is about to go to sleep or drive?
Seeing How Glucose is Trending
• 1 arrow indicates glucose has beenchanging1 to 2 mg/dL/min
• 2 arrows indicate glucose has been changing >2 mg/dL/min.
mg/dL
How might a patient react differently, to this?CGM ProvidesImportant Live Biofeedback
Sensor data provides information that allows patients to make more informed decisions
• 1 arrow indicates glucose has beenchanging1 to 2 mg/dL/min
• 2 arrows indicate glucose has been changing >2 mg/dL/min.
Continuous Monitoring Systems
Paradigm or Guardian REAL-Time
DexCom G4 Platinum
CGMS® iPro™ Recorder
Interstitial Glucose Readings
Issues with Lag Time
� Occurs with all subcutaneous sensors� Will delay alarm for hypoglycemia� Will affect calibration of sensor
– Calibration should not be done when glucose values are changing rapidly
CGM
Professional� Owned by Professional
(HCP, CDE, Clinic, Hospital)
� Can be Masked or Real-time
� Reimbursement for Technical fee (95250) and Interpretation (95251)
� Covered by most insurers including CMS
Personal� Owned by the Patient
� Real-time only
� Reimbursement for the Interpretation (95251)
� Covered by most insurers but not CMS
Indications for CGM
� Patient is not at goal
- A1C above target
- Labile BG values
- Hypoglycemia
- Lifestyle or Employment reasons
� Pharmaceutical Research (Masked)
Case 1: Type 2 DM not at goal
� 64 year-old female with type 2 DM since age 37, 1984
� On insulin since 1994; pump since 2000
� Gastric bypass 2006; BMI 48 to 29
� Current insulin: 26 units/day (0.35 units/kg) with 69% basal; 31% Bolus
� SMBG 1.5/day; mean BG 149 +/- 97 mg/dL
� A1C 7.9%
Patient PG: Case 1; Type 2 DM on pump
Patient PG: Case 1; Type 2 DM on pump
Ordered a Professional CGM on Case 1
Patient PG: Case 1; Type 2 DM on pumpDaily Sensor Overlay
Patient PG: Case 1; Type 2 DM on pumpMeal Sensor Overlay
Patient PG: Case 1; Type 2 DM on pumpNight Time Sensor Overlay
Case 2: Type 1 DM on pumpnot at goal
Recommendations:
1. Bolus for each meal
- Start with 4 to 6 units and increase as needed to keep next BG <120 mg/dL or post meal <180 mg/dL
2. Increase SMBG to 4/day
Short-term, Episodic, Real-Time Continuous Glucose Monitoring (RT-CGM) Improves Short-Term and Legacy Glycemic Control in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes
� Study population:– Type 2 diabetes with an
A1C of > 7.0%.
– N=50 real-time CGM group; N=50 SMBG/control group.
– No subjects were on meal-time/prandial insulin.
Vigersky RA, Ehrhardt NM, Chellappa M, Walker S, Fonda SJ. Diabetes Late-Breaking Abstract 0026-LB ADA, 2011.
7
51
9
33
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
%
Lifestyle Orals Orals+Byetta Orals+BasalInsulinTherapy
Selected Characteristics of Study Subjects
Characteristics SMBG Group RT-CGM Group
Age [mean (SD)] 60.0 (11.9) 55.5 (9.6)
Male [n (%)] 22 (44.0) 33 (66.0)
Baseline A1c [mean (SD)]
8.2 (1.1) 8.4 (1.3)
Vigersky RA, Ehrhardt NM, Chellappa M, Walker S, Fonda SJ. Diabetes Late-Breaking Abstract 0026-LB ADA, 2011.
N=100; 50 per group
Study Protocol
Vigersky RA, Ehrhardt NM, Chellappa M, Walker S, Fonda SJ. Diabetes Late-Breaking Abstract 0026-LB ADA, 2011.
Mean A1c Change From Baseline(RT-CGM vs. SMBG)
Vigersky RA, Ehrhardt NM, Chellappa M, Walker S, Fonda SJ. Diabetes Late-Breaking Abstract 0026-LB ADA, 2011.
Conclusion of CGM in Type 2 DM� Intermittent use of real-time CGM in the type 2, non-
intensive insulin treated diabetes patients showed a significantly greater reduction in A1C than SMBG alone and was sustained for 1 year (p=0.05).
� More regular use of real time CGM (>48 out of 56 days) led to greater reductions in A1C.
� Study suggests that real time CGM is a powerful behavior modification tool.– Real time CGM increases glycemic awareness and promotes
lifestyle changes and medication adherence.
Vigersky RA, et al Diabetes Late-Breaking Abstract 0026-LB ADA, 2011.
JDRF Study HbA1c Change in ≥ 7.0% Cohortwith CGM Use ≥ 6 days/week in Month 12
-0.5 -0.5
-1.0
-0.5
-0.7-0.8
-1.2
-1
-0.8
-0.6
-0.4
-0.2
0
0-26wks0-52wks
Age > = 25 Age 15-24 Age 8-14n = 34 n = 6 n = 15
Changein
A1c (%)
JDRF A1c < 7% Cohort: Change in the frequency of sensor glucose levels < 70 mg /dL
Medianminutes/day
9154
p = 0.002
96 91
p = 0.43
Baseline Baseline26 Wks 26 Wks
Severe hypoglycemia
n = 49
1-year study 6-month continuation phase485 type 1 adults and children30 sitesPublished 2010
Two Arms:MDI + meter + CareLink (control)Pump + CGM + CareLink
• Pump + CGM improves A1c 1.21%• Pump + CGM improves A1c 1.0% compared to MDI + meter• No increase in hypoglycemia
n = 56
-1.21%
n = 27 n = 46 n = 10881 – 100%61 – 80%41 – 60%21 – 40%
-0.79%-0.64%
-0.19%
-1.5%
-1.0%
-0.5%
0.0%
% A
1cre
duct
ion
% CGM Usage
Bergenstal RM, et al. N Engl J Med. 2010;363:311-20.
STAR 3: Randomized, controlled SAPT vs MDI
6 month study115 subjects, A1c ≥ 8.0 69 adults 46 children
On MDI + meter ≥ 3 meter readings / day
8 French centersPublished 2009
Two Arms:Pump + meterPump + CGM (CGM group instructed to wear sensors 70% of the time (5 d/wk)
RealTrend: Randomized, controlled SAPT vs Pump
• Pump improves A1c > 0.5% compared to MDI
• Pump + CGM improves A1c 1.2% compared to MDI + meterRaccah D et al. The RealTrend Study. Diabetes Care 2009.
p = 0.004
0.55%
0.96%
MDI + meter
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
Pump + meter Pump + CGM ≥ 70%
A1C
Red
uctio
n (%
)
1.23%
6 Month Study83 adults type 1: Age 18-65 years Using MDI (multiple daily injections) HbA1c ≥ 8.2%
Multicenter: 8 European centers 8 European countries
Two Arms:
Stay on MDI + meter (control)Pump + CGM (Paradigm REAL-Time) No specified CGM usage frequency
1.2%
7.0
7.5
8.0
8.5
9.0
Baseline 13 weeks 26 weeks
HbA
1c (%
)Pump + CGM
MDI + meter
EURYTHMICS: Investigator-initiated, randomized, controlled
• Pump + CGM improves A1c 1.2% compared to MDI + meter• No increase in hypoglycemia
Abstract, EASD 2010 to be published 2011.
Adapted from Figure 5B of: DCCT. N Engl J Med. 1993;329:977-986.
Severe Hypoglycemia and A1C:DCCT15 (1993), JDRF2 (2008), and STAR 316 (2010) Studies
DCCT (intensive therapy):62 per 100 pt-yrs,
A1C(6.5 yr): 9.0% 7.2%
JDRF CGM (adults):43.4 per 100 pt-yrs;
A1C (6 mo): 7.5% 7.1%
JDRF data from: JDRF CGM Study Group. N Engl J Med. 2008;359:1465-1476.
Adapted from Figure 5B of: DCCT. N Engl J Med. 1993;329:977-986.
Severe Hypoglycemia and A1C:DCCT15 (1993), JDRF2 (2008), and STAR 316 (2010) Studies
JDRF CGM (adults, 1 subject excluded):20.0 per 100 pt-yrs;
A1C (6 mo): 7.5% 7.1%
DCCT (intensive therapy):62 per 100 pt-yrs,
A1C(6.5 yr): 9.0% 7.2%
STAR 3 SAP (all ages): 13.3 per 100 pt-yrs;
A1C (1 yr): 8.3% 7.5%
STAR 3 MDI (all ages): 13.5 per 100 pt-yrs;
A1C (1 yr): 8.3% 8.1%
JDRF data from: JDRF CGM Study Group. N Engl J Med. 2008;359:1465-1476.
Bergenstal RM, et al. N Engl J Med. 2010;363:311-320.
74
CGM Concepts and Guidelines
1. Empower patients to use trending
75
Preventing Hypoglycemia with CGM:
Fruit juice
Breakfast Lunch Dinner
Hypoglycemia avoided
76
CGM Concepts and Guidelines
1. Empower patients to use trending2. Look for patterns in foods commonly eaten
77
How CGM Provides Information Missed By SMBG
High Fat Meal
Delayed increase after rapid analog wears off
Insulin Bolus
Insulin Boluses
78
CGM Concepts and Guidelines
1. Empower patients to use trending2. Look for patterns in foods commonly eaten3. Be patient: avoid over treatment of both highs and
lows
79
Welcome to the GlucoseRoller Coaster…
Correction dose given, no breakfast
Hypoglycemia overtreated with 3 chocolate bars
Marked hyperglycemia after over treatment of hypoglycemia, followed by stacking insulin boluses, leading to more hypoglycemia
Insulin given
80
CGM Concepts and Guidelines
1. Empower patients to use trending2. Look for patterns in foods commonly eaten3. Be patient: avoid over treatment of both highs and
lows4. Calibration is key: get a high quality fingerstick
81
How important is a clean fingerstick…
SMBG reading 182 mg/dl
SMBG 2 minutes later 48 mg/dl
82
CGM Concepts and Guidelines
1. Empower patients to use trending2. Look for patterns in foods commonly eaten3. Be patient: avoid over treatment of both highs and
lows4. Calibration is key: get a high quality fingerstick5. Alarms should mean something
The Sensor Report
Normal Bolus w/ BW; followed by low in late meal period may indicate Basalsare too high
CGM Concepts and Guidelines1. Empower patients to use trending2. Look for patterns in foods commonly eaten3. Be patient: avoid over treatment of both highs and
lows4. Calibration is key: get a high quality fingerstick5. Alarms should mean something6. Timing is everything: bolus 20 minutes ahead to lower
post prandial hyperglycemia
Ultimate Goal
A closed-loop system
Pipeline Overview: Closed Loop
SENSINGCOMMUNICATING
PUMPINGTHINKING
FuturePresent 2013-2014Past
ACTING AUTOMATING
Phase IV:Closing the Loop
•Predictive LGS algorithm
•Treat-to-Range
•Overnight closed loop
•Fully-automated delivery
Phase II:The First Big Step
•Pump & Sensor combined
•REAL-Time data integration
•Improved algorithms
•Enhanced data management
Phase III:The Next Big Step
•Semi-automated insulin dosing
•Threshold suspend if low
•Enhanced data management
•Optimized sensor performance
Phase I:Building the Foundation
•Standard pump
•Data/pump integration
•Sensor technology
•Bolus Wizard
First Commercial Step in the Artificial Pancreas
� Threshold Suspend
Example of Threshold Suspend Cycle
88
Suspend time maximum = 2 hrs
Insulin infusion stops
Basal insulin infusion will resume even if glucose is below
Thresh Suspend limit
Basal Insulin Basal Insulin2 Hour Suspend
Insulin Suspends for 2 hours / Resumes for 4 hours
Automatically suspends insulin delivery if sensor glucose reaches the user-set limit
Threshold Suspend Manual Suspend(Not represented in
above report)
Daily Detail Report
Threshold Suspend in CareLink® Professional
Threshold Suspend: Two Hour Suspension
• Patient did not respond to TS alarm
• Basal suspended for two hours, then automatically resumed
©2014 Medtronic MiniMed, Inc. and Bayer Healthcare, LLC. All rights reserved.
Threshold Suspend: Insulin Restarted
Patient: • Cleared the alarm• Tested BG • Resumed insulin delivery
immediately
©2014 Medtronic MiniMed, Inc. and Bayer Healthcare, LLC. All rights reserved.
Threshold Suspend: Insulin Restarted after One Hour
Patient:• Cleared alarm and kept the
basal rate suspended. • Confirmed low with a
fingerstick• Resumed basal delivery after
approximately one hour
©2014 Medtronic MiniMed, Inc. and Bayer Healthcare, LLC. All rights reserved.
Therapy Management Dashboard
CareLink® Sample ReportAdherence Report
Start with Overnight
Evaluate Overnight & Meal Glucose
ASPIRE In-HomeOutpatient Study to Evaluate Safety and Effectiveness of the Threshold Suspend
Feature (NCT01497938)
Primary endpoints: – Efficacy: Nocturnal hypoglycemia event mean area under the curve (AUC)– Safety: Change in A1C from baseline
19 Centers in the United StatesRonald Brazg, MD
Renton, WA
Andrew Ahmann, MDPortland, OR
David Klonoff, MDSan Mateo, CA
Timothy Bailey, MDEscondido, CA
David Liljenquist, MDIdaho Falls, ID
Robert Slover, MDSatish Garg, MD
Aurora, CO
Luis Casaubon, MDAustin, TX
Richard Bergenstal, MDMinneapolis, MN
Melissa Meredith, MDMadison, WI
Anuj Bhargava, MDDes Moines, IA
James Thrasher, MDLittle Rock, AR John Reed III, MD
Bruce Bode, MDOla Odugbesan, MD
Atlanta, GA
Frank Schwartz, MDAthens, OH
Robin Goland, MDNew York, NY
Ruth Weinstock, MDSyracuse, NY
Barry Horowitz, MDWest Palm Beach, FL
ASPIRE In-Home Study: Participants
Study conducted with Veo pump that is not FDA approved and not commercially available in the US. Study data and final report have not been submitted to FDA.Bergenstal RM, Klonoff DC, Garg SK, et al. Threshold-based insulin-pump interruption for reduction of hypoglycemia. N Engl J Med. 2013;369(3):224-232.
Screen failuresor withdrawals (94)
Withdrawals or did notmeet randomization
criteria (73)
BaselineEnrollment
(414)Run-in Phase
(2 weeks)(320)
Randomized(247)
Threshold Suspend (121)
Control (126)
Early withdrawals(5 Threshold
Suspend, 2 Control)
A1C and Nocturnal
Hypoglycemia AUC
Study Phase (3 months)
Threshold Suspend ControlAge 41.6 ± 12.8 44.8 ± 13.8
% Male 38 39.7Diabetes Duration 27.1 ± 12.5 26.7 ± 12.7
BMI, kg/m2 27.6 ± 4.7 27.1 ± 4.3
ASPIRE In-Home Study: Predictors of Nocturnal Hypoglycemia
Data taken from the run-in phase of the ASPIRE study
Study conducted with Veo pump that is not FDA approved and not commercially available in the US. Study data and final report have not been submitted to FDA.Bergenstal RM, Klonoff DC, Garg SK, et al. Threshold-based insulin-pump interruption for reduction of hypoglycemia. N Engl J Med. 2013;369(3):224-232.
Continuous Variable P value P value(adjusted for GV)
Baseline A1c <0.001 <0.001
Coefficient of Variation <0.001 N/A
Basal : Bolus Ratio 0.76 0.20
Age <0.001 0.26
Diabetes Duration <0.001 0.92
BMI 0.026 0.39
ASPIRE In-Home Study: Results
Study conducted with Veo pump that is not FDA approved and not commercially available in the US. Study data and final report have not been submitted to FDA.Bergenstal RM, Klonoff DC, Garg SK, et al. Threshold-based insulin-pump interruption for reduction of hypoglycemia. N Engl J Med. 2013;369(3):224-232.
The severity and/or duration of nocturnal hypoglycemic events was lower in the Threshold Suspend Group.
1547 980 1406 1568
37.5% reduction (p<0.001)
ASPIRE In-Home Study: Results
Hypoglycemic events were less frequent in the Threshold Suspend Group.
Study conducted with Veo pump that is not FDA approved and not commercially available in the US. Study data and final report have not been submitted to FDA.Bergenstal RM, Klonoff DC, Garg SK, et al. Threshold-based insulin-pump interruption for reduction of hypoglycemia. N Engl J Med. 2013;369(3):224-232.
30% reduction (p<0.001)
32% reduction (p<0.001)
ASPIRE In-Home Study: ResultsReduction in hypoglycemia in the Group Threshold Suspend
There were fewer SG values in hypoglycemic ranges in the Threshold Suspend Group.
Study conducted with Veo pump that is not FDA approved and not commercially available in the US. Study data and final report have not been submitted to FDA.Bergenstal RM, Klonoff DC, Garg SK, et al. Threshold-based insulin-pump interruption for reduction of hypoglycemia. N Engl J Med 2013 June 22;DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1303576.
40% reduction (p<0.001)
35% reduction (p<0.001)
ASPIRE In-Home Study: Results
∆A1C was similar in the two groups. The 95% CI of the difference in ∆A1C (-0.05, 0.15) did not include the non-inferiority limit of 0.4%.
Study conducted with Veo pump that is not FDA approved and not commercially available in the US. Study data and final report have not been submitted to FDA.Bergenstal RM, Klonoff DC, Garg SK, et al. Threshold-based insulin-pump interruption for reduction of hypoglycemia. N Engl J Med. 2013;369(3):224-232.
Phase IV:Closing the Loop
•Predictive LGS algorithm
•Treat-to-Range
•Overnight closed loop
•Fully-automated delivery
104Veo and Enlite are not FDA approved, and other products and features mentioned are under development.
TechnologyTechnology
DataData
InvestigatorsInvestigators
AlgorithmsAlgorithms
Artificial Pancreas
Closed-loop vs. Hybrid Closed-loop control
6 12 18 24 30 36 420
100
200
300
400Closed Loop (N=5)
mealssetpoint
Hybrid Closed Loop (N=5)
Glu
cose
(mg/
dl)
Mean Nocturnal Peak PP
Full Closed Loop 156 (149-163) 109 (87-131) 232 (208-256)Hybrid Closed Loop 135 (129-141) 114 (98-131) 191 (168-215)
Connectivity – Remote Monitoring
Connectivity - Future
Connectivity - Future
Conclusions
� We have a lot to learn
� The future is bright
� Technology will revolutionize diabetes care
� Continuous glucose sensing will drive CSII
� Thank you
For a Copy of These Slides
WWW.ATLANTADIABETES.COM