Outpatient Randomized Crossover Comparison of Zone Model Predictive Control Automated Insulin Delivery with Weekly Data Driven Adaptation Versus Sensor-Augmented Pump: Results from the International Diabetes Closed-Loop Trial 4
Jordan E. Pinsker, Eyal Dassau, Sunil Deshpande, Dan Raghinaru, Bruce A. Buckingham, Yogish C. Kudva, Lori M. Laffel, Carol J. Levy, Mei Mei Church, Hannah Desrochers, Laya Ekhlaspour, Ravinder Jeet Kaur, Camilla Levister, Dawei Shi, John W. Lum, Craig Kollman, Francis J. Doyle, Elvira Isganaitis, Louise Ambler-Osborn, Emily Freiner, Grenye O’Malley, Danielle Brooks, Selassie Ogyaadu, Mitchell Plesser, Vinaya Simha, Donna Desjardins, Shelly McCrady-Spitzer, Lisa Nolander, Liana Hsu, Roy W. Beck, Samantha Passman, Tiffany Campos, Carlos Murphy, Nandan Patibandla, Sarah Borgman, Guillermo Arreaza-Rubín, Thomas L. Eggerman, Neal Green, Steven H. Belle, Jessica R. Castle, Jennifer Green, Laurent Legault, Steven M. Willi, Carol Wysham, Thomas L. Eggerman
Abstract
Background: Automated insulin delivery (AID) systems have proven effective in increasing time-in-range during both clinical trials and real-world use. Further improvements in outcomes for single-hormone (insulin only) AID may be limited by suboptimal insulin delivery settings. Methods: Adults (≥18 years of age) with type 1 diabetes were randomized to either sensor-augmented pump (SAP) (inclusive of predictive low-glucose suspend) or adaptive zone model predictive control AID for 13 weeks, then crossed over to the other arm. Each week, the AID insulin delivery settings were sequentially and automatically updated by an adaptation system running on the study phone. Primary outcome was sensor glucose time-in-range 70–180 mg/dL, with noninferiority in percent time below 54 mg/dL as a hierarchical outcome. Results: Thirty-five participants completed the trial (mean age 39 ± 16 years, HbA1c at enrollment 6.9% ± 1.0%). Mean time-in-range 70–180 mg/dL was 66% with SAP versus 69% with AID (mean adjusted difference +2% [95% confidence interval: −1% to +6%], P = 0.22). Median time <70 mg/dL improved from 3.0% with SAP to 1.6% with AID (−1.5% [−2.4% to −0.5%], P = 0.002). The adaptation system decreased initial basal rates by a median of 4% (−8%, 16%) and increased initial carbohydrate ratios by a median of 45% (32%, 59%) after 13 weeks. Conclusions: Automated adaptation of insulin delivery settings with AID use did not significantly improve time-in-range in this very well-controlled population. Additional study and further refinement of the adaptation system are needed, especially in populations with differing degrees of baseline glycemic control, who may show larger benefits from adaptation.