Hybrid Closed-Loop Control with Ultrarapid Lispro Compared with Standard Insulin Aspart and Faster Insulin Aspart: An In silico Study

2021 ◽  
pp. 193229682110460
Author(s):  
Sylvain Lachal ◽  
Yousra Tourki ◽  
Sylvia Franc ◽  
Erik Huneker ◽  
Guillaume Charpentier ◽  
...  

Objective: There is room for improvement in the performance of closed-loop regulation algorithms during the prandial period. This in silico study evaluated the efficiency and safety of ultrarapid lispro insulin using the Diabeloop DBLG1® algorithm. Methods: We modeled the insulin profile of URLi according to literature data and integrated it to the model used within a simulation platform built from a 60 patients’ virtual cohort. We then ran the DBLG1® algorithm in silico with various meal intakes using modeled URLi, Aspart and Faster Aspart. The primary endpoints were glucose metrics (time in 70-180 mg/dL range and time below range). Results: When insulin time constant values were tuned, time in 70-180 mg/dL range was 69.4 [61.1-75.6] (Aspart) vs 74.7 [65.5-81.5] (URLi). Glucose coefficient of variation was reduced from 34.1 [29.7-37.8] to 28.4 [25.7-34.6]. Time below 70 mg/dL and 54 mg/dL were significantly reduced with URLi, whether or not DBLG1 was specifically tuned to this insulin. Metrics with Faster Aspart were intermediate and did not significantly differ from URLi. Conclusions: This simulation study performed on a virtual T1D population suggests that the use of URLi within an unmodified closed-loop DBLG1 regulation algorithm is safe and, with DBLG1 being tuned to this specific insulin type, improved the regulation performances as compared with Aspart. This fact supports the use of such an insulin in clinical investigations.

2008 ◽  
Vol 41 (2) ◽  
pp. 4234-4239 ◽  
Author(s):  
B. Kovatchev ◽  
D.M. Raimondo ◽  
M. Breton ◽  
S. Patek ◽  
C. Cobelli

2015 ◽  
Vol 62 (10) ◽  
pp. 2369-2378 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stamatina Zavitsanou ◽  
Athanasios Mantalaris ◽  
Michael C. Georgiadis ◽  
Efstratios N. Pistikopoulos

2019 ◽  
Vol 52 (1) ◽  
pp. 1000-1005 ◽  
Author(s):  
Arthur Bertachi ◽  
Charrise M. Ramkissoon ◽  
Aleix Beneyto ◽  
Josep Vehí

2009 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 269-282 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephen D. Patek ◽  
B. Wayne Bequette ◽  
Marc Breton ◽  
Bruce A. Buckingham ◽  
Eyal Dassau ◽  
...  

2018 ◽  
Vol 65 (10) ◽  
pp. 2231-2236 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pau Herrero ◽  
Timothy M. Rawson ◽  
Akash Philip ◽  
Luke Stephen Prockter Moore ◽  
Alison Helen Holmes ◽  
...  

2012 ◽  
Vol 220 (1) ◽  
pp. 3-9 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sandra Sülzenbrück

For the effective use of modern tools, the inherent visuo-motor transformation needs to be mastered. The successful adjustment to and learning of these transformations crucially depends on practice conditions, particularly on the type of visual feedback during practice. Here, a review about empirical research exploring the influence of continuous and terminal visual feedback during practice on the mastery of visuo-motor transformations is provided. Two studies investigating the impact of the type of visual feedback on either direction-dependent visuo-motor gains or the complex visuo-motor transformation of a virtual two-sided lever are presented in more detail. The findings of these studies indicate that the continuous availability of visual feedback supports performance when closed-loop control is possible, but impairs performance when visual input is no longer available. Different approaches to explain these performance differences due to the type of visual feedback during practice are considered. For example, these differences could reflect a process of re-optimization of motor planning in a novel environment or represent effects of the specificity of practice. Furthermore, differences in the allocation of attention during movements with terminal and continuous visual feedback could account for the observed differences.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document