Jenny L Diaz C, Patricio Colmegna, Elliot Pryor, Marc D Breton
{"title":"A Performance-Based Adaptation Index for Automated Insulin Delivery Systems.","authors":"Jenny L Diaz C, Patricio Colmegna, Elliot Pryor, Marc D Breton","doi":"10.1177/19322968251315499","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Automated insulin delivery (AID) algorithms can benefit from tuning of their aggressiveness to meet individual needs, as insulin requirements vary among and within users. We introduce the Performance-Based Adaptation Index (PAI), a tool designed to enable automatic adjustment of an AID system aggressiveness based on continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) metrics.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>PAI integrates two CGM-based metrics-one for hypoglycemia and another for hyperglycemia exposure-over a previous time window into a single index (<math><mrow><msub><mi>α</mi><mi>θ</mi></msub></mrow></math>). We propose two methods to compute <math><mrow><msub><mi>α</mi><mi>θ</mi></msub></mrow></math>: one based on time in range (TIR, 70-180 mg/dL), and the other on glycemic risk indices. Using <math><mrow><msub><mi>α</mi><mi>θ</mi></msub></mrow></math>, we developed a multiplicative strategy to adjust the AID system's aggressiveness, accounting for situations where <math><mrow><msub><mi>α</mi><mi>θ</mi></msub></mrow></math> cannot be reliably calculated. The feasibility of this method was assessed in-silico using the UVA/Padova Type 1 Diabetes Simulator and our full closed-loop algorithm (UVA-model predictive control (MPC)) across five scenarios: optimal tuning (baseline), conservative and aggressive tunings, and temporary and permanent changes in insulin needs. Glycemic outcomes were evaluated from the simulated glucose traces.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Negligible performance variations were observed in the baseline scenario. For the conservative scenario, adjusting <math><mrow><msub><mi>α</mi><mi>θ</mi></msub></mrow></math> improved TIR (35.1% vs 71.8%) and increased total daily insulin (32.1 U vs 41.2 U). Conversely, for the aggressive scenario, it reduced hypoglycemia exposure (TBR: 2.6% vs 1.4%) and overall insulin usage (45.6 U vs 43.0 U).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In-silico results demonstrated the safety and efficacy of using PAI to automatically tune the UVA-MPC controller, achieving TIR values above 70% under fully closed-loop conditions and across various physiological states. Clinical validation of these results is warranted.</p>","PeriodicalId":15475,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Diabetes Science and Technology","volume":" ","pages":"19322968251315499"},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11803600/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Diabetes Science and Technology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/19322968251315499","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Automated insulin delivery (AID) algorithms can benefit from tuning of their aggressiveness to meet individual needs, as insulin requirements vary among and within users. We introduce the Performance-Based Adaptation Index (PAI), a tool designed to enable automatic adjustment of an AID system aggressiveness based on continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) metrics.
Methods: PAI integrates two CGM-based metrics-one for hypoglycemia and another for hyperglycemia exposure-over a previous time window into a single index (). We propose two methods to compute : one based on time in range (TIR, 70-180 mg/dL), and the other on glycemic risk indices. Using , we developed a multiplicative strategy to adjust the AID system's aggressiveness, accounting for situations where cannot be reliably calculated. The feasibility of this method was assessed in-silico using the UVA/Padova Type 1 Diabetes Simulator and our full closed-loop algorithm (UVA-model predictive control (MPC)) across five scenarios: optimal tuning (baseline), conservative and aggressive tunings, and temporary and permanent changes in insulin needs. Glycemic outcomes were evaluated from the simulated glucose traces.
Results: Negligible performance variations were observed in the baseline scenario. For the conservative scenario, adjusting improved TIR (35.1% vs 71.8%) and increased total daily insulin (32.1 U vs 41.2 U). Conversely, for the aggressive scenario, it reduced hypoglycemia exposure (TBR: 2.6% vs 1.4%) and overall insulin usage (45.6 U vs 43.0 U).
Conclusion: In-silico results demonstrated the safety and efficacy of using PAI to automatically tune the UVA-MPC controller, achieving TIR values above 70% under fully closed-loop conditions and across various physiological states. Clinical validation of these results is warranted.
背景:自动胰岛素输送(AID)算法可以通过调整其侵略性来满足个人需求,因为用户之间和内部的胰岛素需求是不同的。我们介绍了基于性能的适应指数(PAI),这是一种基于连续血糖监测(CGM)指标的自动调节AID系统侵略性的工具。方法:PAI将两个基于cgm的指标——一个用于低血糖,另一个用于高血糖暴露——在前一个时间窗口内整合成一个单一指数(αθ)。我们提出了两种计算αθ的方法:一种基于时间范围(TIR, 70-180 mg/dL),另一种基于血糖危险指数。利用αθ,我们开发了一种乘法策略来调整AID系统的攻击性,考虑到αθ无法可靠计算的情况。使用UVA/Padova 1型糖尿病模拟器和我们的全闭环算法(UVA模型预测控制(MPC))在五种情况下对该方法的可行性进行了计算机评估:最佳调整(基线),保守和积极调整,以及胰岛素需求的临时和永久变化。根据模拟的葡萄糖痕迹评估血糖结果。结果:在基线情况下观察到的性能变化可以忽略不计。在保守组中,调节αθ可提高TIR (35.1% vs 71.8%),增加每日总胰岛素(32.1 U vs 41.2 U),而在积极组中,则可降低低血糖暴露(TBR: 2.6% vs 1.4%)和总体胰岛素使用量(45.6 U vs 43.0 U)。结论:实验结果表明,使用PAI自动调节UVA-MPC控制器的安全性和有效性,在全闭环条件下和各种生理状态下,TIR值均可达到70%以上。这些结果的临床验证是必要的。
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Diabetes Science and Technology (JDST) is a bi-monthly, peer-reviewed scientific journal published by the Diabetes Technology Society. JDST covers scientific and clinical aspects of diabetes technology including glucose monitoring, insulin and metabolic peptide delivery, the artificial pancreas, digital health, precision medicine, social media, cybersecurity, software for modeling, physiologic monitoring, technology for managing obesity, and diagnostic tests of glycation. The journal also covers the development and use of mobile applications and wireless communication, as well as bioengineered tools such as MEMS, new biomaterials, and nanotechnology to develop new sensors. Articles in JDST cover both basic research and clinical applications of technologies being developed to help people with diabetes.