Application of MPC incorporating Stochastic Programming to Type 1 diabetes treatment

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Graham C. Goodwin ◽  
Adrian M. Medioli ◽  
Hieu V. Phan ◽  
Bruce R. King ◽  
Aaron D. Matthews
Keyword(s):  
Type 1 Diabetes ◽  
Stochastic Programming ◽  
Diabetes Treatment

scholarly journals Type 1 diabetes: treatment without tears?

Diabetologia ◽  
2005 ◽  
Vol 48 (10) ◽  
pp. 1963-1964 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. A. Amiel
Keyword(s):  
Type 1 Diabetes ◽  
Diabetes Treatment

scholarly journals Effect of 6 months flash glucose monitoring in youth with type 1 diabetes and high-risk glycemic control – a randomized controlled trial

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sara E Boucher ◽  
Andrew R Gray ◽  
Esko J Wiltshire ◽  
Martin I de Bock ◽  
Barbara C Galland ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Type 1 Diabetes ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Glycemic Control ◽  
Treatment Satisfaction ◽  
Glucose Monitoring ◽  
Diabetes Treatment ◽  
Glucose Testing ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Freestyle Libre

OBJECTIVE <p>To investigate whether intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitoring (isCGM) significantly improves glycemic control compared with capillary self-monitored blood glucose (SMBG) in youth with type 1 diabetes and high-risk glycemic control.</p> <p>RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS</p> <p>This multi-center 6-month randomized, controlled, parallel-arm trial included 64 participants aged 13 to 20 years with established Type 1 diabetes and glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) ≥9% (≥75mmol/mol). Participants were allocated to 6-month intervention (isCGM, FreeStyle Libre, Abbott; n = 33) or control (SMBG; n = 31) using minimization. The primary outcome was the difference in change in HbA1c from baseline to 6 months. </p> <p>RESULTS</p> <p>There was no evidence of a difference between groups for changes in HbA1c at 6 months (adjusted mean 0.2% greater improvement for isCGM, 95% CI -0.9% to 0.5% [-2.1 mmol/mol, 95% CI -9.6 to 5.4], p = 0.576). However, glucose monitoring frequency was 2.83 (95% CI 1.72 to 4.65, p < 0.001) times higher in the isCGM group compared to that in the SMBG group at 6 months. The change in the Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire mean item score also favored isCGM at 6 months (p=0.048), with no significant differences between groups for fear of hypoglycemia and quality of life (both general and diabetes-specific) all p>0.1.</p> <p>CONCLUSIONS</p> <p>For youth with high-risk glycemic control, isCGM led to improvements in glucose testing frequency and diabetes treatment satisfaction. However, these did not translate to greater improvement in glycemic control over usual care with SMBG at 6 months. </p>

scholarly journals Effect of 6 months flash glucose monitoring in youth with type 1 diabetes and high-risk glycemic control – a randomized controlled trial

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sara E Boucher ◽  
Andrew R Gray ◽  
Esko J Wiltshire ◽  
Martin I de Bock ◽  
Barbara C Galland ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Type 1 Diabetes ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Glycemic Control ◽  
Treatment Satisfaction ◽  
Glucose Monitoring ◽  
Diabetes Treatment ◽  
Glucose Testing ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Freestyle Libre

OBJECTIVE <p>To investigate whether intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitoring (isCGM) significantly improves glycemic control compared with capillary self-monitored blood glucose (SMBG) in youth with type 1 diabetes and high-risk glycemic control.</p> <p>RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS</p> <p>This multi-center 6-month randomized, controlled, parallel-arm trial included 64 participants aged 13 to 20 years with established Type 1 diabetes and glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) ≥9% (≥75mmol/mol). Participants were allocated to 6-month intervention (isCGM, FreeStyle Libre, Abbott; n = 33) or control (SMBG; n = 31) using minimization. The primary outcome was the difference in change in HbA1c from baseline to 6 months. </p> <p>RESULTS</p> <p>There was no evidence of a difference between groups for changes in HbA1c at 6 months (adjusted mean 0.2% greater improvement for isCGM, 95% CI -0.9% to 0.5% [-2.1 mmol/mol, 95% CI -9.6 to 5.4], p = 0.576). However, glucose monitoring frequency was 2.83 (95% CI 1.72 to 4.65, p < 0.001) times higher in the isCGM group compared to that in the SMBG group at 6 months. The change in the Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire mean item score also favored isCGM at 6 months (p=0.048), with no significant differences between groups for fear of hypoglycemia and quality of life (both general and diabetes-specific) all p>0.1.</p> <p>CONCLUSIONS</p> <p>For youth with high-risk glycemic control, isCGM led to improvements in glucose testing frequency and diabetes treatment satisfaction. However, these did not translate to greater improvement in glycemic control over usual care with SMBG at 6 months. </p>

Engineering β-cell islets or islet-like structures for type 1 diabetes treatment

2015 ◽  
Vol 85 (1) ◽  
pp. 82-84 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xiaoyan Liu ◽  
Xiaowei Li ◽  
Ning Zhang ◽  
Xuejun Wen
Keyword(s):  
Type 1 Diabetes ◽  
Diabetes Treatment ◽  
Β Cell
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document