Background: A composite metric for the quality of glycemia from continuous glucose monitor (CGM) tracings could be useful for assisting with basic clinical interpretation of CGM data. Methods: We assembled a data set of 14-day CGM tracings from 225 insulin-treated adults with diabetes. Using a balanced incomplete block design, 330 clinicians who were highly experienced with CGM analysis and interpretation ranked the CGM tracings from best to worst quality of glycemia. We used principal component analysis and multiple regressions to develop a model to predict the clinician ranking based on seven standard metrics in an Ambulatory Glucose Profile: very low–glucose and low-glucose hypoglycemia; very high–glucose and high-glucose hyperglycemia; time in range; mean glucose; and coefficient of variation. Results: The analysis showed that clinician rankings depend on two components, one related to hypoglycemia that gives more weight to very low-glucose than to low-glucose and the other related to hyperglycemia that likewise gives greater weight to very high-glucose than to high-glucose. These two components should be calculated and displayed separately, but they can also be combined into a single Glycemia Risk Index (GRI) that corresponds closely to the clinician rankings of the overall quality of glycemia (r = 0.95). The GRI can be displayed graphically on a GRI Grid with the hypoglycemia component on the horizontal axis and the hyperglycemia component on the vertical axis. Diagonal lines divide the graph into five zones (quintiles) corresponding to the best (0th to 20th percentile) to worst (81st to 100th percentile) overall quality of glycemia. The GRI Grid enables users to track sequential changes within an individual over time and compare groups of individuals. Conclusion: The GRI is a single-number summary of the quality of glycemia. Its hypoglycemia and hyperglycemia components provide actionable scores and a graphical display (the GRI Grid) that can be used by clinicians and researchers to determine the glycemic effects of prescribed and investigational treatments.

The development of an artificial pancreas is placed in the context of the history of the field of feedback control systems, beginning with the water clock of ancient Greece, and including a discussion of current efforts in the control of complex systems. The first generation of artificial pancreas devices included two manipulated variables (insulin and glucose infusion) and nonlinear functions of the error (difference between desired and measured glucose concentration) to minimize hyperglycemia while avoiding hypoglycemia. Dynamic lags between insulin infusion and glucose measurement were relatively small for these intravenous-based systems. Advances in continuous glucose sensing, fast-acting insulin analogs, and a mature insulin pump market bring us close to commercial realization of a closed-loop artificial pancreas. Model predictive control is discussed in-depth as an approach that is well suited for a closed-loop artificial pancreas. A major challenge that remains is handling an unknown glucose disturbance (meal), and an approach is proposed to base a current insulin infusion action on the predicted effect of a meal on future glucose values. Better "meal models" are needed, as a limited knowledge of the effect of a meal on the future glucose values limits the performance of any control algorithm.

Algorithms for real-time use in continuous glucose monitors are reviewed, including calibration, filtering of noisy signals, glucose predictions for hypoglycemic and hyperglycemic alarms, compensation for capillary blood glucose to sensor time lags, and fault detection for sensor degradation and dropouts. A tutorial on Kalman filtering for real-time estimation, prediction, and lag compensation is presented and demonstrated via simulation examples. A limited number of fault detection methods for signal degradation and dropout have been published, making that an important area for future work.

The objective of this article is to present a comprehensive strategy for a closed-loop artificial pancreas. A meal detection and meal size estimation algorithm is developed for situations in which the subject forgets to provide a meal insulin bolus. A pharmacodynamic model of insulin action is used to provide insulin-on-board constraints to explicitly include the future effect of past and currently delivered insulin boluses. In addition, a supervisory pump shut-off feature is presented to avoid hypoglycemia. All of these components are used in conjunction with a feedback control algorithm using model predictive control (MPC). A model for MPC is developed based on a study of 20 subjects and is tested in a hypothetical clinical trial of 100 adolescent and 100 adult subjects using a Food and Drug Administration-approved diabetic subject simulator. In addition, a performance comparison of previously and newly proposed meal size estimation algorithms using 200 in silico subjects is presented. Using the new meal size estimation algorithm, the integrated artificial pancreas system yielded a daily mean glucose of 138 and 132 mg/dl for adolescents and adults, respectively, which is a substantial improvement over the MPC-only case, which yielded 159 and 145 mg/dl.

The relative merits of model predictive control (MPC) and proportional-integral-derivative (PID) control are discussed, with the end goal of a closed-loop artificial pancreas (AP). It is stressed that neither MPC nor PID are single algorithms, but rather are approaches or strategies that may be implemented very differently by different engineers. The primary advantages to MPC are that (i) constraints on the insulin delivery rate (and/or insulin on board) can be explicitly included in the control calculation; (ii) it is a general framework that makes it relatively easy to include the effect of meals, exercise, and other events that are a function of the time of day; and (iii) it is flexible enough to include many different objectives, from set-point tracking (target) to zone (control to range). In the end, however, it is recognized that the control algorithm, while important, represents only a portion of the effort required to develop a closed-loop AP. Thus, any number of algorithms/approaches can be successful—the engineers involved in the design must have experience with the particular technique, including the important experience of implementing the algorithm in human studies and not simply through simulation studies.