60-OR: A Pilot Study Evaluating an Insulin and Pramlintide Fully Closed-Loop Delivery System
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We conducted a randomized, controlled, pilot study to eliminate carbohydrate counting (CC) in adults with type 1 diabetes using an automated insulin (insulin aspart and faster aspart) and pramlintide dual-pump fully closed-loop delivery system. The interventions included 5 arms (n = 11, 8 F, A1C 7.4%) and participants underwent 14 hours of outpatient, free-living, supervised interventions of (i) faster aspart with CC, (ii) faster aspart and pramlintide at a 1u:8µg ratio without CC, and (iii) faster aspart and pramlintide (1:10) without CC (iv) insulin aspart and pramlintide (1:8) without CC, and (v) insulin aspart and pramlintide (1:10) without CC. One participant opted out of the two insulin aspart and pramlintide arms. Prior to each dual-hormone intervention, participants had a 2-4-day drug dose-escalation period. P-values are not reported as this is an underpowered pilot study. During the faster aspart and pramlintide interventions, the mean time in target range (70-180 mg/dL) was 69% (24%) and 77% (13%) with the 1:8 and 1:10 ratios, respectively. During the aspart and pramlintide interventions, the time in range was 71% (15%) and 77% (11%) with the 1:8 and 1:10 ratios, respectively. Compared to the control arm where time in range was 72% (26%), both the insulin aspart and faster aspart arms with the 1:10 ratio provided numerical improvements to time in range. The median time spent below 54mg/dL with each respective ratio was 1.3% (0, 4.5), 0.6% (0, 2.4) on the aspart arms and 0.0% in the faster aspart and control arms. The mean total insulin used throughout the interventions was 38.2 (23.5) units on the control arm, 31.8 (18.4) and 32.5 (17.5) on the faster aspart 1:8 and 1:10 respectively, and 36.6 (26.9) and 32.2 (23.5) on the insulin aspart 1:8 and 1:10 arms respectively. This pilot study suggests that our fully automated dual-hormone delivery system has the potential to alleviate carbohydrate counting without degrading time in the target range; and it will be investigated in a larger subsequent study. Disclosure M.Odabassian: None. M.Tsoukas: Speaker's Bureau; Novo Nordisk Canada Inc., Boehringer Ingelheim (Canada) Ltd., Eli Lilly and Company, Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC, AstraZeneca, Sanofi. E.Cohen: None. M.Pasqua: None. J.Rutkowski: None. A.Haidar: Consultant; Eli Lilly and Company, Other Relationship; Bigfoot Biomedical, Inc., Research Support; Adocia, Dexcom, Inc., Tandem Diabetes Care, Inc.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".