Therapeutic advances in type 1 diabetes (T1DM) are currently focused on developing a closed-loop control system using a continuous glucose monitor (CGM), subcutaneous insulin delivery, and a control algorithm. Because a CGM assesses blood glucose indirectly (and therefore often inaccurately), it limits the effectiveness of the controller. In order to improve the quality of CGM data, a series of analyses are suggested. These analyses evaluate and compensate for CGM errors, assess risks associated with glucose variability, predict glucose fluctuation, and forecast hypo- and hyperglycemia. These analyses are illustrated with data collected using the MiniMed CGMS® (Medtronic, Northridge, CA) and Freestyle Navigator™ (Abbott Diabetes Care, Alameda, CA). It is important to remember that traditional statistics do not work with CGM data because consecutive CGM readings are highly interdependent.
AlbisserAMLeibelBSEwartTGDavidovacZBotzCKZinggW. An artificial endocrine pancreas. Diabetes. 1974; 23 (5): 389–96.
2.
ClemensAHChangPHMyersRW. The development of Biostator, a Glucose Controlled Insulin Infusion System (GCIIS). Horm Metab Res. 1977; Suppl 7: 23–33.
3.
SantiagoJVClemensAHClarkeWLKipnisDM. Closed-loop and open-loop devices for blood glucose control in normal and diabetic subjects. Diabetes. 1979; 28 (1): 71–84.
4.
KlonoffDC. The artificial pancreas: how sweet engineering will solve bitter problems. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2007; 1 (1): 72–81.
5.
FeldmanBBrazgRSchwartzSWeinsteinR. A continuous glucose sensor based on wired enzyme technology—results from a 3-day trial in patients with type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2003; 5 (5): 769–79.
6.
GrossTMBodeBEinhornDKayneDMReedJHWhiteNHMastrototaroJJ. Performance evaluation of the MiniMed continous glucose monitoring system during patient home use. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2000; 2 (1): 49–56.
7.
KlonoffDC. Continuous glucose monitoring: roadmap for 21st century diabetes therapy. Diabetes Care. 2005 May; 28 (5): 1231–9.
8.
HovorkaRChassinLJWilinskaMECanonicoVAkwiJAFedericiMOMassi-BenedettiMHutzliIZauggCKaufmannHBothMVeringTSchallerHCSchauppLBodenlenzMPieberTR. Closing the loop: the adicol experience. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2004; 6 (3): 307–18.
SteilGMRebrinKDarwinCHaririFSaadMF. Feasibility of automating insulin delivery for the treatment of type 1 diabetes. Diabetes. 2006; 55 (12): 3344–50.
12.
KovatchevBPGonder-FrederickLACoxDJClarkeWL. Evaluating the accuracy of continuous glucose monitoring sensors: continuous glucose error-grid analysis illustrated by Therasense Freestyle Navigator data. Diabetes Care. 2004; 27 (8): 1922–8.
13.
Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. Performance metrics for continuous interstitial glucose monitoring; proposed guideline. CLSI document POCT4-P. In press 2007.
14.
RenardEShahRMillerMKoloppMCostalatGBringerJ, Sustained safety and accuracy of central IV glucose sensors connected to implanted insulin pumps and short-term closed-loop trials in diabetic patients. Diabetologia. 2003; 46: A47.
15.
RenardEPanteleonAELeongPHanJKoloppMMillerM. Efficacy of closed-loop control of blood glucose based on an implantable i.v. sensor and intraperitoneal pump. Diabetes. 2004; 53: A114.
16.
BoyneMSSilverDMKaplanJSaudekCD. Timing of changes in interstitial and venous blood glucose measured with a continuous subcutaneous glucose sensor. Diabetes. 2003; 52 (11): 2790–4.
17.
KulcuETamadaJAReachGPottsROLeshoMJ. Physiological differences between interstitial glucose and blood glucose measured in human subjects. Diabetes Care. 2003; 26 (8): 2405–9.
18.
HovorkaRShojaee-MoradieFCarrollPVChassinLJGowrieIJJacksonNCTudorRSUmplebyAMJonesRH. Partitioning glucose distribution/transport, disposal, and endogenous production during IVGTT. Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab. 2002; 282 (5): E992–1007.
19.
PlankJWutteABrunnerGSiebenhoferASemlitschBSommerRHirschbergerSPieberTR. A direct comparison of insulin aspart and insulin lispro in patients with type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2002; 25 (11): 2053–7.
20.
KingCRClarkeWLAndersonSMBretonMDKovatchevBP. Modeling of calibration effectiveness and blood-to-interstitial glucose dynamics as potential confounders of the accuracy of continuous glucose sensors during hyperinsulinemic clamp. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2007; 1 (3): 317–22.
21.
SchlichtkrullJMunckOJersildM. The M-value, an index of blood glucose control in diabetics. Acta Med Scand. 1965; 177: 95–102.
22.
ServiceFJMolnarGDRosevearJWAckermanEGatewoodLCTaylorWF. Mean amplitude of glycemic excursions, a measure of diabetic instability. Diabetes. 1970; 19 (9): 644–55.
23.
RyanEAShandroTGreenKPatyBWSeniorPABigamDShapiroAMVantyghemMC. Assessment of the severity of hypoglycemia and glycemic lability in type 1 diabetic subjects undergoing islet transplantation. Diabetes. 2004; 53 (4): 955–62.
24.
KovatchevBPCoxDJGonder-FrederickLClarkeWL. Methods for quantifying self-monitoring blood glucose profiles exemplified by an examination of blood glucose patterns in patients with type 1 and type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2002; 4 (3): 295–303.
25.
KovatchevBPClarkeWLBretonMBraymanKMcCallA. Quantifying temporal glucose variability in diabetes via continuous glucose monitoring: mathematical methods and clinical application. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2005; 7 (6): 849–62.
26.
KovatchevBPCoxDJGonder-FrederickLAClarkeW. Symmetrization of the blood glucose measurement scale and its applications. Diabetes Care. 1997; 20 (11): 1655–8.
27.
KovatchevBPStraumeMCoxDJFarhyLS. Risk analysis of blood glucose data: a quantitative approach to optimizing the control of insulin dependent diabetes. J Theor Med. 2001; 3: 1–10.
28.
ZanderigoFSparacinoGKovatchevBPCobelliC. Glucose prediction algorithms from continuous monitoring data: assessment of accuracy via continuous glucose-error grid analysis. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2007; 1 (5): 645–51.
