Insulin Glargine in the intensive care unit: A model-based clinical trial design

Jonathan G. Willis, Liam Fisk, Normy Razak, Aaron Le Compte, Geoffrey M. Shaw, J. Geoffrey Chase

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Introduction: Current successful AGC (Accurate Glycemic Control) protocols require extra clinical effort and are impractical in less acute wards where patients are still susceptible to stress-induced hyperglycemia. Long-acting insulin Glargine has the potential to be used in a low effort controller. However, potential variability in efficacy and length of action prevent direct in-hospital use in an AGC framework for less acute wards. Method: Clinically validated virtual trials based on data from stable ICU patients from the SPRINT cohort who would be transferred to such an approach are used to develop a 24-h AGC protocol robust to different Glargine potencies (1.0×, 1.5× and 2.0× regular insulin) and initial dose sizes (dose = total insulin over prior 12, 18 and 24 h). Glycemic control in this period is provided only by varying nutritional inputs. Performance is assessed as %BG in the 4.0-8.0 mmol/L band and safety by %BG < 4.0 mmol/L. Results: The final protocol consisted of Glargine bolus size equal to insulin over the previous 18 h. Compared to SPRINT there was a 6.9-9.5% absolute decrease in mild hypoglycemia (%BG < 4.0 mmol/L) and up to a 6.2% increase in %BG between 4.0 and 8.0 mmol/L. When the efficacy is known (1.5× assumed) there were reductions of: 27% BG measurements, 59% insulin boluses, 67% nutrition changes, and 6.3% absolute in mild hypoglycemia. Conclusion: Based on current understanding of Glargine behaviour, a robust protocol for a 24-48 clinical trial has been designed to safely investigate possible differences in efficacy and kinetics of Glargine in a critically ill population. This protocol is a first step towards developing a Glargine-based protocol for less acute wards. Ensuring robustness to variability in Glargine efficacy directly affects the performance and safety that can be obtained.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)120-129
Number of pages10
JournalBiomedical Signal Processing and Control
Volume8
Issue number2
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 01 Mar 2013

Fingerprint

Intensive care units
Insulin
Intensive Care Units
Clinical Trials
Hypoglycemia
Long-Acting Insulin
Nutrition
Safety
Insulin Glargine
Critical Illness
Hyperglycemia
Controllers
Kinetics
Population

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Signal Processing
  • Health Informatics

Cite this

Willis, Jonathan G. ; Fisk, Liam ; Razak, Normy ; Le Compte, Aaron ; Shaw, Geoffrey M. ; Chase, J. Geoffrey. / Insulin Glargine in the intensive care unit : A model-based clinical trial design. In: Biomedical Signal Processing and Control. 2013 ; Vol. 8, No. 2. pp. 120-129.
@article{68b01d645ceb458d9f6c7db710a4f9ce,
title = "Insulin Glargine in the intensive care unit: A model-based clinical trial design",
abstract = "Introduction: Current successful AGC (Accurate Glycemic Control) protocols require extra clinical effort and are impractical in less acute wards where patients are still susceptible to stress-induced hyperglycemia. Long-acting insulin Glargine has the potential to be used in a low effort controller. However, potential variability in efficacy and length of action prevent direct in-hospital use in an AGC framework for less acute wards. Method: Clinically validated virtual trials based on data from stable ICU patients from the SPRINT cohort who would be transferred to such an approach are used to develop a 24-h AGC protocol robust to different Glargine potencies (1.0×, 1.5× and 2.0× regular insulin) and initial dose sizes (dose = total insulin over prior 12, 18 and 24 h). Glycemic control in this period is provided only by varying nutritional inputs. Performance is assessed as {\%}BG in the 4.0-8.0 mmol/L band and safety by {\%}BG < 4.0 mmol/L. Results: The final protocol consisted of Glargine bolus size equal to insulin over the previous 18 h. Compared to SPRINT there was a 6.9-9.5{\%} absolute decrease in mild hypoglycemia ({\%}BG < 4.0 mmol/L) and up to a 6.2{\%} increase in {\%}BG between 4.0 and 8.0 mmol/L. When the efficacy is known (1.5× assumed) there were reductions of: 27{\%} BG measurements, 59{\%} insulin boluses, 67{\%} nutrition changes, and 6.3{\%} absolute in mild hypoglycemia. Conclusion: Based on current understanding of Glargine behaviour, a robust protocol for a 24-48 clinical trial has been designed to safely investigate possible differences in efficacy and kinetics of Glargine in a critically ill population. This protocol is a first step towards developing a Glargine-based protocol for less acute wards. Ensuring robustness to variability in Glargine efficacy directly affects the performance and safety that can be obtained.",
author = "Willis, {Jonathan G.} and Liam Fisk and Normy Razak and {Le Compte}, Aaron and Shaw, {Geoffrey M.} and Chase, {J. Geoffrey}",
year = "2013",
month = "3",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.bspc.2012.09.004",
language = "English",
volume = "8",
pages = "120--129",
journal = "Biomedical Signal Processing and Control",
issn = "1746-8094",
publisher = "Elsevier BV",
number = "2",

}

Insulin Glargine in the intensive care unit : A model-based clinical trial design. / Willis, Jonathan G.; Fisk, Liam; Razak, Normy; Le Compte, Aaron; Shaw, Geoffrey M.; Chase, J. Geoffrey.

In: Biomedical Signal Processing and Control, Vol. 8, No. 2, 01.03.2013, p. 120-129.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Insulin Glargine in the intensive care unit

T2 - A model-based clinical trial design

AU - Willis, Jonathan G.

AU - Fisk, Liam

AU - Razak, Normy

AU - Le Compte, Aaron

AU - Shaw, Geoffrey M.

AU - Chase, J. Geoffrey

PY - 2013/3/1

Y1 - 2013/3/1

N2 - Introduction: Current successful AGC (Accurate Glycemic Control) protocols require extra clinical effort and are impractical in less acute wards where patients are still susceptible to stress-induced hyperglycemia. Long-acting insulin Glargine has the potential to be used in a low effort controller. However, potential variability in efficacy and length of action prevent direct in-hospital use in an AGC framework for less acute wards. Method: Clinically validated virtual trials based on data from stable ICU patients from the SPRINT cohort who would be transferred to such an approach are used to develop a 24-h AGC protocol robust to different Glargine potencies (1.0×, 1.5× and 2.0× regular insulin) and initial dose sizes (dose = total insulin over prior 12, 18 and 24 h). Glycemic control in this period is provided only by varying nutritional inputs. Performance is assessed as %BG in the 4.0-8.0 mmol/L band and safety by %BG < 4.0 mmol/L. Results: The final protocol consisted of Glargine bolus size equal to insulin over the previous 18 h. Compared to SPRINT there was a 6.9-9.5% absolute decrease in mild hypoglycemia (%BG < 4.0 mmol/L) and up to a 6.2% increase in %BG between 4.0 and 8.0 mmol/L. When the efficacy is known (1.5× assumed) there were reductions of: 27% BG measurements, 59% insulin boluses, 67% nutrition changes, and 6.3% absolute in mild hypoglycemia. Conclusion: Based on current understanding of Glargine behaviour, a robust protocol for a 24-48 clinical trial has been designed to safely investigate possible differences in efficacy and kinetics of Glargine in a critically ill population. This protocol is a first step towards developing a Glargine-based protocol for less acute wards. Ensuring robustness to variability in Glargine efficacy directly affects the performance and safety that can be obtained.

AB - Introduction: Current successful AGC (Accurate Glycemic Control) protocols require extra clinical effort and are impractical in less acute wards where patients are still susceptible to stress-induced hyperglycemia. Long-acting insulin Glargine has the potential to be used in a low effort controller. However, potential variability in efficacy and length of action prevent direct in-hospital use in an AGC framework for less acute wards. Method: Clinically validated virtual trials based on data from stable ICU patients from the SPRINT cohort who would be transferred to such an approach are used to develop a 24-h AGC protocol robust to different Glargine potencies (1.0×, 1.5× and 2.0× regular insulin) and initial dose sizes (dose = total insulin over prior 12, 18 and 24 h). Glycemic control in this period is provided only by varying nutritional inputs. Performance is assessed as %BG in the 4.0-8.0 mmol/L band and safety by %BG < 4.0 mmol/L. Results: The final protocol consisted of Glargine bolus size equal to insulin over the previous 18 h. Compared to SPRINT there was a 6.9-9.5% absolute decrease in mild hypoglycemia (%BG < 4.0 mmol/L) and up to a 6.2% increase in %BG between 4.0 and 8.0 mmol/L. When the efficacy is known (1.5× assumed) there were reductions of: 27% BG measurements, 59% insulin boluses, 67% nutrition changes, and 6.3% absolute in mild hypoglycemia. Conclusion: Based on current understanding of Glargine behaviour, a robust protocol for a 24-48 clinical trial has been designed to safely investigate possible differences in efficacy and kinetics of Glargine in a critically ill population. This protocol is a first step towards developing a Glargine-based protocol for less acute wards. Ensuring robustness to variability in Glargine efficacy directly affects the performance and safety that can be obtained.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84874516075&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84874516075&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.bspc.2012.09.004

DO - 10.1016/j.bspc.2012.09.004

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:84874516075

VL - 8

SP - 120

EP - 129

JO - Biomedical Signal Processing and Control

JF - Biomedical Signal Processing and Control

SN - 1746-8094

IS - 2

ER -