submit to the journals

Research Update—Closed Loop/Artificial Pancreas

US Endocrinology 2016;12(1):31–6 DOI:


A cure for diabetes, either biological or mechanical, has been the dream of many for a very long time. Technological advances in closed loop/ artificial pancreas (CL/AP) therapy, accompanied by an improved understanding of how the human body and the CL/AP system works, are bringing the potential for a mechanical cure for type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) closer to reality. This article discusses the components of the CL/AP system, describes its limitations, and reviews recent CL/AP research studies on multihormonal CL/AP treatments, exercise, dining out, and using the CL/AP in the outpatient setting. Future directions and grassroots efforts towards an automated insulin delivery system are also addressed. Study results are encouraging, and suggest that initial CL/AP systems may be available for the general public with T1DM in the next few years, despite current limitations.
Keywords: Closed loop, artificial pancreas, type 1 diabetes, research update, glucagon, pramlintide, exenatide, multihormonal
Disclosure: Jeniece Trast Ilkowitz has been part of a research team working with the Medtronic MiniMed ePID closed loop system on studies that were funded by the National Institutes of Health. Neesha Ramchandani is a contracted insulin pump trainer for Tandem Diabetes, is a certified pump trainer for all insulin pumps available in the US (Animas, Medtronic MiniMed, OmniPod, Roche, Tandem), and has been part of a research team working with the Medtronic MiniMed ePID closed loop system on studies that were funded by the National Institutes of Health. The information contained in this manuscript was presented as an oral presentation at the Pediatric Endocrine Nursing Society in Savannah, GA, US, on May 6, 2015.
Compliance with Ethics: This article involves a review of the literature and did not involve any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.
Open Access: This article is published under the Creative Commons Attribution Noncommercial License, which permits any noncommercial use, distribution, adaptation, and reproduction provided the original author(s) and source are given appropriate credit.
Received: August 24, 2015 Accepted: March 29, 2016
Correspondence: Neesha Ramchandani, New York University College of Nursing, 140 West End Ave., 10F, New York, NY 10023, US. E:
Support: Neesha Ramchandani received a small honorarium for her presentation of this topic at the Pediatric Endocrine Nursing Society 2015 meeting. No funding was received in the publication of this article.

Creation of a working closed loop/artificial pancreas (CL/AP) system is one of the holy grails of type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM). In essence, this would be a mechanical cure for a potentially devastating chronic disease. While the CL/AP still has its limitations, the results of recent research studies are encouraging. The CL/AP system also has the attention and support of organizations such as the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation (JDRF), which is a large charitable organization dedicated to funding T1DM research.1 The JDRF has created a six-step pathway which ends in a fully automated CL/AP system, and the FDA has created a helpful guide with recommendations and instructions for those interested in developing a CL/AP. The purpose of this paper is to discuss the components of the CL/AP system, describe its limitations, and review recent CL/AP research studies and future directions.

Components of the closed loop/artificial pancreas system
The CL/AP system is composed of an insulin pump, a continuous glucose monitor (CGM) plus calibration fingerstick blood glucose (BG) measurements to assist with accuracy,2 and a control algorithm (Figure 1). Initially, the control algorithm was housed on a laptop computer. Now, it can be either on a laptop computer or on a CL/AP-dedicated smartphone. The CGM, once calibrated with a fingerstick BG, checks the glucose in the interstitial fluid and sends the value to the control algorithm, which decides if insulin is needed or not. If insulin is needed, it instructs the insulin pump to deliver a bolus. All components of the system are in constant communication with each other to try to maintain glucose levels in a target range of 70–180 mg/dl (3.9–10 mmol/l).

Several different control algorithms are being used in CL/AP studies. The most common ones are the Proportional-Integral-Derivative (PID, ePID) algorithm, the Model Predictive Control (MPC)/Multiple Model Predictive Control (MMPC)/Multiple Model Probabilistic Predictive Control (MMPPC) algorithms, and the Fuzzy Logic (FL) algorithm.2,3 Each of these commonly used algorithms are described in more detail below. A comparison of the algorithms performed by Bequette and colleagues (2013) found the ePID to have the highest postprandial glucose values, followed by the MPC and MMPPC algorithms, and then open-loop basal/bolus insulin administration. The significance of the differences between algorithms was not discussed.4

1. Federal Drug Administration, Device Regulation and Guidance, 2016. Available at: DeviceRegulationandGuidance/GuidanceDocuments/ UCM259305.pdf (accessed: February 1, 2016).
2. Doyle FJ, Huyett LM, Lee JB, et al., Closed-loop artificial pancreas systems: engineering the algorithms, Diabetes Care, 2014;37:1191–7.
3. Shah VN, Shoskes A, Tawfik B, Garg SK, Closed-loop system in the management of diabetes: past, present, and future, Diabetes Technol Ther, 2014;16:477–90.
4. Bequette BW, Algorithms for a closed-loop artificial pancreas: the case for model predictive control, J Diabetes Sci Technol, 2013; 7:1632–43.
5. Mauseth R, Hirsch IB, Bollyky JB, et al., Use of a ‘fuzzy logic’ controller in a closed-loop artificial pancreas, Diabetes Technol Ther, 2013;15:628–33.
6. Haakens K, Hanssen KF, Dahl-Jørgensen K, et al., Early morning glycaemia and the metabolic consequences of delaying breakfast/morning insulin. A comparison of continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion and multiple injection therapy with human isophane or human ultralente insulin at bedtime in insulin-dependent diabetics, Scand J Clin Lab Invest, 1989;49:653–9.
7. Olsson PO, Arnqvist H, Von Schenck H, Ottosson AM, Overnight metabolic control with bedtime injection of intermediate-acting insulin or continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion, Diabetes Care, 1987;10:702–6.
8. El-Khatib FH, Russell SJ, Nathan DM, A bihormonal closedloop artificial pancreas for type 1 diabetes, Sci Transl Med, 2010;2:27ra27.
9. Weinzimer SA, Closed-loop artificial pancreas: current studies and promise for the future, Curr Opin Endocrinol Diabetes Obes, 2012;19:88–92.
10. Basu A, Dube S, Veettil S, et al., Time lag of glucose from intravascular to interstitial compartment in type 1 diabetes, J Diabetes Sci Technol, 2015;9:63–8.
11. Mamkin I, Ten S, Bhandari S, Ramchandani N, Real-time continuous glucose monitoring in the clinical setting: the good, the bad, and the practical, J Diabetes Sci Technol, 2008;2:882–9.
12. Nakamura K, Balo A, The Accuracy and Efficacy of the Dexcom G4 Platinum Continuous Glucose Monitoring System, J Diabetes Sci Technol, 2015;9:1021–6.
13. Russell SJ, El-Khatib FH, Sinha M, et al., Outpatient glycemic control with a bionic pancreas in type 1 diabetes, N Engl J Med, 2014;371:313–25.
14. Renukuntla VS, Ramchandani N, Trast J, Cantwell M, and Heptulla RA, Role of glucagon-like peptide-1 analogue versus amylin as an adjuvant therapy in type 1 diabetes in a closed loop setting with ePID algorithm, J Diabetes Sci Technol, 8:1011–7.
15. Pohl R, Li M, Krasner A, De Souza E, Development of stable liquid glucagon formulations for use in artificial pancreas, J Diabetes Sci Technol, 2015;9:8–16.
16. Weinzimer SA, Sherr JL, Cengiz E, et al., Effect of pramlintide on prandial glycemic excursions during closed-loop control in adolescents and young adults with type 1 diabetes, Diabetes Care, 2012;35:1994–9.
17. Sherr JL, Cengiz E, Palerm CC, et al., Reduced hypoglycemia and increased time in target using closed-loop insulin delivery during nights with or without antecedent afternoon exercise in type 1 diabetes, Diabetes Care, 2013;36: 2909–14.
18. Van Bon AC, Jonker LD, Koebrugge R, et al., Feasibility of a bihormonal closed-loop system to control postexercise and postprandial glucose excursions, J Diabetes Sci Technol, 2012;6:1114–22.
19. Breton M, Farret A, Bruttomesso D, et al., Fully integrated artificial pancreas in type 1 diabetes: modular closed-loop glucose control maintains near normoglycemia, Diabetes, 2012;61:2230–7.
20. Hovorka R, Kumareswaran K, Harris J, et al., Overnight closed loop insulin delivery (artificial pancreas) in adults with type 1 diabetes: crossover randomised controlled studies, BMJ, 2011;342:d1855.
21. Brown, AW, Medtronic to Use Glucositter Artificial Pancrease Software in Future Insulin Pumps - A Big Deal!, diatribe, 2015. Available at: pancreas-software-future-insulin-pumps-big-deal (accessed August 24, 2015).
22. Del Favero S, Place J, Kropff J, Renard, et al., Multicenter outpatient dinner/overnight reduction of hypoglycemia and increased time of glucose in target with a wearable artificial pancreas using modular model predictive control in adults with type 1 diabetes, Diabetes Obes Metab, 2015;17:468–76.
23. Kovatchev BP, Renard E, Cobelli C, et al., Safety of outpatient closed-loop control: first randomized crossover trials of a wearable artificial pancreas, Diabetes Care, 2014;37:1789–96.
24. Sparling K, Go Bionic: Ed Damiano, Clara Barton Camp, and How the Bionic Pancreas ‘Really Works.,’ Six Until Me, 2014.
25. Greenan K, Campers Participate in the Bionic Pancreas Study, The Barton Spirit, The Barton Center for Diabetes Educatoin, Inc. North Oxford MA, 2013.
26. Anon, Bionic Pancreas Team at Barton, The Barton Spirit, The Barton Center for Diabetes Educatoin, Inc. North Oxford MA, p. 1, 2013.
27. Thabit H, Elleri D, Leelarathna L, et al., Unsupervised overnight closed loop insulin delivery during free living: analysis of randomised cross-over home studies in adults and adolescents with type 1 diabetes, The Lancet, 2015;385:S96.
28. Haidar A, Rabasa-Lhoret R, Legault L, et al., Single- and Dual- Hormone Artificial Pancreas for Overnight Glucose Control in Type 1 Diabetes, J Clin Endocrinol Metab, 2016:101:214–23.
29. Thabit H, Lubina-Solomon A, Stadler M, et al., Home use of closed-loop insulin delivery for overnight glucose control in adults with type 1 diabetes: a 4-week, multicentre, randomised crossover study, Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol, 2014;2701–9.
30. Farrington C, The artificial pancreas: challenges and opportunities, Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol, 2015;3:937.
31. Raz I, Bitton G, Feldman D, et al., Improved Postprandial Glucose Control Using the InsuPad Device in Insulin-Treated Type 2 Diabetes: Injection Site Warming to Improve Glycemic Control, J Diabetes Sci Technol, 2015;9:639–43.
32. Newswanger B, Ammons S, Phadnis N, et al., Development of a highly stable, nonaqueous glucagon formulation for delivery via infusion pump systems, J Diabetes Sci Technol, 2015;9:24–33.
33. owalski A, Pathway to artificial pancreas systems revisited: moving downstream, Diabetes Care, 2015;38:1036–43.
34. Ziegler C, Liberman A, Nimri R, et al., Reduced Worries of Hypoglycaemia, High Satisfaction, and Increased Perceived Ease of Use after Experiencing Four Nights of MD-Logic Artificial Pancreas at Home (DREAM4), J Diabetes Res, 2015;1–8.
35. Dexcom, Dexcom G5 Mobile, Dexcom, 2016. Available at: http:// (accessed February 1, 2016).
36. 36. Anhalt H, Bohannon NJV, Insulin Patch Pumps: Their Development and Future in Closed-Loop Systems, Diabetes Technol Ther, 2010; 12(Supl.1):S–51–S–58.
37. Klonoff DC, Cybersecurity for Connected Diabetes Devices, J Diabetes Sci Technol, 2015;9:1143–7.
Keywords: Closed loop, artificial pancreas, type 1 diabetes, research update, glucagon, pramlintide, exenatide, multihormonal