Introduction People with T1DM are usually in basal-bolus therapy - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

introduction
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

Introduction People with T1DM are usually in basal-bolus therapy - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

CBR BASED BOLUS RECOMMENDER SYSTEM Ferran Torrent-Fontbona Introduction People with T1DM are usually in basal-bolus therapy Timely and accurate insulin dosage avoids hyperglycaemia and its consequent complications and reduces the risk of


slide-1
SLIDE 1

Ferran Torrent-Fontbona

CBR BASED BOLUS RECOMMENDER SYSTEM

slide-2
SLIDE 2

June 24, 2017 2/16

Introduction

 People with T1DM are usually in basal-bolus therapy  Timely and accurate insulin dosage avoids hyperglycaemia and its

consequent complications and reduces the risk of hypoglycaemia

 Bolus calculators:

– Available in market products: pumps, glucose meters, apps… – They have been proved useful at improving glycaemic self-control – Drawbacks: difficulty setting parameters, need to regularly adjust them… – Far from achieving optimal results

slide-3
SLIDE 3

June 24, 2017 3/16

Objectives

 Provide a method capable of:

– Estimating the personalised bolus calculator parameters – Learning from past experiences to adapt to new situations – Providing personalised adaptive bolus recommendations

CASE BASED REASONING

slide-4
SLIDE 4

June 24, 2017 4/16

Case based reasoning

 Lazy learning method  Propose new solutions using past experiences  Good results with small amounts of data

Retrieve Maintenance Revise Reuse Case base Query case

slide-5
SLIDE 5

June 24, 2017 5/16

Bolus recommender system

 The CBR estimates the Insulin to Carbs Ratio (ICR) and Insulin Sensitivity

Factor (ISF)

 Then, it calculates the bolus dose

Retrieve Maintenance Revise Reuse New case:

  • Carbohydrates
  • Blood Glucose
  • Time of day
  • Exercise
  • Stress

Case base

slide-6
SLIDE 6

June 24, 2017 6/16

Retrieve

Objective: select similar past experiences

 ISF and ICR depend on several factors: stress, time of day, menstruations,

illnesses…

 Not all factors have the same impact  Proposed retrieve consists of two steps:

– Context reasoning (select the case base corresponding to the context) – Similarity measure and case retrieval

slide-7
SLIDE 7

June 24, 2017 7/16

Reuse

Objective: Adapt past solutions to the new case

 Reuse ICR from retrieved cases

– Weighted average according to the similarity

 Calculate ISF using the ICR

𝐽𝑇𝐺 = 341.94 ∙ 𝐽𝐷𝑆 𝑋

 Calculate bolus dose

𝐶 = 𝐷𝐼𝑃 𝐽𝐷𝑆 + 𝐻𝑑 − 𝐻𝑡𝑞 𝐽𝑇𝐺 − 𝐽𝑃𝐶

𝐷𝐼𝑃: carbs 𝐻𝑑: blood glucose level 𝐻𝑡𝑞: blood glucose target 𝐽𝑃𝐶: insulin on board 𝑋: body weight

Walsh et al. (2011). Journal of Diabetes Science and Technology

slide-8
SLIDE 8

June 24, 2017 8/16

Revise

Objective: revise and repair the proposed solution

 Revise: check minimum postprandial blood glucose and correct the

recommended bolus (and ICR and ISF) to bring the value to the target

  • ne

𝐻𝑛𝑗𝑜 𝐻𝑑 Postprandial phase Meal time ෢ 𝐽𝐷𝑆 = 1 − 𝛽 𝐽𝐷𝑆𝑠𝑓𝑣𝑡𝑓 + 𝛽𝐽𝐷𝑆𝑑

slide-9
SLIDE 9

June 24, 2017 9/16

Maintenance

Objective: manage the case base to keep it updated and efficient

 Concept drift problem  Proposed maintenance

– Save the revise query case – If there are similar enough cases to the query case in the case base, then remove them

slide-10
SLIDE 10

June 24, 2017 10/16

Experimentation

 11 virtual adults using UVA/PADOVA simulator  Intra-day and physical activity variability have been added  50 simulations of 90-days  Comparison with a run-to-run algorithm

slide-11
SLIDE 11

June 24, 2017 11/16

Results (without exercise)

slide-12
SLIDE 12

June 24, 2017 12/16

Results (without exercise)

slide-13
SLIDE 13

June 24, 2017 13/16

Results (with exercise)

slide-14
SLIDE 14

June 24, 2017 14/16

Results (with exercise)

slide-15
SLIDE 15

June 24, 2017 15/16

Conclusions

 The proposed system:

– Automatically estimates the personalised ICR and ISF – Is capable of adapting the parameters to new situations

 Results are promising

slide-16
SLIDE 16

THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION

ferran.torrent@udg.edu

slide-17
SLIDE 17

June 24, 2017 17/16

Results (summary)

CBR (avg ± std) R2R (avg ± std) Without exercise In target (%) 86.62 ± 1.73 78.07 ± 6.01 Below target (%) 2.74 ± 0.85 7.05 ± 4.16 Above target (%) 10.63 ± 1.40 14.88 ± 2.68 With exercise In target (%) 82.51 ± 1.43 75.00 ± 4.93 Below target (%) 4.51 ± 1.29 8.41 ± 3.43 Above target (%) 12.98 ± 0.73 16.59 ± 2.26

slide-18
SLIDE 18

June 24, 2017 18/16

Future work

 Automatically learn similarity measure weights  Similarity measure capable to deal with missing values  Adaptable learning rate

slide-19
SLIDE 19

June 24, 2017 19/16

Results (I)

 Without physical activity

slide-20
SLIDE 20

June 24, 2017 20/16

Results (II)

 With physical activity