Galicia-Garcia, U. et al. Pathophysiology of type 2 diabetes mellitus. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 21, 6275. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms21176275 (2020).
WHO. Classification of diabetes mellitus (World Health Organization, 2019).
Committee, American Diabetes Association Professional Practice. Classification and diagnosis of diabetes: Standards of medical care in diabetes-2022. Diabetes Care 45, S17–S38. https://doi.org/10.2337/dc22-S002 (2021).
Wortham, M. & Sander, M. Mechanisms of \(\beta\)-cell functional adaptation to changes in workload. Diabetes Obes. Metab. 18, 78–86. https://doi.org/10.1111/dom.12729 (2016).
DeFronzo, R. A., Tobin, J. D. & Andres, R. Glucose clamp technique: A method for quantifying insulin secretion and resistance. Am. J. Physiol.-Endocrinol. Metab. 237, E214. https://doi.org/10.1152/ajpendo.1979.237.3.E214 (1979).
Matsuda, M. & DeFronzo, R. A. Insulin sensitivity indices obtained from oral glucose tolerance testing: Comparison with the euglycemic insulin clamp. Diabetes Care 22, 1462–1470. https://doi.org/10.2337/diacare.22.9.1462 (1999).
Abdul-Ghani, M. A., Matsuda, M., Balas, B. & DeFronzo, R. A. Muscle and liver insulin resistance indexes derived from the oral glucose tolerance test. Diabetes Care 30, 89–94. https://doi.org/10.2337/dc06-1519 (2007).
O’Donovan, S. D. et al. Improved quantification of muscle insulin sensitivity using oral glucose tolerance test data: The MISI Calculator. Sci. Rep. 9, 9388. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-45858-w (2019).
Matthews, D. R. et al. Homeostasis model assessment: Insulin resistance and \(\beta\)-cell function from fasting plasma glucose and insulin concentrations in man. Diabetologia 28, 412–419. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00280883 (1985).
Singh, B. & Saxena, A. Surrogate markers of insulin resistance: A review. World J. Diabetes 1, 36–47. https://doi.org/10.4239/wjd.v1.i2.36 (2010).
Bergman, R. N., Ider, Y. Z., Bowden, C. R. & Cobelli, C. Quantitative estimation of insulin sensitivity. Am. J. Physiol.-Endocrinol. Metab. 236, E667. https://doi.org/10.1152/ajpendo.1979.236.6.E667 (1979).
Dalla Man, C., Caumo, A. & Cobelli, C. The oral glucose minimal model: Estimation of insulin sensitivity from a meal test. IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng. 49, 419–429. https://doi.org/10.1109/10.995680 (2002).
Palumbo, P., Ditlevsen, S., Bertuzzi, A. & De Gaetano, A. Mathematical modeling of the glucose-insulin system: A review. Math. Biosci. 244, 69–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mbs.2013.05.006 (2013).
Maas, A. et al. A physiology-based model describing heterogeneity in glucose metabolism: The core of the eindhoven diabetes education simulator (e-des). J. Diabetes Sci. Technol. 9, 282–292. https://doi.org/10.1177/1932296814562607 (2015).
O’Donovan, S. D. et al. Quantifying the contribution of triglycerides to metabolic resilience through the mixed meal model. Iscience 25, 105206 (2022).
Van Sloun, B. et al. E-DES-PROT: A novel computational model to describe the effects of amino acids and protein on postprandial glucose and insulin dynamics in humans. iScience 26, 106218. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.isci.2023.106218 (2023).
Erdős, B. et al. Personalized computational model quantifies heterogeneity in postprandial responses to oral glucose challenge. PLOS Computat. Biol. 17, e1008852. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1008852 (2021).
Venkatesh, K. P., Raza, M. M. & Kvedar, J. C. Health digital twins as tools for precision medicine: Considerations for computation, implementation, and regulation. npj Digit. Med. 5, 150. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41746-022-00694-7 (2022).
Zeevi, D. et al. Personalized nutrition by prediction of glycemic responses. Cell 163, 1079–1094. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2015.11.001 (2015).
Klupa, T. et al. Expanding the role of continuous glucose monitoring in modern diabetes care beyond type 1 disease. Diabetes Ther. Res. Treat. Educ. Diabetes Relat. Disord. 14, 1241–1266. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13300-023-01431-3 (2023).
Battelino, T. et al. Continuous glucose monitoring and metrics for clinical trials: an international consensus statement. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 11, 42–57. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2213-8587(22)00319-9 (2023).
Coorey, G. et al. The health digital twin to tackle cardiovascular disease-a review of an emerging interdisciplinary field. npj Digit. Med. 5, 126. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41746-022-00640-7 (2022).
Rodbard, D. Continuous glucose monitoring: A review of successes, challenges, and opportunities. Diabetes Technol. Ther. 18, S2-3. https://doi.org/10.1089/dia.2015.0417 (2016).
Pleus, S. et al. Rate-of-change dependence of the performance of two cgm systems during induced glucose swings. J. Diabetes Sci. Technol. 9, 801–807. https://doi.org/10.1177/1932296815578716 (2015).
Freckmann, G. et al. Standardization process of continuous glucose monitoring: Traceability and performance. Clin. Chim. Acta 515, 5–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cca.2020.12.025 (2021).
Pleus, S. et al. Differences in venous, capillary and interstitial glucose concentrations in individuals without diabetes after glucose load. J. Lab. Med. 47, 97–104. https://doi.org/10.1515/labmed-2023-0013 (2023).
Goel, P., Parkhi, D., Barua, A., Shah, M. & Ghaskadbi, S. A minimal model approach for analyzing continuous glucose monitoring in type 2 diabetes. Front. Physiol. 9, 326748 (2018).
Eichenlaub, M. M., Hattersley, J. G. & Khovanova, N. A. A Minimal Model Approach for the Description of Postprandial Glucose Responses from Glucose Sensor Data in Diabetes Mellitus. Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society. IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society. Annual International Conference2019, 265–268, https://doi.org/10.1109/EMBC.2019.8857195 (2019).
Ng, E., Kaufman, J. M., van Veen, L. & Fossat, Y. A parsimonious model of blood glucose homeostasis. PLOS Digit. Health 1, 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pdig.0000072 (2022).
Trouwborst, I. et al. Cardiometabolic health improvements upon dietary intervention are driven by tissue-specific insulin resistance phenotype: A precision nutrition trial. Cell Metab. 35, 71–83 (2023).
Gijbels, A. et al. The PERSonalized glucose optimization through nutritional intervention (PERSON) study: Rationale, design and preliminary screening results. Front. Nutr. 8, 694568 (2021).
Maas, A. Playing with Numbers: The Development of an Educational Diabetes Game (Technische Universiteit Eindhoven, 2017).
Faggionato, E., Schiavon, M., Ekhlaspour, L., Buckingham, B. A. & Dalla Man, C. The minimally-invasive oral glucose minimal model: Estimation of gastric retention, glucose rate of appearance, and insulin sensitivity from type 1 diabetes data collected in real-life conditions. IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering 1–9, https://doi.org/10.1109/TBME.2023.3324206 (2023).
Rackauckas, C. & Nie, Q. DifferentialEquations.jl-a performant and feature-rich ecosystem for solving differential equations in Julia. J. Open Res. Softw. 5, 15 (2017).
Erdős, B. et al. Quantifying postprandial glucose responses using a hybrid modeling approach: Combining mechanistic and data-driven models in the Maastricht study. PLoS ONE 18, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0285820 (2023).
Arnoud, A., Guvenen, F. & Kleineberg, T. Benchmarking Global Optimizers (National Bureau of Economic Research, 2019).
Borisov, I. & Metelkin, E. Confidence intervals by constrained optimization-an algorithm and software package for practical identifiability analysis in systems biology. PLoS Comput. Biol. 16, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1008495 (2020).
Wieland, F.-G., Hauber, A. L., Rosenblatt, M., Tönsing, C. & Timmer, J. On structural and practical identifiability. Curr. Opin. Syst. Biol. 25, 60–69. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coisb.2021.03.005 (2021).
Raue, A. et al. Structural and practical identifiability analysis of partially observed dynamical models by exploiting the profile likelihood. Bioinformatics 25, 1923–1929. https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/btp358 (2009).
Stuart, A. M. Inverse problems: A Bayesian perspective. Acta Numer. 19, 451–559. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0962492910000061 (2010).
Linden, N. J., Kramer, B. & Rangamani, P. Bayesian parameter estimation for dynamical models in systems biology. PLoS Comput. Biol. 18, 1–48. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1010651 (2022).
Færch, K. et al. Discordance between glucose levels measured in interstitial fluid vs in venous plasma after oral glucose administration: A post-hoc analysis from the randomised controlled PRE-D trial. Front. Endocrinol. 12, 753810 (2021).
Kahn, S. E., Cooper, M. E. & Del Prato, S. Pathophysiology and treatment of type 2 diabetes: Perspectives on the past, present, and future. Lancet (London, England) 383, 1068–1083. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(13)62154-6 (2014).
Gastaldelli, A., Abdul Ghani, M. & DeFronzo, R. A. Adaptation of insulin clearance to metabolic demand is a key determinant of glucose tolerance. Diabetes 70, 377–385. https://doi.org/10.2337/db19-1152 (2021).
Tsai, E. B., Sherry, N. A., Palmer, J. P., Herold, K. C., DPT-1 Study Group. The rise and fall of insulin secretion in type 1 diabetes mellitus. Diabetologia 49, 261–270. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00125-005-0100-8 (2006).
Kitabchi, A. E. et al. Role of insulin secretion and sensitivity in the evolution of type 2 diabetes in the diabetes prevention program: Effects of lifestyle intervention and metformin. Diabetes 54, 2404–2414. https://doi.org/10.2337/diabetes.54.8.2404 (2005).
Mulder, S. T. et al. Dynamic digital twin: Diagnosis, treatment, prediction, and prevention of disease during the life course. J. Med. Internet Res. 24, e35675. https://doi.org/10.2196/35675 (2022).
van den Brink, W. J., van den Broek, T. J., Palmisano, S., Wopereis, S. & de Hoogh, I. M. Digital biomarkers for personalized nutrition: Predicting meal moments and interstitial glucose with non-invasive, wearable technologies. Nutrients 14, 4465. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu14214465 (2022).
Abeltino, A. et al. Putting the personalized metabolic avatar into production: A comparison between deep-learning and statistical models for weight prediction. Nutrients 15, 1199. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu15051199 (2023).
Thomas, A. & Thevis, M. Analysis of insulin and insulin analogs from dried blood spots by means of liquid chromatography-high resolution mass spectrometry. Drug Test. Anal. 10, 1761–1768. https://doi.org/10.1002/dta.2518 (2018).
Berry, S. E. et al. Human postprandial responses to food and potential for precision nutrition. Nat. Med. 26, 964–973. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41591-020-0934-0 (2020).
Arpaia, P., Cesaro, U., Frosolone, M., Moccaldi, N. & Taglialatela, M. A micro-bioimpedance meter for monitoring insulin bioavailability in personalized diabetes therapy. Sci. Rep. 10, 13656. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-70376-5 (2020).
Rodbard, D. Characterizing accuracy and precision of glucose sensors and meters. J. Diabetes Sci. Technol. 8, 980–985. https://doi.org/10.1177/1932296814541810 (2014).
Howard, R., Guo, J. & Hall, K. D. Imprecision nutrition? Different simultaneous continuous glucose monitors provide discordant meal rankings for incremental postprandial glucose in subjects without diabetes. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 112, 1114–1119. https://doi.org/10.1093/ajcn/nqaa198 (2020).
Merino, J. et al. Validity of continuous glucose monitoring for categorizing glycemic responses to diet: Implications for use in personalized nutrition. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 115, 1569–1576. https://doi.org/10.1093/ajcn/nqac026 (2022).
Cengiz, E. & Tamborlane, W. V. A tale of two compartments: Interstitial versus blood glucose monitoring. Diabetes Technol. Ther. 11, S11-16. https://doi.org/10.1089/dia.2009.0002 (2009).
Barua, S., Wierzchowska-McNew, R. A., Deutz, N. E. & Sabharwal, A. Discordance between postprandial plasma glucose measurement and continuous glucose monitoring. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 116, 1059–1069. https://doi.org/10.1093/ajcn/nqac181 (2022).
Source link
