{"title":"Predicting Postprandial Glycemic Responses With Limited Data in Type 1 and Type 2 Diabetes.","authors":"Yiheng Shen, Euiji Choi, Samantha Kleinberg","doi":"10.1177/19322968251321508","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>A core challenge in managing diabetes is predicting glycemic responses to meals. Prior work identified significant interindividual variation in responses and developed personalized forecasts. However, intraindividual variation is still not well understood, and the most accurate approaches require invasive microbiome data. We aimed to investigate (1) whether postprandial glycemic responses (PPGRs) can be predicted with limited data and (2) sources of intraindividual variation.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We used data collected from 397 people with Type 1 Diabetes (T1DEXI) and 100 people with Type 2 Diabetes (ShanghaiT2DM) who wore continuous glucose monitors (CGMs) and logged meals. Using dietary, demographic, and temporal features, we predicted 2 hours PPGR, and peak 2 hours postprandial glucose rise (Glu<sub>max</sub>). We evaluated the contribution of food features (eg, macronutrients, food category) and use of personal training data and investigated intraindividual variability in responses.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We achieved comparable accuracy to prior work for PPGR (T1DEXI R = 0.61, ShanghaiT2DM R = 0.72) and Glu<sub>max</sub> (T1DEXI R = 0.64, ShanghaiT2DM R = 0.73), without using invasive data like microbiome. Including food category features led to higher accuracy than macronutrients alone. Analysis of glycemic responses to duplicate meals identified time of day (PPGR: T1DEXI <i>P</i> < .05 for lunch, ShanghaiT2DM <i>P</i> < .001 for lunch and dinner) and menstrual cycle (Glu<sub>max</sub>: <i>P</i> < .05 for perimenstrual) as sources of variability.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>We demonstrate that in individuals with T1D and T2D, glycemic responses to meals can be predicted without personalized training data or invasive physiological data.</p>","PeriodicalId":15475,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Diabetes Science and Technology","volume":" ","pages":"19322968251321508"},"PeriodicalIF":4.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11883769/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Diabetes Science and Technology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/19322968251321508","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: A core challenge in managing diabetes is predicting glycemic responses to meals. Prior work identified significant interindividual variation in responses and developed personalized forecasts. However, intraindividual variation is still not well understood, and the most accurate approaches require invasive microbiome data. We aimed to investigate (1) whether postprandial glycemic responses (PPGRs) can be predicted with limited data and (2) sources of intraindividual variation.
Methods: We used data collected from 397 people with Type 1 Diabetes (T1DEXI) and 100 people with Type 2 Diabetes (ShanghaiT2DM) who wore continuous glucose monitors (CGMs) and logged meals. Using dietary, demographic, and temporal features, we predicted 2 hours PPGR, and peak 2 hours postprandial glucose rise (Glumax). We evaluated the contribution of food features (eg, macronutrients, food category) and use of personal training data and investigated intraindividual variability in responses.
Results: We achieved comparable accuracy to prior work for PPGR (T1DEXI R = 0.61, ShanghaiT2DM R = 0.72) and Glumax (T1DEXI R = 0.64, ShanghaiT2DM R = 0.73), without using invasive data like microbiome. Including food category features led to higher accuracy than macronutrients alone. Analysis of glycemic responses to duplicate meals identified time of day (PPGR: T1DEXI P < .05 for lunch, ShanghaiT2DM P < .001 for lunch and dinner) and menstrual cycle (Glumax: P < .05 for perimenstrual) as sources of variability.
Conclusions: We demonstrate that in individuals with T1D and T2D, glycemic responses to meals can be predicted without personalized training data or invasive physiological data.
背景:糖尿病管理的一个核心挑战是预测饮食后的血糖反应。先前的工作确定了反应的显著个体间差异,并开发了个性化的预测。然而,个体内的差异仍然没有得到很好的理解,最准确的方法需要侵入性微生物组数据。我们的目的是研究(1)是否可以用有限的数据预测餐后血糖反应(PPGRs)和(2)个体差异的来源。方法:我们收集了397例1型糖尿病患者(T1DEXI)和100例2型糖尿病患者(ShanghaiT2DM)的数据,这些患者佩戴连续血糖监测仪(CGMs)并记录饮食。利用饮食、人口统计学和时间特征,我们预测了2小时PPGR和餐后2小时血糖升高峰值(Glumax)。我们评估了食物特征(如常量营养素、食物类别)和个人训练数据的使用,并调查了个人反应的差异性。结果:在不使用微生物组等侵入性数据的情况下,PPGR (T1DEXI R = 0.61, ShanghaiT2DM R = 0.72)和Glumax (T1DEXI R = 0.64, ShanghaiT2DM R = 0.73)的准确性与先前的工作相当。包括食品类别特征比单独的常量营养素具有更高的准确性。对重复饮食的血糖反应进行分析,确定了一天中的时间(午餐PPGR: T1DEXI P < 0.05,午餐和晚餐ShanghaiT2DM P < 0.001)和月经周期(月经前后Glumax: P < 0.05)是可变性的来源。结论:我们证明,在T1D和T2D患者中,可以在没有个性化训练数据或侵入性生理数据的情况下预测饮食后的血糖反应。
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Diabetes Science and Technology (JDST) is a bi-monthly, peer-reviewed scientific journal published by the Diabetes Technology Society. JDST covers scientific and clinical aspects of diabetes technology including glucose monitoring, insulin and metabolic peptide delivery, the artificial pancreas, digital health, precision medicine, social media, cybersecurity, software for modeling, physiologic monitoring, technology for managing obesity, and diagnostic tests of glycation. The journal also covers the development and use of mobile applications and wireless communication, as well as bioengineered tools such as MEMS, new biomaterials, and nanotechnology to develop new sensors. Articles in JDST cover both basic research and clinical applications of technologies being developed to help people with diabetes.