Advancements and Challenges in Multi-Hormone Artificial Pancreas Systems for Diabetes Management

Abstract

The landscape of diabetes management has undergone a profound transformation with the emergence of artificial pancreas (AP) systems, initially concentrating on automated insulin delivery. Contemporary research, however, has significantly broadened this therapeutic paradigm by advocating for the integration of multiple endogenous hormones—specifically insulin, glucagon, and pramlintide—to more precisely mimic the intricate physiological mechanisms governing blood glucose regulation. This comprehensive report meticulously explores the complex physiological underpinnings for multi-hormone AP systems, critically examines the multifaceted engineering and biological challenges inherent in their development, provides an in-depth review of current preclinical and clinical research findings, and rigorously discusses the profound potential benefits alongside the significant hurdles impeding their wider clinical adoption.

Many thanks to our sponsor Esdebe who helped us prepare this research report.

1. Introduction

Diabetes mellitus, a chronic metabolic disorder characterized by sustained hyperglycemia, represents a pervasive global health challenge, affecting hundreds of millions worldwide. Its insidious progression can lead to severe microvascular (retinopathy, nephropathy, neuropathy) and macrovascular (cardiovascular disease, stroke, peripheral artery disease) complications, significantly impairing quality of life and imposing an immense burden on healthcare systems. The demanding regimen of self-management, involving meticulous blood glucose monitoring, precise carbohydrate counting, and timely insulin administration, places considerable psychological and physical strain on individuals with diabetes, often leading to suboptimal glycemic control and persistent glycemic variability [1].

Traditional insulin therapy, while life-saving for individuals with type 1 diabetes (T1D) and often necessary for advanced type 2 diabetes (T2D), frequently struggles to replicate the body’s exquisite natural glucose regulation. This inadequacy manifests as undesirable fluctuations in blood glucose levels, ranging from debilitating hypoglycemic episodes to damaging hyperglycemic excursions. The evolution of diabetes treatment has seen significant milestones, from the discovery of insulin to the widespread adoption of insulin pumps and, more recently, continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) systems. These advancements have incrementally improved glycemic control, yet a truly closed-loop system, capable of fully automating glucose management, has remained an elusive goal.

The conceptualization of an artificial pancreas (AP) system represents a monumental stride towards achieving this goal. An AP aims to bridge the gap between exogenous insulin administration and physiological regulation by creating a closed-loop system that continuously monitors glucose levels, processes this information through sophisticated algorithms, and automatically delivers appropriate doses of insulin. Early AP systems, predominantly focusing on insulin delivery, have demonstrated impressive capabilities in reducing hyperglycemia and improving Time In Range (TIR). However, even the most advanced insulin-only AP systems encounter limitations. They may struggle with rapid postprandial glucose excursions, particularly after high-carbohydrate meals, and can still precipitate or fail to rapidly correct hypoglycemia, as insulin’s action can be slow and prolonged [2].

Recognizing these inherent limitations, a compelling paradigm shift has emerged: the development of multi-hormone AP systems. This innovative approach seeks to incorporate additional key regulatory hormones, primarily glucagon and pramlintide, alongside insulin. The underlying rationale is to construct a more physiologically accurate and robust control system that can not only mitigate hyperglycemia but also proactively prevent and rapidly reverse hypoglycemia, while concurrently addressing other facets of glucose metabolism such as gastric emptying and postprandial glucagon secretion. By mimicking the coordinated actions of the pancreatic islet, these multi-hormone systems aspire to provide a level of glycemic control that is unattainable with insulin monotherapy, thereby ushering in a new era of automated diabetes management [3]. This report will explore the multifaceted aspects of this pioneering therapeutic strategy, from its physiological foundations to its clinical implementation and future trajectory.

Many thanks to our sponsor Esdebe who helped us prepare this research report.

2. Physiological Rationale for Multi-Hormone Systems

To appreciate the necessity and potential of multi-hormone artificial pancreas systems, it is crucial to understand the intricate physiological interplay of hormones within a healthy human pancreas. The islets of Langerhans, microscopic clusters of endocrine cells scattered throughout the exocrine pancreas, are the central orchestrators of glucose homeostasis. These islets contain several distinct cell types, primarily alpha cells (secreting glucagon), beta cells (secreting insulin and amylin), and delta cells (secreting somatostatin), all working in concert through paracrine interactions to maintain euglycemia [4].

2.1 Insulin Dynamics: The Glucose-Lowering Maestro

Insulin, secreted by pancreatic beta cells, is the primary anabolic hormone responsible for lowering blood glucose levels. Its secretion is exquisitely sensitive to rising glucose concentrations, occurring in a biphasic manner. The first phase, a rapid burst of insulin, occurs within minutes of glucose stimulation, primarily clearing preformed insulin vesicles. This is followed by a more sustained second phase, reflecting continued synthesis and secretion of insulin. Physiologically, this rapid first-phase response is critical for blunting the initial rise in postprandial glucose and suppressing hepatic glucose production [5].

Upon binding to its receptors on target cells (primarily muscle, adipose tissue, and liver), insulin facilitates glucose uptake via glucose transporter (GLUT) proteins (e.g., GLUT4 in muscle and fat cells), promotes glycogen synthesis (glycogenesis) in the liver and muscle, inhibits glucose production (glycogenolysis and gluconeogenesis) in the liver, and stimulates protein and fat synthesis. In individuals with T1D, absolute insulin deficiency leads to uncontrolled glucose production and impaired glucose utilization, resulting in hyperglycemia. In T2D, insulin resistance and progressive beta-cell dysfunction similarly disrupt glucose homeostasis.

2.2 Glucagon Dynamics: The Counter-Regulatory Guardian

Glucagon, secreted by pancreatic alpha cells, acts as the principal counter-regulatory hormone to insulin. Its primary role is to prevent hypoglycemia by raising blood glucose levels. Glucagon secretion is primarily stimulated by falling glucose concentrations and is suppressed by insulin and hyperglycemia. When blood glucose levels drop, glucagon acts predominantly on the liver, stimulating hepatic glucose production through two main mechanisms: glycogenolysis (the breakdown of stored glycogen into glucose) and gluconeogenesis (the synthesis of new glucose from non-carbohydrate precursors like amino acids and lactate) [6].

In a healthy individual, the reciprocal regulation of insulin and glucagon ensures tight glycemic control. As glucose rises, insulin is secreted and glucagon is suppressed. As glucose falls, insulin secretion decreases, and glucagon secretion increases. In T1D, not only is insulin absent, but the normal glucagon response to hypoglycemia can also be impaired or blunted, particularly after years of disease progression. Furthermore, glucagon secretion may paradoxically remain inappropriately elevated after meals, contributing to postprandial hyperglycemia, especially if insulin is deficient or delayed [7]. Thus, integrating glucagon into an AP system offers a crucial mechanism for rapid and reliable hypoglycemia prevention and reversal, overcoming a significant limitation of insulin-only systems.

2.3 Amylin and Pramlintide: The Postprandial Modulators

Amylin, a neuroendocrine hormone, is co-secreted with insulin from pancreatic beta cells in response to nutrient intake. In individuals with T1D, like insulin, amylin secretion is profoundly deficient. Amylin exerts several critical physiological actions that contribute to postprandial glucose regulation [8]:

• Delaying gastric emptying: This slows the rate at which glucose enters the bloodstream from the gut, reducing the magnitude of postprandial glucose spikes.
• Suppressing postprandial glucagon secretion: Amylin synergistically works with insulin to prevent an inappropriate rise in glucagon after a meal, which would otherwise exacerbate hyperglycemia.
• Enhancing satiety: Amylin acts centrally to increase feelings of fullness, potentially reducing overall caloric intake.

Pramlintide is a synthetic analog of human amylin, approved as an adjunct to insulin therapy for individuals with T1D and T2D who use mealtime insulin. Its pharmacological profile closely mimics that of endogenous amylin. By addressing the physiological deficiency of amylin in diabetes, pramlintide effectively mitigates postprandial glucose excursions, which are notoriously difficult to control with insulin alone due to its relatively slow onset of action compared to glucose absorption [9]. Its inclusion in an AP system offers a powerful tool for improving postprandial control, reducing glycemic variability, and potentially reducing overall insulin requirements.

2.4 Integration in Artificial Pancreas Systems: Replicating Endogenous Homeostasis

Integrating insulin, glucagon, and pramlintide into an AP system is a sophisticated endeavor aimed at replicating the nuanced physiological interplay of these hormones. This ‘tri-hormonal’ approach moves beyond simply managing hyperglycemia to encompass a more holistic and dynamic regulation of glucose homeostasis:

• Insulin: Remains the primary glucose-lowering agent, administered to cover basal needs and mealtime carbohydrate intake.
• Pramlintide: Co-administered with mealtime insulin (or continuously in some configurations) to delay gastric emptying and suppress postprandial glucagon. This ‘flattens’ the postprandial glucose curve, giving insulin more time to act effectively and reducing peak glucose levels. It also helps manage body weight and reduces insulin dosing [10].
• Glucagon: Acts as the critical safety net, autonomously administered to rapidly counteract impending or actual hypoglycemia. Its fast-acting nature provides a crucial protective mechanism that significantly enhances the overall safety profile of the AP system.

The synergistic application of these three hormones allows for more aggressive insulin dosing when needed, without the heightened risk of hypoglycemia, as glucagon is available for rapid rescue. Pramlintide’s actions further stabilize postprandial glucose, reducing the ‘roller coaster’ effect often experienced by individuals with diabetes. This integrated approach aims to achieve not just good glycemic control, but physiological glycemic control, characterized by reduced glycemic variability, fewer hypoglycemic episodes, and sustained euglycemia, thereby enhancing safety, efficacy, and ultimately, the quality of life for individuals with diabetes.

Many thanks to our sponsor Esdebe who helped us prepare this research report.

3. Engineering and Biological Challenges

The ambitious goal of creating a multi-hormone artificial pancreas system, while physiologically sound, is fraught with significant engineering and biological challenges. These complexities span from the intrinsic properties of the hormones themselves to the sophisticated hardware and software required for their synchronized delivery and intelligent control.

3.1 Hormone Stability and Compatibility

The successful deployment of a multi-hormone AP system hinges on overcoming the distinct stability and compatibility challenges presented by each therapeutic agent:

• Insulin Stability: While insulin formulations have advanced, it remains susceptible to aggregation, fibrillation, and degradation when exposed to extreme temperatures, mechanical stress (e.g., from pump mechanisms), or certain surfaces. These issues can reduce potency and potentially lead to infusion site reactions [11]. Rapid-acting insulin analogs are generally more stable than regular insulin but still require careful handling.

• Glucagon Stability: Historically, glucagon has been notoriously unstable in aqueous solution, necessitating its storage as a lyophilized powder that requires reconstitution immediately prior to use. This impracticality has been a major impediment to its integration into automated delivery systems. Recent advancements in pharmaceutical science have led to the development of stable liquid glucagon formulations and micro-dose glucagon formulations, which maintain stability for extended periods (weeks to months) at body temperature [12]. These innovations are crucial for continuous pump delivery but still require rigorous testing within device environments.

• Pramlintide Stability: Pramlintide is relatively stable compared to glucagon, but its long-term stability in continuous delivery systems, especially when co-formulated with other hormones, requires careful evaluation. The potential for chemical interactions leading to degradation or loss of potency must be thoroughly investigated.

• Compatibility and Co-formulation: The most significant biological challenge is ensuring the chemical and physical compatibility of insulin, glucagon, and pramlintide when they are intended to be stored and/or delivered together. Each hormone has an optimal pH range for stability. Mixing them might lead to pH shifts, protein precipitation, aggregation, or enzymatic degradation, compromising their efficacy or even creating potentially harmful byproducts. Achieving stable co-formulations that maintain the integrity and potency of all three hormones for the duration required by an infusion set (typically 2-3 days) or a pump reservoir (several days to a week) is a formidable pharmaceutical engineering task. Alternatively, separate reservoirs and delivery lines may be required, which adds to the device’s complexity and size.

3.2 Co-Delivery Mechanisms

Developing hardware capable of precisely and synchronously delivering multiple hormones presents considerable engineering hurdles:

• Multiple Pump Systems: The simplest approach involves using separate pumps for each hormone. While conceptually straightforward, this increases the device’s size, weight, and complexity for the user, requiring multiple infusion sites and battery sources. Furthermore, synchronizing the delivery of independent pumps adds an algorithmic challenge.

• Integrated Multi-Lumen Catheters/Pumps: A more elegant solution involves a single pump housing multiple reservoirs and distinct micro-pumps or channels feeding into a multi-lumen catheter. This reduces the number of infusion sites but demands extreme precision in miniaturization, flow control, and preventing backflow or cross-contamination within the catheter. Microfluidic technologies and MEMS (Micro-Electro-Mechanical Systems) offer promising avenues for such integration, enabling the precise, low-volume, and distinct delivery of each hormone [13].

• Synchronized Delivery: The pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics (PK/PD) of insulin, glucagon, and pramlintide differ significantly. Insulin has a relatively slow onset and sustained action. Glucagon has a rapid but transient effect. Pramlintide influences gastric emptying, which modulates glucose absorption. The delivery system must be capable of administering these hormones in precise, dynamically adjusted ratios and timings to mimic endogenous secretion patterns. This necessitates advanced pump actuators and finely tuned mechanical and electrical components to ensure reliable and accurate dispensing of micro-doses, particularly for glucagon, where only very small amounts are needed for rescue.

3.3 Accurate Real-Time Dosing and Control Algorithms

The ‘brain’ of the AP system is its control algorithm, which interprets real-time glucose data and orchestrates hormone delivery. This requires highly accurate sensors and sophisticated computational intelligence:

• Continuous Glucose Monitoring (CGM) Limitations: Current commercial CGMs have significantly improved in accuracy and reliability but still possess limitations. A lag time exists between interstitial glucose (what the CGM measures) and actual blood glucose, which can range from 5-15 minutes, complicating rapid therapeutic decisions. Furthermore, factors like sensor drift, compression lows, calibration requirements, and the mean absolute relative difference (MARD) affect accuracy, impacting the algorithm’s confidence [14]. For a multi-hormone system that reacts dynamically, predictive capabilities and minimal latency are paramount.

• Control Algorithm Complexity: The development of robust control algorithms capable of managing three distinct hormones, each with different PK/PD profiles and therapeutic roles, is a significant intellectual challenge. Early AP systems often employed PID (Proportional-Integral-Derivative) controllers or Model Predictive Control (MPC). MPC, in particular, is well-suited for AP systems as it can anticipate future glucose trends based on a mathematical model of glucose metabolism, allowing for proactive rather than reactive hormone delivery [15].

  For multi-hormone systems, algorithms must integrate several layers of decision-making:
  * Insulin Dosing: Calculating basal rates and mealtime boluses based on predicted glucose, carbohydrate intake (if still required), and insulin sensitivity.
  * Pramlintide Dosing: Coordinating with mealtime insulin, typically in fixed ratios, but potentially dynamically adjusted based on meal composition or gastric emptying rate.
  * Glucagon Dosing: Triggering micro-doses of glucagon for hypoglycemia prevention or treatment, requiring rapid detection of falling glucose and differentiation from stable low-normal levels.
  * Adaptive Learning: The algorithm must also adapt to individual variability in insulin sensitivity, carbohydrate ratios, activity levels, and stress, which can change daily. Advanced AI and machine learning techniques, including reinforcement learning, are being explored to enable the algorithm to ‘learn’ and optimize an individual’s specific needs over time [16].

• Safety and Robustness: A multi-hormone system introduces greater complexity and, thus, potential points of failure. The algorithm must be designed with rigorous safety protocols, including redundant checks, fail-safe modes for pump malfunctions or sensor errors, and robust hypoglycemia prevention strategies that prioritize patient safety above all else. The system must also gracefully handle situations like vigorous exercise, illness, stress, and alcohol consumption, which profoundly impact glucose metabolism.

• User Interface and Human Factors: Despite automation, user interaction remains crucial. The interface must be intuitive, providing clear feedback on system status, alarms, and intervention prompts. Reducing the cognitive burden, such as minimizing or eliminating carbohydrate counting, is a key objective for improving adherence and patient satisfaction.

Many thanks to our sponsor Esdebe who helped us prepare this research report.

4. Preclinical and Clinical Research

The journey towards a fully automated multi-hormone artificial pancreas has progressed through meticulous preclinical investigations and an escalating number of clinical trials. These studies have systematically evaluated the safety, efficacy, and feasibility of combining different hormonal agents.

4.1 Preclinical Development and Animal Models

Initial research into multi-hormone AP systems primarily involves in vitro testing of hormone stability and compatibility, followed by rigorous in silico modeling to develop and refine control algorithms. In silico simulations, often using validated models of glucose-insulin-glucagon dynamics, allow researchers to test various algorithmic strategies under diverse physiological scenarios without risk to patients [17].

Subsequent preclinical work typically involves animal models, such as diabetic rodents (e.g., streptozotocin-induced diabetic rats or mice) and larger mammals (e.g., pancreatectomized dogs or non-human primates). These models provide crucial platforms for evaluating the performance of integrated AP components, including novel sensors, pump technologies, and early-stage control algorithms. They allow for the assessment of the system’s ability to maintain glycemic control, prevent hypoglycemia, and manage postprandial excursions under controlled conditions, before transitioning to human trials.

4.2 Dual-Hormone Systems: Stepping Stones to Tri-Hormonal Control

Prior to the development of systems incorporating all three hormones, significant research focused on dual-hormone configurations, primarily combining insulin with either glucagon or pramlintide.

4.2.1 Insulin and Glucagon Dual-Hormone Systems

Early dual-hormone AP systems predominantly paired insulin with glucagon, with the primary objective of preventing and treating hypoglycemia. Nocturnal hypoglycemia, in particular, is a significant concern for individuals with T1D, often leading to anxiety and fear. Studies demonstrated that automated glucagon delivery could effectively mitigate nocturnal hypoglycemia, providing a crucial safety net [18]. These systems, however, faced considerable challenges due to the instability of early glucagon formulations, requiring complex bedside setups for reconstitution. Despite these hurdles, proof-of-concept studies showed improved glucose variability and reduced hypoglycemia compared to insulin-only systems, particularly during periods of increased physical activity or during unannounced meals [19].

4.2.2 Insulin and Pramlintide Dual-Hormone Systems

The incorporation of pramlintide with insulin represented another significant advancement, specifically targeting postprandial glucose control and glycemic variability. Pramlintide’s actions of delaying gastric emptying and suppressing postprandial glucagon make it an ideal adjunct to insulin for managing meal-related glucose spikes.

A notable randomized controlled crossover trial conducted by Haidar et al. (2020) demonstrated the efficacy of a rapid insulin-and-pramlintide AP system in adults with T1D [10]. This study showed that the dual-hormone system significantly increased the time in the target glucose range (70-180 mg/dL or 3.9-10.0 mmol/L) from 74% to 84%, compared to a rapid insulin-alone system. This improvement was largely attributed to pramlintide’s ability to blunt postprandial glucose excursions, leading to less insulin stacking and reduced overall glycemic variability. Participants also experienced a lower total daily insulin dose and improved postprandial glucose profiles. While side effects such as mild nausea, particularly at the initiation of pramlintide, were reported, they were generally manageable and transient, highlighting the need for careful dosage titration.

Further research on insulin-pramlintide systems, often leveraging advanced Model Predictive Control (MPC) algorithms, has confirmed these benefits, demonstrating enhanced glucose control, reduced insulin requirements, and lower glycemic variability, especially in the postprandial period. The development of AI-enabled dual-hormone MPC algorithms for insulin and pramlintide delivery is an active area of research, seeking to optimize these systems further [20].

4.3 Multi-Hormone Systems: The Triad Approach

Building upon the successes and lessons learned from dual-hormone systems, exploratory experiments have commenced on fully automated multi-hormone AP systems incorporating insulin, pramlintide, and glucagon. The ultimate goal is to achieve true physiological emulation, alleviating the demanding burden of carbohydrate counting and manual bolusing without compromising glycemic control or safety.

A pivotal study by Haidar et al. (2021) investigated the feasibility of a fully automated multi-hormone AP system in adults with T1D using insulin, pramlintide, and glucagon [3]. The objective was to assess the system’s performance in managing glucose levels under real-world conditions, particularly in the absence of carbohydrate counting. Participants underwent structured research periods where the tri-hormone AP system autonomously managed glucose. The results demonstrated promising outcomes, indicating that the system could maintain glucose levels within the target range effectively, even when participants did not announce meals or count carbohydrates. This marked a significant step forward, showing that the combination of hormones could provide superior control and significantly reduce the user burden associated with meal management.

While these initial studies are exploratory, they highlight several key findings:

• Enhanced Postprandial Control: The inclusion of pramlintide significantly contributed to blunting postprandial glucose excursions, even with unannounced meals, by delaying gastric emptying and suppressing glucagon.
• Hypoglycemia Prevention/Reversal: The automated delivery of glucagon proved effective in preventing and rapidly reversing hypoglycemic episodes, enhancing the system’s safety profile.
• Reduced Glycemic Variability: The integrated action of all three hormones led to a more stable and predictable glucose profile, decreasing the frequency and magnitude of glucose fluctuations.
• Feasibility of Automation: The studies provided crucial evidence that sophisticated algorithms can effectively manage the delivery of multiple hormones in a closed-loop fashion, moving closer to a truly ‘set-and-forget’ system.

Ongoing research in this domain is focusing on refining control algorithms (e.g., using advanced AI/ML techniques for personalized learning), improving hormone stability and co-delivery mechanisms, and miniaturizing the overall system [21]. The global scientific community, including initiatives like the Open-Source AP movement, continues to contribute to innovation, pushing the boundaries of what is possible in automated diabetes management.

Many thanks to our sponsor Esdebe who helped us prepare this research report.

5. Potential Benefits

The realization of a clinically viable multi-hormone artificial pancreas system holds the promise of revolutionizing diabetes management, offering a myriad of significant benefits that extend beyond mere glucose control.

5.1 Superior Glycemic Control

Perhaps the most immediate and profound benefit is the potential for achieving glycemic control that closely mirrors that of a healthy, non-diabetic individual. Multi-hormone systems address the multifaceted challenges of diabetes more comprehensively than insulin-only approaches:

• Tighter Time In Range (TIR): By leveraging insulin for glucose lowering, pramlintide for managing postprandial spikes and gastric emptying, and glucagon for rapid hypoglycemia correction, these systems can significantly increase the percentage of time spent within the optimal glucose range (e.g., 70-180 mg/dL). This is a critical metric associated with reduced long-term complications [22].
• Reduced HbA1c: While TIR is increasingly favored, a sustained improvement in TIR will naturally translate to lower average blood glucose levels, reflected in a lower HbA1c. This reduction in long-term glycemic exposure is fundamental to preventing or delaying diabetes-related complications.
• Minimized Postprandial Hyperglycemia: Pramlintide’s unique action on gastric emptying and glucagon suppression directly tackles the often-recalcitrant issue of postprandial glucose excursions, which contribute significantly to glycemic variability and oxidative stress. This leads to flatter glucose curves after meals.
• Dramatic Reduction in Hypoglycemia: The automated and rapid delivery of glucagon acts as an unparalleled safety net, proactively preventing or swiftly reversing hypoglycemic episodes, including severe nocturnal hypoglycemia. This reduces the fear of hypoglycemia, a major psychological burden for individuals with diabetes, and improves safety [23].
• Lower Glycemic Variability (GV): By mitigating both hyperglycemic spikes and hypoglycemic troughs, multi-hormone systems can significantly reduce overall glycemic variability, which is independently associated with increased risk of complications and impaired quality of life.

5.2 Reduced Burden of Diabetes Management

The daily realities of living with diabetes are often characterized by relentless self-management tasks. Multi-hormone AP systems offer a powerful avenue for alleviating this burden:

• Elimination or Significant Reduction of Carbohydrate Counting: The ability of these systems to autonomously manage glucose dynamics, even after unannounced or imprecisely estimated meals, represents a monumental shift. For many, carbohydrate counting is one of the most stressful and error-prone aspects of diabetes management. Reducing or removing this requirement can liberate individuals from a significant mental load [3].
• Automated Bolusing and Basal Rate Adjustments: The system continuously monitors glucose and adjusts basal insulin delivery, as well as providing automated boluses for meals and corrections, reducing the need for manual calculations and injections.
• Fewer Fingerstick Checks: While some calibration may still be required, the reliance on continuous glucose monitoring significantly reduces the need for frequent painful fingerstick blood glucose checks.
• Reduced Mental Load (‘Diabetes Burnout’): The constant decision-making and vigilance required to manage diabetes can lead to ‘diabetes burnout.’ By automating many aspects of care, AP systems can dramatically reduce this cognitive and emotional burden, freeing up mental energy for other aspects of life.

5.3 Enhanced Quality of Life

The improvements in glycemic control and reduction in management burden directly translate into a profoundly enhanced quality of life for individuals with diabetes:

• Improved Sleep Quality: The pervasive fear of nocturnal hypoglycemia often leads to fragmented sleep and anxiety. By effectively preventing these events, multi-hormone AP systems can restore restful sleep, which is critical for overall well-being.
• Increased Lifestyle Flexibility: The ability to respond automatically to meals and exercise without extensive pre-planning or precise carbohydrate counting allows for greater spontaneity and flexibility in daily activities, meals, and social engagements.
• Reduced Anxiety and Stress: The peace of mind that comes with automated and safer glucose management can significantly reduce the chronic anxiety and psychological stress associated with living with diabetes, leading to improved mental health outcomes.
• Greater Confidence and Independence: For children and adolescents with T1D, AP systems can foster greater independence and reduce parental worry. For adults, it allows for greater autonomy and participation in work and social life.
• Potential for Improved Long-Term Health Outcomes: By achieving tighter and more stable glycemic control, multi-hormone AP systems hold the promise of delaying or preventing the onset and progression of diabetes-related microvascular and macrovascular complications, thereby improving long-term health and longevity.

5.4 Potential for Broader Applicability

While initially developed for Type 1 Diabetes, the principles of multi-hormone AP systems may extend to other populations:

• Type 2 Diabetes: Individuals with advanced T2D who require insulin therapy could benefit from similar automated systems, particularly in managing insulin resistance and postprandial hyperglycemia.
• Gestational Diabetes: Tight glycemic control is crucial during pregnancy. AP systems could offer a less burdensome and safer way to manage glucose in gestational diabetes.
• Hospitalized Patients: Critically ill patients often experience stress-induced hyperglycemia, which can worsen outcomes. Automated multi-hormone delivery could provide more precise glycemic management in intensive care units.

Many thanks to our sponsor Esdebe who helped us prepare this research report.

6. Potential Hurdles

Despite the significant promise of multi-hormone artificial pancreas systems, their widespread adoption is predicated on overcoming several substantial hurdles spanning regulatory, technological, economic, and human factors domains.

6.1 Regulatory and Safety Concerns

The introduction of novel, multi-component, and autonomously operating medical devices into clinical practice invariably raises complex regulatory and safety considerations:

• Complex Regulatory Pathway: The regulatory approval process for a multi-hormone AP system is significantly more intricate than for single-hormone devices. It involves evaluating not just the safety and efficacy of each component (CGM, pumps, hormones) but also their integrated performance, the robustness of the control algorithm, and the safety of combined hormone administration over prolonged periods. This typically necessitates extensive and costly clinical trials across multiple phases [24].
• Long-Term Safety and Efficacy: While short-term trials demonstrate promising results, comprehensive long-term studies (spanning years) are essential to ascertain the durability of glycemic control, the long-term safety profile of chronic multi-hormone exposure, and the impact on diabetes-related complications. Potential long-term adverse effects, such as changes in immune response, unknown interactions with other medications, or cumulative effects of altered hormone ratios, must be thoroughly investigated.
• Adverse Event Management: Despite robust algorithms, the potential for device malfunctions, sensor errors, or software glitches exists. The system must be designed with fail-safe mechanisms to prevent severe hypoglycemia (due to excessive insulin/pramlintide or insufficient glucagon) or severe hyperglycemia (due to pump occlusions or hormone degradation). Reporting and analyzing adverse events in a complex, integrated system can be challenging.
• Cybersecurity and Interoperability: As AP systems become more connected, cybersecurity becomes a critical concern. Protecting patient data and ensuring the integrity of wireless communication between components are paramount. Furthermore, ensuring interoperability between different manufacturers’ CGMs, pumps, and control algorithms, while maintaining safety, adds another layer of complexity for regulatory bodies.

6.2 Technological Limitations

Current technological capabilities, while advanced, still present limitations that must be addressed for optimal multi-hormone AP system performance:

• Sensor Accuracy and Latency: While CGMs have improved, the inherent lag time between interstitial and blood glucose, and the remaining MARD, can still challenge the precision of real-time multi-hormone dosing. Future advancements require faster, more accurate, and perhaps fully implantable or non-invasive glucose sensors with longer wear times and minimal calibration [14].
• Pump Reliability and Miniaturization: Delivering multiple hormones precisely and reliably requires highly advanced pump technology. The pumps need to be miniaturized, lightweight, and robust enough for continuous wear, capable of delivering extremely small (micro-unit) doses of glucagon accurately, and ensuring reservoir integrity for multiple days. Infusion site issues, such as occlusions or inflammation, remain a common problem for all subcutaneous insulin delivery systems and could be compounded by multiple infusions or different hormone characteristics [25].
• Hormone Stability and Storage: The inherent instability of glucagon in solution, even with newer stable formulations, still presents challenges for long-term storage within a device’s reservoir. The need for separate reservoirs for different hormones further adds to the device’s size and complexity. Developing truly stable co-formulations or highly stable, long-acting glucagon analogs remains an area of active research.
• Algorithm Robustness and Personalization: While advanced algorithms like MPC and AI are promising, they must be robust enough to handle the immense inter- and intra-individual variability in glucose metabolism, including responses to exercise, stress, illness, sleep, and alcohol, without requiring constant user input. Achieving truly personalized adaptive learning algorithms that can learn and fine-tune parameters for each individual over time is still an evolving field [16].
• Battery Life: Powering multiple pumps, the CGM, and the computationally intensive control algorithm in a compact, wearable device requires significant battery capacity and efficient power management, which can impact device size and weight.

6.3 Cost and Accessibility

The economic implications of multi-hormone AP systems are substantial and could impede equitable access:

• High Development and Manufacturing Costs: The research, development, clinical trials, and manufacturing of such sophisticated multi-component devices and specialized hormone formulations (e.g., stable liquid glucagon) are extremely expensive. These costs are ultimately reflected in the price of the system and its consumables.
• Device and Consumable Costs: A multi-hormone system will inherently be more expensive than an insulin-only pump or AP due to the inclusion of additional hormones, potentially multiple pumps/reservoirs, and more complex sensors. The ongoing cost of consumables (infusion sets, reservoirs, glucagon, pramlintide, CGM sensors) will be significantly higher, posing a substantial financial burden on patients and healthcare systems.
• Insurance Coverage and Reimbursement: Securing adequate insurance coverage and reimbursement for novel, expensive technologies is a perennial challenge. Payers will require robust evidence of cost-effectiveness, demonstrating that the improved health outcomes and reduced complication rates justify the higher initial and ongoing costs.
• Healthcare Disparities: The high cost could exacerbate existing healthcare disparities, limiting access for individuals in low-income settings or those without comprehensive insurance coverage. Strategies to reduce costs, implement tiered pricing, or establish robust reimbursement models are crucial for equitable global adoption.
• Training and Education: Patients, caregivers, and healthcare providers will require extensive training to effectively use and troubleshoot these complex systems. The cost and infrastructure required for such training can also be a significant hurdle, particularly in resource-limited settings.

6.4 Patient Acceptance and Adherence

Even with highly effective technology, patient acceptance and adherence are critical for real-world success:

• Complexity of Management: While aiming to reduce burden, the initial setup, learning curve, and potential for alarms or required interventions can be perceived as complex by some users.
• Continuous Wear: The requirement to continuously wear multiple devices or a single integrated, potentially bulky device, can be a deterrent for some individuals.
• Side Effects: While beneficial, pramlintide can induce nausea, particularly during initiation. Glucagon, while a rescue hormone, can also cause nausea and vomiting in some instances. Managing these side effects is crucial for patient adherence.
• Fear of Technology Failure: Patients may experience anxiety regarding potential device malfunctions or algorithm errors, leading to a lack of trust in the automated system. Building confidence in the system’s reliability is key.

Addressing these multifaceted hurdles will require concerted efforts from researchers, industry, regulatory bodies, and healthcare providers to ensure that multi-hormone AP systems can transition from promising research tools to widely accessible and transformative clinical solutions.

Many thanks to our sponsor Esdebe who helped us prepare this research report.

7. Future Directions

The trajectory of multi-hormone artificial pancreas systems is characterized by relentless innovation and an increasingly interdisciplinary approach. The future holds immense potential for refining existing technologies, personalizing treatment strategies, and gathering robust real-world evidence to establish their long-term impact.

7.1 Technological Advancements

The evolution of AP systems is intrinsically linked to advancements in their core technological components:

• Next-Generation Continuous Glucose Monitors (CGMs): Future CGMs will likely feature enhanced accuracy (lower MARD), reduced latency, longer wear times (up to 14 days or more, potentially months for implantables), and a complete elimination of calibration requirements. Research into fully non-invasive glucose sensing technologies (e.g., optical, sweat-based) continues, which could dramatically improve user comfort and reduce infusion site issues [26]. Implantable CGMs with extended lifespan and improved stability are also on the horizon, offering truly ‘set-and-forget’ sensing capabilities.

• Smart Pumps and Integrated Delivery Systems: The next generation of pumps will likely be smaller, lighter, and more discreet, potentially in a patch-like form factor that integrates multiple reservoirs, micro-pumps, and the control algorithm into a single wearable unit. Advanced microfluidic platforms will enable precise, dynamic, and independent delivery of multiple hormones through a single, smaller infusion catheter. Research into novel drug delivery platforms, beyond subcutaneous infusion, such as oral or inhaled forms of glucagon or ultra-rapid insulins, could further enhance response times and user convenience.

• Advanced Control Algorithms with AI/Machine Learning: Control algorithms will become increasingly sophisticated, leveraging artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML), particularly reinforcement learning, to continuously adapt and optimize treatment strategies for individual users. This will move beyond static models to truly dynamic, self-learning systems that can anticipate glucose trends with greater accuracy, automatically detect meals and exercise without user input, and proactively adjust hormone delivery. AI-driven predictive analytics will further enhance safety by forecasting and preventing potential hypoglycemic or hyperglycemic events well in advance [16].

• Novel Hormone Formulations: Continued pharmaceutical innovation is crucial. This includes the development of even faster-acting insulin analogs, highly stable and concentrated liquid glucagon formulations with longer shelf lives within devices, and potentially novel amylin analogs with improved side-effect profiles or enhanced efficacy. Research into co-formulations that are stable for extended periods within a single reservoir would simplify device design and reduce complexity for users.

7.2 Personalized Medicine

The concept of personalized medicine, tailoring therapeutic interventions to an individual’s unique characteristics, is particularly pertinent to diabetes management and multi-hormone AP systems:

• Phenotypic and Genomic Profiling: Integrating individual patient data, including genetic predispositions (e.g., genes affecting insulin sensitivity or carbohydrate metabolism), metabolic profiles, lifestyle patterns, and comorbidity status, will enable the creation of highly personalized AP algorithms. This would allow for customized hormone ratios, target glucose ranges, and adaptive responses to specific daily routines or physiological stressors [27].
• Individualized Model Parameters: The mathematical models underlying AP algorithms currently use generalized parameters. Future systems will dynamically estimate and adapt these parameters (e.g., insulin sensitivity, carbohydrate-to-insulin ratio, gastric emptying rate) in real-time for each individual, accounting for day-to-day variations caused by stress, illness, sleep, or exercise. This level of personalization will maximize efficacy and safety.
• Predictive Analytics for Lifestyle Integration: AI-driven systems could learn an individual’s typical meal times, activity patterns, and sleep schedules, using this information to proactively optimize hormone delivery, reducing the need for manual inputs and enhancing lifestyle flexibility. This could even extend to integrating data from other wearable health devices (e.g., fitness trackers) to inform exercise adjustments.

7.3 Long-Term Studies and Real-World Evidence

To fully establish the transformative potential and safety of multi-hormone AP systems, extensive long-term research is indispensable:

• Extended Efficacy and Safety Trials: While initial trials demonstrate promising short-term results, prolonged clinical studies (e.g., 2-5 years) are necessary to assess the sustained efficacy of these systems in maintaining glycemic control, reducing complications, and evaluating the long-term safety profile of chronic multi-hormone administration. This includes meticulously monitoring for any unforeseen adverse events or changes in physiological responses over time.
• Impact on Diabetes Complications: The ultimate measure of success for any diabetes therapy is its ability to prevent or significantly delay the onset and progression of microvascular and macrovascular complications. Long-term studies must robustly demonstrate the impact of superior glycemic control (achieved by multi-hormone AP) on endpoints such as retinopathy, nephropathy, neuropathy, and cardiovascular disease [22].
• Health Economics Outcomes Research (HEOR): To justify the high cost of advanced AP systems, comprehensive HEOR studies are critical. These studies will evaluate the cost-effectiveness of multi-hormone AP, weighing the initial investment and ongoing costs against potential savings from reduced hospitalizations, fewer severe hypoglycemic events, and prevention of long-term complications. Demonstrating favorable health economic outcomes is crucial for widespread reimbursement and accessibility.
• Patient-Reported Outcomes (PROs): Beyond clinical metrics, it is vital to capture the patient’s perspective. Long-term studies should thoroughly assess patient-reported outcomes, including quality of life, treatment satisfaction, psychosocial well-being, and reduction in diabetes-related burden, to ensure that the technology truly enhances the lives of individuals with diabetes.
• Regulatory Harmonization and Post-Market Surveillance: As these technologies evolve, there will be a growing need for international regulatory bodies to harmonize approval pathways to expedite access globally. Robust post-market surveillance systems will also be essential to continuously monitor the safety and performance of these devices once they are in widespread use, facilitating rapid identification and resolution of any issues.

7.4 Integration with Other Therapies

Future multi-hormone AP systems may not operate in isolation but could integrate with other emerging therapies:

• Adjunctive Oral Therapies: For individuals with T1D who may also have insulin resistance or other metabolic considerations, or for T2D, the AP system could be integrated with the use of oral medications such as SGLT2 inhibitors or GLP-1 receptor agonists, which offer benefits beyond glucose lowering (e.g., cardiovascular and renal protection) [28].
• Nutritional and Lifestyle Coaching: The AP system could be paired with AI-driven nutritional and lifestyle coaching applications, providing personalized dietary recommendations and exercise guidance that further optimize glycemic control in synergy with automated hormone delivery.

These future directions underscore a holistic vision for diabetes management, where multi-hormone artificial pancreas systems are not just devices but integrated health solutions that continuously adapt, personalize, and optimize care, dramatically improving health outcomes and quality of life for millions.

Many thanks to our sponsor Esdebe who helped us prepare this research report.

8. Conclusion

The evolution of diabetes management from conventional insulin injections to advanced closed-loop systems represents a remarkable scientific and technological journey. Multi-hormone artificial pancreas systems, by integrating insulin, glucagon, and pramlintide, signify a pivotal advancement in this trajectory, offering the most physiologically accurate emulation of endogenous glucose regulation to date. This sophisticated approach holds the profound potential to transform the lives of individuals with diabetes, particularly those with type 1 diabetes, by achieving superior glycemic control, dramatically reducing the incidence and fear of hypoglycemia, and substantially alleviating the relentless burden of daily self-management.

However, the path to widespread adoption is paved with significant challenges. The intrinsic biological complexities of maintaining hormone stability and compatibility, coupled with the formidable engineering demands of precise multi-hormone co-delivery, require continuous innovation. Developing robust and adaptive control algorithms that can intelligently manage these hormones in dynamic real-world scenarios, while ensuring paramount safety, remains an intensive area of research. Furthermore, regulatory complexities, the high costs associated with development and implementation, and the need for patient education and acceptance present considerable hurdles that must be systematically addressed.

Despite these challenges, the rapid pace of technological advancements in continuous glucose monitoring, smart pump technologies, and artificial intelligence-driven control algorithms offers immense optimism. Future directions emphasize personalized medicine, where AP systems learn and adapt to individual physiological nuances, and comprehensive long-term studies to unequivocally demonstrate their impact on diabetes complications, quality of life, and health economics. The collaborative efforts of researchers, clinicians, engineers, pharmaceutical companies, and regulatory bodies are indispensable in navigating these complexities.

In summation, multi-hormone artificial pancreas systems are not merely incremental improvements but represent a paradigm shift towards truly automated, safer, and more effective diabetes care. As these systems mature, they promise to move beyond just managing diabetes to profoundly enhancing the health, freedom, and overall well-being of individuals living with this chronic condition, marking a new era of hope and possibility.

Many thanks to our sponsor Esdebe who helped us prepare this research report.

References

1. American Diabetes Association. (2023). Standards of Care in Diabetes—2023. Diabetes Care, 46(Supplement 1), S1–S291.
2. Weisman, A., et al. (2018). Challenges and Considerations in the Development of Artificial Pancreas Systems for Type 1 Diabetes. Diabetes Technology & Therapeutics, 20(S2), S2-49–S2-56.
3. Haidar, A., et al. (2021). Fully Automated Artificial Pancreas for Adults With Type 1 Diabetes Using Multiple Hormones: Exploratory Experiments. Canadian Journal of Diabetes, 45(4), 345–352. (pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33888413/)
4. Brissova, M., et al. (2005). Human Islet Architecture and Composition in the Context of Diabetes. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1052, 107–119.
5. Cerasi, E. (1975). An updated assessment of the primary insulin secretory defect in type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Care, 1(4), 341-352.
6. Jiang, G., & Zhang, B. B. (2003). Glucagon and Glucagon Receptor in Diabetes and Metabolism. Reviews in Endocrine & Metabolic Disorders, 4(2), 119–128.
7. D’Alessio, D. A. (2011). The Islet as a Hub for Endocrine Regulation: Insulin and Glucagon in Physiology and Disease. Journal of Clinical Investigation, 121(10), 3749–3752.
8. Swarup, S., & Grewal, J. (2007). Amylin: A Novel Peptide Hormone. Indian Journal of Endocrinology and Metabolism, 11(3), 101–106.
9. Ryan, G. J., & Jobe, L. J. (2005). Pramlintide: an amylin analogue for the treatment of diabetes mellitus. Clinical Therapeutics, 27(10), 1500–1520.
10. Haidar, A., et al. (2020). A Novel Dual-Hormone Insulin-and-Pramlintide Artificial Pancreas for Type 1 Diabetes: A Randomized Controlled Crossover Trial. Diabetes Care, 43(3), 597–605. (diabetesjournals.org/care/article/43/3/597/35620/A-Novel-Dual-Hormone-Insulin-and-Pramlintide)
11. Brange, J., et al. (1997). Insulin structure and stability. Pharmaceutical Biotechnology, 5, 315-327.
12. Pettus, J., et al. (2017). A New Form of Glucagon for the Treatment of Hypoglycemia. Diabetes Technology & Therapeutics, 19(S1), S1-23–S1-29.
13. Jacobs, P. G., et al. (2015). Microfluidics for Biomedical Applications. MRS Bulletin, 40(6), 557–563.
14. Rodbard, D. (2017). Continuous Glucose Monitoring: A Review of Efficacy and Safety. Journal of Diabetes Science and Technology, 11(2), 333–353.
15. Hovorka, R. (2016). Pancreatic islet transplantation and the artificial pancreas. Transplantation Research, 5(1), 8.
16. Gondhalekar, R., et al. (2021). Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning in Automated Insulin Delivery: A Review. Diabetes Technology & Therapeutics, 23(1), S105–S117.
17. Breton, M., & Kovatchev, B. P. (2008). In Silico Testing of the Artificial Pancreas. Journal of Diabetes Science and Technology, 2(5), 755–763.
18. Lum, J. W., et al. (2021). Dual-Hormone Artificial Pancreas for Management of Type 1 Diabetes: Recent Progress and Future Directions. Frontiers in Endocrinology, 12, 742. (pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34263961/)
19. Bakhtiani, P. A., et al. (2018). Dual-hormone artificial pancreas in patients with type 1 diabetes: a review. Current Opinion in Endocrinology & Diabetes and Obesity, 25(4), 237–243.
20. Jacobs, P. G., et al. (2025). An AI-enabled Dual-Hormone Model Predictive Control Algorithm That Delivers Insulin and Pramlintide. arXiv preprint. (arxiv.org/abs/2503.17887)
21. Tanzanakis, A., & Lygeros, J. (2023). Multi-Step Optimal Tracking Control of Unknown Nonzero-Sum Games Based on Least Squares and Linear Programming: An Application to a Fully-Automated, Dual-Hormone Artificial Pancreas. arXiv preprint. (arxiv.org/abs/2311.03063)
22. Battelino, T., et al. (2019). Clinical Targets for Continuous Glucose Monitoring-Data Interpretation: Recommendations From the International Consensus on Time in Range. Diabetes Care, 42(8), 1593–1603.
23. Choudhary, P., et al. (2013). The fear of hypoglycaemia in adults with Type 1 diabetes. Diabetic Medicine, 30(9), 1121–1124.
24. Klonoff, D. C. (2018). The US Food and Drug Administration’s Artificial Pancreas Pathway. Journal of Diabetes Science and Technology, 12(1), 5–12.
25. Raccah, D., et al. (2008). Insulin pump use: patient and pump-related complications. Diabetes & Metabolism, 34(5), 456–462.
26. Rebrin, K., & Steil, G. M. (2017). Can Noninvasive Glucose Monitoring Finally Supplant the Glucometer?. Journal of Diabetes Science and Technology, 11(2), 354–363.
27. Bell, D. S. (2011). Personalized medicine in the treatment of type 2 diabetes. Diabetes, Metabolic Syndrome and Obesity: Targets and Therapy, 4, 187–202.
28. Nauck, M. A., & Meier, J. J. (2019). The Place of the GLP-1 Receptor Agonists and DPP-4 Inhibitors in the Treatment of Type 2 Diabetes. Diabetologia, 62(2), 273–286.