Aim: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of faster insulin aspart (FA) vs. insulin aspart (A) in T2D using fully closed-loop (CL) glucose control.

Methods: Fifteen adults (5 females, age 59±10 years, BMI 34.5±9.1kg/m2) with insulin-treated T2D (HbA1c 7.7±1.2% [60±13mM/mol], insulin dose 1.0±0.7U/kg) underwent two 22h-visits (1900-1700) receiving CL with either FA or A in a double-blind randomized crossover design. Basal-bolus regimen was replaced by model predictive control algorithm-directed s/c administration of FA or A based on sensor glucose levels. After an overnight stay, participants consumed matched breakfast and lunch and performed a 20 min-walk. Plasma glucose measurements every 15 min over 10h (0700-1700) evaluated CL performance.

Results: The proportion of time when plasma glucose was in target range from 5.6-10.0mM did not differ between FA and A (primary endpoint, p=0.17, Table). Mean glucose and glucose variability were comparable, as was time spent below and above target. The 2h-postprandial glucose increment was comparable after breakfast and significantly lower after lunch with FA vs. A (p=0.78 and p=0.047). One hypoglycaemic event (<3.5mM) occurred with FA and two with A. Insulin dose was significantly higher with FA vs. A (p=0.021).

Conclusion: Short-term use of fully CL with FA vs. A requires higher insulin doses to achieve comparable glucose control.


L. Bally: None. D. Herzig: None. M.E. Wilinska: None. Y. Ruan: None. A. Vogt: None. M.M. Wertli: None. B. Vogt: None. C. Stettler: None. R. Hovorka: Advisory Panel; Self; Novo Nordisk A/S. Research Support; Self; Abbott, Dexcom, Inc., Medtronic. Speaker's Bureau; Self; Eli Lilly and Company, Novo Nordisk A/S. Other Relationship; Self; B. Braun Medical Inc., Medtronic.


UDEM Scientific Fund; Swiss Diabetes Foundation; Diabetes Centre Bern

Readers may use this article as long as the work is properly cited, the use is educational and not for profit, and the work is not altered. More information is available at