Techniques to improve polyurethane membranes for implantable glucose sensors

Information

  • Patent Grant
  • 9179869
  • Patent Number
    9,179,869
  • Date Filed
    Wednesday, September 10, 2014
    9 years ago
  • Date Issued
    Tuesday, November 10, 2015
    8 years ago
Abstract
The invention provides an implantable membrane for regulating the transport of analytes therethrough that includes a matrix including a first polymer; and a second polymer dispersed throughout the matrix, wherein the second polymer forms a network of microdomains which when hydrated are not observable using photomicroscopy at 400× magnification or less. In one aspect, the homogeneous membrane of the present invention has hydrophilic domains dispersed substantially throughout a hydrophobic matrix to provide an optimum balance between oxygen and glucose transport to an electrochemical glucose sensor.
Description
FIELD OF THE INVENTION

The present invention relates generally to membranes for use in combination with implantable devices for evaluating an analyte in a body fluid. More particularly, the invention relates to membranes for controlling the diffusion of glucose therethrough to a glucose sensor.


BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

A biosensor is a device that uses biological recognition properties for the selective analysis of various analytes or biomolecules. Generally, the sensor will produce a signal that is quantitatively related to the concentration of the analyte. In particular, a great deal of research has been directed toward the development of a glucose sensor that would function in vivo to monitor a patient's blood glucose level. Such a glucose sensor is useful in the treatment of diabetes mellitus. In particular, an implantable glucose sensor that would continuously monitor the patient's blood glucose level would provide a physician with more accurate information in order to develop optimal therapy. One type of glucose sensor is the amperometric electrochemical glucose sensor. Typically, an electrochemical glucose sensor employs the use of a glucose oxidase enzyme to catalyze the reaction between glucose and oxygen and subsequently generate an electrical signal. The reaction catalyzed by glucose oxidase yields gluconic acid and hydrogen peroxide as shown in the reaction below (equation 1):




embedded image



The hydrogen peroxide reacts electrochemically as shown below in equation 2:

H2O2→2H++O2+2e


The current measured by the sensor is generated by the oxidation of the hydrogen peroxide at a platinum working electrode. According to equation 1, if there is excess oxygen for equation 1, then the hydrogen peroxide is stoichiometrically related to the amount of glucose that reacts with the enzyme. In this instance, the ultimate current is also proportional to the amount of glucose that reacts with the enzyme. However, if there is insufficient oxygen for all of the glucose to react with the enzyme, then the current will be proportional to the oxygen concentration, not the glucose concentration. For the glucose sensor to be useful, glucose must be the limiting reagent, i.e., the oxygen concentration must be in excess for all potential glucose concentrations. Unfortunately, this requirement is not easily achieved. For example, in the subcutaneous tissue the concentration of oxygen is much less that of glucose. As a consequence, oxygen can become a limiting reactant, giving rise to a problem with oxygen deficit. Attempts have been made to circumvent this problem in order to allow the sensor to continuously operate in an environment with an excess of oxygen.


Several attempts have been made to use membranes of various types in an effort to design a membrane that regulates the transport of oxygen and glucose to the sensing elements of glucose oxidase-based glucose sensors. One approach has been to develop homogenous membranes having hydrophilic domains dispersed substantially throughout a hydrophobic matrix to circumvent the oxygen deficit problem, where glucose diffusion is facilitated by the hydrophilic segments.


For example, U.S. Pat. No. 5,322,063 to Allen et al. teaches that various compositions of hydrophilic polyurethanes can be used in order to control the ratios of the diffusion coefficients of oxygen to glucose in an implantable glucose sensor. In particular, various polyurethane compositions were synthesized that were capable of absorbing from 10 to 50% of their dry weight of water. The polyurethanes were rendered hydrophilic by incorporating polyethyleneoxide as their soft segment diols. One disadvantage of this invention is that the primary backbone structure of the polyurethane is sufficiently different so that more than one casting solvent may be required to fabricate the membranes. This reduces the ease with which the membranes may be manufactured and may further reduce the reproducibility of the membrane. Furthermore, neither the percent of the polyethyleneoxide soft segment nor the percent water pickup of the polyurethanes disclosed by Allen directly correlate to the oxygen to glucose permeability ratios. Therefore, one skilled in the art cannot simply change the polymer composition and be able to predict the oxygen to glucose permeability ratios. As a result, a large number of polymers would need to be synthesized before a desired specific oxygen to glucose permeability ratio could be obtained.


U.S. Pat. Nos. 5,777,060 and 5,882,494, each to Van Antwerp, also disclose homogeneous membranes having hydrophilic domains dispersed throughout a hydrophobic matrix to reduce the amount of glucose diffusion to the working electrode of a biosensor. For example, U.S. Pat. No. 5,882,494 to Van Antwerp discloses a membrane including the reaction products of a diisocyanate, a hydrophilic diol or diamine, and a silicone material. In addition, U.S. Pat. No. 5,777,060 to Van Antwerp discloses polymeric membranes that can be prepared from (a) a diisocyanate, (b) a hydrophilic polymer, (c) a siloxane polymer having functional groups at the chain termini, and optionally (d) a chain extender. Polymerization of these membranes typically requires heating of the reaction mixture for periods of time from 1 to 4 hours, depending on whether polymerization of the reactants is carried out in bulk or in a solvent system. Therefore, it would be beneficial to provide a method of preparing a homogenous membrane from commercial polymers. Moreover, as mentioned above, one skilled in the art cannot simply change the polymer composition and be able to predict the oxygen to glucose permeability ratios. Therefore, a large number of polymers would need to be synthesized and coating or casting techniques optimized before a desired specific oxygen to glucose permeability ratio could be obtained.


A further membrane is disclosed in U.S. Pat. No. 6,200,772 B1 to Vadgama et al. that has hydrophilic domains dispersed substantially throughout a hydrophobic matrix for limiting the amount of glucose diffusing to a working electrode. In particular, the patent describes a sensor device that includes a membrane comprised of modified polyurethane that is substantially non-porous and incorporates a non-ionic surfactant as a modifier. The non-ionic surfactant is disclosed as preferably including a poly-oxyalkylene chain, such as one derived from multiple units of poly-oxyethylene groups. As described, the non-ionic surfactant may be incorporated into the polyurethane by admixture or through compounding to distribute it throughout the polyurethane. The non-ionic surfactant is, according to the specification, preferably incorporated into the polyurethane by allowing it to react chemically with the polyurethane so that it becomes chemically bound into its molecular structure. Like most reactive polymer resins, complete reaction of the surfactant into the polyurethane may never occur. Therefore, a disadvantage of this membrane is that it can leach the surfactant over time and cause irritation at the implant site or change its permeability to glucose.


PCT Application WO 92/13271 discloses an implantable fluid measuring device for determining the presence and the amounts of substances in a biological fluid that includes a membrane for limiting the amount of a substance that passes therethrough. In particular, this application discloses a membrane including a blend of two substantially similar polyurethane urea copolymers, one having a glucose permeability that is somewhat higher than preferred and the other having a glucose permeability that is somewhat lower than preferred.


An important factor in obtaining a useful implantable sensor for detection of glucose or other analytes is the need for optimization of materials and methods in order to obtain predictable in vitro and in vivo function. The ability of the sensor to function in a predictable and reliable manner in vitro is dependent on consistent fabrication techniques. Repeatability of fabrication has been a problem associated with prior art membranes that attempt to regulate the transport of analytes to the sensing elements.


We refer now to FIG. 1, which shows a photomicrograph at 200× magnification of a prior art cast polymer blend following hydration. A disadvantage of the prior art membranes is that, upon thermodynamic separation from the hydrophobic portions, the hydrophilic components form undesirable structures that appear circular 1 and elliptical 2 when viewed with a light microscope when the membrane 3 is hydrated, but not when it is dry. These hydrated structures can be detected by photomicroscopy under magnifications in the range of between 200×-400×, for example. They have been shown by the present inventors to be non-uniform in their dimensions throughout the membrane, with some being of the same size and same order of dimensions as the electrode size. It is believed that these large domains present a problem in that they result in a locally high concentration of either hydrophobic or hydrophilic material in association with the electrode. This can result in glucose diffusion being limited or variable across the dimension adjacent the sensing electrode. Moreover, these large hydrated structures can severely limit the number of glucose diffusion paths available. It is noted that particles 4 in membrane 3 are dust particles.


With reference now to a schematic representation of a known membrane 14 in FIG. 2A, one can consider by way of example a continuous path 16 by which glucose may traverse along the hydrophilic segments 10 that are dispersed in hydrophobic sections 12 of the membrane. For path 16, glucose is able to traverse a fairly continuous path along assembled hydrophilic segments 10 from the side 18 of the membrane in contact with the body fluid containing glucose to the sensing side 20 proximal to sensor 22, where an electrode 24 is placed at position 26 where glucose diffusion occurs adjacent surface 20. In particular, in that portion of the membrane 14 proximal to position 26, glucose diffusion occurs along hydrophilic segments 10 that comprise a hydrated structure 28 having a size and overall dimensions x that are of the same order of magnitude as electrode 24. Therefore, glucose diffusion would be substantially constant across the dimension adjacent electrode 24, but the number of glucose diffusion paths would be limited.


Referring now to FIG. 2B, one can consider an example where glucose traversing prior art membrane 14 from side 18 in contact with the body fluid to the sensing side 20 cannot adequately reach electrode 30. In particular, electrode 30 is located at position 34, which is adjacent to a locally high concentration of a hydrophobic region 12 of prior art membrane 14. In this instance, glucose diffusion cannot adequately occur, or is severely limited across the dimension adjacent the electrode surface. Consequently, one would expect that the locally high concentration of the hydrophobic regions adjacent to working electrode 30 would limit the ability of the sensing device to obtain accurate glucose measurements. The random chance that the membrane could be placed in the 2A configuration as opposed to 2B leads to wide variability in sensor performance.


We also refer to FIG. 2C, which shows another cross-section of prior art membrane 14. In this instance, glucose is able to traverse a fairly continuous path 36 from side 18 to side 20 proximal to the sensing device. However, electrode 38 is located at position 40 such that glucose diffusion is variable across the dimension adjacent the electrical surface. In particular, most of the electrode surface is associated with a locally high concentration of hydrophobic region and a small portion is associated with hydrophilic segments 10 along glucose diffusion path 36. Furthermore, glucose diffusing along path 36a would not be associated with the electrode. Again, the large non-uniform structures of the prior art membranes can limit the number of glucose diffusion paths and the ability of the sensing device to obtain accurate glucose measurements.


It would be beneficial to form more homogeneous membranes for controlling glucose transport from commercially available polymers that have a similar backbone structure. This would result in a more reproducible membrane. In particular, it is desired that one would be able to predict the resulting glucose permeability of the resulting membrane by simply varying the polymer composition. In this way, the glucose diffusion characteristics of the membrane could be modified, without greatly changing the manufacturing parameters for the membrane. In particular, there is a need for homogeneous membranes having hydrophilic segments dispersed throughout a hydrophobic matrix that are easy to fabricate reproducibly from readily available reagents. Of particular importance would be the development of membranes where the hydrophilic portions were distributed evenly throughout the membrane, and where their size and dimensions were on an order considerably less than the size and dimensions of the electrode of the sensing device to allow the electrode to be in association with a useful amount of both hydrophobic and hydrophilic portions. The ability of the membranes to be synthesized and manufactured in reasonable quantities and at reasonable prices would be a further advantage.


SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

The present invention provides an implantable membrane for controlling the diffusion of an analyte therethrough to a biosensor with which it is associated. In particular, the membrane of the present invention satisfies a need in the art by providing a homogenous membrane with both hydrophilic and hydrophobic regions to control the diffusion of glucose and oxygen to a biosensor, the membrane being fabricated easily and reproducibly from commercially available materials.


The invention provides a biocompatible membrane that regulates the transport of analytes that includes: (a) a matrix including a first polymer; and (b) a second polymer dispersed throughout the matrix, wherein the second polymer forms a network of microdomains which when hydrated are not observable using photomicroscopy at 400× magnification or less.


Further provided by the invention is a polymeric membrane for regulation of glucose and oxygen in a subcutaneous glucose measuring device that includes: (a) a matrix including a first polymer; and (b) a second polymer dispersed throughout the matrix, wherein the second polymer forms a network of microdomains which are not photomicroscopically observable when hydrated at 400× magnification or less.


Yet another aspect of the present invention is directed to a polymeric membrane for regulating the transport of analytes, the membrane including at least one block copolymer AB, wherein B forms a network of microdomains which are not photomicroscopically observable when hydrated at 400× magnification or less.


Also provided is a membrane and sensor combination, the sensor being adapted for evaluating an analyte within a body fluid, the membrane having: (a) a matrix including a first polymer; and (b) a second polymer dispersed throughout the matrix, wherein the second polymer forms a network of microdomains which are not photomicroscopically observable when hydrated at 400× magnification or less.


The invention further provides an implantable device for measuring an analyte in a hydrophilic body fluid, including: (a) a polymeric membrane having (i) a matrix including a first polymer; and (ii) a second polymer dispersed throughout the matrix, wherein the second polymer forms a network of microdomains which are not photomicroscopically observable when hydrated at 400× magnification or less; and (b) a proximal layer of enzyme reactive with the analyte.


Moreover, a method for preparing an implantable membrane according to the invention is provided, the method including the steps of: (a) forming a composition including a dispersion of a second polymer within a matrix of a first polymer, the dispersion forming a network of microdomains which are not photomicroscopically observable when hydrated at 400× magnification or less; (b) maintaining the composition at a temperature sufficient to maintain the first polymer and the second polymer substantially soluble; (c) applying the composition at this temperature to a substrate to form a film thereon; and (d) permitting the resultant film to dry to form the membrane.





BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS


FIG. 1 is a photomicrograph of a cross-section of prior art membrane at 200× magnification following hydration with water for two hours.



FIG. 2A is a schematic representation of a cross-section of a prior art membrane having large hydrated structures dispersed substantially throughout a hydrophobic matrix, the hydrated structures being photomicroscopically observable at 400× magnification or less. The figure illustrates the positioning of a working electrode relative to a glucose diffusion pathway.



FIG. 2B is another schematic representation of a cross-section of the prior art membrane of FIG. 2A, where the working electrode is placed in association with a locally high concentration of the hydrophobic matrix.



FIG. 2C is yet another schematic representation of a cross-section of the prior art membrane of FIG. 2A where glucose diffusion is variable across the dimension adjacent the electrode surface.



FIG. 3 is a photomicrograph of a cross-section of a membrane of the present invention at 200× magnification following hydration with water for two hours.



FIG. 4 is a schematic representation of a cross-section illustrating one particular form of the membrane of the present invention that shows a network of microdomains which are not photomicroscopically observable at 400× or less magnification dispersed through a hydrophobic matrix, where the membrane is positioned in association with a sensor that includes a working electrode.



FIG. 5 is a schematic representation of a cross-section of the membrane of FIG. 3 in combination with an enzyme containing layer positioned more adjacent to a sensor 50.



FIG. 6 is a graph showing sensor output versus the percent of the hydrophobic-hydrophilic copolymer component in the coating blend.



FIG. 7 is a graph showing the percent standard deviation of the sensor current versus the percent of the hydrophobic-hydrophilic copolymer component in the coating blend.





DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE PREFERRED EMBODIMENT

In order to facilitate understanding of the present invention, a number of terms are defined below.


The term “analyte” refers to a substance or chemical constituent in a biological fluid (e.g. blood or urine) that is intended to be analyzed. A preferred analyte for measurement by analyte detecting devices including the membrane of the present invention is glucose.


The term “sensor” refers to the component or region of a device by which an analyte can be evaluated.


By the terms “evaluated”, “monitored”, “analyzed”, and the like, it is meant that an analyte may be detected and/or measured.


The phrase “continuous glucose sensing” refers to the period in which monitoring of plasma glucose concentration is repeatedly performed over short periods of time, for example, 10 seconds to about every 15 minutes.


The term “domain” refers to regions of the membrane of the present invention that may be layers, uniform or non-uniform gradients (e.g. anisotropic) or provided as portions of the membrane. Furthermore, the region possesses physical properties distinctly different from other portions of the membrane.


The terms “accurate” and “accurately” means, for example, 85% of measured glucose values are within the “A” and “B” region of a standard Clarke Error Grid when the sensor measurements are compared to a standard reference measurement. It is understood that like any analytical device, calibration, calibration validation and recalibration are required for the most accurate operation of the device.


The term “host” refers to humans and other animals.


In the disclosure that follows, the invention will primarily be referred to in terms of assay of glucose and solutions such as blood that tend to contain a large excess of glucose over oxygen. However, it is well within the contemplation of the present invention that the membrane is not limited solely to the assay of glucose in a biological fluid, but may be used for the assay of other compounds. In addition, the sensor primarily referred to is an electrochemical sensor that directly measures hydrogen peroxide. However, it is well within the contemplation of the present invention that non-electrochemical based sensors that use optical detectors or other suitable detectors may be used to evaluate an analyte.


Membranes of the prior art have generally been unreliable at limiting the passage of glucose to implantable glucose sensors. This has presented a problem in the past in that the amount of glucose coming into contact with the immobilized enzyme exceeds the amount of oxygen available. As a result, the oxygen concentration is the rate-limiting component of the reaction, rather than the glucose concentration, such that the accuracy of the glucose measurement in the body fluid is compromised.


As described above, in contrast to the present invention, a disadvantage of prior art membranes for regulating analyte transport therethrough has been their tendency to form large undesirable structures (see FIG. 1) that are observable when the membrane is hydrated. In particular, these hydrated structures can be detected by photomicroscopy under magnifications in the range of between 200×-400×, for example. They have been shown by the present inventors to be non-uniform in their dimensions through the membrane, with some being of the same size and same order of dimensions as the electrode size. These large structures have been found to be problematic in that they can result in a locally high concentration of either hydrophobic or hydrophilic material in association with the working electrode, which can lead to inaccurate glucose readings. Moreover, they can greatly reduce the number of glucose diffusion paths available.


The membrane of the present invention seeks to circumvent these problems associated with prior art membranes by providing a reliable homogeneous membrane that regulates the transport of glucose or other analytes therethrough, the membrane having (a) a matrix including a first polymer; and (b) a second polymer dispersed throughout the matrix, wherein the second polymer forms a network of microdomains which when hydrated are not observable using photomicroscopy at 400× magnification or less. In one embodiment of the invention, the membrane is substantially free of observable domains.


We refer now to FIG. 3, which shows a photomicrograph of a cross-section of a membrane 5 according to the present invention following hydration at two hours. As shown in FIG. 3, the membrane is devoid of any undesirable, large elliptical or spherical structures, such as were observable in hydrated prior art membranes at similar magnifications. It is noted that particles 6 in membrane 5 are dust particles.


For purposes of the present invention, it is likely that glucose permeability and diffusion is related to the ratio of hydrophobic to hydrophilic constituents and their distribution throughout the membrane, with diffusion occurring substantially along assembled hydrophilic segments from the side of the membrane in contact with the host to the sensing side.


Referring now to FIG. 4, membrane 42 of the present invention, in accordance with a particular arrangement, is schematically shown having hydrophilic segments 44 dispersed substantially throughout a hydrophobic matrix 46 and presenting a surface 48 to a hydrophilic body fluid. The hydrophilic body fluid contains the sample to be assayed. In one embodiment, the body fluid contains both glucose and oxygen. Membrane 42 restricts the rate at which glucose enters and passes through the membrane and/or may increase the rate at which oxygen enters and passes through membrane 42.


While not wishing to be bound by any one theory, it is likely that glucose diffuses substantially along hydrophilic segments 44, but is generally excluded from the hydrophobic matrix 46. It is noted that while the hydrophilic segments 44 are shown as comprising discrete microdomains in FIG. 4, small amounts of hydrophobic polymer may be present therein, particularly at the interface with the hydrophobic matrix 46. Similarly, small amounts of hydrophilic polymer may be present in the hydrophobic matrix 46, particularly at the interface with hydrophilic segments 44.


In the embodiment shown in FIG. 4, inventive membrane 42 is shown in combination with a sensor 50, which is positioned adjacent to the membrane. It is noted that additional membranes or layers may be situated between membrane 42 and sensor 50, as will be discussed in further detail below. Diffusion of the sample along paths 52 through membrane 42 into association with a working electrode 54 of sensor 50 causes development of a signal that is proportional to the amount of analyte in the sample. Determination of the analyte may be made by calculations based upon similar measurements made on standard solutions containing known concentrations of the analyte. For example, one or more electrodes may be used to detect the amount of analyte in the sample and convert that information into a signal; the signal may then be transmitted to electronic circuitry required to process biological information obtained from the host. U.S. Pat. Nos. 4,757,022, 5,497,772 and 4,787,398 describe suitable electronic circuitry that may be utilized with implantable devices of the present invention.


The present invention solves a need in the art by providing a reliable membrane for controlling glucose diffusion therethrough. As shown in FIG. 4, glucose can traverse along hydrophilic segments 44 from the side 48 of the membrane in contact with a body fluid to the side 56 proximal to sensor 50. The hydrophilic microdomains 44 are likely distributed substantially evenly throughout the membrane. Furthermore, these microdomains are likely substantially uniform in size throughout the membrane. The size and order to dimensions of these microdomains is considerably less than the that of the working electrode 54 of sensor 50. As such, the electrode is in association with a useful amount of both the hydrophobic 46 and hydrophilic 44 regions of the membrane to allow effective control over the amount of glucose diffusing to the electrode. Moreover, as shown in FIG. 4, the number of paths available for glucose to permeate the membrane and diffuse from side 48 to the sensing side 56 would be greater for the inventive membrane than for prior art membranes. Consequently, more accurate and reproducible glucose readings are attainable across the entire inventive membrane.



FIG. 5 shows a preferred embodiment of the present invention wherein membrane 42 is used in combination with a proximal membrane layer 58 that comprises an enzyme that is reactive with the analyte. In this instance, diffusion of the sample from side 48 through the membrane 42 into contact with the immobilized enzyme in layer 58 leads to an enzymatic reaction in which the reaction products may be measured. For example, in one embodiment the analyte is glucose. In a further embodiment, the enzyme immobilized in layer 58 is glucose oxidase.


As described above, glucose oxidase catalyzes the conversion of oxygen and glucose to hydrogen peroxide and gluconic acid. Because for each glucose molecule metabolized, there is proportional change in the co-reactant O2 and the product H2O2, one can monitor the change in either the co-reactant or the product to determine glucose concentration. With further reference to FIG. 5, diffusion of the resulting hydrogen peroxide through layer 58 to the sensor 50, (e.g. electrochemically reactive surfaces), causes the development of an electrical current that can be detected. This enables determination of the glucose by calculations based upon similar measurements made on standard solutions containing known concentrations of glucose.


In addition to glucose oxidase, the present invention contemplates the use of a layer impregnated with other oxidases, e.g. galactose oxidase or uricase. For an enzyme-based electrochemical glucose sensor to perform well, the sensor's response must neither be limited by enzyme activity nor cofactor concentration. Because enzymes, including glucose oxidase, are subject to deactivation as a function of ambient conditions, this behavior needs to be accounted for in constructing sensors for long-term use.


When the membrane of the present invention is combined with an enzyme layer 58 as shown in FIG. 5, it is the enzyme layer that is located more proximally to the sensor 50 (e.g. electrochemically reactive surfaces). It is noted that enzyme-containing layer 58 must be of sufficient permeability to 1) freely pass glucose to active enzyme and 2) to permit the rapid passage of hydrogen peroxide to the sensor (electrode surface). A failure to permit the rapid passage of glucose to the active enzyme or hydrogen peroxide from the active enzyme to the electrode surface can cause a time delay in the measured signal and thereby lead to inaccurate results.


Preferably, the enzyme layer is comprised of aqueous polyurethane-based latex into which the enzyme is immobilized.


It is noted that while the inventive membrane 42 may itself contain immobilized enzymes for promoting a reaction between glucose and oxygen, it is preferred that the enzyme be located in a separate layer, such as layer 58 shown in FIG. 5. As described above, it is known that enzyme actively reacting with glucose is more susceptible to irreversible inactivation. Therefore, a disadvantage of providing enzyme in a layer that is semi-permeable to glucose, is that the calibration factors of the sensor may change over time as the working enzyme degrades. In contrast, when enzyme is dispersed throughout a membrane freely permeable to glucose (i.e. layer 58 in FIG. 5), such a membrane is likely to yield calibration factors that are more stable over the life of a sensor.


In one preferred embodiment of the invention, the first polymer of the membrane includes homopolymer A and the second polymer includes copolymer AB.


In another embodiment, the first polymer includes copolymer AB and the second polymer includes copolymer AB. Preferably, the amount of B in copolymer AB of the first polymer is different than the amount of B in copolymer AB of the second polymer. In particular, the membrane may be formed from a blend of two AB copolymers, where one of the copolymers contains more of a hydrophilic B polymer component than the blended targeted amount and the other copolymer contains less of a hydrophilic B polymer component than the blended targeted amount.


In yet another embodiment of the invention, the first polymer includes homopolymer A and the second polymer includes homopolymer B.


As described above, the invention also provides a polymeric membrane for regulating the transport of analytes that includes at least one block copolymer AB, wherein B forms a network of microdomains which are not photomicroscopically observable when hydrated at 400× magnification or less. In one embodiment, the ratio of A to B in copolymer AB is 70:30 to 90:10.


For each of the inventive embodiments herein described, homopolymer A is preferably a hydrophobic A polymer. Moreover, copolymer AB is preferably a hydrophobic-hydrophilic copolymer component that includes the reaction products of a hydrophobic A polymer and a hydrophilic B polymer. Suitable materials for preparing membranes the present invention are described below.


For purposes of the present invention, copolymer AB may be a random or ordered block copolymer. Specifically, the random or ordered block copolymer may be selected from the following: ABA block copolymer, BAB block copolymer, AB random alternating block copolymer, AB regularly alternating block copolymer and combinations thereof.


In a preferred embodiment, the sensor, membrane, and methods of the present invention may be used to determine the level of glucose or other analytes in a host. The level of glucose is a particularly important measurement for individuals having diabetes in that effective treatment depends on the accuracy of this measurement.


In particular, the invention provides a method of measuring glucose in a biological fluid that includes the steps of: (a) providing (i) a host, and (ii) an implantable device for measuring an analyte in a hydrophilic body fluid, where the device includes a polymeric membrane having a matrix including a first polymer and a second polymer dispersed throughout the matrix, wherein the second polymer forms a network of microdomains which are not photomicroscopically observable when hydrated at 400× magnification or less; and a proximal layer of enzyme reactive with the analyte; and (b) implanting the device in the host. In one embodiment, the device is implanted subcutaneously.


The invention also provides a method of measuring glucose in a biological fluid that includes the following steps: (a) providing (i) a host, and (ii) an implantable device for measuring an analyte in a hydrophilic body fluid, that includes a polymeric membrane including a matrix including a first polymer and a second polymer dispersed throughout the matrix, wherein the second polymer forms a network of microdomains which are not photomicroscopically observable when hydrated at 400× magnification or less; and a proximal layer of enzyme reactive with the analyte, the device being capable of accurate continuous glucose sensing; and (b) implanting the device in the host. Desirably, the implant is placed subcutaneously in the host.


Glucose sensors that use, for example, glucose oxidase to effect a reaction of glucose and oxygen are known in the art, and are within the skill of one in the art to fabricate (see, for example, U.S. Pat. Nos. 5,165,407, 4,890,620, 5,390,671, 5,391,250, 6,001,067 as well as copending, commonly owned U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/916,858. It is noted that the present invention does not depend on a particular configuration of the sensor, but is rather dependent on the use of the inventive membrane to cover or encapsulate the sensor elements.


For the electrochemical glucose sensor to provide useful results, the glucose concentration, as opposed to oxygen concentration, must be the limiting factor. In order to make the system sensitive to glucose concentration, oxygen must be present within the membrane in excess of the glucose. In addition, the oxygen must be in sufficient excess so that it is also available for electrochemical reactions occurring at the amperometric electrode surfaces. In a preferred embodiment, the inventive membrane is designed so that oxygen can pass readily into and through the membrane and so that a reduced amount of glucose diffuses into and through the membrane into contact with an immobilized glucose oxidase enzyme. The inventive membrane allows the ratio of oxygen to glucose to be changed from a concentration ratio in the body fluid of about approximately 50 and 100 parts of glucose to 1 of oxygen to a new ratio in which there is a stoichiometric excess of oxygen in the enzyme layer. Through the use of the inventive membrane, an implantable glucose sensor system is not limited by the concentration of oxygen present in subcutaneous tissues and can therefore operate under the premise that the glucose oxidase reaction behaves as a 1-substrate (glucose) dependent process.


The present invention provides a semi-permeable membrane that controls the flux of oxygen and glucose to an underlying enzyme layer, rendering the necessary supply of oxygen in non-rate-limiting excess. As a result, the upper limit of linearity of glucose measurement is extended to a much higher value than that which could be achieved without the membrane of the present invention. In particular, in one embodiment the membrane of the present invention is a polymer membrane with oxygen-to-glucose permeability ratios of approximately 200:1; as a result, 1-dimensional reactant diffusion is adequate to provide excess oxygen at all reasonable glucose and oxygen concentrations found in a subcutaneous matrix [Rhodes, et al., Anal. Chem., 66: 1520-1529 (1994)].


A hydrophilic or “water loving” solute such as glucose is readily partitioned into a hydrophilic material, but is generally excluded from a hydrophobic material. However, oxygen can be soluble in both hydrophilic and hydrophobic materials. These factors affect entry and transport of components in the inventive membrane. The hydrophobic portions of the inventive membrane hinder the rate of entry of glucose into the membrane, and therefore to the proximal enzyme layer while providing access of oxygen through both the hydrophilic and hydrophobic portions to the underlying enzyme.


In one preferred embodiment, the membrane of the invention is formed from a blend of polymers including (i) a hydrophobic A polymer component; and (ii) a hydrophobic-hydrophilic copolymer component blended with component (i) that forms hydrophilic B domains that control the diffusion of an analyte therethrough, wherein the copolymer component includes a random or ordered block copolymer. Suitable block copolymers are described above. One is able to modify the glucose permeability and the glucose diffusion characteristics of the membrane by simply varying the polymer composition.


In one preferred embodiment, the hydrophobic A polymer is a polyurethane. In a most preferred embodiment, the polyurethane is polyetherurethaneurea. A polyurethane is a polymer produced by the condensation reaction of a diisocyanate and a difunctional hydroxyl-containing material. A polyurethaneurea is a polymer produced by the condensation reaction of a diisocyanate and a difunctional amine-containing material. Preferred diisocyanates include aliphatic diisocyanates containing from 4 to 8 methylene units. Diisocyanates containing cycloaliphatic moieties, may also be useful in the preparation of the polymer and copolymer components of the membrane of the present invention. The invention is not limited to the use of polyurethanes as the hydrophobic polymer A component. The material that forms the basis of the hydrophobic matrix of the inventive membrane may be any of those known in the art as appropriate for use as membranes in sensor devices and having sufficient permeability to allow relevant compounds to pass through it, for example, to allow an oxygen molecule to pass through the inventive membrane from the sample under examination in order to reach the active enzyme or electrochemical electrodes. Examples of materials which may be used to make a non-polyurethane type membrane include vinyl polymers, polyethers, polyesters, polyamides, inorganic polymers such as polysiloxanes and polycarbosiloxanes, natural polymers such as cellulosic and protein based materials and mixtures or combinations thereof.


As described above, the hydrophobic-hydrophilic copolymer component includes the reaction products of a hydrophobic A polymer component and a hydrophilic B polymer component. The hydrophilic B polymer component is desirably polyethylene oxide. For example, one useful hydrophobic-hydrophilic copolymer component is a polyurethane polymer that includes about 20% hydrophilic polyethyelene oxide. The polyethylene oxide portion of the copolymer is thermodynamically driven to separate from the hydrophobic portions of the copolymer and the hydrophobic A polymer component. The 20% polyethylene oxide based soft segment portion of the copolymer used to form the final blend controls the water pick-up and subsequent glucose permeability of the membrane of the present invention.


The polyethylene oxide may have an average molecular weight of from 200 to 3000 with a preferred molecular weight range of 600 to 1500 and preferably constitutes about 20% by weight of the copolymer component used to form the membrane of the present invention.


It is desired that the membrane of the present invention have a thickness of about 5 to about 100 microns. In preferred embodiments, the membrane of the present invention is constructed of a polyetherurethaneurea/polyetherurethaneurea-block-polyethylene glycol blend and has a thickness of not more than about 100 microns, more preferably not less than about 10 microns, and not more than about 80 microns, and most preferably, not less than about 20 microns, and not more than about 60 microns.


The membrane of the present invention can be made by casting from solutions, optionally with inclusion of additives to modify the properties and the resulting cast film or to facilitate the casting process.


The present invention provides a method for preparing the implantable membrane of the invention. The method includes the steps of: (a) forming a composition including a dispersion of a second polymer within a matrix of a first polymer, the dispersion forming a network of microdomains which are not photomicroscopically observable when hydrated at 400× magnification or less; (b) maintaining the composition at a temperature sufficient to maintain the first polymer and the second polymer substantially soluble; (c) applying the composition at the temperature to a substrate to form a film thereon; and (d) permitting the resultant film to dry to form the membrane. In one embodiment, the forming step includes forming a mixture or a blend. As described above, in preferred embodiments, the first polymer is a polyurethane and the second polymer is polyethylene oxide. In general, the second polymer may be a random or ordered block copolymer selected from the following: ABA block copolymer, BAB block copolymer, AB random alternating block copolymer, AB regularly alternating block copolymer and combinations thereof.


In one embodiment, the composition comprised of a dispersion of the second polymer within the matrix of a first polymer is heated to a temperature of about 70° C. to maintain the first and second polymers substantially soluble. For example, the combination of a hydrophobic polymer A component and a hydrophobic-hydrophilic copolymer AB component is desirably exposed to a temperature of about 70° C. to maintain the polymer and copolymers substantially soluble. In particular, the blend is heated well above room temperature in order to keep the hydrophilic and hydrophobic components soluble with each other and the solvent.


The invention contemplates permitting the coated film formed on the substrate to dry at a temperature from about 120° C. to about 150° C. The elevated temperature further serves to drive the solvent from the coating as quickly as possible. This inhibits the hydrophilic and hydrophobic portions of the membrane from segregating and forming large undesired structures.


The membrane and sensor combinations of the present invention provide a significant advantage over the prior art in that they provide accurate sensor operation at temperatures from about 30° C. to about 45° C. for a period of time exceeding about 30 days to exceeding about a year.


EXAMPLES
Example 1
A Method for Preparing a Membrane of the Present Invention

The inventive membrane may be cast from a coating solution. The coating solution is prepared by placing approximately 281 gm of dimethylacetamide (DMAC) into a 3 L stainless steel bowl to which a solution of polyetherurethaneurea (344 gm of Chronothane H (Cardiotech International, Inc., Woburn, Mass.), 29,750 cp @25% solids in DMAC) is added. To this mixture is added another polyetherurethaneurea (approximately 312 gm, Chronothane 1020 (Cardiotech International, Inc., Woburn, Mass.), 6275 cp @25% solids in DMAC). The bowl is then fitted to a planetary mixer with a paddle-type blade and the contents are stirred for 30 minutes at room temperature. Coatings solutions prepared in this manner are then coated at between room temperature to about 70° C. onto a PET release liner (Douglas Hansen Co., Inc., Minneapolis, Minn.) using a knife-over-roll set at a 0.012 inch gap. The film is continuously dried at 120° C. to about 150° C. The final film thickness is approximately 0.0015 inches.


Observations of Membrane Using Photomicroscopy at 400× Magnification or Less


A ¼″ by ¼″ piece of membrane is first immersed in deionized water for a minimum of 2 hours at room temperature. After this time, the sample is placed onto a microscope slide along with one drop of water. A glass cover slide is then placed over the membrane and gentle pressure is applied in order to remove excess liquid from underneath the cover glass. In this way, the membrane does not dry during its evaluation. The hydrated membrane sample is first observed at 40×-magnification using a light microscope (Nikon Eclipse E400). If air bubbles are present on the top or bottom of the film, the cover glass is gently pressed again with a tissue in order to remove them. Magnification is then increased to 200×; and the hydrated membrane is continuously observed while changing the focus from the top to bottom of the film. This is followed by an increase in magnification to 400×, with the membrane again being continuously observed while changing the focus from the top to bottom of the film.


Results


Based on the results of an optical micrograph of a sample membrane prepared by using a room temperature coating solution and drying of the coated film at 120° C., the micrograph being captured as described above, it was noticed that both circular and elliptical domains were present throughout the hydrated section of membrane. At the same magnification, the domains were not observable in dry membrane. Giving that in an electrochemical sensor, the electrodes included therein are typically of the same size and same order of dimensions as the observed circular and elliptical domains, such domains are not desired. These domains present a problem in that they result in a locally high concentration of either hydrophilic or hydrophobic material in association with the electrodes.


Example 2
Optimizing the Coating Solution Conditions

This example demonstrates that preheating the coating solution to a temperature of 70° C. prior to coating eliminates the presence of both the circular and elliptical domains that were present throughout the hydrated cross-section of a membrane prepared using a room temperature coating solution and drying of the coated film at 120° C. Example 2 further demonstrates that, provided the coating solution is preheated to about 70° C., either a standard) (120° or elevated (150° C.) drying temperature were sufficient to drive the DMAC solvent from the coated film quickly to further inhibit the hydrophilic and hydrophobic portions of the polyurethane membrane from segregating into large domains.


In particular, the invention was evaluated by performing a coating experiment where standard coating conditions (room temperature coating solution and 120° C. drying temperature of the coated film) were compared to conditions where the coating solution temperature was elevated and/or the drying temperature of the coated film was elevated. Four experimental conditions were run as follows:


SS-room temperature solution and standard (120° C.) oven temperature.


SE-room temperature solution and elevated (150° C.) oven temperature.


ES-preheated (70° C.) solution and standard (120° C.) oven temperature.


EE-preheated (70° C.) solution and elevated (150° C.) oven temperature.


Results


Samples of each of the four membranes listed above were then hydrated for 2 hours, and then observed under the microscope. Performance specifications were achieved when the micrograph of the membrane prepared under a given condition showed an absence of circular and/or elliptical domains that result in an undesirable, discontinuous hydrophilic and hydrophobic membrane structure. Table 1 below summarizes these results where (+) indicates a membrane meeting desired performance specifications and (−) is indicative of a membrane showing the undesirable circular and/or elliptical domains. In summary, for both the ES and EE conditions, where the coating solution was preheated to 70° C. prior to coating on a substrate, no hydrated domains were observed at a 200× magnification. Furthermore, regardless of the drying temperature used for the coated film, when the coating solution was not preheated (conditions SS and SE), the hydrated structures were observed. Therefore, it is likely that preheating the coating solution effectively inhibits the hydrophilic and hydrophobic segments of the polyurethane from segregating into large domains.












TABLE 1







Coating Condition
Result









SS




SE




ES (Inventive)
+



EE (Inventive)
+










Example 3
Evaluation of the Inventive Membranes for their Permeability to Glucose and H2O2

Membranes prepared under the EE condition described in Example 2 were evaluated for their ability to allow glucose and hydrogen peroxide to get through the membrane to a sensor. In particular, a series of polyurethane blends of the present invention were generated wherein the percentage of Chronothane H in a coating blend was varied. Furthermore, one of these blends (57.5% Chronothane H in coating blend) was prepared under both the EE condition and the SS condition as described in Example 2. FIG. 6 shows that the sensor output generated with a series of polyurethane blends of the present invention was dependent upon the percentage of the Chronothane H. In particular, the sensor output increased as the percentage of Chronothane H in the coating blend increased. With further reference to FIG. 6, when the percentage of Chronothane H in the coating blend was 57.5%, the sensor output was three times greater for the membrane prepared under the optimized EE coating condition as compared to the non-optimized SS coating condition.


Furthermore, FIG. 7 demonstrates that, regardless of the percent Chronothane H in the coating blend, an inventive membrane prepared under the EE condition shows a fairly constant percent standard deviation of sensor output. Moreover, a membrane prepared with 57.5% Chronothane H in the coating blend under the SS condition showed a percent standard deviation of sensor output approximately twice that of an EE membrane prepared with the same percentage of Chronothane H in the blend. It is noted that given that the sensor output is a true measure of the amount of glucose getting through the membrane to the sensor, the results indicate that the permeability of glucose and H2O2 is relatively constant throughout a given inventive membrane prepared under optimized coating conditions (i.e., EE conditions). This is important from a manufacturing standpoint.


Having described the particular, preferred embodiments of the invention herein, it should be appreciated that modifications may be made therethrough without departing from the contemplated scope of the invention. The true scope of the invention is set forth in the claims appended hereto.

Claims
  • 1. A method for preparing an implantable membrane for an implantable glucose sensor, the method comprising: forming a composition comprising a dispersion of a first polymer within a matrix of a second polymer, wherein the first polymer comprises a hydrophilic segment, wherein the second polymer comprises polyurethaneurea;applying the composition to at least one of a substrate or a layer on the substrate to form a film thereon; anddrying the film to form a membrane configured to cover at least a portion of an electrode of the implantable glucose sensor, whereby the membrane is configured to reduce passage of glucose therethrough, whereby the membrane is configured to change a ratio of oxygen to glucose from a concentration ratio in a body fluid to a new ratio in which there is a stoichiometric excess of oxygen in an enzyme layer of the implantable glucose sensor, whereby the membrane is configured to extend an upper limit of linearity of glucose measurement to a higher value than that which could be achieved without the membrane.
  • 2. The method of claim 1, wherein the substrate comprises the electrode.
  • 3. The method of claim 1, further comprising applying an enzyme on the substrate to form an enzyme layer thereon.
  • 4. The method of claim 1, wherein the composition further comprises a solvent.
  • 5. The method of claim 1, wherein drying the film forms a membrane with a network of microdomains, wherein the microdomains are substantially uniform in size and are substantially distributed throughout the membrane.
  • 6. The method of claim 1, wherein the microdomains are not observable at 400× magnification or less.
  • 7. A method for preparing a plurality of implantable membranes for a plurality of implantable glucose sensors, the method comprising: forming a composition comprising a dispersion of a first polymer within a matrix of a second polymer, wherein the first polymer comprises a hydrophilic segment, wherein the second polymer comprises a hydrophobic segment;applying the composition to at least one of a substrate or a layer on the substrate to form a film thereon; anddrying the film to form a membrane configured to cover at least a portion of an electrode of the implantable glucose sensor and configured to change a ratio of oxygen to glucose from a concentration ratio in a body fluid to a new ratio in which there is a stoichiometric excess of oxygen in an enzyme layer of the implantable glucose sensor;repeating at least the applying and drying steps under constant conditions to form a plurality of implantable membranes for a plurality of implantable glucose sensors, wherein the plurality of sensors demonstrate under constant conditions a substantially constant percent standard deviation of sensor output of less than 30%.
  • 8. The method of claim 7, wherein the second polymer comprises polyurethane.
  • 9. The method of claim 8, wherein the polyurethane is polyurethaneurea.
  • 10. The method of claim 7, wherein the substrate comprises the electrode.
  • 11. The method of claim 7, further comprising applying an enzyme on the substrate to form an enzyme layer thereon.
  • 12. The method of claim 7, wherein the composition further comprises a solvent.
  • 13. The method of claim 7, wherein drying the film forms a membrane with a network of microdomains, wherein the microdomains are substantially uniform in size and are substantially distributed throughout the membrane.
  • 14. The method of claim 13, wherein the microdomains are not observable at 400× magnification or less.
  • 15. The method of claim 7, wherein the second polymer comprises polysiloxanes or polycarbosiloxanes.
  • 16. The method of claim 7, wherein the plurality of sensors demonstrate under constant conditions a substantially constant percent standard deviation of sensor output of less than 25%.
  • 17. The method of claim 7, wherein the plurality of sensors demonstrate under constant conditions a substantially constant percent standard deviation of sensor output of less than 20%.
INCORPORATION BY REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS

Any and all priority claims identified in the Application Data Sheet, or any correction thereto, are hereby incorporated by reference under 37 CFR 1.57. This application is a continuation of U.S. application Ser. No. 13/631,780 filed Sep. 28, 2012, which is a continuation of U.S. application Ser. No. 13/283,397 filed Oct. 27, 2011, now abandoned, which is a continuation of U.S. application Ser. No. 11/280,672 filed Nov. 16, 2005, now U.S. Pat. No. 8,050,731, which is a division of U.S. application Ser. No. 10/153,356, filed May 22, 2002, now U.S. Pat. No. 7,226,978. Each of the aforementioned applications is incorporated by reference herein in its entirety, and each is hereby expressly made a part of this specification.

US Referenced Citations (511)
Number Name Date Kind
3562352 Nyilas Feb 1971 A
3775182 Patton et al. Nov 1973 A
3898984 Mandel et al. Aug 1975 A
3929971 Roy Dec 1975 A
3943918 Lewis Mar 1976 A
3966580 Janata et al. Jun 1976 A
3979274 Newman Sep 1976 A
4040908 Clark, Jr. Aug 1977 A
4073713 Newman Feb 1978 A
4076656 White et al. Feb 1978 A
4136250 Mueller et al. Jan 1979 A
4172770 Semersky et al. Oct 1979 A
4197840 Beck et al. Apr 1980 A
4240889 Yoda et al. Dec 1980 A
4253469 Aslan Mar 1981 A
4255500 Hooke Mar 1981 A
4292423 Kaufmann et al. Sep 1981 A
4353888 Sefton Oct 1982 A
4374013 Enfors Feb 1983 A
4388166 Suzuki et al. Jun 1983 A
4403984 Ash et al. Sep 1983 A
4415666 D'Orazio et al. Nov 1983 A
4418148 Oberhardt Nov 1983 A
4431004 Bessman et al. Feb 1984 A
4436094 Cerami Mar 1984 A
4484987 Gough Nov 1984 A
4493714 Ueda et al. Jan 1985 A
4494950 Fischell Jan 1985 A
4506680 Stokes Mar 1985 A
4527999 Lee Jul 1985 A
4534355 Potter Aug 1985 A
4545382 Higgins et al. Oct 1985 A
4554927 Fussell Nov 1985 A
4577642 Stokes Mar 1986 A
4602922 Cabasso et al. Jul 1986 A
4632968 Yokota et al. Dec 1986 A
4644046 Yamada Feb 1987 A
4647643 Zdrabala et al. Mar 1987 A
4650547 Gough Mar 1987 A
4671288 Gough Jun 1987 A
4672970 Uchida et al. Jun 1987 A
4680268 Clark, Jr. Jul 1987 A
4684538 Klemarczyk Aug 1987 A
4685463 Williams Aug 1987 A
4686044 Behnke et al. Aug 1987 A
4686137 Ward, Jr. et al. Aug 1987 A
4689149 Kanno et al. Aug 1987 A
4689309 Jones Aug 1987 A
4702732 Powers et al. Oct 1987 A
4703756 Gough et al. Nov 1987 A
4711245 Higgins Dec 1987 A
4711251 Stokes Dec 1987 A
4721677 Clark Jan 1988 A
4726381 Jones Feb 1988 A
4731726 Allen Mar 1988 A
4753652 Langer et al. Jun 1988 A
4757022 Shults et al. Jul 1988 A
4759828 Young et al. Jul 1988 A
4763658 Jones Aug 1988 A
4776944 Janata et al. Oct 1988 A
4781733 Babcock et al. Nov 1988 A
4781798 Gough Nov 1988 A
4786657 Hammar et al. Nov 1988 A
4793555 Lee et al. Dec 1988 A
4795542 Ross et al. Jan 1989 A
4798876 Gould et al. Jan 1989 A
4803243 Fujimoto et al. Feb 1989 A
4805625 Wyler Feb 1989 A
4810470 Burkhardt et al. Mar 1989 A
4822336 DiT raglia Apr 1989 A
4849458 Reed et al. Jul 1989 A
4852573 Kennedy Aug 1989 A
4861830 Ward, Jr. Aug 1989 A
4871440 Nagata et al. Oct 1989 A
4880883 Grasel et al. Nov 1989 A
4886740 Vadgama Dec 1989 A
4889744 Quaid Dec 1989 A
4890620 Gough Jan 1990 A
4908208 Lee et al. Mar 1990 A
4909908 Ross et al. Mar 1990 A
4919141 Zier et al. Apr 1990 A
4927407 Dorman May 1990 A
4935345 Guilbeau et al. Jun 1990 A
4951657 Pfister et al. Aug 1990 A
4953552 DeMarzo Sep 1990 A
4963595 Ward et al. Oct 1990 A
4970145 Bennetto et al. Nov 1990 A
4973320 Brenner et al. Nov 1990 A
4974929 Curry Dec 1990 A
4984929 Rock et al. Jan 1991 A
4986671 Sun et al. Jan 1991 A
4994167 Shults et al. Feb 1991 A
5002572 Picha Mar 1991 A
5002590 Friesen et al. Mar 1991 A
5007929 Quaid Apr 1991 A
5034461 Lai et al. Jul 1991 A
5050612 Matsumura Sep 1991 A
5059654 Hou et al. Oct 1991 A
5063081 Cozzette et al. Nov 1991 A
5070169 Robertson et al. Dec 1991 A
5071452 Avrillon et al. Dec 1991 A
5101814 Palti Apr 1992 A
5113871 Viljanto et al. May 1992 A
5120813 Ward, Jr. Jun 1992 A
5128408 Tanaka et al. Jul 1992 A
5137028 Nishimura Aug 1992 A
5140985 Schroeder et al. Aug 1992 A
5155149 Atwater et al. Oct 1992 A
5165407 Wilson et al. Nov 1992 A
5169906 Cray et al. Dec 1992 A
5171689 Kawaguri et al. Dec 1992 A
5183549 Joseph et al. Feb 1993 A
5190041 Palti Mar 1993 A
5200051 Cozzette et al. Apr 1993 A
5202261 Musho et al. Apr 1993 A
5208313 Krishnan May 1993 A
5212050 Mier et al. May 1993 A
5221724 Li et al. Jun 1993 A
5235003 Ward et al. Aug 1993 A
5242835 Jensen Sep 1993 A
5250439 Musho et al. Oct 1993 A
5264104 Gregg et al. Nov 1993 A
5269891 Colin Dec 1993 A
5271736 Picha Dec 1993 A
5282848 Schmitt Feb 1994 A
5284140 Allen et al. Feb 1994 A
5286364 Yacynych et al. Feb 1994 A
5296144 Sternina et al. Mar 1994 A
5299571 Mastrototaro Apr 1994 A
5314471 Brauker et al. May 1994 A
5316008 Suga et al. May 1994 A
5322063 Allen et al. Jun 1994 A
5326356 Della Valle et al. Jul 1994 A
5331555 Hashimoto et al. Jul 1994 A
5340352 Nakanishi et al. Aug 1994 A
5342693 Winters et al. Aug 1994 A
5344454 Clarke et al. Sep 1994 A
5348788 White Sep 1994 A
5352348 Young et al. Oct 1994 A
5356786 Heller et al. Oct 1994 A
5372133 Hogen Esch Dec 1994 A
5380536 Hubbell et al. Jan 1995 A
5384028 Ito Jan 1995 A
5387327 Khan Feb 1995 A
5390671 Lord et al. Feb 1995 A
5391250 Cheney, II et al. Feb 1995 A
5397848 Yang et al. Mar 1995 A
5426158 Mueller et al. Jun 1995 A
5428123 Ward et al. Jun 1995 A
5431160 Wilkins Jul 1995 A
5453278 Chan et al. Sep 1995 A
5462051 Oka et al. Oct 1995 A
5462064 D'Angelo et al. Oct 1995 A
5466575 Cozzette et al. Nov 1995 A
5469846 Khan Nov 1995 A
5476094 Allen et al. Dec 1995 A
5494562 Maley et al. Feb 1996 A
5496453 Uenoyama et al. Mar 1996 A
5497772 Schulman et al. Mar 1996 A
5507288 Bocker et al. Apr 1996 A
5513636 Palti May 1996 A
5521273 Yilgor et al. May 1996 A
5531878 Vadgama et al. Jul 1996 A
5540828 Yacynych Jul 1996 A
5541305 Yokota et al. Jul 1996 A
5545220 Andrews et al. Aug 1996 A
5545223 Neuenfeldt et al. Aug 1996 A
5564439 Picha Oct 1996 A
5568806 Cheney, II et al. Oct 1996 A
5569186 Lord et al. Oct 1996 A
5569462 Martinson et al. Oct 1996 A
5571395 Park et al. Nov 1996 A
5575930 Tietje-Girault et al. Nov 1996 A
5582184 Erickson et al. Dec 1996 A
5584876 Bruchman et al. Dec 1996 A
5586553 Halili et al. Dec 1996 A
5589563 Ward et al. Dec 1996 A
5593440 Brauker et al. Jan 1997 A
5593852 Heller et al. Jan 1997 A
5611900 Worden Mar 1997 A
5624537 Turner et al. Apr 1997 A
5628890 Carter et al. May 1997 A
5653756 Clarke et al. Aug 1997 A
5653863 Genshaw et al. Aug 1997 A
5658330 Carlisle et al. Aug 1997 A
5665222 Heller et al. Sep 1997 A
5683562 Schaffar et al. Nov 1997 A
5686829 Girault Nov 1997 A
5695623 Michel et al. Dec 1997 A
5703359 Wampler, III Dec 1997 A
5706807 Picha Jan 1998 A
5711861 Ward et al. Jan 1998 A
5713888 Neuenfeldt et al. Feb 1998 A
5733336 Neuenfeldt et al. Mar 1998 A
5741330 Brauker et al. Apr 1998 A
5743262 Lepper, Jr. et al. Apr 1998 A
5746898 Preidel May 1998 A
5756632 Ward et al. May 1998 A
5760155 Mowrer et al. Jun 1998 A
5776324 Usala Jul 1998 A
5777060 Van Antwerp Jul 1998 A
5782912 Brauker et al. Jul 1998 A
5783054 Raguse et al. Jul 1998 A
5787900 Butler et al. Aug 1998 A
5791344 Schulman et al. Aug 1998 A
5795453 Gilmartin Aug 1998 A
5795774 Matsumoto et al. Aug 1998 A
5798065 Picha Aug 1998 A
5800420 Gross et al. Sep 1998 A
5800529 Brauker et al. Sep 1998 A
5807375 Gross et al. Sep 1998 A
5807406 Brauker et al. Sep 1998 A
5811487 Schulz, Jr. et al. Sep 1998 A
5833603 Kovacs et al. Nov 1998 A
5834583 Hancock et al. Nov 1998 A
5837454 Cozzette et al. Nov 1998 A
5837728 Purcell Nov 1998 A
5840240 Stenoien et al. Nov 1998 A
5861019 Sun et al. Jan 1999 A
5863972 Beckelmann et al. Jan 1999 A
5871514 Wiklund et al. Feb 1999 A
5882494 Van Antwerp Mar 1999 A
5897578 Wiklund et al. Apr 1999 A
5904708 Goedeke May 1999 A
5910554 Kempe et al. Jun 1999 A
5913998 Butler et al. Jun 1999 A
5914026 Blubaugh, Jr. et al. Jun 1999 A
5919215 Wiklund et al. Jul 1999 A
5931814 Alex et al. Aug 1999 A
5957854 Besson et al. Sep 1999 A
5961451 Reber et al. Oct 1999 A
5964261 Neuenfeldt et al. Oct 1999 A
5964804 Brauker et al. Oct 1999 A
5964993 Blubaugh et al. Oct 1999 A
5965380 Heller et al. Oct 1999 A
5972199 Heller Oct 1999 A
5976085 Kimball et al. Nov 1999 A
5985129 Gough et al. Nov 1999 A
5995860 Sun et al. Nov 1999 A
5999848 Gord et al. Dec 1999 A
6001067 Shults et al. Dec 1999 A
6002954 Van Antwerp et al. Dec 1999 A
6007845 Domb Dec 1999 A
6011984 Van Antwerp et al. Jan 2000 A
6013113 Mika Jan 2000 A
6016448 Busacker et al. Jan 2000 A
6018013 Yoshida et al. Jan 2000 A
6022463 Leader et al. Feb 2000 A
6030827 Davis et al. Feb 2000 A
6043328 Domschke et al. Mar 2000 A
6049727 Crothall Apr 2000 A
6059946 Yukawa et al. May 2000 A
6063637 Arnold et al. May 2000 A
6071406 Tsou Jun 2000 A
6081736 Colvin et al. Jun 2000 A
6083710 Heller et al. Jul 2000 A
6088608 Schulman et al. Jul 2000 A
6091975 Daddona et al. Jul 2000 A
6093172 Funderburk et al. Jul 2000 A
6119028 Schulman et al. Sep 2000 A
6121009 Heller et al. Sep 2000 A
6122536 Sun et al. Sep 2000 A
6134461 Say et al. Oct 2000 A
6135978 Houben et al. Oct 2000 A
6144869 Berner et al. Nov 2000 A
6162611 Heller et al. Dec 2000 A
6175752 Say et al. Jan 2001 B1
6187062 Oweis et al. Feb 2001 B1
6200772 Vadgama et al. Mar 2001 B1
6201980 Darrow et al. Mar 2001 B1
6208894 Schulman et al. Mar 2001 B1
6212416 Ward et al. Apr 2001 B1
6230059 Duffin May 2001 B1
6231879 Li et al. May 2001 B1
6233471 Berner et al. May 2001 B1
6241863 Monbouquette Jun 2001 B1
6248067 Causey, III et al. Jun 2001 B1
6256522 Schultz Jul 2001 B1
6259937 Schulman et al. Jul 2001 B1
6271332 Lohmann et al. Aug 2001 B1
6274285 Gries et al. Aug 2001 B1
6275717 Gross et al. Aug 2001 B1
6284478 Heller et al. Sep 2001 B1
6299578 Kurnik et al. Oct 2001 B1
6300002 Webb et al. Oct 2001 B1
6309351 Kurnik et al. Oct 2001 B1
6309384 Harrington et al. Oct 2001 B1
6312706 Lai et al. Nov 2001 B1
6325978 Labuda et al. Dec 2001 B1
6325979 Hahn et al. Dec 2001 B1
6329161 Heller et al. Dec 2001 B1
6330464 Colvin, Jr. et al. Dec 2001 B1
6343225 Clark, Jr. Jan 2002 B1
6365670 Fry Apr 2002 B1
6372244 Antanavich et al. Apr 2002 B1
6395325 Hedge et al. May 2002 B1
6400974 Lesho Jun 2002 B1
6407195 Sherman et al. Jun 2002 B2
6409674 Brockway et al. Jun 2002 B1
6413393 Van Antwerp et al. Jul 2002 B1
6424847 Mastrototaro et al. Jul 2002 B1
6442413 Silver Aug 2002 B1
6447448 Ishikawa et al. Sep 2002 B1
6447542 Weadock Sep 2002 B1
6454710 Ballerstadt et al. Sep 2002 B1
6459917 Gowda et al. Oct 2002 B1
6461496 Feldman et al. Oct 2002 B1
6466810 Ward et al. Oct 2002 B1
6471689 Joseph et al. Oct 2002 B1
6475750 Han et al. Nov 2002 B1
6477392 Honigs et al. Nov 2002 B1
6477395 Schulman et al. Nov 2002 B2
6484046 Say et al. Nov 2002 B1
6512939 Colvin et al. Jan 2003 B1
6514718 Heller et al. Feb 2003 B2
6520997 Pekkarinen et al. Feb 2003 B1
6527729 Turcott Mar 2003 B1
6537318 Ita et al. Mar 2003 B1
6541107 Zhong et al. Apr 2003 B1
6545085 Kilgour et al. Apr 2003 B2
6546268 Ishikawa et al. Apr 2003 B1
6547839 Zhang et al. Apr 2003 B2
6551496 Moles et al. Apr 2003 B1
6558321 Burd et al. May 2003 B1
6579498 Eglise Jun 2003 B1
6613379 Ward et al. Sep 2003 B2
6615078 Burson et al. Sep 2003 B1
6618934 Feldman et al. Sep 2003 B1
6642015 Vachon et al. Nov 2003 B2
6654625 Say et al. Nov 2003 B1
6689265 Heller et al. Feb 2004 B2
6702857 Brauker et al. Mar 2004 B2
6721587 Gough Apr 2004 B2
6741877 Shults et al. May 2004 B1
6784274 van Antwerp et al. Aug 2004 B2
6801041 Karinka et al. Oct 2004 B2
6862465 Shults et al. Mar 2005 B2
6881551 Heller et al. Apr 2005 B2
6895263 Shin et al. May 2005 B2
6895265 Silver May 2005 B2
6931327 Goode et al. Aug 2005 B2
7008979 Schottman et al. Mar 2006 B2
7033322 Silver Apr 2006 B2
7074307 Simpson et al. Jul 2006 B2
7110803 Shults et al. Sep 2006 B2
7120483 Russell et al. Oct 2006 B2
7136689 Shults et al. Nov 2006 B2
7192450 Brauker et al. Mar 2007 B2
7226978 Tapsak et al. Jun 2007 B2
7248906 Dirac et al. Jul 2007 B2
7279174 Pacetti et al. Oct 2007 B2
7335286 Abel et al. Feb 2008 B2
7336984 Gough et al. Feb 2008 B2
7357793 Pacetti Apr 2008 B2
7366556 Brister et al. Apr 2008 B2
7379765 Petisce et al. May 2008 B2
7226978 Tapsak et al. Aug 2011 C1
8050731 Tapsak et al. Nov 2011 B2
8050737 Kovacs et al. Nov 2011 B2
8053018 Tapsak et al. Nov 2011 B2
20020018843 Van Antwerp et al. Feb 2002 A1
20020022883 Burg Feb 2002 A1
20020042090 Heller et al. Apr 2002 A1
20020123087 Vachon et al. Sep 2002 A1
20020151796 Koulik Oct 2002 A1
20020162792 Zepf Nov 2002 A1
20020182241 Borenstein et al. Dec 2002 A1
20020193885 Legeay et al. Dec 2002 A1
20030006669 Pei et al. Jan 2003 A1
20030009093 Silver Jan 2003 A1
20030023317 Brauker et al. Jan 2003 A1
20030032874 Rhodes et al. Feb 2003 A1
20030036803 McGhan et al. Feb 2003 A1
20030065254 Schulman et al. Apr 2003 A1
20030069383 Van Antwerp et al. Apr 2003 A1
20030070548 Clausen Apr 2003 A1
20030076082 Morgan et al. Apr 2003 A1
20030078481 McIvor et al. Apr 2003 A1
20030078560 Miller et al. Apr 2003 A1
20030088166 Say et al. May 2003 A1
20030091433 Tam et al. May 2003 A1
20030125613 Enegren et al. Jul 2003 A1
20030134347 Heller et al. Jul 2003 A1
20030199745 Burson et al. Oct 2003 A1
20030211050 Majeti et al. Nov 2003 A1
20030217966 Tapsak et al. Nov 2003 A1
20030225324 Anderson et al. Dec 2003 A1
20030228681 Ritts et al. Dec 2003 A1
20030235817 Bartkowiak et al. Dec 2003 A1
20040006263 Anderson et al. Jan 2004 A1
20040011671 Shults et al. Jan 2004 A1
20040045879 Shults et al. Mar 2004 A1
20040063167 Kaastrup et al. Apr 2004 A1
20040106857 Gough Jun 2004 A1
20040111017 Say et al. Jun 2004 A1
20040138543 Russell et al. Jul 2004 A1
20040167801 Say et al. Aug 2004 A1
20040176672 Silver et al. Sep 2004 A1
20040180391 Gratzl et al. Sep 2004 A1
20040186362 Brauker et al. Sep 2004 A1
20040199059 Brauker et al. Oct 2004 A1
20040224001 Pacetti et al. Nov 2004 A1
20040234575 Horres et al. Nov 2004 A1
20050027180 Goode et al. Feb 2005 A1
20050027181 Goode et al. Feb 2005 A1
20050027463 Goode et al. Feb 2005 A1
20050031689 Shults et al. Feb 2005 A1
20050033132 Shults et al. Feb 2005 A1
20050043598 Goode et al. Feb 2005 A1
20050051427 Brauker et al. Mar 2005 A1
20050051440 Simpson et al. Mar 2005 A1
20050054909 Petisce et al. Mar 2005 A1
20050056552 Simpson et al. Mar 2005 A1
20050070770 Dirac et al. Mar 2005 A1
20050077584 Uhland et al. Apr 2005 A1
20050079200 Rathenow et al. Apr 2005 A1
20050090607 Tapsak et al. Apr 2005 A1
20050103625 Rhodes et al. May 2005 A1
20050107677 Ward et al. May 2005 A1
20050112169 Brauker et al. May 2005 A1
20050118344 Pacetti Jun 2005 A1
20050119720 Gale et al. Jun 2005 A1
20050124873 Shults et al. Jun 2005 A1
20050143635 Kamath et al. Jun 2005 A1
20050154271 Rasdal et al. Jul 2005 A1
20050154272 Dirac et al. Jul 2005 A1
20050161346 Simpson et al. Jul 2005 A1
20050176136 Burd et al. Aug 2005 A1
20050176678 Horres et al. Aug 2005 A1
20050177036 Shults et al. Aug 2005 A1
20050181012 Saint et al. Aug 2005 A1
20050182451 Griffin et al. Aug 2005 A1
20050187720 Goode et al. Aug 2005 A1
20050192557 Brauker et al. Sep 2005 A1
20050197554 Polcha Sep 2005 A1
20050203360 Brauker et al. Sep 2005 A1
20050242479 Petisce et al. Nov 2005 A1
20050245795 Goode et al. Nov 2005 A1
20050245799 Brauker et al. Nov 2005 A1
20050251083 Carr-Brendel et al. Nov 2005 A1
20060003398 Heller et al. Jan 2006 A1
20060015020 Neale et al. Jan 2006 A1
20060016700 Brister et al. Jan 2006 A1
20060019327 Brister et al. Jan 2006 A1
20060020186 Brister et al. Jan 2006 A1
20060020187 Brister et al. Jan 2006 A1
20060020188 Kamath et al. Jan 2006 A1
20060020189 Brister et al. Jan 2006 A1
20060020190 Kamath et al. Jan 2006 A1
20060020191 Brister et al. Jan 2006 A1
20060020192 Brister et al. Jan 2006 A1
20060036139 Brister et al. Feb 2006 A1
20060036140 Brister et al. Feb 2006 A1
20060036141 Kamath et al. Feb 2006 A1
20060036142 Brister et al. Feb 2006 A1
20060036143 Brister et al. Feb 2006 A1
20060036144 Brister et al. Feb 2006 A1
20060036145 Brister et al. Feb 2006 A1
20060040402 Brauker et al. Feb 2006 A1
20060047095 Pacetti Mar 2006 A1
20060067908 Ding Mar 2006 A1
20060068208 Tapsak et al. Mar 2006 A1
20060078908 Pitner et al. Apr 2006 A1
20060079740 Silver et al. Apr 2006 A1
20060086624 Tapsak et al. Apr 2006 A1
20060134165 Pacetti Jun 2006 A1
20060142651 Brister et al. Jun 2006 A1
20060155180 Brister et al. Jul 2006 A1
20060171980 Helmus et al. Aug 2006 A1
20060177379 Asgari Aug 2006 A1
20060183871 Ward et al. Aug 2006 A1
20060195029 Shults et al. Aug 2006 A1
20060198864 Shults et al. Sep 2006 A1
20060200019 Petisce et al. Sep 2006 A1
20060200970 Brister et al. Sep 2006 A1
20060204536 Shults et al. Sep 2006 A1
20060229512 Petisce et al. Oct 2006 A1
20060258761 Boock et al. Nov 2006 A1
20060263839 Ward et al. Nov 2006 A1
20060269586 Pacetti Nov 2006 A1
20060275857 Kjaer et al. Dec 2006 A1
20060275859 Kjaer Dec 2006 A1
20060289307 Yu et al. Dec 2006 A1
20060293487 Gaymans et al. Dec 2006 A1
20070007133 Mang et al. Jan 2007 A1
20070032717 Brister et al. Feb 2007 A1
20070032718 Shults et al. Feb 2007 A1
20070038044 Dobbles et al. Feb 2007 A1
20070129524 Sunkara Jun 2007 A1
20070135698 Shah et al. Jun 2007 A1
20070163880 Woo et al. Jul 2007 A1
20070173709 Petisce et al. Jul 2007 A1
20070173710 Petisce et al. Jul 2007 A1
20070200267 Tsai Aug 2007 A1
20070213611 Simpson et al. Sep 2007 A1
20070215491 Heller et al. Sep 2007 A1
20070218097 Heller et al. Sep 2007 A1
20070227907 Shah et al. Oct 2007 A1
20070233013 Schoenberg Oct 2007 A1
20070275193 DeSimone et al. Nov 2007 A1
20070299385 Santini et al. Dec 2007 A1
20070299409 Whibourne et al. Dec 2007 A1
20080021008 Pacetti et al. Jan 2008 A1
20080027301 Ward et al. Jan 2008 A1
20080033269 Zhang Feb 2008 A1
20080034972 Gough et al. Feb 2008 A1
20080045824 Tapsak et al. Feb 2008 A1
20080154101 Jain et al. Jun 2008 A1
20100119693 Tapsak et al. May 2010 A1
20110147300 Xiao et al. Jun 2011 A1
20120040101 Tapsak et al. Feb 2012 A1
Foreign Referenced Citations (69)
Number Date Country
0 098 592 Jan 1984 EP
0 107 634 May 1984 EP
0 127 958 Dec 1984 EP
0 291 130 Nov 1988 EP
0 313 951 May 1989 EP
0 320 109 Jun 1989 EP
0 353 328 Feb 1990 EP
0 362 145 Apr 1990 EP
0 390 390 Oct 1990 EP
0 534 074 Mar 1993 EP
0 535 898 Apr 1993 EP
0 817 809 Jan 1998 EP
0 885 932 Dec 1998 EP
2656423 Jun 1991 FR
2760962 Sep 1998 FR
1442303 Jul 1976 GB
2149918 Jun 1985 GB
57156004 Sep 1982 JP
57156005 Sep 1982 JP
58163402 Sep 1983 JP
58163403 Sep 1983 JP
59029693 Feb 1984 JP
59049803 Mar 1984 JP
59049805 Mar 1984 JP
59059221 Apr 1984 JP
59087004 May 1984 JP
59209608 Nov 1984 JP
59209609 Nov 1984 JP
59209610 Nov 1984 JP
60245623 Dec 1985 JP
61238319 Oct 1986 JP
62074406 Apr 1987 JP
62102815 May 1987 JP
62227423 Oct 1987 JP
63130661 Jun 1988 JP
01018404 Jan 1989 JP
01018405 Jan 1989 JP
05279447 Oct 1993 JP
8196626 Aug 1996 JP
62083849 Apr 1997 JP
WO 89-02720 Apr 1989 WO
WO 90-00738 Jan 1990 WO
WO 92-07525 May 1992 WO
WO 92-13271 Aug 1992 WO
WO 93-14693 Aug 1993 WO
WO 93-19701 Oct 1993 WO
WO 96-01611 Jan 1996 WO
WO 96-14026 May 1996 WO
WO 96-25089 Aug 1996 WO
WO 96-30431 Oct 1996 WO
WO 96-32076 Oct 1996 WO
WO 96-36296 Nov 1996 WO
WO 97-01986 Jan 1997 WO
WO 97-11067 Mar 1997 WO
WO 97-43633 Nov 1997 WO
WO 98-24358 Jun 1998 WO
WO 99-56613 Apr 1999 WO
WO 00-13003 Mar 2000 WO
WO 00-19887 Apr 2000 WO
WO 00-32098 Jun 2000 WO
WO 00-33065 Jun 2000 WO
WO 00-59373 Oct 2000 WO
WO 00-74753 Dec 2000 WO
WO 01-12158 Feb 2001 WO
WO 01-20019 Mar 2001 WO
WO 01-20334 Mar 2001 WO
WO 01-43660 Jun 2001 WO
WO 01-88524 Nov 2001 WO
WO 02-053764 Jul 2002 WO
Non-Patent Literature Citations (153)
Entry
Armour et al. Dec. 1990. Application of Chronic Intravascular Blood Glucose Sensor in Dogs. Diabetes 39:1519-1526.
Atanasov et al. 1994. Biosensor for continuous glucose monitoring. Biotechnology and Bioengineering 43:262-266.
Baker et al. 1993. Dynamic concentration challenges for biosensor characterization. Biosensors & Bioelectronics 8:433-441.
Bani Amer, M. M. 2002. An accurate amperometric glucose sensor based glucometer with eliminated cross-sensitivity. J Med Eng Technol 26(5):208-213.
Beach et al. 1999. Subminiature implantable potentiostat and modified commercial telemetry device for remote glucose monitoring. IEEE Transactions on Instrumentation and Measurement 48(6):1239-1245.
Bellucci et al. Jan. 1986. Electrochemical behaviour of graphite-epoxy composite materials (GECM) in aqueous salt solutions, Journal of Applied Electrochemistry, 16( 1):15-22.
Bindra et al. 1989. Pulsed amperometric detection of glucose in biological fluids at a surface-modified gold electrode. Analytical Chemistry 61:2566-2570.
Bindra et al. 1991. Design and In Vitro Studies of a Needle-Type Glucose Sensor for Subcutaneous Monitoring. Analytical Chemistry 63:1692-96.
Bobbioni-Harsch et al. 1993. Lifespan of subcutaneous glucose sensors and their performances during dynamic glycaemia changes in rats, J. Biomed. Eng. 15:457-463.
Bode et al. 1999. Continuous glucose monitoring used to adjust diabetes therapy improves glycosylated hemoglobin: A pilot study. Diabetes Research and Clinical Practice 46:183-190.
Bode et al. 2000. Using the continuous glucose monitoring system to improve the management of type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Technology & Therapeutics, 2(Suppl 1):S43-48.
Bode, B. W. 2000. Clinical utility of the continuous glucose monitoring system. Diabetes Technology & Therapeutics 2(Suppl 1):S35-41.
Bott, A. W. 1997. A Comparison of Cyclic Voltammetry and Cyclic Staircase Voltammetry Current Separations 16:1, 23-26.
Bowman, L.; Meindl, J. D. 1986. The packaging of implantable integrated sensors. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng BME 33(2):248-255.
Brauker et al. 1995. Neovascularization of synthetic membranes directed by membrane Microarchitecture. J. Biomed Mater Res 29:1517-1524.
Brauker et al. 1998. Sustained expression of high levels of human factor IX from human cells implanted within an immunoisolation device into athymic rodents. Hum Gene Ther 9:879-888.
Brauker et al. 2001. Unraveling Mysteries at the Biointerface: Molecular Mediator of Inhibition of Blood vessel Formation in the Foreign Body Capsule Revealed. Surfacts Biomaterials 6. 1;5.
Bremer et al. 2001. Benchmark data from the literature for evaluation of new glucose sensing technologies. Diabetes Technology & Therapeutics 3(3):409-418.
Brooks et al. 1987-1988. Development of an on-line glucose sensor for fermentation monitoring. Biosensors, 3:45-56.
Brunner et al. 1998. Validation of home blood glucose meters with respect to clinical and analytical approaches. Diabetes Care 21(4):585-590.
Cass et al. 1984. Ferrocene-mediated enzyme electrodes for amperometric determination of glucose. Analytical Chemistry 36:667-71.
Chatterjee et al. 1997. Poly(ether Urethane) and poly(ether urethane urea) membranes with high H2S-CH4 selectivity. Journal of Membrane Science 135:99-106.
D'Arrigo et al. 2003. Porous-Si based bioreactors for glucose monitoring and drugs production. Proc. of SPIE 4982:178-184.
Davies, et al. 1992. Polymer membranes in clinical sensor applications. I. An overview of membrane function. Biomaterials 13(14):971-978.
Dixon et al. 2002. Characterization in vitro and in vivo of the oxygen dependence of an enzyme-polymer biosensor for monitoring brain glucose. Journal of Neuroscience Methods 119:135-142.
Ernst et al. 2002. Reliable glucose monitoring through the use of microsystem technology. Analytical Bioanalytical Chemistry 373:758-761.
Fare et al. 1998. Functional characterization of a conducting polymer-based immunoassay system. Biosensors & Bioelectronics 13(3-4):459-470.
Frost et al. 2002. Implantable chemical sensors for real-time clinical monitoring: Progress and challenges. Current Opinion in Chemical Biology 6:633-641.
Geller et al. 1997. Use of an immunoisolation device for cell transplantation and tumor immunotherapy. Ann NY Acad Sci 831:438-451.
Gerritsen et al. 1999. Performance of subcutaneously implanted glucose sensors for continuous monitoring. The Netherlands Journal of Medicine 54:167-179.
Gerritsen et al. 2001. Influence of inflammatory cells and serum on the performance of implantable glucose sensors. J Biomed Mater Res 54:69-75.
Gerritsen, M. 2000. Problems associated with subcutaneously implanted glucose sensors. Diabetes Care 23(2):143-145.
Gilligan et al. 1994. Evaluation of a subcutaneous glucose sensor out to 3 months in a dog model. Diabetes Care 17(8):882-887.
Gough et al. 2000. Immobilized glucose oxidase in implantable glucose sensor technology. Diabetes Technology & Therapeutics 2(3):377-380.
Gross et al. 2000. Efficacy and reliability of the continuous glucose monitoring system. Diabetes Technology & Therapeutics 2(Suppl 1):S19-26.
Gross et al. 2000. Performance evaluation of the MiniMed® continuous glucose monitoring system during patient home use. Diabetes Technology & Therapeutics 2(1):49-56.
Gross, Todd, 2001. Letters to the Editor Re: Diabetes Technology & Therapeutics 2000;2:49-56. Diabetes Technology & Therapeutics. 3(1):130-131.
Hall et al. 1998. Electrochemical oxidation of hydrogen peroxide at platinum electrodes. Part I: An adsorption-controlled mechanism. Electrochimica Acta, 43(5-6):579-588.
Hall et al. 1998. Electrochemical oxidation of hydrogen peroxide at platinum electrodes. Part II: Effect of potential. Electrochimica Acta 43(14-15):2015-2024.
Hall et al. 1999. Electrochemical oxidation of hydrogen peroxide at platinum electrodes. Part III: Effect of temperature. Electrochimica Acta, 44:2455-2462.
Hall et al. 1999. Electrochemical oxidation of hydrogen peroxide at platinum electrodes. Part IV: Phosphate buffer dependence. Electrochimica Acta, 44:4573-4582.
Hall et al. 2000. Electrochemical oxidation of hydrogen peroxide at platinum electrodes. Part V: Inhibition by chloride. Electrochimica Acta, 45:3573-3579.
Hawley's Condensed Chemical Dictionary (14th Edition) “Block Polymer”. Lewis, Richard J., Sr. (Ed.), John Wiley & Sons, 2002, p. 1248.
Heller, 1990. Electrical wiring of redox enzymes. Acc. Chem. Res. 23:128-134.
Heller, A. 1992. Electrical Connection of Enzyme Redox Centers to Electrodes. J. Phys. Chem. 96:3579-3587.
Hicks, 1985. In Situ Monitoring, Clinical Chemistry 31(12):1931-1935.
Hitchman, M. L. 1978. Measurement of Dissolved Oxygen. In Elving et al. (Eds.). Chemical Analysis, vol. 49, Chap. 3, pp. 34-49, 59-123. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Hu, et al. 1993. A needle-type enzyme-based lactate sensor for in vivo monitoring, Analytica Chimica Acta 281:503-511.
Huang et al. Aug. 1975. Electrochemical Generation of Oxygen. 1: The Effects of Anions and Cations on Hydrogen Chemisorption and Aniodic Oxide Film Formation on Platinum Electrode. 2: The Effects of Anions and Cations on Oxygen Generation on Platinum Electrode. Case Western Reserve Univ., Cleveland, OH, Electrochemistry Research Lab. US Department of Commerce National Technical Information Service N7625362.
Ionescu, Mihail, 2005. Chemistry and Technology of Polyols for Polyurethanes, Rapra Technology Limited, U.K. (2005) Chapter 2, Basic Chemistry of Polyurethanes, pp. 13-29.
Ishikawa et al. 1998. Initial evaluation of a 290-mm diameter subcutaneous glucose sensor: Glucose monitoring with a biocompatible, flexible-wire, enzyme-based amperometric microsensor in diabetic and nondiabetic humans. Journal of Diabetes and Its Complications 12(6):295-301.
Jenkins et al., 1996. Glossary of Basic Terms in Polymer Science. Intl Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry;. PureAppl Chem 68(12): 2287-2311.
Jensen et al. 1997. Fast wave forms for pulsed electrochemical detection of glucose by incorporation of reductive desorption of oxidation products. Analytical Chemistry 69(9): 1776-1781.
Johnson et al. 1992. In vivo evaluation of an electroenzymatic glucose sensor implanted in subcutaneous tissue. Biosensors & Bioelectronics 7:709-714.
Jovanovic, L. 2000. The role of continuous glucose monitoring in gestational diabetes mellitus. Diabetes Technology & Therapeutics 2(Suppl 1):S67-S71.
Kargol et al. 2001. Studies on the structural properties of porous membranes: measurement of linear dimensions of solutes. Biophys Chem 91:263-271.
Kaufman. 2000. Role of the continuous glucose monitoring system in pediatric patients. Diabetes Technology & Therapeutics 2(Suppl. 1):S49-S52.
Kawagoe et al. 1991. Enzyme-modified organic conducting salt microelectrode. Analytical Chemistry 63:2961-2965.
Kerner et al. 1993. The function of a hydrogen peroxide-detecting electroenzymatic glucose electrode is markedly impaired in human sub-cutaneous tissue and plasma. Biosensors & Bioelectronics 8:473-482.
Kiechle, F.L. 2001. The impact of continuous glucose monitoring on hospital point-of-care testing programs. Diabetes Technology & Therapeutics 3:647-649.
Koschinsky et al. 2001. Sensors for glucose monitoring: Technical and clinical aspects. Diabetes Metab. Res. Rev. 17:113-123.
Kruger et al. 2000. Psychological motivation and patient education: A role for continuous glucose monitoring. Diabetes Technology & Therapeutics 2(Suppl 1):S93-S97.
Lee et al. 1998. Platelet adhesion onto segmented polyurethane surfaces modified by PEO-and sulfonated PEO-containing block copolymer additives. J Biomed Mater Res. 40(2):314-323.
Lee et al. 1999. Effects of pore size, void volume, and pore connectivity on tissue responses. Society for Biomaterials 25th Annual Meeting, 171.
Lerner et al. 1984. An implantable electrochemical glucose sensor. Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 428:263-278.
Leypoldt et al. 1984. Model of a two-substrate enzyme electrode for glucose. Analytical Chemistry 56:2896-2904.
Maidan et al. 1992. Elimination of Electrooxidizable Interferent-Produced Currents in Amperometric Biosensors, Analytical Chemistry, 64:2889-2896.
Makale et al. 2003. Tissue window chamber system for validation of implanted oxygen sensors. Am. J. Physiol. Heart Circ. Physiol. 284:H2288-2294.
Malin et al. 1999. Noninvasive Prediction of Glucose by Near-Infrared Diffuse Reflectance Spectroscopy. Clinical Chemistry 45:9, 1651-1658.
Maran et al. 2002. Continuous subcutaneous glucose monitoring in diabetic patients: A multicenter analysis. Diabetes Care 25(2):347-352.
Mastrototaro et al. 1991. An electroenzymatic glucose sensor fabricated on a flexible substrate. Sensors and Actuators B 5:139-44.
Matsumoto et al. 2001. A long-term lifetime amperometric glucose sensor with a perfluorocarbon polymer coating. Biosensors & Bioelectronics 16:271-276.
McKean et al. Jul. 7, 1988. A Telemetry Instrumentation System for Chronically Implanted Glucose and Oxygen Sensors. Transactions on Biomedical Engineering 35:526-532.
Miller et al. 1989. Generation of IL1-like activity in response to biomedical polymer implants: a comparison of in vitro and in vivo models. J Biomed Mater Res 23:1007-1026.
Miller et al. 1989. In vitro stimulation of fibroblast activity by factors generated from human monocytes activated by biomedical polymers. Journal of J Biomed Mater Res 23:911-930.
Miller, A. 1988. Human monocyte/macrophage activation and interleukin 1 generation by biomedical polymers. J Biomed Mater Res 23:713-731.
Moatti-Sirat et al. 1992. Towards continuous glucose monitoring: in vivo evaluation of a miniaturized glucose sensor implanted for several days in rat subcutaneous tissue. Diabetologia 35:224-230.
Moussy et al. 2000. Biomaterials community examines biosensor biocompatibility Diabetes Technology & Therapeutics 2:473-477.
Mowery et al. 2000. Preparation and characterization of hydrophobic polymeric films that are thromboresistant via nitric oxide release. Biomaterials 21:9-21.
Murphy, et al. 1992. Polymer membranes in clinical sensor applications. II. The design and fabrication of permselective hydrogels for electrochemical devices, Biomaterials, 13(14):979-990.
Myler et al. 2002. Ultra-thin-polysiloxane-film-composite membranes for the optimisation of amperometric oxidase enzyme electrodes. Biosensors & Bioelectronics 17:35-43.
Nam et al. 2000. A novel fabrication method of macroporous biodegradable polymer scaffolds using gas foaming salt as a porogen additive. J Biomed Mater Res 53:1-7.
Ohara, et al. Dec. 1993. Glucose electrodes based on cross-linked bis(2,2′-bipyridine)chloroosmium(+-2+) complexed poly(l-vinylimidazole) films. Analytical Chemistry 65:3512-3517.
Palmisano et al. 2000. Simultaneous monitoring of glucose and lactate by an interference and crosstalk free dual electrode amperometric biosensor based on electropolymerized thin films. Biosensors & Bioelectronics 15:531-539.
Pegoraro et al. 1995. Gas transport properties of siloxane polyurethanes. Journal of Applied Polymer Science 57:421-429.
Pickup et al. 1987-1988. Implantable glucose sensors: choosing the appropriate sensing strategy. Biosensors 3:335-346.
Pickup et al. In vivo molecular sensing in diabetes mellitus: an implantable glucose sensor with direct electron transfer. Diabetologia 32:213-217 (1989).
Pishko et al. 1991. Amperometric glucose microelectrodes prepared through immobilization of glucose oxidase in redox hydrogels. Analytical Chemistry 63:2268-72.
Pitzer et al. 2001. Detection of hypoglycemia with the GlucoWatch biographer. Diabetes Care 24(5):881-885.
Poitout et al. 1993. A glucose monitoring system for on line estimation in man of blood glucose concentration using a miniaturized glucose sensor implanted in the subcutaneous tissue and a wearable control unit. Diabetologia 36:658-663.
Poitout et al. 1991. In Vitro and In Vivo Evaluation in Dogs of a Miniaturized Glucose Sensor, ASAIO Transactions, 37:M298-M300.
Postlethwaite et al. 1996. Interdigitated array electrode as an alternative to the rotated ring-disk electrode for determination of the reaction products of dioxygen reduction. Analytical Chemistry 68:2951-2958.
Ratner, B.D. 2002. Reducing capsular thickness and enhancing angiogenesis around implant drug release systems. J Control Release 78:211-218.
Reach et al. 1992. Can continuous glucose monitoring be used for the treatment of diabetes? Analytical Chemistry 64(5):381-386.
Reach, Gerard. 2001. Letters to the Editor Re: Diabetes Technology & Therapeutics, 2000;2:49-56. Diabetes Technology & Therapeutics 3(1): 129-130.
Rebrin et al. 1989. Automated feedback control of subcutaneous glucose concentration in diabetic dogs. Diabetologia 32:573-576.
Rhodes et al. 1994. Prediction of pocket-portable and implantable glucose enzyme electrode performance from combined species permeability and digital simulation analysis. Analytical Chemistry 66(9):1520-1529.
Rinken et al. 1998. Calibration of glucose biosensors by using pre-steady state kinetic data. Biosensors & Bioelectronics 13:801-807.
Sakakida et al. 1993. Ferrocene-Mediated Needle Type Glucose Sensor Covered with Newly Designed Biocompatible Membran3 Sensors and Actuators B 13-14:319-322.
Sansen et al. 1985. Glucose sensor with telemetry system. In Ko, W. H. (Ed.). Implantable Sensors for Closed Loop Prosthetic Systems. Chap. 12, pp. 167-175, Mount Kisco, NY: Futura Publishing Co.
Sansen et al. 1990. A smart sensor for the voltammetric measurement of oxygen or glucose concentrations. Sensors and Actuators B 1:298-302.
Schmidt et al. 1993. Glucose concentration in subcutaneous extracellular space. Diabetes Care 16(5):695-700.
Schoemaker et al. 2003. The SCGM1 system: Subcutaneous continuous glucose monitoring based on microdialysis technique. Diabetes Technology & Therapeutics 5(4):599-608.
Shaw et al. 1991. In vitro testing of a simply constructed, highly stable glucose sensor suitable for implantation in diabetic patients. Biosensors & Bioelectronics 6:401-406.
Shichiri et al. 1985. Needle-type Glucose Sensor for Wearable Artificial Endocrine Pancreas in Implantable Sensors 197-210.
Shichiri et al. 1986. Telemetry Glucose Monitoring Device with Needle-Type Glucose Sensor: A Useful Tool for Blood Glucose Monitoring in Diabetic Individuals. Diabetes Care 9(3):298-301.
Shichiri et al. 1989. Membrane Design for Extending the Long-Life of an Implantable Glucose Sensor. Diab. Nutr. Metab. 2:309-313.
Shults et al. 1994. A telemetry-instrumentation system for monitoring multiple subcutaneously implanted glucose sensors. IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering 41(10):937-942.
Sieminski et al. 2000. Biomaterial-microvasculature interactions. Biomaterials 21:2233-2241.
Singh et al., 2013. Micelles, mixed micelles, and applications of polyoxypropylene (PPO)-polyoxyethylene (PEO)-polyoxypropylene (PPO) triblock polymers. Intl J Industr Chem. 4:12-29.
Skyler, J. S. 2000. The economic burden of diabetes and the benefits of improved glycemic control: The potential role of a continuous glucose monitoring system. Diabetes Technology & Therapeutics 2(Suppl 1):S7-12.
Sokol et al. 1980. Immobilized-enzyme rate-determination method for glucose analysis. Clinical Chemistry 26(1):89-92.
Steil et al. 2003. Determination of plasma glucose during rapid glucose excursions with a subcutaneous glucose sensor. Diabetes Technology & Therapeutics 5(1 ):27-31.
Sternberg et al. 1988. Study and Development of Multilayer Needle-type Enzyme-based Glucose Microsensors. Biosensors 4:27-40.
Szycher, Michael, 1999. Szycher's Handbook of Polyurethanes, 1st Ed., Chapter 4, pp. 4-6.
Takegami et al. 1992. Pervaporation of ethanol water mixtures using novel hydrophobic membranes containing polydimethylsiloxane, Journal of Membrance Science, 75(93-105).
Tanenberg et al. 2000. Continuous glucose monitoring system: A new approach to the diagnosis of diabetic gastroparesis. Diabetes Technology & Therapeutics, 2(Suppl 1):S73-S80.
Tang et al. 1993. Fibrin(ogen) mediates acute inflammatory responses to biomaterials. J Exp Med 178:2147-2156.
Tang et al. 1995. Inflammatory responses to biomaterials. Am J Clin Pathol 103:466-471.
Tang et al. 1996. Molecular determinants of acute inflammatory responses to biomaterials. J Clinical Investigations 97:1329-1334.
Tang et al. 1998. Mast cells mediate acute inflammatory responses to implanted biomaterials. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 95:8841-8846.
Teraoka, 2002. Polymer Solutions: An Introduction to Physical Properties. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. (2002), pp. 1-349; p. 69.
Thomas et al. 2001. In vitro studies on the effect of physical cross-linking on the biological performance of aliphatic poly(urethane urea) for blood contact applications. Biomacromol. 2(2): 588-596.
Thome-Duret et al. 1996. Use of a subcutaneous glucose sensor to detect decreases in glucose concentration prior to observation in blood. Analytical Chemistry 68:3822-3826.
Thompson et al. 1986. In Vivo Probes: Problems and Perspectives. Department of Chemistry, University of Toronto, Canada, pp. 255-261.
Tibell et al. 2001. Survival of macroencapsulated allogeneic parathyroid tissue one year after transplantation in nonimmunosuppressed humans. Cell Transplant 10:591-9.
Tierney et al. 2000. The GlucoWatch® biographer: A frequent, automatic and noninvasive glucose monitor. Ann. Med. 32:632-641.
Turner and Pickup, 1985. Diabetes mellitus: biosensors for research and management. Biosensors 1:85-115.
Updike et al. 1967. The enzyme electrode. Nature 214:986-988.
Updike et al. 1994. Enzymatic glucose sensor: Improved long-term performance in vitro and in vivo. ASAIO Journal, 40(2):157-163.
Updike et al. 1997. Principles of long-term fully implanted sensors with emphasis on radiotelemetric monitoring of blood glucose form inside a subcutaneous foreign body capsule (FBC). In Fraser, ed., Biosensors in the Body. New York. John Wiley & Sons.
Updike et al. 2000. A subcutaneous glucose sensor with improved longevity, dynamic range, and stability of calibration. Diabetes Care 23(2):208-214.
Velho et al. 1989. Strategies for calibrating a subcutaneous glucose sensor. Biomed Biochim Acta 48(11-12): 957-964.
von Woedtke et al. 1989. In situ calibration of implanted electrochemical glucose sensors. Biomed Biochim. Acta 48(11-12):943-952.
Wagner et al. 1988. Continuous amperometric monitoring of glucose in a brittle diabetic chimpanzee with a miniature subcutaneous electrode. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 95:6379-6382.
Ward et al. 2000. Rise in background current over time in a subcutaneous glucose sensor in the rabbit: Relevance to calibration and accuracy. Biosensors & Bioelectronics 15:53-61.
Ward et al. 2002. A new amperometric glucose microsensor: In vitro and short-term in vivo evaluation. Biosensors & Bioelectronics, 17:181-189.
Wilkins et al. 1995. Integrated implantable device for long-term glucose monitoring. Biosensors & Bioelectronics 10:485-494.
Wilson et al. 1992. Progress toward the development of an implantable sensor for glucose. Clinical Chemistry 38(9):1613-1617.
Wilson et al. 2000. Enzyme-based biosensors for in vivo measurements. Chem. Rev., 100:2693-2704.
Wu et al. 1999. n situ electrochemical oxygen generation with an immunoisolation device. Annals New York Academy of Sciences, pp. 105-125.
Yang et al. 1998. Development of needle-type glucose sensor with high selectivity. Science and Actuators B 46:249-256.
PCT/US2003/15816: International Search Report.
JP 2004/507523: Notice of Reasons for Rejection dated Jan. 27, 2009.
U.S. Reexamination Control No. 90/011329, re U.S. Pat. No. 7,226,978, filed by Abbott Diabetes Care on Nov. 12, 2010: Partial Electronic File History including Request, Office Actions dated Feb. 4, 2011, Mar. 15, 2011 and Jun. 1, 2011, Applicant Responses dated Mar. 30, 2011 and May 4, 2011; and Reexamination Certificate C1 for U.S. Pat. No. 7,226,978.
U.S. Reexamination Control No. 95/002379, re U.S. Pat. No. 7,226,978, filed by Abbott Laboratories on Sep. 14, 2012: Partial Electronic File History, including the Request as filed; Office Actions dated Dec. 6, 2012 and Nov. 13, 2013; Applicant Responses dated Feb. 5, 2013; and 3rd Party Requester comments dated Mar. 7, 2013.
U.S. Appl. No. 10/153,356: Office Action dated Oct. 6, 2005.
U.S. Appl. No. 10/153,356: Office Action dated Mar. 7, 2007.
U.S. Appl. No. 10/153,356: Office Action dated Mar. 10, 2006.
U.S. Appl. No. 10/153,356: Office Action dated Aug. 12, 2004.
U.S. Appl. No. 10/153,356: Office Action dated Mar. 15, 2005.
U.S. Appl. No. 10/153,356: Office Action dated Feb. 17, 2004.
U.S. Appl. No. 10/153,356: Office Action dated Aug. 29, 2006.
Related Publications (1)
Number Date Country
20140378798 A1 Dec 2014 US
Divisions (1)
Number Date Country
Parent 10153356 May 2002 US
Child 11280672 US
Continuations (3)
Number Date Country
Parent 13631780 Sep 2012 US
Child 14482458 US
Parent 13283397 Oct 2011 US
Child 13631780 US
Parent 11280672 Nov 2005 US
Child 13283397 US