Probability of Achieving Glycemic Control with Basal Insulin in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes in Real-World Practice in the USA

INTRODUCTION

Basal insulin (BI) plays an important role in treating type 2 diabetes (T2D), especially when oral antidiabetic (OAD) medications are insufficient for glycemic control. We conducted a retrospective, observational study using electronic medical records (EMR) data from the IBM^® Explorys database to evaluate the probability of achieving glycemic control over 24 months after BI initiation in patients with T2D in the USA.

METHODS

A cohort of 6597 patients with T2D who started BI following OAD(s) and had at least one valid glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) result recorded both within 90 days before and 720 days after BI initiation were selected. We estimated the changes from baseline in HbA1c every 6 months, the quarterly conditional probabilities of reaching HbA1c < 7% if a patient had not achieved glycemic control prior to each quarter (Q), and the cumulative probability of reaching glycemic control over 24 months.

RESULTS

Our cohort was representative of patients with T2D who initiated BI from OADs in the USA. The average HbA1c was 9.1% at BI initiation, and decreased robustly (1.5%) in the first 6 months after initiation with no further reductions thereafter. The conditional probability of reaching glycemic control decreased rapidly in the first year (26.6% in Q2; 17.6% in Q3; 8.6% in Q4), and then remained low (≤ 6.1%) for each quarter in the second year. Cumulatively, about 38% of patients reached HbA1c < 7% in the first year; only approximately 8% more did so in the second year.

CONCLUSION

Our study of real-world data from a large US EMR database suggested that among patients with T2D who initiated BI after OADs, the likelihood of reaching glycemic control diminished over time, and remained low from 12 months onwards. Additional treatment options should be considered if patients do not reach glycemic control within 12 months of BI initiation.

FUNDING

Sanofi Corporation.

Treatment Intensification in Type 2 Diabetes: A Real-World Study of 2-OAD Regimens, GLP-1 RAs, or Basal Insulin

INTRODUCTION

Treatment guidelines recommend a stepwise approach to glycemia management in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D), but this may result in uncontrolled glycated hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) between steps. This retrospective analysis compared clinical and economic outcomes among patients with uncontrolled T2D initiating two oral antidiabetes drugs (OADs), glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs), or basal insulin in a real-world setting.

METHODS

Adults with T2D on OAD monotherapy were identified in the MarketScan claims database (2007-2014). Those initiating two OADs (simultaneously or sequentially), GLP-1 RAs, or basal insulin were selected (date of initiation was termed the 'index date'); patients were required to have HbA1c > 7.0% in the 6 months pre-index date. HbA1c was compared from 6 months pre- to 1-year post-index. Annual all-cause healthcare utilization and costs were reported over the 1-year follow-up period.

RESULTS

Data for 6054 patients were analyzed (2-OAD, n = 4442; GLP-1 RA, n = 361; basal insulin, n = 1251). Baseline HbA1c was high in all cohorts, but highest in the basal-insulin cohort. Treatment initiation resulted in reductions in HbA1c in all cohorts, which was generally maintained throughout the follow-up period. Average HbA1c reductions from the 6 months pre- to 1 year post-index date were -1.2% for GLP-1 RA, -1.6% for OADs, and -1.8% for basal insulin. HbA1c < 7.0% at 1 year occurred in 32.6%, 47.5%, and 41.1% of patients, respectively. Annual healthcare costs (mean [SD]) were lowest for OAD (US$10,074 [$22,276]) followed by GLP-1 RA (US$14,052 [$23,829]) and basal insulin (US$18,813 [$37,332]).

CONCLUSION

Despite robust HbA1c lowering following treatment initiation, many patients did not achieve HbA1c < 7.0%. Basal insulin, generally prescribed for patients with high baseline HbA1c, was associated with a large reduction in HbA1c and with higher costs. Therapy intensification at an appropriate time could lead to clinical and economic benefits and should be investigated further.

FUNDING

Sanofi U.S., Inc.

Safety and Efficacy of High Versus Standard Starting Doses of Insulin Glargine in Overweight and Obese Chinese Individuals with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Inadequately Controlled on Oral Antidiabetic Medications (Beyond VII): Study Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Treatment with basal insulin in Chinese populations is currently sub-optimal, with delayed initiation of insulin treatment and inadequate dose titration. Increasing the initial dose of insulin may be a practicable and effective solution to the problem of titration. A higher initial dose will be helpful for patients to achieve the blood glucose target and improve treatment satisfaction and compliance as well require fewer steps to titrate. Considering that overweight and obese patients usually require higher insulin doses because of insulin resistance, a higher initial dose of the basal insulin is feasible in overweight and obese patients with type 2 diabetes. However, safety is an important issue needing to be considered for higher initial dose treatment. The aim of this study is to assess the safety and efficacy of higher (0.3 U/kg) compared with standard (0.2 U/kg) starting doses of basal insulin in overweight and obese Chinese patients with type 2 diabetes who have failed to achieve glycaemic control using oral antidiabetic drugs (OADs).

METHODS

This is a phase IV, randomized, non-inferiority, open-label trial that will be conducted at approximately 50 centers in China. Eight hundred eighty overweight and obese adult Chinese patients with type 2 diabetes will be randomized to receive higher (0.3 U/kg) or standard (0.2 U/kg) starting doses of basal insulin glargine (100 U/ml) during a 16-week period. The primary endpoint is whether a higher initial dose of basal insulin (0.3 U/kg) is non-inferior to a standard initial dose (0.2 U/kg) based on the percentage of patients with at least one episode of hypoglycaemia (≤ 3.9 mmol/l or severe) over 16 weeks. Secondary endpoints include evaluation of glycosylated haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), fasting blood glucose, postprandial blood glucose, insulin dose and safety.

DISCUSSION

This study is the first randomized-controlled study to evaluate the safety and efficacy of basal insulin treatment with a higher starting dose versus standard starting dose in overweight and obese Chinese patients with type 2 diabetes. Results of this study could generate evidence to support the feasibility of a higher starting dose of basal insulin in diabetes management of overweight and obese Chinese patients, therefore providing an easy approach to improve diabetes management.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT02836704. Registered on July 7th 2016.

FUNDING

Sanofi China.

Adherence to Basal Insulin Therapy Among People with Type 2 Diabetes: A Retrospective Cohort Study of Costs and Patient Outcomes

INTRODUCTION

This research compares costs, resource utilization, and complications between adherent and nonadherent patients over the 3-year period post initiation on basal insulin therapy.

METHODS

The study utilized the US-based Truven Health MarketScan^® Research Databases from 2011 through 2015. Adults aged 18 years or older and identified with type 2 diabetes (T2D) who initiated therapy on basal insulin in 2012 were included. Patients were excluded if they were pregnant, filled their index basal insulin prescription via mail order, or were not continuously insured from 1 year before through 3 years following initiation of treatment with basal insulin. Instrumental variables were used to control for selection bias, and multivariable analyses were used to examine the associations between adherence to basal insulin therapy and costs, resource utilization, and acute complications.

RESULTS

A total of 21,363 individuals were included in the study. Three years after initiating therapy on basal insulin, patients who were adherent over time to basal insulin treatment therapy (33.8% of patients) had significantly higher diabetes-related drug costs. However, patients' adherence was associated with significantly lower diabetes-related outpatient, acute care, and total costs. Results for all-cause costs were similar. Adherent patients also had significantly fewer all-cause and diabetes-related hospitalizations and emergency room visits and were significantly less likely to be diagnosed with an acute complication.

CONCLUSIONS

Results of this study illustrate that despite higher drug costs, there are disease-specific and all-cause cost offsets and improved patient outcomes associated with adherence to basal insulin therapy for people with T2D.

FUNDING

Eli Lilly and Company.

Comparison of Glycemic Variability in Chinese T2DM Patients Treated with Exenatide or Insulin Glargine: A Randomized Controlled Trial

INTRODUCTION

Increasing the frequency of blood glucose monitoring aids the evaluation of glycemic variability and blood glucose control by antidiabetic drugs. It remains unclear, however, whether GLP-1 receptor agonists or basal insulin has a better effect on glycemic variability in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) patients who are inadequately controlled by metformin. We used a continuous glucose monitoring system (CGMS) to compare patients on a GLP-1 receptor agonist with patients on basal insulin in terms of glycemic variability.

METHODS

This prospective randomized study assigned T2DM patients treated with metformin (N = 39) to either exenatide treatment or insulin glargine treatment for 16 weeks. Glycemic variability was assessed using a CGMS; hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), β-cell function, weight, body mass index (BMI), and waist circumference were also evaluated.

RESULTS

Mean blood glucose level, continuous overlapping net glycemic action, mean amplitude of glycemic excursions, percentage of the time that the blood glucose value was > 10.0 mmol/L, and highest blood glucose level (P  < 0.01-0.05) significantly decreased in both groups. Standard deviation of the mean glucose value, largest amplitude of glycemic excursions, and waist circumference significantly decreased for those treated with exenatide (P  < 0.05), while no changes were observed with insulin glargine treatment. Percentage of the time that the blood glucose value was > 7.8 mmol/L decreased after insulin glargine use (P  < 0.05) but not with the exenatide intervention. Similar decreases in fasting blood glucose and HbA1c and increases in the 1/homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance, disposition index 30, and disposition index 120 were observed in both groups (P  < 0.01-0.05). Reductions in weight and BMI were greater with exenatide than with insulin glargine treatment (P  < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

In overweight and obese patients with T2DM inadequately controlled by metformin, exenatide and insulin glargine have similar efficacies in terms of glycemic variability, HbA1c alleviation, and β-cell function, but exenatide has a greater effect on body weight and BMI.

Combination of basal insulin and GLP-1 receptor agonist: is this the end of basal insulin alone in the treatment of type 2 diabetes?

Glycemic control has been considered a major therapeutic goal within the scope of diabetes management, as supported by robust observational and experimental evidence. However, the coexistence of micro and macrovascular disease is associated with the highest cardiovascular risks which highlights the importance that pharmacological treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus provides not only glycemic control, but also cardiovascular safety. Basal insulin is a highly effective treatment in reducing fasting blood glucose, but it is associated with considerable risk of hypoglycemia and weight gain. Glucagon like peptide 1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) are also effective in terms of glycemic control and associated with weight loss and low risk of hypoglycemia. The potential benefits of combining GLP-1RAs with basal insulin are contemplated in the current position statement of several different position statement and guidelines. This article reviews the efficacy and safety of different strategies to initiate and intensify basal insulin, with focus on new fixed ratio combinations of basal insulin with GLP-1 RAs available for use in a single injection pen (insulin degludec/liraglutide and insulin glargine/lixisenatide).

Primary care physician perspectives on basal insulin initiation and maintenance in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus

AIMS

To describe primary care physicians' (PCPs) perceptions of patient reactions and concerns about insulin initiation and identify opportunities for increased support.

METHODS

Cross-sectional, online survey of PCPs prescribing basal insulin to adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). PCPs were identified from administrative claims of a large commercial health plan and descriptive results of PCP responses were reported.

RESULTS

PCPs (N=100) treated an average of 17 patients receiving insulin during a typical week. More than 85% of insulin initiation recommendations originated with PCPs. Most offered glucose monitoring instructions (96%) and advice on diet, exercise, and diabetes management (96%); 35% provided insulin titration algorithms; 93% reported that patients often or always took their insulin daily within 3 months of initiation; 31% of PCPs reported monthly office contacts with patients for the first 3 months; 16% reported no outreach efforts; fewer than 20% connected patients with support groups. When starting basal insulin, PCPs reported patients feeling personal failure regarding their diabetes treatment (33% often/always) and lacking confidence in their ability to manage insulin therapy (38% often/always).

CONCLUSIONS

Study results identify additional opportunities for assisting patients in making the transition to insulin, including more frequent direct outreach to monitor insulin usage.

Insulin Glargine Combined with Oral Antidiabetic Drugs for Asians with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: A Pooled Analysis to Identify Predictors of Dose and Treatment Response

INTRODUCTION

In Asia, patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) often have suboptimal glycemic control for many years prior to initiating basal insulin. Active titration of basal insulin is also required to improve glycemic outcomes. This pooled analysis was conducted to determine the impact of patient baseline covariates on the required dose of basal insulin and treatment response, for the improved management of Asian patients with T2DM.

METHODS

Data on insulin-naïve Asian patients with T2DM who initiated and fully titrated insulin glargine 100 U/mL (Gla-100) for ≥ 20 weeks were pooled from seven randomized, controlled, treat-to-target trials. Covariance and multivariate linear/logistic regression analyses were applied to determine the impact of the baseline covariates on Gla-100 dose (primary outcome) and treatment response (secondary outcomes) at week 24 for patients from Asia (N = 724) and from China alone (n = 249). Based on the multivariate analysis for the primary outcome in the Asian population, a nomogram was developed.

RESULTS

The dose of Gla-100 at week 24 was negatively correlated with age and positively correlated with body mass index (BMI) and fasting plasma glucose (FPG) at baseline in both Asian and Chinese populations. In both populations, higher baseline glycated hemoglobin (HbA_1c) was associated with a lower reduction in HbA_1c from baseline, higher HbA_1c at week 24, and a lower chance of achieving HbA_1c < 7% at week 24. The constructed nomogram enables calculation of the likely dose of Gla-100 required by Asian patients with T2DM to achieve HbA_1c < 7% at week 24.

CONCLUSIONS

Higher doses of Gla-100 are likely to be required in younger patients or patients with higher baseline BMI or FPG. The nomogram developed in this study can aid clinicians to titrate the dose of Gla-100 appropriately. Evidence in this pooled analysis also indicates that initiating basal insulin at a lower HbA_1c can lead to greater glycemic control.

FUNDING

Sanofi China Investment Company.

Insulin Matters: A Practical Approach to Basal Insulin Management in Type 2 Diabetes

It is currently estimated that 11 million Canadians are living with diabetes or prediabetes. Although hyperglycemia is associated with serious complications, it is well established that improved glycemic control reduces the risk of microvascular complications and can also reduce cardiovascular (CV) complications over the long term. The UKPDS and ADVANCE landmark trials have resulted in diabetes guidelines recommending an A1C target of ≤ 7.0% for most patients or a target of ≤ 6.5% to further reduce the risk of nephropathy and retinopathy in those with type 2 diabetes (T2D), if it can be achieved safely. However, half of the people with T2D in Canada are not achieving these glycemic targets, despite advances in diabetes pharmacological management. There are many contributing factors to account for this poor outcome; however, one of the major factors is the delay in treatment advancement, particularly a resistance to insulin initiation and intensification. To simplify the process of initiating and titrating insulin in T2D patients, a group of Canadian experts reviewed the evidence and best clinical practices with the goal of providing guidance and practical recommendations to the diabetes healthcare community at large. This expert panel included general practitioners (GPs), nurses, nurse practitioners, endocrinologists, dieticians, pharmacists, and a psychologist. This article summarizes the panel recommendations.

Glucose Control and Weight Change Associated with Treatment with Exenatide Compared with Basal Insulin: A Retrospective Study

INTRODUCTION

The aim of the study was to compare glycemic and weight change outcomes for type 2 diabetes patients treated with either exenatide once-weekly (EQW) or exenatide twice-daily (EBID) with those patients treated with basal insulin (BI).

METHODS

Retrospective data (2010-2014) were extracted from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink, a UK primary care database. Patients previously naïve to injectable therapy initiating EQW, EBID, or BI were extracted and matched by propensity score within two analyses (EQW vs BI and EBID vs BI). Absolute and relative change in HbA1c and weight from baseline and the proportion of patients achieving HbA1c ≤ 7.0% (53 mmol/mol) combined with weight reduction targets of (1) any weight loss or (2) ≥ 5.0% from baseline were compared at 6 and 12-24 months.

RESULTS

A total of 485 patients initiated EQW, 3573 EBID, and 13,503 BI. In the propensity matched EQW versus BI analysis, mean HbA1c decreased with changes of - 1.33% (- 14.5 mmol/mol) and - 1.24% (- 13.5 mmol/mol) at 6 months and - 1.19% (- 13.0 mmol/mol) and - 1.17% (- 12.8 mmol/mol) at 12-24 months, respectively. Respective weight change was - 3.7 kg versus + 1.2 kg (p < 0.001) and - 3.2 kg versus + 2.5 kg (p < 0.001). Significantly more EQW patients achieved the combined HbA1c ≤ 7.0% (53 mmol/mol) and weight loss target (22.4% versus 9.9% at 6 months and 18.2% versus 8.0% at 12-24 months, respectively) and HbA1c ≤ 7.0% (53 mmol/mol) and minimum 5% weight loss (11.8% versus 3.7% at 6 months, and 8.0% versus 0.0% at 12-24 months). For EBID versus BI, similar results were found.

CONCLUSION

In this real-world data analysis, exenatide QW and exenatide BID were associated with similar glycemic control and greater weight reduction compared with basal insulin.

The burden of severe hypoglycemia in type 2 diabetes

AIMS

More than 29 million people in the US have type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), a chronic metabolic disorder characterized by a progressive deterioration of glucose control, which eventually requires insulin. Abnormally low levels of blood glucose, a feared side-effect of insulin treatment, may cause severe hypoglycemia (SHO), leading to emergency department (ED) admission, hospitalization, and long-term complications; these, in turn, drive up the costs of T2DM. This study's objective was to estimate the prevalence and costs of SHO-related hospitalizations and their additional longer-term impacts on patients with T2DM using insulin.

METHODS

Using Truven MarketScan claims, we identified adult T2DM patients using basal and basal-bolus insulin regimens who were hospitalized for SHO (inpatient SHO patients) during 2010-2015. Two comparison groups were defined: those with outpatient SHO-related encounters only, including ED visits without hospitalization (outpatient SHO patients), and those with no SHO- or acute hyperglycemia-related events (comparison patients). Lengths of stay and SHO-related hospitalization costs were estimated, and propensity score and inverse probability weighting methods were used to adjust for baseline differences across the groups to evaluate longer-term impacts.

RESULTS

We identified 66,179 patients using basal and 81,876 patients using basal-bolus insulin, of which ∼1.1% (basal) to 3.2% (basal-bolus) experienced at least one SHO-related hospitalization. Among those who experienced SHO (i.e. those in the inpatient and outpatient SHO groups), 27% (basal) and 40% (basal-bolus) experienced at least one SHO-related hospitalization. One-third of basal and about one-quarter of basal-bolus patients were admitted directly to the hospital; the remainder were first assessed or treated in the ED. Inpatient SHO patients using basal insulin stayed in the hospital, including time in the ED, for 2.8 days and incurred $6896 in costs; patients using basal-bolus insulin stayed in the hospital for 2.6 days and incurred costs of $5802. Forty-to-fifty percent of inpatient SHO patients were hospitalized again for SHO. Inpatient SHO patients using basal insulin incurred significantly higher monthly costs after their initial SHO-related hospitalization than patients in the other two groups ($2935 vs $1819 and $1638), corresponding to 61% and 79% higher monthly costs; patients using basal-bolus insulin also incurred significantly higher monthly costs than patients in the other groups ($3606 vs $2731 and $2607), corresponding to 32% and 38% higher monthly costs.

LIMITATIONS

These analyses excluded patients who did not seek ED or hospital care when faced with SHO; events may have been miscoded; and we were not able to account for clinical characteristics associated with SHO, such as insulin dose and duration of diabetes, or unmeasured confounders.

CONCLUSIONS

The burden associated with SHO is not negligible. Nearly one in three patients using only basal insulin and one in four patients using basal-bolus regimens who experienced SHO were hospitalized at least once due to SHO. Not only did those patients incur the costs of their SHO hospitalization, but they also incurred at least $1,116 (62%) and $875 (70%) more per month than outpatient SHO or comparison patients. Reducing SHO events can help decrease the burden associated with SHO among patients with T2DM.

Tolerability and Effectiveness of Exenatide Once Weekly Relative to Basal Insulin Among Type 2 Diabetes Patients of Different Races in Routine Care

INTRODUCTION

Analyses of efficacy and tolerability of pharmacologic interventions are based on clinical trials that often include predominately white populations, in part because of challenges associated with recruitment and retention of racial/ethnically diverse study populations. Using real-world electronic health record (EHR) data, we sought to evaluate the tolerability and effectiveness of exenatide once weekly (EQW), overall and relative to basal insulin (BI), according to race.

METHODS

Patients with type 2 diabetes initiating EQW or BI between 2012 and 2015 were selected from the Optum EHR Research Database, a system pooling data from dozens of hospitals throughout the US. Measures of HbA1c, weight, and body mass index (BMI) were summarized at initiation and quarterly in the first year afterwards. Occurrences of gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms and hypoglycemia were identified by diagnostic codes and clinical notes, and incidence rates (IR) and relative rates (RR) were calculated.

RESULTS

Overall, 4907 white patients (mean age = 57 years) and 454 African American patients (mean age = 53 years) were included. The percent change in HbA1c from initiation through 9-12 months was similar for white and African American patients [EQW-White: -6.89 (95% CI: -8.29, -5.50), EQW-African American: -5.99 (95% CI: -10.33, -1.65), BI-White: -4.68 (95% CI: -5.51, -3.86), BI-African American: -3.11 (95% CI: -5.37, -0.85)]. For EQW, percent change in weight was -1.73 (95% CI: -2.45, -1.02) for white patients and -1.11 (95% CI: -3.02, -0.81) for African American patients. No weight loss was observed among BI initiators. Relative to BI initiators, EQW initiators had lower rates of hypoglycemia [White RR: 0.82 (95% CI: 0.66, 1.01), African American RR: 0.59 (95% CI: 0.26, 1.34)]. GI symptoms were increased in white EQW initiators.

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment with EQW, relative to BI, was associated with larger reductions in HbA1c and weight and reduced risk of hypoglycemia, effects that were not different for white and African American patients.

FUNDING

AstraZeneca, Gothenburg, Sweden.

Optimizing Glycemic Control Through Titration of Insulin Glargine 100 U/mL: A Review of Current and Future Approaches with a Focus on Asian Populations

Various data have demonstrated inadequate glycemic control amongst Asians with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), possibly on account of suboptimal titration of basal insulin-an issue which needs to be further examined. Here we review the available global and Asia-specific data on titration of basal insulin, with a focus on the use of insulin glargine 100 U/mL (Gla-100). We also discuss clinical evidence on the efficacy and safety of titrating Gla-100, different approaches to titration, including some of the latest technological advancements, and guidance on the titration of basal insulin from international and local Asian guidelines. The authors also provide their recommendations for the initiation and titration of basal insulin for Asian populations. Discussion of the data included in this review and in relation to the authors' clinical experience with treating T2DM in Asian patients is also included. Briefly, clinical studies demonstrate the achievement of adequate glycemic control in adults with T2DM through titration of Gla-100. However, studies investigating approaches to titration, specifically in Asian populations, are lacking and need to be conducted. Given that the management of insulin therapy is a multidisciplinary team effort involving endocrinologists, primary care physicians, nurse educators, and patients, greater resources and education targeted at these groups are needed regarding the optimal titration of basal insulin. Technological advancements in the form of mobile or web-based applications for automated dose adjustment can aid different stakeholders in optimizing the dose of basal insulin, enabling a larger number of patients in Asia to reach their target glycemic goals with improved outcomes.

Observational Registry of Basal Insulin Treatment in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes in China: Safety and Hypoglycemia Predictors

BACKGROUND

The Observational Registry of Basal Insulin Treatment (ORBIT) study evaluated the safety of basal insulin (BI) in real-world settings in China.

METHODS

We analyzed 9002 patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) inadequately controlled with oral hypoglycemic agents from 8 geographic regions and 2 hospital tiers in China who initiated and maintained BI treatment. Body weight and hypoglycemic episodes were recorded at baseline and 3 and 6 months. Serious adverse events (SAEs) were recorded at 3 and 6 months.

RESULTS

Age, gender, inpatient/outpatient status, body mass index, glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) at baseline and at the end of study, T2D duration, microvascular complications, BI type, combination with insulin secretagogues, self-monitoring of blood glucose frequency, and insulin dosage, all predicted hypoglycemia. BI use generally did not induce significant weight gain (0.02 kg); weight gain with insulin detemir (-0.30 kg) was less than that with neutral protamine Hagedorn (NPH) insulin (0.20 kg) or insulin glargine (0.05 kg). Overall, general hypoglycemia incidence (5.6% vs. 7.7%) and annual event rate (1.6 vs. 1.8) were similar before and after BI initiation, whereas a slight decrease was noted in severe hypoglycemia incidence (0.6%-0.3%) and frequency (0.05-0.03 events/patient-year). The general hypoglycemia rate was lowest with insulin glargine, whereas there was no significant difference in severe hypoglycemia among the three BI groups. Overall, 3.5% of patients had at least one SAE during the study. Most SAEs were found to be unrelated to BI treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Real-world BI use, particularly insulin detemir and glargine, was associated with only slight weight gain and low hypoglycemia risk in patients with T2D in China.

Addition of once daily prandial lixisenatide to basal insulin therapy in patients with type-2 diabetes results in a reduction of HbA1c as an effect of postprandial glucose lowering

AIMS

Basal insulin has been shown to effectively reduce fasting blood glucose (FBG), but postprandial plasma glucose (PPG) excursions may remain higher than normal. Glucagon-like peptide (GLP)-1 receptor agonists such as the short-acting lixisenatide are able to control such excursions by slowing gastric emptying. However, data regarding its use in a real world clinical setting are scarce.

METHODS

24 week, prospective, multicentre, non-interventional study in 1437 patients with type-2 diabetes receiving 20μg lixisenatide once daily in combination with basal insulin. The per-protocol set (PPS) comprised 540 patients.

RESULTS

HbA_1c levels were found to decrease significantly over 24 weeks of treatment in the PPS (0.94±0.99% [7.9±8.5]; p≤0.001). An HbA_1c of <7% (53mmol/mol) was achieved in 26.9% of patients, with 9.8% reaching <6.5% (48mmol/mol) and 30.0% reaching their individual treatment goal. There was a slight decrease in FBG (2.84±30.4mg/dl; p≤0.001), and a significant reduction in PPG, with levels decreasing by between 35mg/dl (1.9mmol/l) and 38mg/dl (2.1mmol/l), respectively on average after all main meals in basal optimised patients (PPS; ≤140mg/dl). Body weight decreased from 101 to 98kg with a mean difference of 3.10±4.10kg (p≤0.001). There were few reports of hypoglycaemia and no reports of serious hypoglycaemia and need for external help. AEs were infrequent, and were in line with previous studies.

CONCLUSIONS

Lixisenatide in combination with basal insulin was shown to be an effective treatment strategy for patients with type 2 diabetes, controlling HbA_1c levels by reduction of PPG excursions during the whole day.

Hypoglycemia After Initiation of Basal Insulin in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes in the United States: Implications for Treatment Discontinuation and Healthcare Costs and Utilization

INTRODUCTION

Hypoglycemia and fear of hypoglycemia may contribute to basal insulin discontinuation, poor glycemic control, and increased healthcare burden in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D). This study aimed to determine the impact of hypoglycemia soon after basal insulin initiation on treatment discontinuation and economic outcomes in patients with T2D.

METHODS

Hypoglycemic events within 6 months of basal insulin initiation were identified using retrospective cohort data from patients with T2D, at least 18 years of age, initiated on basal insulin therapy in the Clinformatics™ Data Mart for Multiplan claims database from January 1, 2008, through August 31, 2012. Data were adjusted for baseline characteristics. Discontinuation was established for patients with 12-month follow-up data, while discontinuation risk was assessed in the extended analysis (6- to 24-month follow-up) by Cox regression analysis. Healthcare use and costs were determined.

RESULTS

Of 55,608 patients, 4.5% experienced hypoglycemia within 6 months of basal insulin initiation. Patients with hypoglycemia were more likely to discontinue basal insulin within 12 months of initiation (79.0% vs. 74.2%; P < 0.001). Data, adjusted for baseline characteristics such as age, any baseline hypoglycemia, and use of oral antidiabetes drugs, showed that patients with hypoglycemia had a greater risk of discontinuation (hazard ratio 1.16; 95% confidence interval 1.03, 1.32; P = 0.0164), were more likely to have a hospitalization (41.0% vs. 24.3%; P < 0.001) or an ED visit (55.8% vs. 35.1%; P < 0.001), and had higher diabetes-related ($13,662 vs. $7506; P < 0.001) and all-cause ($30,719 vs. $19,079; P < 0.001) healthcare costs.

CONCLUSIONS

US patients with T2D who experienced hypoglycemia within 6 months of basal insulin initiation were more likely to discontinue treatment, accompanied by a greater healthcare burden.

FUNDING

Sanofi US, Inc.

New Basal Insulins: a Clinical Perspective of Their Use in the Treatment of Type 2 Diabetes and Novel Treatment Options Beyond Basal Insulin

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The purpose of this review was to review advances in basal insulin formulations and new treatment options for patients with type 2 diabetes not achieving glycemic targets despite optimized basal insulin therapy.

RECENT FINDINGS

Advances in basal insulin formulations have resulted in products with increasingly favorable pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties, including flatter, peakless action profiles, less inter- and intra-patient variability, and longer duration of activity. These properties have translated to significantly reduced risk of hypoglycemia (particularly during the night) compared with previous generation basal insulins. When optimized basal insulin therapy is not sufficient to obtain or maintain glycemic goals, various options exist to improve glycemic control, including intensification of insulin therapy with the addition of prandial insulin or changing to pre-mixed insulin and, more recently, the addition of a GLP-1 receptor agonist, either as a separate injection or as a component of one of the new fixed-ratio combinations of a basal insulin and GLP-1 RA. New safer and often more convenient basal insulins and fixed ratio combinations containing basal insulin (and GLP-1 receptor agonist) are available today for patients with type 2 diabetes not achieving glycemic goals. Head-to-head studies comparing the latest generation basal insulins are underway, and future studies assessing the fixed-ratio combinations will be important to better understand their differentiating features.

Once weekly glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist albiglutide vs. prandial insulin added to basal insulin in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: Results over 52 weeks

We have previously reported that once-weekly albiglutide was noninferior to thrice-daily lispro for glycemic lowering, with decreased weight and risk of hypoglycemia, in patients inadequately controlled on basal insulin over 26 weeks. Findings after 52 weeks reveal similar responses to albiglutide as an add-on to insulin glargine.

The Durability of Basal Insulin Affects Day-to-Day Glycemic Variability Assessed by Continuous Glucose Monitoring in Type 2 Diabetes Patients: A Randomized Crossover Trial

BACKGROUND

Not only within-day glycemic variability but also day-to-day glycemic variability is a risk factor for diabetic patients. However, the ways of controlling day-to-day glycemic variability are unclear. We hypothesized that the durability of basal insulin plays an important role in controlling day-to-day glycemic variability in type 2 diabetes patients, and we therefore aimed to evaluate whether glargine U300, which exhibits prolonged absorption compared with glargine U100 but the same composition as glargine U100, would lead to improved day-to-day glycemic variability.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was a single-center, randomized, open-label, crossover study in type 2 diabetes patients using basal insulin therapy. After switching from 4 weeks of treatment with glargine U100 or U300, the patients performed continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) for 72 h in an environment with routine activities and mealtimes. The mean of daily difference (MODD) was assessed as day-to-day glycemic variability.

RESULTS

We enrolled 22 patients, and 17 patients completed the study. The MODD assessed as day-to-day glycemic variability was significantly lower with glargine U300 than with glargine U100 (1.8 ± 0.6 mmol/L vs. 2.4 ± 0.9 mmol/L, P = 0.006). No significant difference was observed in short-term glycemic variability between the two glargine formulations as measured by the standard deviation, coefficient of variation, mean amplitude of glucose excursion.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with glargine U100 treatment, glargine U300 treatment improved the MODD as assessed by CGM in type 2 diabetes patients. These findings suggest that the durability of basal insulin may be associated with day-to-day glycemic variability in type 2 diabetes patients.

Fixed ratio combinations of glucagon like peptide 1 receptor agonists with basal insulin: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Basal insulin controls primarily fasting plasma glucose but causes hypoglycaemia and weight gain, whilst glucagon like peptide 1 receptor agonists induce weight loss without increasing risk for hypoglycaemia. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials to investigate the efficacy and safety of fixed ratio combinations of basal insulin with glucagon like peptide 1 receptor agonists.

METHODS

We searched Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Library as well as conference abstracts up to December 2016. We assessed change in haemoglobin A_1c, body weight, and incidence of hypoglycaemia and gastrointestinal adverse events.

RESULTS

We included eight studies with 5732 participants in the systematic review. Switch from basal insulin to fixed ratio combinations with a glucagon like peptide 1 receptor agonist was associated with 0.72% reduction in haemoglobin A_1c [95% confidence interval -1.03 to -0.41; I ² = 93%] and 2.35 kg reduction in body weight (95% confidence interval -3.52 to -1.19; I ² = 93%), reducing also risk for hypoglycaemia [odds ratio 0.70; 95% confidence interval 0.57 to 0.86; I ² = 85%] but increasing incidence of nausea (odds ratio 6.89; 95% confidence interval 3.73-12.74; I ² = 79%). Similarly, switching patients from treatment with a glucagon like peptide 1 receptor agonist to a fixed ratio combination with basal insulin was associated with 0.94% reduction in haemoglobin A_1c (95% confidence interval -1.11 to -0.77) and an increase in body weight by 2.89 kg (95% confidence interval 2.17-3.61).

CONCLUSIONS

Fixed ratio combinations of basal insulin with glucagon like peptide 1 receptor agonists improve glycaemic control whilst balancing out risk for hypoglycaemia and gastrointestinal side effects.

IDegLira Versus Insulin Glargine U100: A Long-term Cost-effectiveness Analysis in the US Setting

INTRODUCTION

Treatment with IDegLira has the potential to improve glycemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) without the weight gain and with a lower risk of hypoglycemia than with other therapies. The aim of the present analysis was to evaluate the long-term cost-effectiveness of IDegLira versus insulin glargine U100 with re-education and up-titration of the dose for treatment of patients with T2DM failing to achieve glycemic control on basal insulin in the US setting.

METHODS

Data were obtained from the DUAL V randomized controlled trial in which adults with T2DM failing to achieve glycemic targets with insulin glargine U100 were randomly allocated to receive either IDegLira or insulin glargine U100. Long-term projections of clinical outcomes and direct costs were made using the IMS CORE Diabetes Model. Costs were accounted from a healthcare payer perspective. Future costs and clinical benefits were discounted at 3% annually.

RESULTS

IDegLira was associated with improved discounted life expectancy (13.99 [standard deviation 0.19] versus 13.82 [standard deviation 0.20] years) and quality-adjusted life expectancy (9.14 [standard deviation 0.12] versus 8.87 [standard deviation 0.13] quality-adjusted life years [QALYs]) compared to insulin glargine U100. IDegLira was associated with increased direct costs of $16,970, yielding an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $63,678 per QALY gained versus insulin glargine U100. Sensitivity analyses identified that the key driver of cost-effectiveness was the greater reduction in glycated hemoglobin with IDegLira compared with insulin glargine U100.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on head-to-head clinical trial data, the present analysis suggests that IDegLira is likely to improve long-term clinical outcomes for patients with T2DM not achieving glycemic control on basal insulin compared to re-education and up-titration of the dose of insulin glargine U100, with these improvements coming at an increased cost from a healthcare payer perspective. An ICER within the range described as high care value was calculated, suggesting IDegLira is a cost-effective treatment option in the US.

FUNDING

Novo Nordisk A/S and Novo Nordisk Inc.

Renal function preservation with pioglitazone or with basal insulin as an add-on therapy for patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus

AIMS

Clinical outcome may differ owing to the distinct pharmacological characteristics of insulin sensitizers and insulin. This study was performed to compare the metabolic and renal function changes with add-on pioglitazone treatment versus basal insulin in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM) in whom sulfonylurea and metformin regimens failed.

METHODS

Patients who were consecutively managed in the diabetes comprehensive program with add-on pioglitazone or detemir/glargine treatment for at least 2 years following sulfonylurea and metformin treatment failure were included.

RESULTS

A total of 1002 patients were enrolled (pioglitazone: 559, detemir: 264, glargine: 179). After propensity score matching, there were 105 patients with matchable baseline characteristics in each group. After a mean of 3.5 years of follow-up, the pioglitazone group showed a greater HbA1c reduction than the detemir group and the glargine group. Despite patients in all three groups exhibiting significant body weight gain, those in the pioglitazone group and the glargine group showed greater body weight increases than the patients in the detemir group (2.1, 1.6 and 0.8 kg, respectively, p < 0.05). Interestingly, Cox regression analysis indicated that patients under detemir or glargine treatment had a higher probability of CKD progression as compared with the pioglitazone group, with hazard ratios of 2.63 (95% CI 1.79-3.88) and 3.13 (95% CI 2.01-4.87), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study first showed that treatment with both pioglitazone and basal insulin improved glycemic control, while only pioglitazone treatment was observed to be advantageous in terms of preserving renal function when used as an add-on therapy for patients with type 2 DM in whom sulfonylurea and metformin regimens failed.

Adding Prandial Insulin to Basal Insulin Plus Oral Antidiabetic Drugs in Chinese Patients with Poorly Controlled Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: An Open-Label, Single-Arm Study

INTRODUCTION

There is relatively little data from China on the efficacy and safety of adding prandial insulin to basal insulin plus oral antidiabetic drugs (OADs) in people with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). This study assessed the efficacy and safety of basal insulin dose optimization followed by the addition of prandial insulin in Chinese people with T2DM achieving suboptimal glycemic control with basal insulin and OADs.

METHODS

In this open-label, single-arm study, adults with T2DM receiving basal insulin plus OADs underwent insulin dose optimization for 12 weeks. At week 12, subjects who achieved fasting blood glucose (FBG) ≤6.5 mmol/L but not HbA1c ≤7% added one injection of prandial insulin at the main meal for an additional 24 weeks. Endpoints included mean HbA1c, the achievement rate of HbA1c ≤7%, hypoglycemia, and other adverse events (AEs).

RESULTS

A total of 120 subjects underwent basal insulin optimization; At week 12, 110 study subjects achieved FBG ≤6.5 mmol/L, of whom 66 did not achieve HbA1c ≤7% and therefore initiated prandial insulin. Three patients discontinued prandial insulin due to dissatisfaction with treatment outcome (n = 1), accidental injury (n = 1), or personal reasons (n = 1). After 24 weeks of basal-plus treatment, mean HbA1c significantly decreased (8.06% to 7.17%; p < 0.001), 65.1% of subjects achieved HbA1c ≤7%, there was no change in FBG (6.23-6.20 mmol/L; p = 0.118), and mean post-prandial blood glucose decreased (13.17-10.14 mmol/L; p < 0.001). During basal-plus treatment, three individuals experienced hypoglycemia, and no significant change in the mean subject weight was observed (73.2 vs. 73.3 kg; p = 0.379).

CONCLUSIONS

In people with T2DM who are achieving suboptimal glycemic control with basal insulin plus OADs, basal insulin dose optimization followed by the addition of prandial insulin improves glycemic control, is well tolerated, and is associated with a low incidence of hypoglycemia.

The role of the new basal insulin analogs in addressing unmet clinical needs in people with type 1 and type 2 diabetes

BACKGROUND

Despite improvements in anti-hyperglycemic therapies, there are many unmet clinical needs that hinder successful glycemic control in people being treated with current basal insulin analogs.

OBJECTIVE

This paper reviews the unmet needs associated with current basal insulin therapy and describes the most recent basal insulins for the treatment of diabetes.

METHODS

PubMed was searched for articles on basal insulin analogs published between 2000 and April 2016.

RESULTS

Although long-acting insulin analogs, such as insulin glargine 100 units/mL and insulin detemir, have come towards approximating physiologic basal insulin levels, limitations such as hypoglycemia and intra- and inter-individual variability are associated with their use resulting in glycemic fluctuations. Some basal insulins lack 24 hour coverage, requiring some patients to split their dose, increasing the number of injections required to maintain glycemic control. Fear of hypoglycemia and the need for additional injections often leads to poor compliance and suboptimal glycemic control. Long-acting insulin analogs, such as insulin glargine 300 units/mL and insulin degludec, have improved upon the shortcomings of the current basal insulin analogs. Improved pharmacodynamic/pharmacokinetic profiles afford lower intra-patient variability and an extended duration of action, providing full and stable 24 hour basal insulin coverage with once daily dosing, and comparable efficacy to insulin glargine with lower rates of hypoglycemia.

CONCLUSION

The improved pharmacodynamic/pharmacokinetic profiles of new long-acting insulin formulations provide greater glycemic control with once daily dosing. With the growing number of therapeutic choices available, physicians have more scope to individualize patient options for basal insulin therapy.

A Large Difference in Dose Timing of Basal Insulin Introduces Risk of Hypoglycemia and Overweight: A Cross-Sectional Study

INTRODUCTION

Basal insulin should be injected at the same time each day, but people with diabetes sometimes mistime their injections. It is not known whether irregular daily dose timing affects diabetes-related factors. We report here our evaluation of the effects of deviations from a regular dosing schedule on glycemic control and hypoglycemia on patients treated with long-acting insulin (insulin glargine U100). We also consider the effects of ultra-long-acting insulin (insulin degludec) in this context.

METHODS

Nineteen individuals with type 1 diabetes and 58 with type 2 diabetes were enrolled. Demographic data on all participants were retrieved from their medical records. Variation in dose timing was determined as the difference between the time of the earliest mistimed dose and the time of the latest mistimed dose, for each participant, over a 2-week period. All participants completed the Summary of Diabetes Self-Care Activities questionnaire, Problem Areas in Diabetes scale and 5-Item World Health Organization Well-being Index. Glargine U100 was switched to degludec in those individuals with type 2 diabetes who achieved inadequate glycemic control or suffered from frequent hypoglycemic episodes or who required two injections per day, and changes in hemoglobin A1c level and frequency of hypoglycemic episodes during the 12-week period were compared.

RESULTS

A greater difference in dose timing was related to a higher frequency of hypoglycemic episodes and overweight in persons with type 2 diabetes. Smoking, drinking and living alone were independently associated with a greater difference in dose timing. Insulin degludec decreased the frequency of hypoglycemia and improved glycemic control in participants whose dose mistiming was >120 min.

CONCLUSION

Fixed dose timing should be employed for basal insulin, as a larger difference in dose timing worsens diabetes-related factors. Insulin degludec improved glycemic control and lowered the hypoglycemia rate in persons with more irregular dose timing.