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.

Basal insulin treatment intensification in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: A comprehensive systematic review of current options

AIM

As type 2 diabetes mellitus progresses, most patients require treatment with basal insulin in combination with another agent to achieve recommended glycaemic targets. The purpose of this systematic review was to examine the evidence supporting the use of the available add-on treatments [rapid-acting insulin (RAI), glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs), dipeptidyl peptidase (DPP)-4 inhibitors and sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT-2) inhibitors] to basal insulin.

METHODS

MEDLINE, EMBASE and EBSCOhost were searched for English-language articles, and all those captured were original articles (case studies and narrative reviews were omitted). Data on study design, population demographics, interventions and outcomes were tabulated. The extracted outcome data included changes in glycated haemoglobin (HbA_1c), fasting plasma glucose (FPG) and postprandial plasma glucose (PPG), as well as body weight and safety data.

RESULTS

A total of 88 publications were deemed relevant. All treatments reduced HbA_1c and FPG. The most pronounced reductions in PPG, an unmet need in patients not controlled by basal insulin, were seen following administration of RAIs and short-acting GLP-1 RAs, although data for this outcome are generally lacking. Body weight benefits were observed with GLP-1 RAs and SGLT-2 inhibitors. However, as only articles in English were included, the result was a possible publication bias, while the diversity of study designs and drug combinations limited comparisons between studies.

CONCLUSION

The evidence supports effectiveness of the available add-on treatments to basal insulin. However, other factors, such as potential body-weight increases, convenience/compliance and adverse events, particularly hypoglycaemia, should be considered on a patient-by-patient basis to optimalize treatment outcomes.

Hypoglycemia in patients with type 2 diabetes newly initiated on basal insulin in the US in a community setting: impact on treatment discontinuation and hospitalization

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the impact of 6 month hypoglycemia on treatment discontinuation and hospitalization of patients initiating basal insulin for type 2 diabetes (T2D) in real-world practice.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study of patient-level data using electronic medical records (EMRs) in the Predictive Health Intelligence diabetes dataset. Data from adult patients with T2D initiating basal insulin glargine, insulin detemir, or Neutral Protamine Hagedorn insulin between January 2008 and March 2014 was analyzed. The date of first basal insulin prescription in an outpatient setting was the index date. A 12 month baseline prior to the index date was established; follow-up was 6-24 months from the index date. Patients were assigned to cohorts by experience of hypoglycemia (International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification [ICD-9-CM] code or blood glucose test) in the first 6 months following the index date; with hypoglycemia and without hypoglycemia cohorts were compared for basal insulin treatment discontinuation and hospitalization.

RESULTS

Overall, 49,062 patients were included; 5159 (10.5%) experienced hypoglycemia in the 6 months following basal insulin initiation. In the first 12 months, 68.1% of patients in the with hypoglycemia cohort discontinued basal insulin versus 53.9% in the without hypoglycemia cohort (p < .0001); more patients in the with hypoglycemia cohort had at least one hospitalization in the first year of follow-up (50.1% vs. 14.6%; p < .0001).

CONCLUSION

Patients with hypoglycemia soon after initiating basal insulin are at greater risk of discontinuation of their basal insulin therapy and hospitalization versus those who did not have hypoglycemic events within the first 6 months of basal insulin initiation. A limitation of this study is that it was a retrospective analysis of EMR data and the study may not be representative of all US patients with T2D on basal insulin and it cannot be assumed that every hypoglycemic event was recorded.

Basal Insulin Persistence, Associated Factors, and Outcomes After Treatment Initiation: A Retrospective Database Study Among People with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus in Japan

INTRODUCTION

The objective of this study was to assess basal insulin persistence, associated factors, and economic outcomes for insulin-naïve people with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) in Japan.

METHODS

People aged at least 18 years with T2DM with first claim for basal insulin between May 2006 and April 2013 (index date), no insulin use before index date, and continuous insurance coverage for 6 months before (baseline) and 12 months after index date were selected from the Japan Medical Center Database. On the basis of whether there were at least 30-day gaps in basal insulin treatment, patients were classified as continuers (no gap), interrupters (at least one prescription after gap), and discontinuers (no prescription after gap). A multinomial logistic regression model identified factors associated with persistence. Annual healthcare resource use and costs in the year after initiation were compared between continuers and interrupters and between continuers and discontinuers using propensity score-based inverse probability weighting to adjust for baseline differences.

RESULTS

Of the 827 people included (mean age 50 years, ca. 71% male), 36% continued, 42% interrupted, and 22% discontinued basal insulin therapy in the year after initiation. Having at least one inpatient visit and using fewer classes of non-insulin antihyperglycemic medications during baseline were associated with lower likelihoods of continuing therapy. Relative to interrupters and discontinuers, continuers had lower hospitalization rates [continuers, 12.7%; interrupters, 25.4% (p < 0.001); discontinuers, 28.4% (p < 0.001)] and lower inpatient costs [continuers, ¥132,013; interrupters, ¥225,745 (p = 0.054); discontinuers, ¥320,582 (p = 0.036)], but higher pharmacy costs [continuers, ¥158,403; interrupters, ¥134,301 (p = 0.039); discontinuers, ¥121,593 (p = 0.002)] in the year after insulin initiation. Total healthcare costs were similar for the three cohorts.

CONCLUSIONS

Substantial proportions of people with T2DM in Japan interrupt or discontinue basal insulin within the year after initiation, and they have higher rates and costs of hospitalizations than patients who continue with their insulin therapy. Further research is needed to understand reasons behind basal insulin persistence and the implications thereof to help clinicians manage T2DM more effectively.

FUNDING

Eli Lilly and Company, Boehringer Ingelheim.

Efficacy and Safety of Vildagliptin as an Add-On Therapy in Inadequately Controlled Type 2 Diabetes Patients Treated With Basal Insulin

Background

The aim of this study was to investigate the efficacy and safety of vildagliptin as an add-on therapy for patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus inadequately controlled with basal insulin.

Methods

Twenty-four patients treated with basal insulin and oral anti-diabetes drugs were randomly allocated into two groups: the control group (did not receive any add-on drugs) and vildagliptin group (received vildagliptin 100 mg/day for 6 months). The primary outcome was changes in hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) from baseline to end of study.

Results

Treatment with vildagliptin significantly reduced HbA1c from 8.1±0.7% at baseline to 7.1±0.7% (P < 0.01), while there was no significant change of HbA1c in the control group. Vildagliptin group showed significant reduction of HbA1c compared with control group (-1.0±0.3% vs. 0.2±0.8%, P < 0.01). In addition, vildagliptin group showed a significant increase in 1,5-anhydroglucitol compared with the control group (4.5 ± 3.4 vs. 0.5 ± 4.1 μg/mL, P < 0.05). Mild hypoglycemia was reported in one patient of the vildagliptin group and two patients of the control group.

Conclusion

Vildagliptin improved glycemic control without increasing hypoglycemia in Japanese type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled with basal insulin treatment and other oral anti-diabetes drugs. This study was registered with UMIN (University Hospital Medical Information Network ID#000010849).

Factors associated with reaching or not reaching target HbA1c after initiation of basal or premixed insulin in patients with type 2 diabetes

AIMS

To evaluate factors associated with reaching or not reaching target glycated haemoglobin (HbA_1c) levels by analysing the respective contributions of fasting hyperglycaemia (FHG), also referred to as basal hyperglycaemia, vs postprandial hyperglycaemia (PHG) before and after initiation of a basal or premixed insulin regimen in patients with type 2 diabetes.

METHODS

This post-hoc analysis of insulin-naïve patients in the DURABLE study randomised to receive either insulin glargine or insulin lispro mix 25 evaluated the percentages of patients achieving a target HbA_1c of <7.0% (<53mmol/mol) per baseline HbA_1c quartiles, and the effect of each insulin regimen on the relative contributions of PHG and FHG to overall hyperglycaemia.

RESULTS

Patients had comparable demographic characteristics and similar HbA_1c and FHG values at baseline in each HbA_1c quartile regardless of whether they reached the target HbA_1c. The higher the HbA_1c quartile, the greater was the decrease in HbA_1c, but also the smaller the percentage of patients achieving the target HbA_1c. HbA_1c and FHG decreased more in patients reaching the target, resulting in significantly lower values at endpoint in all baseline HbA_1c quartiles with either insulin treatment. Patients not achieving the target HbA_1c had slightly higher insulin doses, but lower total hypoglycaemia rates.

CONCLUSION

Smaller decreases in FHG were associated with not reaching the target HbA_1c, suggesting a need to increase basal or premixed insulin doses to achieve targeted fasting plasma glucose and improve patient response before introducing more intensive prandial insulin regimens.

Reduction of Sulfonylurea with the Initiation of Basal Insulin in Patients with Inadequately Controlled Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Undergoing Long-Term Sulfonylurea-Based Treatment

BACKGROUND

There were a limited number of studies about β-cell function after insulin initiation in patients exposed to long durations of sulfonylurea treatment. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the recovery of β-cell function and the efficacy of concurrent sulfonylurea use after the start of long-acting insulin.

METHODS

In this randomized controlled study, patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), receiving sulfonylurea for at least 2 years with glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) >7%, were randomly assigned to two groups: sulfonylurea maintenance (SM) and sulfonylurea reduction (SR). Following a 75-g oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT), we administered long-acting basal insulin to the two groups. After a 6-month follow-up, we repeated the OGTT.

RESULTS

Among 69 enrolled patients, 57 completed the study and were analyzed: 31 in the SM and 26 in the SR group. At baseline, there was no significant difference except for the longer duration of diabetes and lower triglycerides in the SR group. After 6 months, the HbA1c was similarly reduced in both groups, but there was little difference in the insulin dose. In addition, insulin secretion during OGTT was significantly increased by 20% to 30% in both groups. A significant weight gain was observed in the SM group only. The insulinogenic index was more significantly improved in the SR group.

CONCLUSION

Long-acting basal insulin replacement could improve the glycemic status and restore β-cell function in the T2DM patients undergoing sulfonylurea-based treatment, irrespective of the sulfonylurea dose reduction. The dose reduction of the concurrent sulfonylurea might be beneficial with regard to weight grain.

Are patients on basal insulin attaining glycemic targets? Characteristics and goal achievement of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus treated with basal insulin and physician-perceived barriers to achieving glycemic targets

AIMS

To investigate treatment patterns and achievement of glycemic targets in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus treated with basal insulin in a real-world setting, and to determine physicians' beliefs and practices regarding these patients.

METHODS

This study had two components; a retrospective analysis using a US claims database of patient and treatment data, and a survey of physicians' beliefs and practices.

RESULTS

A total of 39,074 patients treated with basal insulin were included in this analysis. The proportion of patients achieving HbA1c<7.0% (53mmol/mol) was similar in ongoing basal insulin users at baseline (26%) and at 3months follow-up (27%). The number of new initiators achieving HbA1c<7.0% (53mmol/mol) increased from baseline (11%) to 3months (27%). In the physician survey component, the majority of physicians indicated they would continue to increase basal insulin dose as long as was needed to reach HbA1c/fasting blood glucose goals (85% of physicians treating 'not on-goal' patients, 78% of physicians treating 'on-goal' patients). Physician-perceived barriers to insulin intensification included patient's lifestyle, non-adherence, and concerns about out-of-pocket costs.

CONCLUSIONS

A large proportion of patients on insulin-based therapy fail to reach glycemic goals. More education of clinicians may improve insulin intensification rates and increase the proportion of patients reaching glycemic targets.

Insulin degludec in a simple or stepwise titration algorithm in a Japanese population of patients with type 2 diabetes: a randomized, 26-week, treat-to-target trial

Aims

Managing insulin therapy is a challenge for both patients and healthcare providers.The primary aim of this trial was to compare the efficacy and safety of insulin degludec (IDeg) in a fixed versus flexible dosing schedule. The secondary aim and subject of this manuscript was to compare a simple versus a stepwise titration algorithm.

Materials and methods

This was a 26-week, controlled, multicenter, open-label, randomized, treat-to-target phase 3b trial of Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes inadequately treated with insulin glargine and with/without antidiabetic drugs orally. The trial had a 2 × 2 factorial design whereby 458 patients were randomized 1:1:1:1 to one of two titration algorithms and one of two dosing schedules. IDeg dose was adjusted weekly using a clinician-led, treat-to-target approach in order to ensure optimal insulin titration and glycemic control following self-measured blood glucose (SMBG) readings.

Results

Mean insulin dose at the end of the trial was similar in both simple and stepwise titration algorithms. Glycemic control improved in both titration algorithms, with noninferiority in glycated hemoglobin (HbA_1c) reduction confirmed when comparing simple and stepwise titration algorithms and no significant differences in fasting plasma glucose or SMBG at 26 weeks. No safety concerns were observed in terms of adverse events, and rates of hypoglycemia were not significantly different between the two algorithms.

Conclusions

This trial demonstrated comparable efficacy with noninferior HbA_1c and comparable safety of once-daily IDeg using either a simple or stepwise titration algorithm in Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled with insulin glargine.

Drug usage patterns and treatment costs in newly-diagnosed type 2 diabetes mellitus cases, 2007 vs 2012: findings from a large US healthcare claims database analysis

Objective To explore trends in demographics, comorbidities, anti-diabetic drug usage, and healthcare utilization costs in patients with newly-diagnosed type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) using a large US claims database. Methods For the years 2007 and 2012, Truven Health Marketscan Research Databases were used to identify adults with newly-diagnosed T2DM and continuous 12-month enrollment with prescription benefits. Variables examined included patient demographics, comorbidities, inpatient utilization patterns, healthcare costs (inpatient and outpatient), drug costs, and diabetes drug claim patterns. Results Despite an increase in the overall database population between 2007-2012, the incidence of newly-diagnosed T2DM decreased from 1.1% (2007) to 0.65% (2012). Hyperlipidemia and hypertension were the most common comorbidities and increased in prevalence from 2007 to 2012. In 2007, 48.3% of newly-diagnosed T2DM patients had no claims for diabetes medications, compared with 36.2% of patients in 2012. The use of a single oral anti-diabetic drug (OAD) was the most common diabetes medication-related claim (46.2% of patients in 2007; 56.7% of patients in 2012). Among OAD monotherapy users, metformin was the most commonly used and increased from 2007 (74.7% of OAD monotherapy users) to 2012 (90.8%). Decreases were observed for sulfonylureas (14.1% to 6.2%) and thiazolidinediones (7.3% to 0.6%). Insulin, predominantly basal insulin, was used by 3.9% of patients in 2007 and 5.3% of patients in 2012. Mean total annual healthcare costs increased from $13,744 in 2007 to $15,175 in 2012, driven largely by outpatient services, although costs in all individual categories of healthcare services (inpatient and outpatient) increased. Conversely, total drug costs per patient were lower in 2012 compared with 2007. Conclusions Despite a drop in the rate of newly-diagnosed T2DM from 2007 to 2012 in the US, increased total medical costs and comorbidities per individual patient suggest that the clinical and economic trends for T2DM are not declining.

Efficacy and safety of once-daily insulin degludec dosed flexibly at convenient times vs fixed dosing at the same time each day in a Japanese cohort with type 2 diabetes: A randomized, 26-week, treat-to-target trial

Aims/Introduction

This trial assessed the efficacy and safety of the possibility of varying the daily injection time of once‐daily, long‐acting basal insulin degludec (IDeg) in Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled with insulin glargine.

Materials and Methods

This was a 26‐week, multicenter, open‐label, randomized, treat‐to‐target trial, with a 2 × 2 factorial design comparing IDeg flexible (allowing dosing ±8 h from an agreed dosing time) with IDeg fixed dosing (at the same time each day). It was carried out in 458 adult patients who were inadequately controlled on insulin glargine with or without oral antidiabetic drugs.

Results

The majority of doses were taken within 2 h of the agreed dosing time, showing a high level of adherence among Japanese patients. After 26 weeks, IDeg flexible was non‐inferior to IDeg fixed with respect to change in glycated hemoglobin from baseline, estimated treatment difference 0.08% points (95% confidence interval −0.05; 0.22). Fasting plasma glucose decreased to a similar level with IDeg flexible and IDeg fixed, estimated treatment difference −0.18 mmol/L (95% confidence interval −0.48; 0.12). The rates of confirmed and nocturnal confirmed hypoglycemia were numerically, but not significantly, higher with IDeg flexible vs IDeg fixed dosing. The rates of adverse events with IDeg flexible and IDeg fixed dosing were similar.

Conclusions

These results showed the efficacy and safety of allowing patients to vary the time they dosed IDeg, when necessary, in Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes. Dosing of IDeg at a time convenient to the patient was non‐inferior, with respect to glycated hemoglobin, to dosing at the same time each day.

Basal insulin persistence, associated factors, and outcomes after treatment initiation among people with type 2 diabetes mellitus in the US

OBJECTIVE

To assess basal insulin persistence, associated factors, and economic outcomes for insulin-naïve people with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) in the US.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

People aged ≥18 years diagnosed with T2DM initiating basal insulin between April 2006 and March 2012 (index date), no prior insulin use, and continuous insurance coverage for 6 months before (baseline) and 24 months after index date (follow-up period) were selected using de-identified administrative claims data in the US. Based on whether there were ≥30 day gaps in basal insulin use in the first year post-index, patients were classified as continuers (no gap), interrupters (≥1 prescription after gap), and discontinuers (no prescription after gap).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Factors associated with persistence - assessed using multinomial logistic regression model; annual healthcare resource use and costs during follow-up period - compared separately between continuers and interrupters, and continuers and discontinuers.

RESULTS

Of the 19,110 people included in the sample (mean age: 59 years, ∼60% male), 20% continued to use basal insulin, 62% had ≥1 interruption, and 18% discontinued therapy in the year after initiation. Older age, multiple antihyperglycemic drug use, and injectable antihyperglycemic use during baseline were associated with significantly higher likelihoods of continuing basal insulin. Relative to interrupters and discontinuers, continuers had fewer emergency department visits, shorter hospital stays, and lower medical costs (continuers: $10,890, interrupters: $13,674, discontinuers: $13,021), but higher pharmacy costs (continuers: $7449, interrupters: $5239, discontinuers: $4857) in the first year post-index (p < 0.05 for all comparisons). Total healthcare costs were similar across the three cohorts. Findings for the second year post-index were similar.

CONCLUSIONS

The majority of people in this study interrupted or discontinued basal insulin treatment in the year after initiation; and incurred higher medical resource use and costs than continuers. The findings are limited to the commercially insured population in the US. In addition, persistence patterns were assessed using administrative claims as opposed to actual medication-taking behavior and did not account for measures of glycemic control. Further research is needed to understand the reasons behind basal insulin persistence and the implications thereof, to help clinicians manage care for T2DM more effectively.

Total costs of basal or premixed insulin treatment in 5077 insulin-naïve type 2 diabetes patients: register-based observational study in clinical practice

Background

To investigate the costs of treatment with basal insulin (insulin NPH [NPH], insulin glargine [IG], insulin determir [IG]), and premixed insulin (PM) in routine clinical care.

Methods

Cohort study based on data from the Swedish National Diabetes Register, including 5077 insulin-naïve men and women with type 2 diabetes, resident in a distinct geographical region of Sweden. Patients were included between 1 July 2006 and 31 December 2009 and followed for 12 months. All drug- and healthcare-related costs, stratified by diabetes-related or non-diabetes care contacts, were quantified and compared to baseline.

Results

Initiation of insulin treatment generally entails increased diabetes-related health care contacts and treatment costs, and decrease in health care costs. The median changes in costs were generally smaller than the mean changes, reflecting great variations between patients. The treatment costs were higher for IG, ID and PM compared with NPH, although higher age, history cardiovascular disease and diabetes complications as well as higher diabetes-related and other treatment costs were independent predictors. Overall, only PM (but not IG or ID) were associated with higher diabetes-related health care costs, although these were also independently predicted by cardiovascular morbidity and markers of complicated diabetes.

Conclusions

This study demonstrates that the initiation of insulin in patients with type 2 diabetes in clinical practice leads to increased health care contacts, overall and treatment costs, but also generally results in a decrease in health care costs. The diabetes-related treatment cost was lowest using NPH insulin but only premixed insulin was associated with higher diabetes-related health care costs than NPH.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s40842-015-0017-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Insulin Initiation in Insulin-Naïve Korean Type 2 Diabetic Patients Inadequately Controlled on Oral Antidiabetic Drugs in Real-World Practice: The Modality of Insulin Treatment Evaluation Study

BACKGROUND

The Modality of Insulin Treatment Evaluation (MOTIV) study was performed to provide real-world data concerning insulin initiation in Korean type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) patients with inadequate glycemic control with oral hypoglycemic agents (OHAs).

METHODS

This multicenter, non-interventional, prospective, observational study enrolled T2DM patients with inadequate glycemic control (glycosylated hemoglobin [HbA1c] ≥7.0%) who had been on OHAs for ≥3 months and were already decided to introduce basal insulin by their physician prior to the start of the study. All treatment decisions were at the physician's discretion to reflect real-world practice.

RESULTS

A total of 9,196 patients were enrolled, and 8,636 patients were included in the analysis (mean duration of diabetes, 8.9 years; mean HbA1c, 9.2%). Basal insulin plus one OHA was the most frequently (51.0%) used regimen. After 6 months of basal insulin treatment, HbA1c decreased to 7.4% and 44.5% of patients reached HbA1c <7%. Body weight increased from 65.2 kg to 65.5 kg, which was not significant. Meanwhile, there was significant increase in the mean daily insulin dose from 16.9 IU at baseline to 24.5 IU at month 6 (P<0.001). Overall, 17.6% of patients experienced at least one hypoglycemic event.

CONCLUSION

In a real-world setting, the initiation of basal insulin is an effective and well-tolerated treatment option in Korean patients with T2DM who are failing to meet targets with OHA therapy.

Number-Based Approach to Insulin Taxonomy

This article describes a number-based system for the classification of insulin regimes. It utilizes a patient-centered variable (number of injections per day) and pharmacokinetic/dynamic characteristics to craft a taxonomic system that is able to incorporate all available insulin preparations and coformulations. This framework of systematics is robust enough to include various molecules that have been recently developed. It serves to enhance understanding of the subject, and facilitates the practical or clinical usage of theoretical knowledge. We propose that number-based insulin taxonomic models should be used in clinical guidelines and recommendations rather than restricting ourselves to pharmaceutical-based classifications. PubMed articles including both review articles and clinical trials published since the year 1990 were searched, to gather evidence and information on the various types of insulins available, and how they can be used, based on the number or frequency of injections prescribed per day.

Characteristics Relating to Adherence and Persistence to Basal Insulin Regimens Among Elderly Insulin-Naïve Patients with Type 2 Diabetes: Pre-Filled Pens versus Vials/Syringes

Introduction

Previous studies have found higher rates of adherence in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) using insulin pens compared to vial and syringe administration; however, little evidence is available to support this observation in elderly patients.

Methods

This was a retrospective claims database analysis of a predominantly elderly Medicare Advantage with Prescription Drug (MAPD) insurance population consisting of 3172 insulin-naïve patients with T2DM who initiated basal insulin using pre-filled pens or vial and syringe (‘vial’). The index date was defined by the first pharmacy claim for basal insulin. Adherence, measured as proportion of days covered (PDC) and medication possession ratio (MPR), and persistence were evaluated in a 12-month follow-up period using an adjusted days’ supply. Multivariate regression analyses and a Cox proportional hazards model were used to identify characteristics associated with adherence and non-persistence, respectively, and compare findings between the pen and vial groups.

Results

The pen cohort was slightly younger than the vial cohort (69.4 vs. 70.1 years, respectively; P = 0.0338). Similar proportions of male patients (53.3% vs. 56.8%; P = 0.0529) occurred in both cohorts, and lower Deyo–Charlson Comorbidity Index (4.4 vs. 5.0; P < 0.0001) was found for the pen cohort. Adjusted mean PDC was significantly higher in the pen cohort than the vial cohort (0.67 vs. 0.50; P < 0.001), as was mean MPR (0.75 vs. 0.57; P < 0.0001). Adjusted odds for adherence (PDC ≥ 80%) showed a positive association with use of an insulin pen (odds ratio = 2.19, 95% CI: 1.86–2.59). The adjusted risk of non-persistence (discontinuation) was significantly lower (58%) in the pen cohort relative to the vial cohort (hazard ratio = 0.42, 95% CI: 0.38–0.45). Key limitations include assumptions related to accuracy and comprehensiveness of claims data, and specifically days’ supply data used to measure insulin adherence.

Conclusion

These findings suggest that pen devices improved insulin therapy adherence in a primarily elderly MAPD population with T2DM.

Funding

Novo Nordisk Pharmaceuticals, Inc.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s12325-015-0266-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

IDegLira Versus Alternative Intensification Strategies in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Inadequately Controlled on Basal Insulin Therapy

INTRODUCTION

IDegLira is a once-daily combination of insulin degludec (IDeg) and liraglutide. Trials directly comparing IDegLira with alternative strategies for intensifying basal insulin are ongoing. While awaiting results, this analysis compared indirectly how different strategies affected glycated hemoglobin (HbA_1c) and other outcomes.

METHODS

A pooled analysis of five completed Novo Nordisk randomized clinical trials in patients with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled on basal insulin was used to compare indirectly IDegLira (N = 199) with: addition of liraglutide to basal insulin (N = 225) [glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1RA) add-on strategy]; basal-bolus (BB) insulin [insulin glargine (IGlar) + insulin aspart] (N = 56); or up-titration of IGlar (N = 329). A supplementary analysis was performed with the BB arm including patients who received IGlar or IDeg as basal insulin in the relevant trial (N = 210). All trials had comparable inclusion/exclusion criteria and baseline characteristics. Individual patient-level data were analyzed using multivariable statistical models with potential baseline heterogeneity accounted for using explanatory variables.

RESULTS

At end of study, differences between IDegLira and BB or up-titrated IGlar, respectively, were as follows: reduction in HbA_1c -0.30%, 95% confidence interval (-0.58; -0.01) and -0.65% (-0.83; -0.47); change in body weight -6.89 kg (-7.92; -5.86) and -4.04 kg (-4.69; -3.40) all in favor of IDegLira. Confirmed hypoglycemia rate was 122.8 (90.7; 166.1), 1060.8 (680.2; 1654.4), and 286.1 (231.1; 354.1) events/100 patient-years for IDegLira, BB, and up-titrated IGlar, respectively. Odds ratios for achieving HbA_1c <7.0%, <7.0% without hypoglycemia, and <7.0% without hypoglycemia and no weight gain were greater with IDegLira versus up-titrated IGlar. The supplementary analysis yielded similar results to the main analysis. Results with IDegLira were similar to those for the 'GLP-1RA add-on' arm.

CONCLUSION

These results suggest that IDegLira may be more effective, with lower hypoglycemia rates and less weight gain, than up-titrated basal insulin or BB in patients uncontrolled on basal insulin.

The Effects of Transition from Bedtime to Morning Glargine Administration in Patients with Poorly Regulated Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus: Croatian Pilot Study

INTRODUCTION

The objective of this study was to compare differences in glucoregulation, frequency of hypoglycemic episodes, glucose variability and lipid profiles of inpatients with poorly regulated type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) after evening versus morning glargine application.

METHODS

Eighteen patients with poorly regulated T1DM, glycated hemoglobin (Hba1c) levels ≥7% and frequent nocturnal and/or morning hypoglycemic episodes were included in this study. There was a 12-week screening phase where patients continued their usual insulin regimen and were encouraged to achieve optimal glycemic control; however, all patients maintained HbA1c values ≥7% and continued to have frequent nocturnal and/or morning hypoglycemic events and were therefore transitioned to morning application of insulin glargine for 12 weeks. The primary outcome was to investigate changes in HbA1c values 12 weeks after the transition. The secondary outcome was to evaluate the effect of transition on glucose variability, incidence of hypoglycemic episodes, insulin doses, lipid profile and weight. Data were analyzed using paired Student's t test and Pearson correlation.

RESULTS

After the transition, there was no significant change in total daily dose of basal insulin (p 0.114) and the average body weight remained unchanged, while significant reduction of HbA1c was present (8.02 ± 0.5 vs. 7.4 ± 0.3%) (p < 0.01) resulting in a decrease in nocturnal and daytime hypoglycemic episodes per month per person (p < 0.01). Parameters of glucose variability (glycemic standard deviations and J-index) were also improved after transition period (p < 0.01). As for the lipid profile, increase of high-density lipoprotein cholesterol and decrease of triglycerides (p < 0.01) were noticed, while other lipid parameters remained unaffected. Furthermore, insignificant association of basal insulin dose with HbA1c values regardless of the time of administration was observed.

CONCLUSION

In patients with poorly regulated T1DM, transition to morning application of glargine improved glucoregulation (including a decrease in HbA1c, glucose variability and number of nocturnal hypoglycemic episodes), followed by favorable changes in lipid profile without affecting body weight. These effects were associated with the time of application, but not with the insulin dose.

National Variations in Comorbidities, Glycosylated Hemoglobin Reduction, and Insulin Dosage in Asian Patients with Type 2 Diabetes: The FINE-Asia Registry

INTRODUCTION

The First Basal Insulin Evaluation (FINE) Asia study was a prospective, observational registry evaluating basal insulin initiation in Asian patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus inadequately controlled by oral antihyperglycemic agents.

METHODS

The objective of this post hoc analysis was to observe and report the findings from individual participating countries. The primary endpoint was change in glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) from baseline to month 6 after basal insulin initiation. Secondary endpoints included change in fasting blood glucose (FBG), percent of patients achieving target HbA1c and FBG levels, average insulin doses, and hypoglycemic events.

RESULTS

The study included 2921 patients from 11 Asian countries at baseline, 2679 (92%) of whom had evaluable data. Following initiation of basal insulin (neutral protamine Hagedorn insulin, glargine, or detemir), there was a significant (P < 0.001) difference in HbA1c reduction and proportions of patients meeting HbA1c and FBG targets (<7% and <110 mg/dL, respectively) across all country cohorts by month 6. Glycemic control also varied greatly, with 7.4% (Taiwan) to 71.5% (China) of patients reaching target HbA1c <7% levels. Mean (±standard deviation) insulin dose increases over the 6-month period ranged from 0.5 ± 3.1 U (Pakistan) to 6.0 ± 8.6 U (Thailand). Hypoglycemia rates also varied, with 7.1% (India) to 27.3% (China) of patients experiencing one or more events.

CONCLUSIONS

Data from the FINE-Asia registry study show widely varying degrees of baseline comorbidities and glycemic control in patients among the country cohorts observed. Countries with >9 years of diabetes prior to insulin initiation had the lowest reductions in HbA1c and proportions of patients achieving HbA1c and FBG targets, suggesting that earlier basal insulin initiation may afford better glycemic control in these patients.

FUNDING

This study was funded by Sanofi.

Treatment persistence after initiating basal insulin in type 2 diabetes patients: A primary care database analysis

AIMS

To compare persistence and its predictors in type 2 diabetes patients in primary care, initiating either basal supported oral therapy (BOT) or intensified conventional therapy (ICT) with glargine, detemir, or NPH insulin.

METHODS

In the BOT cohort, 1398 glargine (mean age: 68 years), 292 detemir (66 years), and 874 NPH (65 years) users from 918 practices were retrospectively analyzed (Disease Analyzer, Germany: 2008-2012). The ICT group incorporated 866 glargine (64 years), 512 detemir (60 years), and 1794 NPH (64 years) new users. Persistence was defined as proportion of patients remaining on the initial basal insulin (glargine, detemir and NPH insulin) over 2 years. Persistence was evaluated by Kaplan-Meier curves (log-rank tests) and Cox regression adjusting for age, sex, diabetes duration, antidiabetic co-therapy, comorbidities, specialist care, and private health insurance.

RESULTS

In BOT, two-year persistence was 65%, 53%, and 59% in glargine, detemir, and NPH users, respectively (p<0.001). In ICT, persistence was higher without differences between groups: 84%, 85%, 86% in glargine, detemir, and NPH, respectively (p=0.536). In BOT, detemir and NPH users were more likely to discontinue basal insulin compared with glargine (detemir vs. glargine: adjusted Hazard Ratio; 95% CI: 1.56; 1.31-1.87; NPH vs. glargine: 1.22; 1.07-1.38). Heart failure (1.39; 1.16-1.67) was another predictor of non-persistence, whereas higher age (per year: 0.99; 0.98-0.99), metformin (0.61; 0.54-0.69), and sulfonylurea co-medication (0.86; 0.77-0.97) were associated with lower discontinuation.

CONCLUSIONS

In BOT, treatment persistence among type 2 diabetes patients initiating basal insulin is influenced by type of insulin, antidiabetic co-medication, and patient characteristics.

Practical Guidance on the Use of Premix Insulin Analogs in Initiating, Intensifying, or Switching Insulin Regimens in Type 2 Diabetes

INTRODUCTION

Premix insulin analogs are a well-established treatment for type 2 diabetes (T2D). However, there is a lack of simple, clear guidance on some aspects of their use. These include choosing a regimen for insulin initiation, recognizing when patients need intensification of therapy, and switching from basal-bolus to a premix insulin analog when appropriate.

METHODS

An independent expert panel formulated recommendations on the use in T2D of the premix insulin analog formulations widely available in Australasia, based on the available evidence and their own experience.

RESULTS

Results from trials in both initiation and intensification of insulin show that no single insulin or regimen is best on all endpoints, and that improved glycemic control can be expected regardless of which regimen is used. Thus, individual patient factors and preferences become more important. Guidance is presented to help the clinician choose between a premix insulin analog or basal analog for insulin initiation, and to intensify insulin therapy using premix insulin analogs. Recommendations are made on dosing, titration, the concomitant use of non-insulin glucose-lowering drugs, and other practical issues, and on the special case of switching from basal-bolus to premix insulin analog therapy.

CONCLUSION

This guidance is intended to help both general and specialist practitioners make informed choices and provide optimal care for patients with T2D. It emphasizes the importance of taking into account individual patient factors and preferences so that the choice of insulin regimen is individualized to the patient in the same way that glycemic targets are now individualized.

FUNDING

Novo Nordisk Region IO A/S.

Changes in HbA1c, insulin dose and incidence of hypoglycemia in patients with type 1 diabetes after switching to insulin degludec in an outpatient setting: an observational study

OBJECTIVE

Insulin degludec, a basal insulin with an ultra-long duration of action, became available in Sweden from July 2013. The diabetes team at Danderyd Hospital decided to perform a clinical follow-up of patients with type 1 diabetes switching to insulin degludec to evaluate its clinical performance, using a simple form and available measures, thereby indirectly assessing cost-effectiveness.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

This was a prospective, open-label, single-arm, observational, clinical follow-up from August 2013 to February 2015 of consecutive patients who switched to insulin degludec according to predefined indications (i.e., currently administering basal insulin twice daily, unacceptable HbA1c, repeated hypoglycemic events and/or unstable glucose, difficulty with fixed-time administration) in conjunction with professional judgment and patient wishes. Information about HbA1c, insulin dose and frequency of hypoglycemia (self-reported by patient recall) was collected at baseline and repeated after 4-6 months.

RESULTS

In February 2015, data were available on 357 patients. Median time to follow-up was 20 weeks. Mean (SD) HbA1c decreased from 68.9 (15.7) to 65.8 (14.3) mmol/mol, p < 0.0001, and this improvement was achieved despite less insulin. Median reduction of the total insulin dose (basal + prandial) was 12% (interquartile range [IQR] -20% to -3%). The mean (SD) number of self-reported hypoglycemic events in the previous 4 weeks decreased from 8.2 (8.9) to 6.4 (7.6) events, p < 0.0001, and nocturnal hypoglycemic events were reduced from 1.6 (2.9) to 0.7 (2.0) events, p < 0.0001.

CONCLUSION

Due to improvement in glycemic control, reduction of hypoglycemic events and reduction of insulin dose, we concluded that insulin degludec was clinically useful and economically justifiable for our patients with type 1 diabetes. Not every patient may benefit to the same degree after switching to insulin degludec. Controlled studies are needed to confirm these benefits in a larger sample of real-world patients.

Clinical use of Insulin Degludec: Practical Experience and Pragmatic Suggestions

Insulin degludec (IDeg) is an ultralong acting basal insulin. IDeg has unique pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties which allow once a daily dosage, at any time of the day. Its use is associated with a significantly lower risk of hypoglycemia. This review discusses the pragmatic use of IDeg, based on available evidence. A complete search of all nine original research papers (BEGIN® clinical trial program) pertaining to IDeg, listed in PubMed, was made to prepare this article.

Fixed combination of insulin and a glucagon-like peptide-1 analog for the treatment of type 2 diabetes, exemplified by insulin degludec and liraglutide

Insulin therapy in the management of Type 2 diabetes is often postponed and/or not adequately intensified to maintain glycemic control because of the risk of weight gain and hypoglycemia. A fixed combination of the long-acting insulin degludec and liraglutide has recently been accepted by the EMA for the management of Type 2 diabetes. The incentive for this combination is to exploit the advantages of each of the drugs while counterbalancing the side effects. Insulin degludec effectively reduces fasting plasma glucose, but carries the risk of hypoglycemia and body weight gain. Liraglutide, on the other hand, exerts glycemic control with a minimal risk of hypoglycemia and, at the same time, reduces appetite and body weight.

Insulin initiation: bringing objectivity to choice

The choice of initial insulin is often dictated by subjective criteria: the “severity” of diabetes, the ability of the person with diabetes to self inject, at specific times of the day, and the physician’s personal experience. No objective criteria have been evolved by any expert body so far to help guide clinicians make an appropriate, and accurate, choice of initiating insulin. Neither have large studies been able to shed light on the preferred type of insulin regime for a particular individual.

This communication suggests various objective parameters which may be used to inform this decision.