Insulin degludec compared with insulin glargine in insulin-naïve patients with type 2 diabetes: A 26-week, randomized, controlled, Pan-Asian, treat-to-target trial

Effect of adding insulin degludec to treatment in patients with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled with metformin and liraglutide: a double-blind randomized controlled trial (BEGIN: ADD TO GLP-1 Study)

AIM

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of adding insulin degludec (IDeg) to treatment in patients with type 2 diabetes receiving liraglutide and metformin and qualifying for treatment intensification because of inadequate glycaemic control.

METHODS

In this 26-week, double-blind trial, patients who still had inadequate glycaemic control after a 15-week run-in period with initiation and dose escalation of liraglutide to 1.8 mg in combination with metformin (≥1500 mg) were randomized to addition of once-daily IDeg ('IDeg add-on to liraglutide' arm; n = 174) or placebo ('placebo add-on to liraglutide' arm; n = 172), with dosing of both IDeg and placebo based on titration guidelines.

RESULTS

At 26 weeks, the mean change in glycated haemoglobin level was greater in the IDeg add-on to liraglutide arm (-1.04%) than in the placebo add-on to liraglutide arm (-0.16%; p < 0.0001). Similarly, the mean fasting plasma glucose reduction was greater, and self-measured plasma glucose values were lower at all eight time points, with IDeg add-on versus placebo add-on (both p < 0.0001). At 26 weeks, the IDeg dose was 51 U (0.54 U/kg). During the run-in period with liraglutide, body weight decreased by ∼3 kg in both groups. After 26 weeks, the mean change was +2.0 kg (IDeg add-on to liraglutide) and -1.3 kg (placebo add-on to liraglutide). Confirmed hypoglycaemia rates were low in both groups, although higher with IDeg than with placebo (0.57 vs. 0.12 episodes/patient-years of exposure; p = 0.0002). Nocturnal confirmed hypoglycaemia was infrequent in both groups, with no episodes of severe hypoglycaemia, and no marked differences in adverse events with either treatment approach.

CONCLUSION

The addition of liraglutide and IDeg to patients sub-optimally treated with metformin and liraglutide and requiring treatment intensification was found to be effective and well-tolerated.

Insulin degludec does not increase antibody formation versus insulin glargine: an evaluation of phase IIIa trials

We examined insulin antibody formation in patients with type 1 (T1D) or type 2 diabetes (T2D) treated with once-daily insulin degludec (IDeg) or insulin glargine (IGlar) to evaluate the impact of antibody formation on efficacy and safety. Insulin antibodies were measured using subtraction radioimmunoassays in six phase IIIa clinical trials using IDeg (n = 2250) and IGlar (n = 1184). Spearman's correlation coefficient was used to evaluate associations between cross-reacting antibodies and change from baseline glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) and insulin dose. IDeg- and IGlar-specific antibodies remained low [<1% bound/total radioactivity (B/T)] and with low levels of antibodies cross-reacting with human insulin in patients with T1D (<20% B/T) and T2D (<6% B/T). Spearman's correlation coefficients between insulin antibody levels and change in HbA1c or insulin dose were low in both treatment groups. No clinically meaningful differences in adverse event (AE) rates were observed in patients with >10% B/T or without an absolute increase in antibodies cross-reacting with human insulin. IDeg treatment resulted in few immunogenic responses in patients with T1D and T2D; antibody formation was not associated with change in HbA1c, insulin dose or rates of AEs.

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.

New insulin glargine 300 U/ml versus glargine 100 U/ml in Japanese people with type 2 diabetes using basal insulin and oral antihyperglycaemic drugs: glucose control and hypoglycaemia in a randomized controlled trial (EDITION JP 2)

AIMS

To compare the efficacy and safety of insulin glargine 300 U/ml (Gla-300) with glargine 100 U/ml (Gla-100) in Japanese people with type 2 diabetes using basal insulin plus oral antihyperglycaemic drug(s) [OAD(s)].

METHODS

The EDITION JP 2 study (NCT01689142) was a 6-month, multicentre, open-label, phase III study. Participants (n = 241, male 61%, mean diabetes duration 14 years, mean weight 67 kg, mean body mass index 25 kg/m(2), mean glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) 8.02 %, mean basal insulin dose 0.24 U/kg/day) were randomized to Gla-300 or Gla-100, while continuing OAD(s). Basal insulin was titrated to target fasting self-monitored plasma glucose 4.4-5.6 mmol/l. The primary efficacy endpoint was HbA1c change over 6 months. Safety endpoints included hypoglycaemia and weight change.

RESULTS

Gla-300 was non-inferior to Gla-100 for HbA1c reduction [least squares (LS) mean difference 0.10 (95% confidence interval [CI] -0.08, 0.27) %]. The mean HbA1c at month 6 was 7.56 and 7.52 % with Gla-300 and Gla-100, respectively. Nocturnal confirmed (≤3.9 mmol/l) or severe hypoglycaemia risk was 38% lower with Gla-300 versus Gla-100 [relative risk 0.62 (95% CI 0.44, 0.88)]; annualized rates were 55% lower at night [rate ratio 0.45 (95% CI 0.21, 0.96)] and 36% lower at any time [24 h; rate ratio 0.64 (95% CI 0.43, 0.96)]. Severe hypoglycaemia was infrequent. A significant between-treatment difference in weight change favoured Gla-300 [LS mean difference -1.0 (95% CI -1.5, -0.5) kg; p = 0.0003]. Adverse event rates were comparable between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Japanese people with type 2 diabetes using basal insulin plus OAD(s) experienced less hypoglycaemia with Gla-300 than with Gla-100, while glycaemic control did not differ.

A meta-analysis of rate ratios for nocturnal confirmed hypoglycaemia with insulin degludec vs. insulin glargine using different definitions for hypoglycaemia

AIMS

A prospective meta-analysis of phase 3 trials showed lower rates of nocturnal hypoglycaemia with insulin degludec vs. insulin glargine. We investigated the consistency of the results across different definitions of hypoglycaemia.

METHODS

This post-hoc, patient-level meta-analysis included six randomized, controlled, 26- or 52-week phase 3a trials in insulin-naïve participants with Type 2 diabetes mellitus (Type 2 diabetesinsulin naïve ), participants with Type 2 diabetes mellitus using basal-bolus therapy (Type 2 diabetesBB ) and those with Type 1 diabetes mellitus. We used three definitions of hypoglycaemia and different timescales for the nocturnal period. Rates were analysed for the entire core trial period, the 'maintenance period' only, and the extension trial set population. Analyses utilized a negative binomial regression model.

RESULTS

In Type 2 diabetesinsulin naïve participants, risk of nocturnal hypoglycaemia was significantly lower with insulin degludec vs. insulin glargine for all hypoglycaemia definitions and trial periods. Risk was also lower for the timescale 21.59-05.59, but not 00.01-07.59. For Type 2 diabetesBB , nocturnal hypoglycaemia rates were lower with insulin degludec vs. insulin glargine across all definitions, timescales and trial periods, with one exception. For individuals with Type 1 diabetes mellitus, nocturnal hypoglycaemia risk was significantly lower with insulin degludec during the maintenance period for the original definition (plasma glucose < 3.1 mmol/l, timescale 00.01-05.59) and in the extension trial set population for all hypoglycaemia definitions except for the nocturnal timescale 00.01-07.59.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with insulin glargine, insulin degludec is associated with lower rates of nocturnal hypoglycaemia in people with Type 2 diabetes mellitus, and similar or lower rates in Type 1 diabetes mellitus, across different definitions.

Severe hypoglycaemia in adults with insulin-treated diabetes: impact on healthcare resources

AIMS

To assess resource utilization associated with severe hypoglycaemia across three insulin regimens in a large phase 3a clinical programme involving people with Type 1 diabetes treated with basal-bolus insulin, people with Type 2 diabetes treated with multiple daily injections and people with Type 2 diabetes treated with basal-oral therapy.

METHODS

Data relating to severe hypoglycaemia events (defined as episodes requiring external assistance) from the insulin degludec and insulin degludec/insulin aspart programme (15 trials) were analysed using descriptive statistics. Comparators included insulin glargine, biphasic insulin aspart, insulin detemir and sitagliptin. Mealtime insulin aspart was used in some regimens. This analysis used the serious adverse events records, which documented the use of ambulance/emergency teams, a hospital/emergency room visit ≤ 24 h, or a hospital visit > 24 h.

RESULTS

In total, 536 severe hypoglycaemia events were analysed, of which 157 (29.3%) involved an ambulance/emergency team, 64 (11.9%) led to hospital/emergency room attendance of ≤ 24 h and 36 (6.7%) required hospital admission (> 24 h). Although there were fewer events in people with Type 2 diabetes compared with Type 1 diabetes, once a severe episode occurred, the tendency to utilize healthcare resources was higher in Type 2 diabetes vs. Type 1 diabetes. A higher proportion (47.6%) in the basal-oral therapy group required hospital treatment for > 24 h versus the Type 1 diabetes (5.0%) and Type 2 diabetes multiple daily injections (5.3%) groups.

CONCLUSION

This analysis suggests that severe hypoglycaemia events often result in emergency/ambulance calls and hospital treatment, incurring a substantial health economic burden, and were associated with all insulin regimens.

Hypoglycemia Event Rates: A Comparison Between Real-World Data and Randomized Controlled Trial Populations in Insulin-Treated Diabetes

INTRODUCTION

Hypoglycemia is the most common adverse effect of diabetes therapy, particularly insulin treatment. Hypoglycemia is associated with considerable clinical and economic burden, and may be under-reported. The aim of this study was to com pare the frequency of hypoglycemic events reported in real-world settings with those reported in clinical trials.

METHODS

We conducted a structured literature review in PubMed to identify hypoglycemic event rates in patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) and insulin-treated type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) from real-world data (RWD) and randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The search was restricted to English language, full-text publications from 2010 onwards, reporting on treatment of T1DM or T2DM with basal only, basal-bolus, or premix insulin.

RESULTS

The final dataset included 30 studies (11 RWD studies and 19 RCTs). Six studies (RWD, n = 2; RCT, n = 4) reported hypoglycemia event rates in people with T1DM. For all reported categories of hypoglycemia (severe, non-severe, and nocturnal), rates were consistently higher in RWD studies compared with RCTs. Twenty-five studies (RWD, n = 10; RCT, n = 15) reported hypoglycemia event rates in people with insulin-treated T2DM. For T2DM basal-oral therapy; the highest rates were observed in RWD studies, although there was an overlap with RCT rates. For basal-bolus therapy, there was considerable between-study variability but higher rates of severe and non-severe hypoglycemia were generally observed in RWD studies. For T2DM premix insulin, reported rates of hypoglycemia in RWD studies and RCTs were similar.

CONCLUSION

We found that higher rates of hypoglycemia are observed in real-world settings compared with clinical trial settings, although there is a large degree of overlap. Due to the inherent constraints of RCTs, they are likely to underestimate the burden of hypoglycemia in clinical practice. Further, high-quality RWD are needed to determine a more accurate incidence of hypoglycemia in clinical practice.

Comparison of intra-individual coefficients of variation on the paired sampling data when inter-individual variations are different between measures

Background

Pain intensities of patients are repeatedly measured by Visual Analog Scale (VAS) and Pain Vision (PV) in a clinical research. Two measurements by VAS and PV are performed at the same time. In order to evaluate within patient consistency, intra-individual coefficient of variations (CVs) are compared between measures assuming that the pain status of each patient is stable during the research period. The correlated samples and different inter-individual variation due to different scales of the measures should be taken into account in statistical analysis. The adjustment of covariates will improve the estimation of population mean values of the measures.

Methods

In this paper, statistical approach to compare the intra-individual CVs is proposed. The approach consists of two steps: (1) estimating population mean values and intra-individual variances of the pain intensities by measure in a mixed effect model framework, (2) computing intra-individual CVs and comparing them between measures. The mixed effect model includes measure and some variables as fixed effects and subject by measure as a random effect. The different inter-individual variations between measures and their covariance reflect the paired sampling in the variance component. The confidence interval of the difference of intra-individual CVs is constructed using the asymptotic normality and the delta method. Bootstrap method is available if sample size is small.

Results

The proposed approach is illustrated using pain research data. Measure (VAS and PV), age and sex are included in the model as fixed effects. The confidence intervals of the difference of intra-individual CVs between measures are estimated by the asymptotic theory and by bootstrap using a subgroup resampling, respectively. Both confidence intervals are similar.

Conclusion

The proposed approach is useful to compare two intra-individual CVs taking it into account to reflect the paired sampling, different inter-individual variations between measures and some covariates. Although the inclusion of covariates did not improve the goodness-of-fit in the illustration, the proposed model with covariates will improve the accuracy and/or precision if covariates truly influence response variable. This approach can be applicable with small modification to various situations.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13104-016-1912-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Safety, efficacy, and early clinical experience of insulin degludec in Japanese people with diabetes mellitus: A first-year report from Japan

In Japan, insulin therapy is recommended for the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus either directly after diet, exercise and lifestyle improvements, or if the target for glycemic control is not achieved with other hypoglycemic agents. Insulin degludec is an ultra-long-acting insulin that was launched in Japan in 2013, having shown good efficacy and safety in its clinical development program. It has now been used in clinical practice for more than 1 year. During this time, clinicians and researchers have identified possible factors that could influence the decision as to which patients might be appropriate for insulin degludec treatment. In the present review, we describe how to initiate and manage insulin degludec therapy in routine clinical practice. We also discuss several important topics related to the use of insulin degludec, including patient selection, dosing, handling of bolus insulin, hypoglycemia and other potential safety considerations.

Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties of insulin degludec in Japanese patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus reflect similarities with Caucasian patients

Introduction

The present study aimed to evaluate the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties of insulin degludec (IDeg) in Japanese patients with type 1 diabetes.

Materials and Methods

This was a randomized, single‐center, double‐blind, two‐period, crossover, multiple‐dose trial. Patients were randomized into two treatment sequences, and received IDeg or insulin detemir for 6 days and a washout period (7–21 days) before switching treatment. Blood samples for pharmacokinetic measurements were obtained before each dose and up to 120 h after the last dose of each treatment period. Pharmacodynamic measurements were obtained using a 26‐h euglycemic clamp procedure after the last dose of each treatment period.

Results

A total of 22 patients were randomized (14 men, 8 women; mean glycosylated hemoglobin at baseline of 7.5% [based on Japanese Diabetes Society value]). At steady state, total glucose‐lowering effect (area under the glucose infusion rate [GIR] curve during one dosing interval [τ, 0–24 h] at steady state [AUC_GIR,τ,SS]) was 1,446 mg/kg and total exposure (geometric mean) of IDeg (AUC_IDeg,τ,SS) was 81,270 pmol h/L. Both the glucose‐lowering effect and the exposure of IDeg were evenly distributed over the dosing interval, with AUC for the first 12‐h intervals being approximately 50% of the total (geometric mean; AUC_{GIR,0–12h,SS}/AUC_GIR,τ,SS = 48%; AUC_{IDeg,0–12h,SS}/AUC_IDeg,τ,SS = 53%).

Conclusions

IDeg has a flat, consistent and ultra‐long glucose‐lowering effect that is evenly distributed across a 24‐h interval and an ultra‐long duration of action in Japanese patients with type 1 diabetes. These data support once‐daily dosing of IDeg in all patients. Overall, the pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic end‐points and safety observations are consistent with those previously reported in Caucasian patients.

New forms of insulin and insulin therapies for the treatment of type 2 diabetes

Insulin is a common treatment option for many patients with type 2 diabetes, and is generally used late in the natural history of the disease. Its injectable delivery mode, propensity for weight gain and hypoglycaemia, and the paucity of trials assessing the risk-to-safety ratio of early insulin use are major shortcomings associated with its use in patients with type 2 diabetes. Development of new insulins-such as insulin analogues, including long-acting and short-acting insulins-now provide alternative treatment options to human insulin. These novel insulin formulations and innovative insulin delivery methods, such as oral or inhaled insulin, have been developed with the aim to reduce insulin-associated hypoglycaemia, lower intraindividual pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic variability, and improve imitation of physiological insulin release. Availability of newer glucose-lowering drugs (such as glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists, dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors, and sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitors) also offers the opportunity for combination treatment; the results of the first trials in this area of research suggest that such treatment might lead to use of reduced insulin doses, less weight gain, and fewer hypoglycaemic episodes than insulin treatment alone. These and future developments will hopefully offer better opportunities for individualisation of insulin treatment for patients with type 2 diabetes.

Insulin degludec versus insulin glargine, both once daily as add-on to existing orally administered antidiabetic drugs in insulin-naive Japanese patients with uncontrolled type 2 diabetes: subgroup analysis of a pan-Asian, treat-to-target phase 3 trial

Insulin degludec (IDeg) is a novel basal insulin analogue with an ultralong duration of action that provides flat and stable reductions in blood glucose. The BEGIN ONCE ASIA trial was a phase 3 pan-Asian study examining the efficacy and safety of IDeg once daily (OD) versus insulin glargine (IGlar) OD in insulin-naive patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D). In this multinational, 26-week, open-label, treat-to-target trial, participants were randomised (2:1) to IDeg OD or IGlar OD, administered with one or more antidiabetic drugs (OAD) per os. Here we report the results from a post hoc analysis of Japanese patients enrolled in the trial [n = 133; 63.2 % male; mean age 61.0 years; mean body mass index 24.1 kg/m²; mean glycosylated haemoglobin (HbA_1c) 8.5 %]. After 26 weeks, mean HbA_1c levels were similar between the two groups [estimated mean treatment difference 0.11 %; 95 % confidence interval (CI) -0.09, 0.31]. Confirmed hypoglycaemia was reported in 53.4 and 61.4 % of patients in the IDeg OD and IGlar OD groups [rate ratio (IDeg/IGlar) 0.87; 95 % CI 0.51, 1.48]. Confirmed nocturnal hypoglycaemia was reported in 17.0 and 22.7 % of patients in the IDeg OD and IGlar OD groups, respectively [rate ratio (IDeg/IGlar) 0.50; 95 % CI 0.19, 1.32]. Adverse event rates were similar between treatment groups. Initiating insulin treatment with IDeg OD in Japanese patients with T2D, inadequately maintained on OADs and requiring treatment intensification, provided effective glycaemic control with low rates of confirmed and nocturnal confirmed hypoglycaemia.

Clinical use of insulin degludec

The limitations of current basal insulin preparations include concerns related to their pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties, hypoglycaemia, weight gain, and perception of management complexity, including rigid dosing schedules. Insulin degludec (IDeg) is a novel basal insulin with improved pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties compared to insulin glargine (IGlar) including a long half-life of ∼25 h and a duration of action >42 h at steady state, providing a flat and stable blood glucose-lowering effect when injected once daily. Evidence from phase 3a clinical trials with a treat-to-target design in patients with type 1 and type 2 diabetes has shown that IDeg has similar efficacy to IGlar, with a 9% and 26% reduction in risk of overall and nocturnal hypoglycaemia, respectively (in the pooled population) during the entire treatment period, and a 16% and 32% reduction during the maintenance period, respectively. Given its pharmacodynamic properties, IDeg offers a broad dosing window, allowing for flexible dose administration, if required. Two different formulations of IDeg are available (100 units/mL [U100] and 200 units/mL), the latter providing the same IDeg dose as the U100 formulation in half the injection volume. The unique pharmacokinetic profile of IDeg facilitates glycaemic control while minimising the risk of nocturnal hypoglycaemia.

PEGylated insulin Lispro (LY2605541): clinical overview of a new long-acting basal insulin analog in the treatment of Type 2 diabetes mellitus

Neutral Protamine Hagedorn insulin with an intermediate action profile has been in use for many years for the treatment of Type 1 diabetes and as an option for Type 2 diabetes. It is efficacious in reducing blood sugars, but shows substantial variability and risk of hypoglycemia. Basal insulin analogs have been developed in recent years to overcome these issues. Three basal insulin analogs are currently in the market in Europe. PEGylated insulin lispro is a new second-generation basal insulin analog which most likely will undergo review in 2016 by the US FDA and EMA in Europe for possible approval for marketing. Phase III trials are finalized, but not yet published. Phase II studies suggest antiglycemic efficacy, possible with a preferential hepato-specific action, a low rate of hypoglycemia, minor weight loss and acceptable tolerability. The benefit-risk profile needs, however, to be established.

Clinical and cost-effectiveness of insulin degludec: from clinical trials to clinical practice

The increasing prevalence of diabetes presents one of the greatest challenges to healthcare provision in modern times, with the cost of treating diabetes and its related complications representing a significant proportion of healthcare expenditure. In recent years, many new therapeutic entities have been developed with the aim of improving glycemic control, and thus slowing the development of micro- and macrovascular complications. Insulin degludec is a new-generation basal insulin analog with an ultra-long duration of action and low day-to-day and hour-to-hour intrapatient variability in blood glucose-lowering action. In this review, we consider evidence from clinical trials and real-world studies demonstrating the clinical benefits and cost-effectiveness of insulin degludec and its potential for improving patient care.

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 degludec early clinical experience: does the promise from the clinical trials translate into clinical practice--a case-based evaluation

BACKGROUND

Clinical experience of patients is an additional source of information that can inform prescribing decisions for new therapies in practice. In diabetes, for example, patients with recurrent hypoglycemia may be excluded from trials conducted for regulatory purposes. Using insulin degludec (IDeg), a new basal insulin with an ultra-long duration of action as an example, an interim analysis is presented describing whether the decision to prescribe IDeg to patients experiencing treatment-limiting problems on their existing insulin regimes represented good clinical and economic value.

METHODS

Records from the first 51 consecutive patients with diabetes (35 type 1 [T1D] and 16 type 2 [T2D]) switching to insulin degludec from either insulin glargine (IGlar) or insulin detemir (IDet), mostly due to problems with hypoglycemia (39/51, 76.5%), were reviewed at up to 37 weeks. Patients indicated frequency of hypoglycemia and completed a disease-specific questionnaire reporting six measures of confidence and treatment satisfaction. For the largest group of exposed patents, the T1D module of the IMS Core Diabetes Model (CDM) was used to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the treatment decision.

FINDINGS

HbA1c decreased by 0.5 ± 0.3% points and 0.7 ± 0.3% points for T1D and T2D, respectively. Hypoglycemic events decreased by >90%. Combined mean scores were ≥ 3.7 (1 = much worse, 3 = no change, 5 = much improved) for all six satisfaction and confidence items. In T1D, the treatment decision was highly cost-effective in the CDM lifetime analysis. Even when excluding benefits beyond hypoglycemia reduction, predicted cost per quality-adjusted life-year for IDeg vs IGlar/IDet was £10,754.

INTERPRETATION

These data illustrate the complementary nature of clinical trial and practice data when evaluating the value of therapeutic innovations in diabetes care. There were reductions in patient-reported hypoglycemia, reduced HbA1c, and improved treatment satisfaction in relation to the decision to prescribe IDeg. Initial health economic evaluation suggested that the decision to prescribe IDeg in this phenotypic group of T1D patients represented good value for money.

Long-term safety and efficacy of insulin degludec in the management of type 2 diabetes

Insulin degludec (IDeg) is a novel antiglycemic agent belonging to the therapeutic class of ultra-long duration basal insulin analogs. Its half-life and duration of action are 25 hours and 42 hours, respectively. This pharmacodynamic profile leads to a strict dosing schedule, ie, IDeg is injected at the same time each day to ensure optimal biological action and consistent glycemic control. According to the literature, IDeg provides glycemic control and nocturnal hypoglycemia reduction comparable with other long-acting analogs in type 2 diabetes mellitus. The risk of severe hypoglycemic episodes seems also to be reduced when using IDeg therapy; however, long-term follow-up is warranted for monitoring of possible but relatively infrequent adverse events. IDeg is also available in combination with aspart insulin and with liraglutide. The above preparations have been approved by the European Medicines Agency and other national health authorities. In 2012, the US Food and Drug Administration asked for a complementary study on IDeg-associated cardiovascular risk. Future prospective evaluation of large cohorts of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus treated with IDeg, with long-term follow-up, can provide further relevant information on the safety of IDeg therapy.

Insulin degludec versus insulin glargine in type 1 and type 2 diabetes mellitus: a meta-analysis of endpoints in phase 3a trials

INTRODUCTION

Insulin degludec (degludec) is a basal insulin with an ultra-long, stable action profile and reduced pharmacodynamic variability. Seven phase 3a trials compared degludec with insulin glargine (glargine). Patient-level meta-analyses were performed to obtain a comprehensive overview of differences between the insulin preparations, possible because consistent outcome definitions were utilized.

METHODS

Three categories of trials were analyzed: basal-bolus-treated type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DMB/B), insulin-naïve type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DMinsulin-naïve), and basal-bolus-treated T2DM (T2DMB/B). Regression models were adjusted for baseline characteristics. Endpoints analyzed were glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c), fasting plasma glucose (FPG), insulin dose and hypoglycemic rates analyzed in mutually exclusive groups: non-severe nocturnal, non-severe daytime, and severe.

RESULTS

As with previous treat-to-target trials, reductions in HbA1c were similar between degludec and glargine. Reductions in FPG were significantly greater with degludec in T1DMB/B and T2DMinsulin-naïve. Total daily insulin dose was significantly lower with degludec in T1DMB/B and T2DMinsulin-naïve. Estimated hypoglycemia rate ratios for degludec/glargine were as follows for T1DMB/B, T2DMinsulin-naïve and T2DMB/B, respectively: non-severe nocturnal 0.83, 0.64, 0.75 (all P < 0.05); non-severe daytime 1.14 [not significant (ns)], 0.89 (ns), and 0.83 (P < 0.05). Rate ratios for severe events were 1.12 (ns) (T1DMB/B); 0.14 (P < 0.05) (T2DMinsulin-naïve); and not analyzed (T2DMB/B) due to too few events.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with glargine, degludec is associated with equivalent HbA1c control and significantly lower nocturnal hypoglycemia rates. In T1DMB/B and T2DMinsulin-naïve, degludec is also associated with significantly greater reductions in FPG and lower total doses of insulin versus glargine.

Evolution of insulin: from human to analog

The development of insulin analogs has made improved treatment of type 2 diabetes possible. In this article, structural alterations, pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics, clinical end points, and safety issues are reviewed for the currently available basal insulins, rapid-acting insulins, and premixes. The flatter activity profiles of insulin glargine and insulin detemir translate into good clinical efficacy with a lower risk of hypoglycemia relative to neutral protamine Hagedorn insulin. Weight gain is consistently lower with insulin detemir than with neutral protamine Hagedorn insulin. Insulin degludec, licensed in Europe and Japan but not yet in the United States, has a mean half-life of 25.4 hours, a duration of action of >42 hours, and low variability. In trials in type 2 diabetes, rates of nocturnal hypoglycemia were lower with insulin degludec than with insulin glargine, and more flexible; once-daily dose timing was shown to be possible. Insulin lispro, insulin aspart, and insulin glulisine are rapidly absorbed after injection and thus provide better coverage of the post-prandial glucose surge compared with human insulin. Trials and meta-analyses show that reductions in glycated hemoglobin are similar and control of postprandial glucose is better with the rapid-acting analogs versus human insulin. Convenience is greater for patients because the analogs can be injected just before a meal. In premix or biphasic insulins, a proportion of the rapid-acting analog is protaminated, providing both rapid-acting and intermediate-acting components in one formulation, thus reducing the number of injections required. Alterations to human insulin have resulted in improvements in safety, efficacy, tolerability, and convenience for patients.

A review of the pharmacological properties of insulin degludec and their clinical relevance

Insulin degludec (IDeg) is a new-generation basal insulin with an ultra-long duration of action. To date, a large number of studies have been conducted to investigate the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties of IDeg. Standardised methods for collection and analysis of blood samples (for pharmacokinetic endpoints) and euglycaemic clamp procedures (for pharmacodynamic endpoints) were applied across studies to enable cross-study evaluation of important pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic parameters. Data show that IDeg has a half-life of >25 h [compared with ~12 h for insulin glargine (IGlar)] and reaches steady state within 3 days of administration in all patient populations investigated. The pharmacokinetic profile of IDeg demonstrates an even distribution of exposure across one dosing interval. The pharmacodynamic profile of IDeg is flat and stable, demonstrated by an even distribution of glucose-lowering effect across all four 6-h intervals in a 24-h period (one dosing day). These properties were consistently demonstrated across different type 1 and type 2 diabetes mellitus patient populations, including those from different ethnic origins (both males and females with type 2 diabetes), the elderly, and patients with hepatic or renal impairment. IDeg has an ultra-long duration of action exceeding 42 h and demonstrates four times lower day-to-day within-subject variability in glucose-lowering effect than IGlar. This review discusses the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic data accumulated thus far, and the relevance of these results from a clinical perspective.

Elderly patients with diabetes experience a lower rate of nocturnal hypoglycaemia with insulin degludec than with insulin glargine: a meta-analysis of phase IIIa trials

Background and Objective

Elderly patients with diabetes are more vulnerable to the occurrence and effects of hypoglycaemia; therefore, treatments with low risk of hypoglycaemia are preferred in this population. This study aimed to compare hypoglycaemia rates between insulin degludec (IDeg) and insulin glargine (IGlar) in elderly patients.

Methods

Hypoglycaemia data from patients ≥65 years of age with type 1 (T1DM) or type 2 (T2DM) diabetes from seven randomised, treat-to-target phase IIIa trials were used to compare IDeg and IGlar in a pre-planned meta-analysis. Overall, 917/4345 (21 %) randomised patients in the seven trials were elderly (634 IDeg, 283 IGlar). Overall confirmed hypoglycaemia was defined as <3.1 mmol/L or severe hypoglycaemia (symptoms requiring external assistance). Nocturnal hypoglycaemia included confirmed episodes from 0001 to 0559 hours (inclusive). Treatment comparisons of hypoglycaemia in T1DM patients were not performed due to low numbers of elderly patients with T1DM randomised (43 IDeg, 18 IGlar); statistical comparisons were also not made for severe hypoglycaemia due to the low number of events.

Results

In elderly patients with T2DM, the rate of overall confirmed hypoglycaemia was significantly lower with IDeg than IGlar [estimated rate ratio (ERR) 0.76 (0.61; 0.95)_{95 % CI}]; nocturnal confirmed hypoglycaemia was also significantly lower with IDeg [ERR 0.64 (0.43; 0.95)_95 % CI]. Confirmed hypoglycaemia occurred in the majority of T1DM patients, whereas severe episodes occurred infrequently and at similar rates in both treatment groups in T1DM and T2DM.

Conclusion

Results of this pre-planned meta-analysis in elderly patients with diabetes demonstrate a significant reduction in hypoglycaemic events with IDeg relative to IGlar.

Insulin degludec--the impact of a new basal insulin on care in type 2 diabetes

Many patients with type 2 diabetes continue to have poor glycaemic control and would benefit from insulin therapy. However, resistance to the introduction of insulin therapy can be high on both the part of the healthcare provider and the patient. A number of new, long-acting basal insulins are in development that provide good metabolic control, but with a lower risk of hypoglycaemia than currently available insulins, and greater flexibility in dosing time from day to day. These attributes may address some of the current barriers to insulin initiation and intensification that currently limit the effectiveness of diabetes care.

Patient safety and minimizing risk with insulin administration - role of insulin degludec

Diabetes is a lifelong condition requiring ongoing medical care and patient self-management. Exogenous insulin therapy is essential in type 1 diabetes and becomes a necessity in patients with longstanding type 2 diabetes who fail to achieve optimal control with lifestyle modification, oral agents, and glucagon-like peptide 1-based therapy. One of the risks that hinders insulin use is hypoglycemia. Optimal insulin therapy should therefore minimize the risk of hypoglycemia while improving glycemic control. Insulin degludec (IDeg) is a novel basal insulin that, following subcutaneous injection, assembles into a depot of soluble multihexamer chains. These subsequently release IDeg monomers that are absorbed at a slow and steady rate into the circulation, with the terminal half-life of IDeg being ~25 hours. Thus, it requires only once-daily dosing unlike other basal insulin preparations that often require twice-daily dosing. Despite its long half-life, once-daily IDeg does not cause accumulation of insulin in the circulation after reaching steady state. IDeg once a day will produce a steady-state profile with a lower peak:trough ratio than other basal insulins. In clinical trials, this profile translates into a lower frequency of nocturnal hypoglycemia compared with insulin glargine, as well as an ability to allow some flexibility in dose timing without compromising efficacy and safety. Indeed, a study that tested the extremes of dosing intervals of 8 and 40 hours showed no detriment in either glycemic control or hypoglycemic frequency versus insulin glargine given at the same time each day. While extreme flexibility in dose timing is not recommended, these findings are reassuring. This may be particularly beneficial to elderly patients, patients with learning difficulties, or others who have to rely on health-care professionals for their daily insulin injections. Further studies are required to confirm whether this might benefit adherence to treatment, reduce long-term hypoglycemia or reduce diabetes-related complications.

The development of new basal insulins: is there any clinical advantage with their use in type 2 diabetes?

INTRODUCTION

The basal insulin products currently on market do not optimally mimic endogenous insulin secretion. These unmet clinical needs have fueled the development of new basal insulin analogues for improving their pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics profile.

AREAS COVERED

We review the recent literature investigating the efficacy and safety of new basal insulin analogues in type 2 diabetes, as in the USA, insulin utilization accounted for 26% of treatment visits for these patients in 2012. Insulin degludec is a desB30 insulin acylated at the LysB29 residue with a glutamate linker and 16-carbon fatty diacyl side chain. Insulin lispro has been PEGylated at lysine B28, via a urethane bond, which increases the hydrodynamic size of the molecule and reduces its absorption and clearance following subcutaneous administration. Glargine U300 represents a new high-strength glargine formulation (300 U/ml): once injected, U300 forms a compact subcutaneous depot with a smaller surface area to produce a more gradual and prolonged release. Both PEG-lispro and glargine U300 are not yet on the market.

EXPERT OPINION

Ultra-long acting and high-strength formulations of new basal analogues have the potential for less glycemic variability, less (nocturnal) hypoglycemia and weight-loss advantage for PEG-lispro. However, these new basal insulin analogues need to be monitored closely for adverse signals.

Basal insulin analogues in the management of diabetes mellitus: What progress have we made?

Insulin remains the most effective and consistent means of controlling blood glucose levels in diabetes. Since 1946, neutral protamine Hagedorn (NPH) has been the predominant basal insulin in clinical use. However, absorption is variable due to the need for resuspension and the time-action profile (peak activity 4-6 h after subcutaneous administration) confers an increased propensity for between-meal and nocturnal hypoglycaemia. In the 1980s, recombinant DNA technology enabled modifications to the insulin molecule resulting in the soluble long-acting insulin analogues, glargine and detemir. Both exhibit a lower risk of hypoglycaemia compared with neutral protamine Hagedorn due to improved time-action profiles and reduced day-to-day glucose variability. Glargine is indicated for administration once daily and detemir once or twice daily. Degludec is the latest prolonged-acting insulin which forms long subcutaneous multi-hexamers that delay absorption. Recent phase III trials in type 1 and type 2 diabetes show that degludec was non-inferior to comparators (predominantly glargine) with a minimal although inconsistent reduction in overall hypoglycaemia and a small absolute difference in nocturnal hypoglycaemia. Newer developmental agents include LY2605541 and glargine U300. LY2605541 comprises insulin lispro combined with polyethylene glycol, thereby increasing its hydrodynamic size and retarding absorption from the subcutaneous tissue. Glargine U300 is a new formulation of glargine resulting in a flatter and more prolonged time-action profile than its predecessor. This article reviews recent advances in basal insulin analogues, including a critical appraisal of the degludec trials.

Is insulin degludec a more effective treatment for patients using high doses of insulin glargine but not attaining euglycemia? Some case reports from India

Insulin therapy is not without side effects. In patients with complications on complex regimens, failure to attain adequate glycemic control exposes the patient to high risks and the considerable mental distress associated with failed injectable therapy. As clinicians, we felt it necessary to undertake a trial of newer therapies like insulin degludec, which according to published literature, appears to be superior to earlier basal analogs by fewer hypoglycemic episodes, better glycemic predictability, and genuine 24-hour coverage. Here we report on three cases seen in our own clinical practice where insulin degludec was used in patients experiencing inadequacies with their current basal insulin therapy (insulin glargine). Switching to insulin degludec resulted in clinically meaningful reductions in hypoglycemia, along with reduced fasting plasma glucose and glycosylated hemoglobin and improved satisfaction with treatment. We also explored the use of long-acting insulin in renal failure and the possibility of dose reduction when switching from existing basal insulin therapy.