Insulin degludec, an ultra-longacting basal insulin, versus insulin glargine in basal-bolus treatment with mealtime insulin aspart in type 1 diabetes (BEGIN Basal-Bolus Type 1): a phase 3, randomised, open-label, treat-to-target non-inferiority trial

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.

PATIENTS ACHIEVING GOOD GLYCEMIC CONTROL (HBA1c <7%) EXPERIENCE A LOWER RATE OF HYPOGLYCEMIA WITH INSULIN DEGLUDEC THAN WITH INSULIN GLARGINE: A META-ANALYSIS OF PHASE 3A TRIALS

OBJECTIVE

Meta-analysis to compare hypoglycemia rates of basal insulin degludec (IDeg) with insulin glargine (IGlar) in patients with diabetes achieving good glycemic control (hemoglobin A1c [HbA1c] <7% at end of trial).

METHODS

In a preplanned meta-analysis, patient data from 7 randomized, treat-to-target, 26- or 52-week trials in patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) or type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) who administered IDeg (n = 2,899) or IGlar (n = 1,431) once daily were analyzed. Using a negative binomial regression model, this meta-analysis compared hypoglycemia rates in patients achieving HbA1c <7% at end of trial with IDeg (n = 1,347) and IGlar (n = 697).

RESULTS

In all trials, IDeg was noninferior to IGlar in HbA1c reduction from baseline. At end of trial, 2,044 patients (T2DM, n = 1,661; T1DM, n = 383) achieved HbA1c <7%. The overall confirmed hypoglycemia rate, defined as plasma glucose <56 mg/dL or severe hypoglycemia if requiring assistance, was significantly lower with IDeg versus IGlar (estimated rate ratio [ERR] IDeg:IGlar, 0.86; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.76 to 0.98). The nocturnal confirmed hypoglycemia rate, defined as occurring between midnight and 6:00 am, was significantly lower with IDeg (ERR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.52 to 0.77). In the maintenance period (16 weeks onward when average insulin dose and glycemic levels stabilized), the overall confirmed hypoglycemia rate was significantly lower (ERR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.68 to 0.92) and the nocturnal confirmed hypoglycemia rate was significantly lower (ERR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.45 to 0.72) with IDeg versus IGlar.

CONCLUSION

Patients with T1DM and T2DM achieved HbA1c <7% with significantly lower rates of overall and nocturnal confirmed hypoglycemia with IDeg versus IGlar. The lower hypoglycemia rate with IDeg was more pronounced in the maintenance period.

Comparison of the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic profiles of insulin degludec and insulin glargine

OBJECTIVES

A medical need remains for a once-daily insulin with 24-h basal coverage in all patients. We characterize the steady-state (SS) pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic properties of insulin degludec (IDeg) versus insulin glargine (IGlar).

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

In this controlled, single-center study, 66 type 1 diabetes patients were randomized to two 8-day periods of once-daily IDeg or IGlar at 0.4, 0.6 or 0.8 U/kg. At SS, subjects underwent a 42-h euglycemic glucose clamp (5.5 mmol/l; 100 mg/dl). Glucose infusion rate (GIR), distribution of GIR and half-life were assessed.

RESULTS

Mean 24-h GIR profiles were flatter and more stable for all doses of IDeg versus IGlar. The evenly distributed glucose-lowering effect of IDeg was confirmed by the AUCGIR across one dosing interval, as each of the four 6-h intervals across one dosing interval contributed ∼ 25% of the AUCGIR,τ,SS. IGlar was most effective during the first 12 - 18 h after dosing. At SS, the half-life was 25.4 (IDeg) versus 12.1 h (IGlar). No safety concerns were identified for IDeg or IGlar.

CONCLUSION

IDeg has a longer half-life (> 25 h) than IGlar. Exposure and glucose-lowering effects are more stable and evenly distributed across one dosing interval for IDeg versus IGlar (Clinical trials.gov identifier: NCT01114542).

Efficacy and safety of insulin degludec in Japanese patients with type 1 and type 2 diabetes: 24-week results from the observational study in routine clinical practice

Aims/Introduction

Insulin degludec, a new long‐acting insulin analog, showed its better glycemic control and reduced risk of hypoglycemia. This is the first prospective observational study that evaluated the efficacy and safety of insulin degludec in routine clinical practice.

Materials and Methods

Japanese patients with type 1 or type 2 diabetes mellitus receiving basal–bolus insulin therapy were switched their basal insulin to degludec, and prospectively observed over a 24‐week course. The Diabetes Therapy‐Related Quality of Life questionnaire was administered before and 12 weeks after switching.

Results

The participants were 80 diabetes patients = (type 1, 44; type 2, 36). In the type 1 group, there was no difference in glycated hemoglobin levels between the pre‐switching and 24‐week measurements (from 62 to 62 mmol/mol, P = 0.768), whereas the daily insulin dose (per kg of bodyweight) decreased significantly (basal, from 0.25 to 0.20 U/kg, P < 0.001; bolus, from 0.40 to 0.37 U/kg, P = 0.001). In the type 2 group, glycated hemoglobin levels decreased after switching (from 60 to 58 mmol/mol, P = 0.028). In the type 1 group, the frequency of hypoglycemia decreased significantly after switching, but not significantly in the type 2 group. Patient satisfaction with the control of hypoglycemia tended to improve in the type 1 group.

Conclusions

Compared with existing long‐acting insulin, degludec can maintain glycemic control at a lower insulin dose and frequency of hypoglycemia in type 1 diabetes, while it can improve glycemic control at an equal insulin dose in type 2 diabetes.

This is first observational prospective study of insulin degludec in routine clinical practice that we evaluated the effect on glycemic control and risk of hypoglycemia in basal‐bolus insulin therapy. We found that insulin degludec can maintain glycemic control at a lower insulin dose and frequency of hypoglycemia in type 1 diabetes, while it can improve glycemic control at equally insulin dose in type 2 diabetes.

These results mean that insulin degludec is of use in routine clinical practice.

Evidence-informed clinical practice recommendations for treatment of type 1 diabetes complicated by problematic hypoglycemia

Problematic hypoglycemia, defined as two or more episodes per year of severe hypoglycemia or as one episode associated with impaired awareness of hypoglycemia, extreme glycemic lability, or major fear and maladaptive behavior, is a challenge, especially for patients with long-standing type 1 diabetes. Individualized therapy for such patients should include a composite target: optimal glucose control without problematic hypoglycemia. Therefore, we propose a tiered, four-stage algorithm based on evidence of efficacy given the limitations of educational, technological, and transplant interventions. All patients with problematic hypoglycemia should undergo structured or hypoglycemia-specific education programs (stage 1). Glycemic and hypoglycemia treatment targets should be individualized and reassessed every 3-6 months. If targets are not met, one diabetes technology-continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion or continuous glucose monitoring-should be added (stage 2). For patients with continued problematic hypoglycemia despite education (stage 1) and one diabetes technology (stage 2), sensor-augmented insulin pumps preferably with an automated low-glucose suspend feature and/or very frequent contact with a specialized hypoglycemia service can reduce hypoglycemia (stage 3). For patients whose problematic hypoglycemia persists, islet or pancreas transplant should be considered (stage 4). This algorithm provides an evidence-informed approach to resolving problematic hypoglycemia; it should be used as a guide, with individual patient circumstances directing suitability and acceptability to ensure the prudent use of technology and scarce transplant resources. Standardized reporting of hypoglycemia outcomes and inclusion of patients with problematic hypoglycemia in studies of new interventions may help to guide future therapeutic strategies.

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.

Insulin degludec in combination with bolus insulin aspart is safe and effective in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes

Insulin degludec (IDeg) once-daily was compared with insulin detemir (IDet) once- or twice-daily, with prandial insulin aspart in a treat-to-target, randomized controlled trial in children 1-17 yr with type 1 diabetes, for 26 wk (n = 350), followed by a 26-wk extension (n = 280). Participants were randomized to receive either IDeg once daily at the same time each day or IDet given once or twice daily according to local labeling. Aspart was titrated according to a sliding scale or in accordance with an insulin:carbohydrate ratio and a plasma glucose correction factor. Randomization was age-stratified: 85 subjects 1-5 yr. (IDeg: 43), 138 6-11 yr (IDeg: 70) and 127 12-17 yr (IDeg: 61) were included. Baseline characteristics were generally similar between groups overall and within each stratification. Non-inferiority of IDeg vs. IDet was confirmed for HbA1c at 26 wk; estimated treatment difference (ETD) 0.15% [-0.03; 0.32]95% CI . At 52 wk, HbA1c was 7.9% (IDeg) vs. 7.8% (IDet), NS; change in mean FPG was -1.29 mmol/L (IDeg) vs. +1.10 mmol/L (IDet) (ETD -1.62 mmol/L [-2.84; -0.41]95% CI , p = 0.0090) and mean basal insulin dose was 0.38 U/kg (IDeg) vs. 0.55 U/kg (IDet). The majority of IDet treated patients (64%) required twice-daily administration to achieve glycemic targets. Hypoglycemia rates did not differ significantly between IDeg and IDet, but confirmed and severe hypoglycemia rates were numerically higher with IDeg (57.7 vs. 54.1 patient-years of exposure (PYE) [NS] and 0.51 vs. 0.33, PYE [NS], respectively) although nocturnal hypoglycemia rates were numerically lower (6.0 vs. 7.6 PYE, NS). Rates of hyperglycemia with ketosis were significantly lower for IDeg vs. IDet [0.7 vs. 1.1 PYE, treatment ratio 0.41 (0.22; 0.78)95% CI , p = 0.0066]. Both treatments were well tolerated with comparable rates of adverse events. IDeg achieved equivalent long-term glycemic control, as measured by HbA1c with a significant FPG reduction at a 30% lower basal insulin dose when compared with IDet. Rates of hypoglycemia did not differ significantly between the two treatment groups; however, hyperglycemia with ketosis was significantly reduced in those treated with IDeg.

Insulin degludec requires lower bolus insulin doses than does insulin glargine in Japanese diabetic patients with insulin-dependent state

BACKGROUND

The study presents a comparison of the glucose-lowering effects, glycemic variability, and insulin doses during treatment with insulin degludec or insulin glargine.

METHODS

In this open-label, single-center, 2-way crossover study, 13 Japanese diabetic outpatients in the insulin-dependent state on basal-bolus therapy were assigned to receive either insulin glargine followed by insulin degludec, or insulin degludec followed by insulin glargine. Basal insulin doses were fixed in principle, and patients self-adjusted their bolus insulin doses. Seventy-two-hour continuous glucose monitoring was performed 2 weeks after switching the basal insulin.

RESULTS

Mean blood glucose (mg/dL) was not significantly different between insulin degludec and insulin glargine over 48 hours (141.8 ± 35.2 vs 151.8 ± 43.3), at nighttime (125.6 ± 40.0 vs 124.7 ± 50.4), or at daytime (149.3 ± 37.1 vs 163.3 ± 44.5). The standard deviation (mg/dL) was also similar (for 48 hours: 48.9 ± 19.4 vs 50.3 ± 17.3; nighttime: 18.7 ± 14.3 vs 13.7 ± 6.7; daytime: 49.3 ± 20.0 vs 44.3 ± 17.7). Other indices of glycemic control, glycemic variability, and hypoglycemia were similar for both insulin analogs. Total daily insulin dose (TDD) and total daily bolus insulin dose (TDBD) were significantly lower with insulin degludec than with insulin glargine (TDD: 0.42 ± 0.20 vs 0.46 ± 0.22 U/kg/day, P = .028; TDBD: 0.27 ± 0.13 vs 0.30 ± 0.14 U/kg/day, P = .036).

CONCLUSIONS

Insulin degludec and insulin glargine provided effective and stable glycemic control. Insulin degludec required lower TDD and TDBD in this population of patients.

Medium-term effects of insulin degludec on patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to analyze the changes in daily blood glucose fluctuation and insulin dose in patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) undergoing basal-bolus therapy following a switching of basal insulin used from insulin glargine or detemir to insulin degludec.

METHODS

Seven patients with T1DM were enrolled. All patients treated with insulin glargine or detemir twice daily were switched to insulin degludec with 80-90 % of the prior insulin dose. During the study period, the basal insulin doses were adjusted by the attending physician. The patients underwent continuous glucose monitoring before, 3 days after, and 24 weeks after switching to insulin degludec. The daily insulin dose was analyzed before, 3 days after, and 24 weeks after switching. Glycated hemoglobin levels were measured before and 24 weeks after switching.

RESULTS

The blood glucose profile did not change significantly before and after switching. On the other hand, the total daily insulin dose and total daily basal insulin dose decreased significantly 24 weeks after switching.

DISCUSSION

In patients with T1DM undergoing insulin glargine or detemir treatment, it is possible to achieve similar glycemic control in the medium term with a once daily, lower dose of insulin degludec.

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.

The beneficial effect of insulin degludec on nocturnal hypoglycaemia and insulin dose in type 1 diabetic patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised trials

AIMS

Insulin degludec is a new-generation ultra-long-acting basal insulin which offers a significantly more predictable glucose-lowering effect than other long-acting insulin analogues. The aim of this study was to compare the effect of treatment with insulin degludec and long-acting insulin analogues glargine and detemir in type 1 diabetic (T1D) patients by means of a systematic review and meta-analysis.

METHODS

The following electronic databases were searched up to January 2014: MEDLINE, EMBASE and The Cochrane Library. Additional references were obtained from the reviewed articles. There were included randomised controlled trials of at least 12-week duration with basal-bolus regimen therapies in T1D patients.

RESULTS

Current analysis included four studies involving 1,846 T1D patients. The combined data from all trials showed a statistically significant reduction in the basal insulin dose (MD -0.042, 95 % CI -0.067 to -0.018, p = 0.001) and the total daily insulin dose (MD -0.072, 95 % CI 0.016 to -0.027, p = 0.002) in the degludec group compared to other long-acting analogues. There was also a significant reduction of nocturnal hypoglycaemia in the degludec group compared to the controls (rate ratio 0.697, 95 % CI 0.617-0.786, p = 0.000). There were no differences between the groups in terms of glycated haemoglobin values, fasting plasma glucose (FPG) and adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

Basal-bolus treatment with insulin degludec was superior to long-acting insulin analogues detemir and glargine in reducing the rate of nocturnal hypoglycaemia. In comparison with other long-acting analogues, treatment with insulin degludec was safe and patients obtained similar metabolic control expressed by HbA1c and FPG levels with the added benefit of a reduced basal and total insulin dose.

Glucose-responsive insulin activity by covalent modification with aliphatic phenylboronic acid conjugates

Since its discovery and isolation, exogenous insulin has dramatically changed the outlook for patients with diabetes. However, even when patients strictly follow an insulin regimen, serious complications can result as patients experience both hyperglycemic and hypoglycemic states. Several chemically or genetically modified insulins have been developed that tune the pharmacokinetics of insulin activity for personalized therapy. Here, we demonstrate a strategy for the chemical modification of insulin intended to promote both long-lasting and glucose-responsive activity through the incorporation of an aliphatic domain to facilitate hydrophobic interactions, as well as a phenylboronic acid for glucose sensing. These synthetic insulin derivatives enable rapid reversal of blood glucose in a diabetic mouse model following glucose challenge, with some derivatives responding to repeated glucose challenges over a 13-h period. The best-performing insulin derivative provides glucose control that is superior to native insulin, with responsiveness to glucose challenge improved over a clinically used long-acting insulin derivative. Moreover, continuous glucose monitoring reveals responsiveness matching that of a healthy pancreas. This synthetic approach to insulin modification could afford both long-term and glucose-mediated insulin activity, thereby reducing the number of administrations and improving the fidelity of glycemic control for insulin therapy. The described work is to our knowledge the first demonstration of a glucose-binding modified insulin molecule with glucose-responsive activity verified in vivo.

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.

Evaluating the toxic and beneficial effects of lichen extracts in normal and diabetic rats

Lichens can be used as a novel bioresource for natural antioxidants. However, there is need for further investigations to validate the lichens used in medicinal remedies. In this study, the effects of Cetraria islandica and Pseudevernia furfuracae lichen species in streptozotocin (STZ)-induced diabetes were evaluated. Diabetic rats were treated with aqueous lichen extracts (250 and 500 mg/kg/day) for 2 weeks starting at 72 h after STZ injection. On the 14th day, animals were anesthetized, and then metabolic and biochemical parameters were evaluated between control and treatment groups. Pancreatic histology and β-cell mass were examined by hematoxylin and eosin and insulin immunohistochemistry stainings. Our findings revealed that these lichen species could be used safely in this dose range. In addition, C. islandica extracts showed prominent results compared to the doses of P. furfuracae extract for antioxidant capacity. However, the protectivity of C. islandica extract was inadequate against diabetes-induced pancreatic damages via forming oxidative stress. In conclusion, the usage of C. islandica might serve for early intervening in the risk reduction of type 1 diabetes.

Clinical considerations for insulin pharmacotherapy in ambulatory care, part two: review of primary literature and an evidence-based approach for treatment

IN BRIEF This article reinforces the dosing guidance from the package inserts of available insulin products and supplemental information provided by the manufacturers of insulin products. It reviews and evaluates pertinent primary literature detailing algorithms for the initiation and titration of insulin therapy that have helped to shape current clinical practice guidelines. The article discusses the clinical applicability of the evidence on insulin pharmacotherapy and offers recommendations for initiation and titration of various insulin products for insulin-requiring people with type 2 diabetes in the ambulatory care setting.

Switching from Twice-Daily Basal Insulin Injections to Once-Daily Insulin Degludec Injection for Basal-Bolus Insulin Regimen in Japanese Patients with Type 1 Diabetes: A Pilot Study

The aim of this study was to investigate the efficacy of insulin degludec used for basal-bolus insulin regimen after switching from twice-daily basal insulin in Japanese patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus. The subjects were 22 type 1 diabetes patients treated with basal-bolus insulin regimen with twice-daily basal insulin. Basal insulin was switched to once-daily injection of insulin degludec with 10% dose reduction. HbA1c and fasting plasma glucose (FPG) were measured before and 12 weeks after switching. The frequency of hypoglycemic episodes, standard deviation (SD) of blood glucose, and mean of daily difference (MODD) were evaluated by continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) before and 4 weeks after switching. HbA1c and FPG before and 12 weeks after switching were comparable (HbA1c 8.5 ± 1.4 versus 8.7 ± 1.6%, P = 0.28; FPG 203.2 ± 81.2 versus 206.5 ± 122.4 mg/dL, P = 0.91). The frequency of hypoglycemia during nighttime was not significantly different at 4 weeks after switching (14.4 ± 17.0 versus 11.1 ± 15.0%, P = 0.45). In addition, SD and MODD before and 4 weeks after switching were also comparable. In conclusion, glycemic control under once-daily insulin degludec injection was almost comparable to that under twice-daily basal insulin injections in Japanese type 1 diabetes patients. This study was registered with ID: UMIN000010474.

Cost-effectiveness of insulin degludec compared with insulin glargine in a basal-bolus regimen in patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus in the UK

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of insulin degludec (IDeg) vs insulin glargine (IGlar) as part of a basal-bolus treatment regimen in adults with T1DM, using a short-term economic model.

METHODS

Data from two phase III clinical studies were used to populate a simple and transparent short-term model. The costs and effects of treatment with IDeg vs IGlar were calculated over a 12-month period. The analysis was conducted from the perspective of the UK National Health Service. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to assess the degree of uncertainty surrounding the results. The main outcome measure, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), was the cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY).

RESULTS

IDeg is a cost-effective treatment option vs IGlar in patients with T1DM on a basal-bolus regimen. The base case ICER was estimated at £16,895/QALY, which is below commonly accepted thresholds for cost-effectiveness in the UK. Sensitivity analyses demonstrated that the ICER was stable to variations in the majority of input parameters. The parameters that exerted the most influence on the ICER were hypoglycemia event rates, daily insulin dose, and disutility associated with non-severe nocturnal hypoglycemic events. However, even under extreme assumptions in the majority of analyses the ICERs remained below the commonly accepted threshold of £20,000-£30,000 per QALY gained.

CONCLUSIONS

This short-term modeling approach accommodates the treat-to-target trial design required by regulatory bodies, and focuses on the impact of important aspects of insulin therapy such as hypoglycemia and dosing. For patients with T1DM who are treated with a basal-bolus insulin regimen, IDeg is a cost-effective treatment option compared with IGlar. IDeg may be particularly cost-effective for sub-groups of patients, such as those suffering from recurrent nocturnal hypoglycemia and those with impaired awareness of hypoglycemia.

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.

Modern basal insulin analogs: An incomplete story

The currently available basal insulin does not completely mimic the endogenous insulin secretion. This has continued to promote the search for ideal basal insulin. The newer basal insulin have primarily focused on increasing the duration of action, reducing variability, and reducing the incidence of hypoglycemia, particularly nocturnal. However, the changing criteria of hypoglycemia within a short span of a few years along with the surprising introduction of major cardiac events as another outcome measure has not only clouded the assessment of basal insulin but has also polarized opinion worldwide about the utility of the newer basal insulin. A critical review of both the pre and post FDA analysis of all the basal insulin in this article attempts to clear some of the confusion surrounding the issues of hypoglycemia and glycemic control. This article also discusses all the trials and meta-analysis done on all the current basal insulin available along with their head-to-head comparison with particular attention to glycemic control and hypoglycemic events including severe and nocturnal hypoglycemia. This in-depth analysis hopes to provide a clear interpretation of the various analyses available in literature at this point of time thereby acting as an excellent guide to the readers in choosing the most appropriate basal insulin for their patient.

Treatment of type 2 diabetes, lifestyle, GLP1 agonists and DPP4 inhibitors

In recent years the treatment focus for type 2 diabetes has shifted to prevention by lifestyle change and to more aggressive reduction of blood sugars during the early stage of treatment. Weight reduction is an important goal for many people with type 2 diabetes. Bariatric surgery is no longer considered a last resort treatment. Glucagon-like peptide-1 agonists given by injection are emerging as a useful treatment since they not only lower blood sugar but are associated with a modest weight reduction. The role of the oral dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitors is emerging as second line treatment ahead of sulphonylureas due to a possible beneficial effect on the beta cell and weight neutrality. Drugs which inhibit glucose re-absorption in the kidney, sodium/glucose co-transport 2 inhibitors, may have a role in the treatment of diabetes. Insulin treatment still remains the cornerstone of treatment in many patients with type 2 diabetes.

Advances in management of type 1 diabetes mellitus

Treatment of type 1 diabetes mellitus has always posed a challenge to balance hyperglycemia control with hypoglycemia episodes. The quest for newer therapies is continuing and this review attempts to outline the recent developments. The insulin molecule itself has got moulded into different analogues by minor changes in its structure to ensure well controlled delivery, stable half-lives and lesser side effects. Insulin delivery systems have also consistently undergone advances from subcutaneous injections to continuous infusion to trials of inhalational delivery. Continuous glucose monitoring systems are also becoming more accurate and user friendly. Smartphones have also made their entry into therapy of diabetes by integrating blood glucose levels and food intake with calculated adequate insulin required. Artificial pancreas has enabled to a certain extent to close the loop between blood glucose level and insulin delivery with devices armed with meal and exercise announcements, dual hormone delivery and pramlintide infusion. Islet, pancreas-kidney and stem cells transplants are also being attempted though complete success is still a far way off. Incorporating insulin gene and secretary apparatus is another ambitious leap to achieve insulin independence though the search for the ideal vector and target cell is still continuing. Finally to stand up to the statement, prevention is better than cure, immunological methods are being investigated to be used as vaccine to prevent the onset of diabetes mellitus.

Efficacy and safety of insulin degludec given as part of basal-bolus treatment with mealtime insulin aspart in type 1 diabetes: a 26-week randomized, open-label, treat-to-target non-inferiority trial

AIMS

The efficacy and safety of insulin degludec (IDeg) was compared with insulin detemir (IDet), both administered once daily (OD) as basal treatment in participants with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM). The primary outcome was non-inferiority of IDeg to IDet in glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) reduction after 26 weeks.

METHODS

This multinational, 26-week, controlled, open-label, parallel-group trial randomized adults with T1DM to IDeg or IDet as OD basal insulin treatment combined with mealtime bolus insulin aspart (IAsp). Participants with T1DM treated with any basal-bolus insulin regimen for ≥ 12 months prior to the trial, a mean HbA1c ≤ 10.0% (85.8 mmol/mol) and body mass index (BMI) ≤ 35.0 kg/m(2) at screening participated in the trial (IDeg: N = 302; IDet: N = 153).

RESULTS

After 26 weeks, HbA1c decreased 0.73% (8.0 mmol/mol) (IDeg) and 0.65% (7.1 mmol/mol) (IDet) [estimated treatment difference (ETD) IDeg-IDet: -0.09% (-0.23; 0.05)95% CI (-10.0 mmol/mol [-2.6; 0.6]95% CI ); confirming non-inferiority]. Mean fasting plasma glucose improved in both groups, and was lower with IDeg than IDet [ETD IDeg-IDet: -1.66 mmol/l (-2.37; -0.95)95% CI , p < 0.0001]. The rate of confirmed hypoglycaemia was similar with IDeg and IDet [45.83 vs. 45.69 episodes per patient-year of exposure (PYE); estimated rate ratio (RR) IDeg/IDet: 0.98 (0.80; 1.20)95% CI , p = 0.86]. The rate of nocturnal confirmed hypoglycaemia was lower with IDeg than IDet [4.14 vs. 5.93 episodes per PYE; RR IDeg/IDet: 0.66 (0.49; 0.88)95% CI , p = 0.0049]. Adverse event profiles were similar between groups.

CONCLUSION

IDeg administered OD in basal-bolus therapy effectively improved long-term glycaemic control in participants with T1DM with a lower risk of nocturnal confirmed hypoglycaemia than IDet.

New developments in insulin therapy for type 2 diabetes

Insulin has classically been considered a treatment of last resort for individuals with type 2 diabetes, delayed until all other efforts by the patient and healthcare provider have failed. Recent treatment guidelines recommend the use of insulin, in particular basal insulin, as part of a treatment regimen earlier in the disease process. Many patients are reticent about initiating insulin, so therapies that allow insulin treatment to be more tailored to individual needs are likely to result in greater acceptance and patient adherence with therapy. To meet this need, a range of insulin products are in development that aim to increase absorption rate or prolong the duration of action, reduce peak variability and weight gain associated with insulin treatment, and offer alternative delivery methods. This review describes insulin products in clinical development, new combination therapies, and new devices for insulin delivery.

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.

Insulin degludec/insulin aspart combination for the treatment of type 1 and type 2 diabetes

Glycemic control remains the major therapeutic objective to prevent or delay the onset and progression of complications related to diabetes mellitus. Insulin therapy represents a cornerstone in the treatment of diabetes and has been used widely for achieving glycemic goals. Nevertheless, a large portion of the population with diabetes does not meet the internationally agreed glycemic targets. Moreover, insulin treatment, especially if intensive, may be associated with emergency room visits and hospitalization due to hypoglycemic events. Therefore, fear of hypoglycemia or hypoglycemic events represents the main barriers to the attainment of glycemic targets. The burden associated with multiple daily injections also remains a significant obstacle to initiating and maintaining insulin therapy. The most attractive insulin treatment approach should meet the patients’ preference, rather than demanding patients to change or adapt their lifestyle. Insulin degludec/insulin aspart (IDegAsp) is a new combination, formulated with ultra-long-acting insulin degludec and rapid-acting insulin aspart, with peculiar pharmacological features, clinical efficacy, safety, and tolerability. IDegAsp provides similar, noninferior glycemic control to a standard basal–bolus regimen in patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus, with additional benefits of significantly lower episodes of hypoglycemia (particularly nocturnal) and fewer daily insulin injections. Moreover, although treatment strategy and patients’ viewpoint are different in type 1 and type 2 diabetes, trial results suggest that IDegAsp may be an appropriate and reasonable option for initiating insulin therapy in patients with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled on maximal doses of conventional oral agents. This paper will discuss the role of IDegAsp combination as a novel treatment option in diabetic patients.

Old and new basal insulin formulations: understanding pharmacodynamics is still relevant in clinical practice

Long-acting insulin analogues have been developed to mimic the physiology of basal insulin secretion more closely than human insulin formulations (Neutral Protamine Hagedorn, NPH). However, the clinical evidence in favour of analogues is still controversial. Although their major benefit as compared with NPH is a reduction in the hypoglycaemia risk, some cost/effectiveness analyses have not been favourable to analogues, largely because of their higher price. Nevertheless, these new formulations have conquered the insulin market. Human insulin represents currently no more than 20% of market share. Despite (in fact because of) the widespread use of insulin analogues it remains critical to analyse the pharmacodynamics (PD) of basal insulin formulations appropriately to interpret the results of clinical trials correctly. Importantly, these data may help physicians in tailoring insulin therapy to patients' individual needs and, additionally, when clinical evidence is not available, to optimize insulin treatment. For patients at low risk for/from hypoglycaemia, it might be acceptable and also cost-effective not to use long-acting insulin analogues as basal insulin replacement. Conversely, in patients with a higher degree of insulin deficiency and increased risk for hypoglycaemia, analogues are the best option due to their more physiological profile, as has been shown in PD and clinical studies. From this perspective optimizing basal insulin treatment, especially in type 2 diabetes patients who are less prone to hypoglycaemia, would be suitable making significant resources available for other relevant aspects of diabetes care.

Insulin degludec, a long-acting once-daily basal analogue for type 1 and type 2 diabetes mellitus

Here, we discuss certain practical issues related to use of insulin degludec, a new long-acting basal insulin analogue. Degludec provides uniform ("peakless") action that extends over more than 24 hours and is highly consistent from dose to dose. Like the 2 previously available basal analogues (detemir and glargine), degludec is expected to simplify dose adjustment and enable patients to reach their glycemic targets with reduced risk of hypoglycemia. Phase 3 clinical trials involving type 1 and type 2 diabetes have demonstrated that degludec was noninferior to glargine in allowing patients to reach a target glycated hemoglobin (A1C) of 7%, and nocturnal hypoglycemia occurred significantly less frequently with degludec. In addition, when dosing intervals vary substantially from day to day, degludec continues to be effective and to maintain a low rate of nocturnal hypoglycemia. Degludec thus has the potential to reduce risk of nocturnal hypoglycemia, to enhance the flexibility of the dosing schedule and to improve patient and caregiver confidence in the stability of glycemic control. A dedicated injector, the FlexTouch prefilled pen, containing degludec 200 units/mL, will be recommended for most patients with type 2 diabetes. Degludec will also be available as 100 units/mL cartridges, to be used in the NovoPen 4 by patients requiring smaller basal insulin doses, including most patients with type 1 diabetes.

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.

Effect of insulin analogues on risk of severe hypoglycaemia in patients with type 1 diabetes prone to recurrent severe hypoglycaemia (HypoAna trial): a prospective, randomised, open-label, blinded-endpoint crossover trial

BACKGROUND

Insulin analogues have been developed to reduce the risk of hypoglycaemia in patients with diabetes who require insulin-based treatment, but their effect on this endpoint in patients with type 1 diabetes complicated by recurrent severe hypoglycaemia is unknown. We compared the occurrence of severe hypoglycaemic episodes in such patients during treatment with insulin analogues or human insulin.

METHODS

In this investigator-initiated, prospective, randomised, open-label, blinded-endpoint crossover trial at seven medical centres in Denmark, we recruited patients (aged ≥18 years) with type 1 diabetes (diagnosed for >5 years) who had reported two or more episodes of severe hypoglycaemia in the preceding year. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) using computer-generated site-specific randomisation lists in blocks of four to treatment with basal-bolus therapy with either analogue insulin (detemir and aspart) or human insulin (human neutral protamine Hagedorn and human regular) in a balanced crossover design. A 1-year plus 1-year treatment period was specified, consisting of two 3-month run-in periods, each followed by a 9-month maintenance period. The primary endpoint was the number of validated episodes of severe hypoglycaemia (defined by need for treatment assistance from others) reported during the maintenance periods, analysed by intention to treat. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00346996.

FINDINGS

Between May 9, 2007, and Oct 30, 2009, 159 patients were randomly assigned. 18 patients discontinued during the first run-in period, leaving 141 patients in the intention-to-treat population. 136 severe hypoglycaemic episodes were reported during treatment with human insulin and 105 episodes were reported during treatment with insulin analogues, resulting in an absolute rate reduction of 0.51 episodes (95% CI 0.19-0.84) per patient-year with insulin analogues. This result corresponds to a relative rate reduction of 29% (95% CI 11-48; p=0.010).

INTERPRETATION

Treatment with insulin detemir and aspart in patients with type 1 diabetes and recurrent severe hypoglycaemia resulted in a clinically significant reduced rate of severe hypoglycaemia compared with human insulin. Patients with the greatest chance of benefitting from improved insulin therapy should be offered treatment with insulin analogues and be included in future trials of new insulins.

FUNDING

Novo Nordisk A/S.

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.

Will the next generation of basal insulins offer clinical advantages?

The 21st century has seen the arrival of several insulin analogue products and the refinement of insulin regimens, with widespread advocacy of continuous titration algorithms and earlier initiation of supplementary insulin therapy (predominantly using basal insulins) in type 2 diabetes. Nevertheless, many insulin-treated diabetes patients remain in poor glycaemic control. This might reflect insufficient titration effort or lax adherence, but these issues could in some cases result from concerns about hypoglycaemia. Certainly there is scope for improving the pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) profile of basal insulin, and three new products offer this prospect. Insulin degludec, now in clinical use, and PEGylated insulin lispro, in development, have greatly extended action profiles that result from two very different, but unique, mechanisms. With once-daily dosing, these insulins produce stable PK/PD profiles at steady state, associated with a low incidence of hypoglycaemia. The feasibility of varied daily dose timing has also been confirmed with insulin degludec. High strength formulations of insulin glargine and insulin degludec offer the prospect of a reduced injection number/volume in high dose users, and in the case of glargine, the PK/PD profile might also be favourably modified. This review considers critically the clinical evidence and expectations we should have for these new basal insulins.

Insulin Degludec Aspart: The First Co-formulation of Insulin Analogues

Insulin degludec/insulin aspart (IDegAsp) is the first soluble co-formulation which combines two insulin analogues, and provides effective basal and prandial glycemic coverage. It has been assessed as basal insulin in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), and as part of basal-bolus regime in both type 1 diabetes mellitus and T2DM. Insulin degludec has also been assessed as flexibly administered basal insulin in terms of time of administration. This review discusses data pertaining to the efficacy, safety, tolerability, and clinical potential of IDegAsp. The discussion includes comparisons of IDegAsp with basal as well as premixed insulin.

The evolution of insulin glargine and its continuing contribution to diabetes care

The epoch-making discovery of insulin heralded a new dawn in the management of diabetes. However, the earliest, unmodified soluble insulin preparations were limited by their short duration of action, necessitating multiple daily injections. Initial attempts to protract the duration of action of insulin involved the use of various additives, including vasoconstrictor substances, which met with limited success. The subsequent elucidation of the chemical and three-dimensional structure of insulin and its chemical synthesis and biosynthesis allowed modification of the insulin molecule itself, resulting in insulin analogs that are designed to mimic normal endogenous insulin secretion during both fasting and prandial conditions. Insulin glargine was the first once-daily, long-acting insulin analog to be introduced into clinical practice more than 10 years ago and is specifically designed to provide basal insulin requirements. It has a prolonged duration of action and no distinct insulin peak, making it suitable for once-daily administration and reducing the risk of nocturnal hypoglycemia that is seen with intermediate-acting insulins. Insulin glargine can be used in combination with prandial insulin preparations and non-insulin anti-diabetic agents according to individual requirements.

PEGylated insulin Lispro, (LY2605541)--a new basal insulin analogue

There is a clinical rationale for a basal insulin with a predictable action and low inter- and intra-individual variability coupled with an improved side effect and metabolic profile. Since insulin therapy is anabolic and its initiation is commonly associated with weight gain, an insulin preparation associated with a beneficial weight profile would represent a particularly valuable therapeutic entity. LY2605541, or PEGylated insulin Lispro, has a large hydrodynamic size while still exerting the metabolic effects of insulin. This may reduce absorption and clearance of the compound following subcutaneous administration. A number of preclinical and clinical studies have been constructed to evaluate the utility of this novel insulin. The currently available data from preclinical, phase I and phase II studies suggests LY2605541 has a non-inferior glucose-lowering efficacy compared to insulin glargine in people with type 1 and type 2 diabetes and may afford a weight-loss advantage. Pre-clinical studies indicate that LY2605541 has low mitogenic potency, exerting a preferential hepatic effect on glucose homeostasis. LY2605541 appears to cause elevated transaminases and derangement of lipid profiles. On the basis of these initial observations, LY2605541 requires further extensive clinical evaluation to fully assess its risk/benefit profile in the management in people with diabetes.

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.

Insulin degludec/liraglutide: innovation-driven combination for advancement in diabetes therapy

INTRODUCTION

Existing pharmacological therapies with basal insulins are limited by weight gain and hypoglycemia, while those with glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists (RAs) are limited by issues of efficacy when used alone. However, when used in combination they show a complementarity of action, in terms of reducing the incidence of hypoglycemia while providing sufficient glycemic control, that might help counterbalance their individual limitations. Clinical trials have demonstrated better efficacy and safety profile of this combination. Insulin degludec/liraglutide (IDegLira) is a once-daily fixed-dose combination of ultra-long-acting basal insulin degludec (IDeg) and GLP-1 RA, liraglutide.

AREAS COVERED

We reviewed published data regarding chemistry, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, clinical efficacy and safety of IDeg, liraglutide and the co-formulation. Literature was searched from the electronic medical database PubMed up to December 2013.

EXPERT OPINION

Preliminary studies on IDegLira indicate improved overall glycemic control, better safety profile with reduction in bodyweight and low rate of hypoglycemia compared to IDeg but higher rates of hypoglycemia than liraglutide therapy alone. Further, simplicity of fixed-dose combination offers an additional advantage of improved treatment adherence. IDegLira might be used similar to basal insulins in the current treatment algorithms, but with a greater preference for initiation instead of two or more oral drugs.

Cost-effectiveness of insulin degludec compared with insulin glargine for patients with type 2 diabetes treated with basal insulin - from the UK health care cost perspective

AIMS

The aim of this analysis was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of insulin degludec (IDeg) versus insulin glargine (IGlar) in adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) who are considered appropriate for treatment with a basal insulin analogue, using a short-term economic model.

METHODS

Meta-analysis data from three phase III clinical studies were used to populate a simple and transparent short-term model. The costs and effects of treatment with IDeg versus IGlar were calculated over a 12-month period. The analysis was conducted from the perspective of the UK National Health Service. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to assess the degree of uncertainty surrounding the results.

RESULTS

IDeg is a cost-effective treatment option versus IGlar in patients with T2DM using basal insulin. Base case incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were estimated at £15,795 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) and £13,078 per QALY, which are below commonly accepted thresholds for cost-effectiveness. Sensitivity analyses demonstrated that hypoglycaemia event rates had an important effect on the results. With higher event rates for non-severe hypoglycaemia IDeg was less costly and more effective than IGlar (dominant). Conversely, using lower event rates for severe hypoglycaemia generated higher ICERs. Using hypoglycaemia rates from a subgroup of patients who experienced ≥1 hypoglycaemic event per year IDeg was highly cost-effective versus IGlar; with estimated ICERS of £4887 and £2625 per QALY.

CONCLUSIONS

This short-term modelling approach allows the economic evaluation of newer insulin analogues when advanced long-term modelling based on HbA1c differences is inappropriate. For patients with T2DM who are considered appropriate for treatment with a basal insulin analogue, IDeg is a cost-effective treatment option compared with IGlar and offers additional benefits to subgroups of patients, such as those suffering from recurrent hypoglycaemia.

Insulin therapy in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes

Treatment of type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) requires lifelong administration of exogenous insulin. The primary goal of treatment of T1DM in children and adolescents is to maintain near-normoglycemia through intensive insulin therapy, avoid acute complications, and prevent long-term microvascular and macrovascular complications, while facilitating as close to a normal life as possible. Effective insulin therapy must, therefore, be provided on the basis of the needs, preferences, and resources of the individual and the family for optimal management of T1DM. To achieve target glycemic control, the best therapeutic option for patients with T1DM is basal-bolus therapy either with multiple daily injections (MDI) or continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII). Many formulations of insulin are available to help simulate endogenous insulin secretion as closely as possible in an effort to eliminate the symptoms and complications of hyperglycemia, while minimizing the risk of hypoglycemia secondary to therapy. When using MDI, basal insulin requirements are given as an injection of long- or intermediate-acting insulin analogs, while meal-related glucose excursions are controlled with bolus injections of rapid-acting insulin analogs. Alternatively, CSII can be used, which provides a 24-h preselected but adjustable basal rate of rapid-acting insulin, along with patient-activated mealtime bolus doses, eliminating the need for periodic injections. Both MDI treatment and CSII therapy must be supported by comprehensive education that is appropriate for the individual needs of the patient and family before and after initiation. Current therapies still do not match the endogenous insulin profile of pancreatic β-cells, and all still pose risks of suboptimal control, hypoglycemia, and ketosis in children and adolescents. The safety and success of a prescribed insulin regimen is, therefore, dependent on self-monitoring of blood glucose and/or a continuous glucose monitoring system to avoid critical hypoglycemia and glucose variability. Regardless of the mode of insulin therapy, doses should be adapted on the basis of the daily pattern of blood glucose, through regular review and reassessment, and patient factors such as exercise and pubertal status. New therapy options such as sensor-augmented insulin pump therapy, which integrates CSII with a continuous glucose sensor, along with emerging therapies such as the artificial pancreas, will likely continue to improve safe insulin therapy in the near future.

Treat-to-target trials in diabetes

Treat-to-target is a therapeutic concept that considers well defined and specific physiologic targets as aims in controlling the pathophysiology of the disease. It has been widely used in diseases that pathophysiology includes, chronic metabolic and physiological disturbances, namely rheumatic conditions, vascular medicine and diabetes. In diabetes, the availability of "gold-standard" quantitative measures like fasting plasma glucose and glycated hemoglobin make the application of treat-to-target trials especially pertinent. Treatment modalities which have used single therapeutic agents or combinations or in combination with a variety of titration algorithms and implementation protocols have broadened our understanding of diabetes management with specific reference to insulin initiation and maintenance. Treat-to-target trials have been used to investigate a wide variety of questions including efficacy, safety, effect of treatment on comorbidities and patient satisfaction, ideal mechanisms to implement insulin initiation etc. A more generalized acceptance and implementation of treat-to-target trials may finally revolutionize diabetes management by combining aspects of individual care with standard treatment protocols.

Degludec, a new ultra-long-acting basal insulin for the treatment of diabetes mellitus type 1 and 2: advances in clinical research

Degludec is the most recent molecule of the ultra-long-acting basal insulin analogues approved for human use. It forms soluble multihexamers which after subcutaneous injection are converted into monomers, and are thus slowly and continuously absorbed into the bloodstream. This absorption mechanism confers degludec an ultra-long and stable action profile, with no concentration peaks. This paper discusses the most recent studies in patients with type 1 and 2 diabetes mellitus, which showed degludec to be non inferior in decreasing HbA1c, ensuring optimum glycemic control similar to that achieved with insulin glargine or detemir. Degludec also had an improved safety profile, as it was associated to a significantly lower rate of nocturnal hypoglycemia in both types of diabetes and to a potentially lower overall hypoglycemia rate in type 2 DM. Degludec also opens the possibility to use more flexible regimens.

Severe hypoglycaemia in type 1 diabetes mellitus: underlying drivers and potential strategies for successful prevention

Hypoglycaemia remains an over-riding factor limiting optimal glycaemic control in type 1 diabetes. Severe hypoglycaemia is prevalent in almost half of those with long-duration diabetes and is one of the most feared diabetes-related complications. In this review, we present an overview of the increasing body of literature seeking to elucidate the underlying pathophysiology of severe hypoglycaemia and the limited evidence behind the strategies employed to prevent episodes. Drivers of severe hypoglycaemia including impaired counter-regulation, hypoglycaemia-associated autonomic failure, psychosocial and behavioural factors and neuroimaging correlates are discussed. Treatment strategies encompassing structured education, insulin analogue regimens, continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion pumps, continuous glucose sensing and beta-cell replacement therapies have been employed, yet there is little randomized controlled trial evidence demonstrating effectiveness of new technologies in reducing severe hypoglycaemia. Optimally designed interventional trials evaluating these existing technologies and using modern methods of teaching patients flexible insulin use within structured education programmes with the specific goal of preventing severe hypoglycaemia are required. Individuals at high risk need to be monitored with meticulous collection of data on awareness, as well as frequency and severity of all hypoglycaemic episodes.

Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic responses of insulin degludec in African American, white, and Hispanic/Latino patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus

BACKGROUND

Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic profiles of exogenous insulin may be affected by intrinsic factors, such as age, ethnicity/race, and hepatic and renal function. Insulin degludec (IDeg) is a basal insulin with an ultralong duration of action and a flat and stable glucose-lowering effect profile.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to investigate whether the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic responses to IDeg at steady state vary according to patient race/ethnicity.

METHODS

This randomized, single-center, double-blind, 2-period crossover trial investigated responses to IDeg in 59 patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus from 3 groups: African American, Hispanic/Latino, and white. Patients were allocated randomly to a sequence of 2 treatment periods, separated by a 7- to 21-day washout period, with once-daily IDeg or insulin detemir dosing for 6 days at a predefined fixed dose level (0.6 U/kg). Differences in pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic variables among groups were analyzed using an ANOVA with treatment period, an interaction between race/ethnicity, and treatment as fixed factors, subject as a random effect, and residual variance, depending on treatment.

RESULTS

Total exposure to IDeg during one dosing interval at steady state (AUCIDeg,τ,SS) was similar among the racial/ethnic groups (ratio [95% CI]: African American vs white, 1.10 [0.91-1.31]; African American vs Hispanic/Latino, 1.13 [0.95-1.34]; and Hispanic/Latino vs white, 0.97 [0.82-1.16]). The total glucose-lowering effect of IDeg (AUCGIR,τ,SS) was also similar among the groups, with no statistically significant difference in pairwise comparisons (1940, 1735, and 2286 mg/kg in African American, white, and Hispanic/Latino patients, respectively). Steady state was reached in all groups after 2 to 3 days of dosing. In all groups, both exposure and glucose-lowering effect for IDeg were evenly distributed between the first and second 12 hours of the 24-hour dosing interval at steady state (mean AUCIDeg,0-12h,SS/AUCIDeg,τ,SS = 53%-54%; AUCGIR,0--12h,SS/AUCGIR,τ,SS = 47%-52%).

CONCLUSION

The similar pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic responses to IDeg in 3 racial/ethnic groups of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus suggest that the flat, stable, and ultralong pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic profiles of IDeg are preserved irrespective of race/ethnicity. Although insulin doses must be adjusted on an individual basis, similar pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic responses to IDeg are observed in patients with differing race/ethnicity.

Insulin degludec and insulin degludec/insulin aspart: a review of their use in the management of diabetes mellitus

Insulin degludec (Tresiba(®)) is an ultra-long-acting insulin analogue that is also available as a coformulation with rapid-acting insulin aspart (insulin degludec/insulin aspart) [Ryzodeg(®)]. Insulin degludec has a flat, stable glucose-lowering profile with a duration of action of >42 h, and less within-patient day-to-day variability in glucose-lowering effect than the long-acting insulin analogue insulin glargine. In clinical trials, insulin degludec achieved similar glycaemic control to that seen with insulin glargine in patients with type 1 or 2 diabetes, but with a lower risk of nocturnal hypoglycaemia. In addition, trials examining a flexible dosing regimen of insulin degludec in patients with type 1 or 2 diabetes show the potential for adjusting the injection time, without compromising glycaemic control or safety. A 200 U/mL formulation of insulin degludec is also available for use in patients who require large volumes of basal insulin. Insulin degludec/insulin aspart was noninferior to the long-acting insulin analogue insulin detemir in patients with type 1 diabetes and has the potential to reduce the number of daily injections. Trial results also indicate that insulin degludec/insulin aspart may be an appropriate option for initiating insulin therapy in patients with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled with oral antidiabetic drugs. Subcutaneous insulin degludec was generally well tolerated in patients with type 1 or 2 diabetes. In conclusion, insulin degludec and insulin degludec/insulin aspart represent a useful advance in the treatment of type 1 or 2 diabetes.

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.

Insulin degludec's ultra-long pharmacokinetic properties observed in adults are retained in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes

Insulin degludec (IDeg) is a basal insulin with an ultra-long pharmacokinetic profile in adults that at steady-state produces remarkably flat and stable insulin levels; however, no studies have yet reported on the pharmacokinetic properties of IDeg in subjects younger than 18 years of age. This was a single-centre, randomised, single-dose, double-blind, two-period crossover trial conducted in children (6-11 years), adolescents (12-17 years), and adults (18-65 years) with type 1 diabetes. Subjects received a single subcutaneous dose of 0.4 U/kg IDeg or insulin glargine (IGlar), respectively, on two separate dosing visits, with pharmacokinetic blood sampling up to 72-h postdose. A total of 37 subjects (12 children, 13 adolescents, and 12 adults) completed the trial. Total exposure of IDeg after a single dose (AUCIDeg ,0-∞, SD ) was higher in children compared to adults [estimated ratio children/adults 1.48 (95% confidence interval, CI: 0.98; 2.24)] and in adolescents compared to adults [estimated ratio adolescents/adults 1.33 (95% CI: 1.08; 1.64)]; however, the difference was only statistically significant for the latter comparison. No statistically significant difference in maximum concentration of IDeg (Cmax, IDeg , SD ) was observed. Estimated ratios for Cmax, IDeg , SD were (children/adults) 1.20 (95% CI: 0.90; 1.60) and (adolescents/adults) 1.23 (95% CI: 1.00; 1.51). Simulated mean steady state pharmacokinetic profiles supported a flat and stable IDeg exposure across a 24-h dosing interval. IDeg was detectable in serum for at least 72 h (end of blood sampling period) in all subjects following single dose. In conclusion, the ultra-long pharmacokinetic properties of IDeg observed in adults are preserved in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes.

Insulin degludec: pharmacokinetics in patients with renal impairment

BACKGROUND

Insulin degludec is a new-generation basal insulin with an ultra-long duration of action. We evaluated the pharmacokinetic properties of insulin degludec in subjects with normal renal function; mild, moderate or severe renal impairment; or end-stage renal disease (ESRD) undergoing hemodialysis.

METHODS

Thirty subjects (n = 6 per group) received a single subcutaneous dose of 0.4 U/kg insulin degludec. Blood samples up to 120 h post-dose and fractionated urine samples were collected.

RESULTS

The ultra-long pharmacokinetic properties of insulin degludec were preserved in subjects with renal impairment, with no statistically significant differences in absorption or clearance, compared with subjects with normal renal function. In subjects with ESRD, pharmacokinetic parameters were similar whether the insulin degludec pharmacokinetic assessment period included hemodialysis or not, and total exposure was comparable to subjects with normal renal function. Simulated mean steady-state pharmacokinetic profiles were comparable between groups.

CONCLUSION

This study indicated dose adjustments due to impaired renal function should not be required for insulin degludec.