Insulin degludec: four times lower pharmacodynamic variability than insulin glargine under steady-state conditions in type 1 diabetes

Basal Insulin Inadequacy versus Failure - Using Appropriate Terminology

This editorial focuses on appropriate terminology related to basal insulin therapy. The authors analyse current usage of ‘basal insulin failure’, and propose ‘basal insulin inadequacy’ as a better descriptor for persons not responding to basal insulin alone. The pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic differences between various basal insulin preparations are highlighted. Based upon these, a drug-specific definition for insulin inadequacy is suggested, instead of a generic class-based labelling.

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

OBJECTIVE

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

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

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.

Preserved pharmacokinetic exposure and distinct glycemic effects of insulin degludec and liraglutide in IDegLira, a fixed-ratio combination therapy

Insulin degludec/liraglutide (IDegLira) is a novel fixed-ratio combination of the basal insulin insulin degludec (IDeg) and liraglutide, a glucagon-like peptide-1 analog. The pharmacokinetics (PK) and pharmacodynamics of IDegLira were assessed versus its components. A single-dose, randomized, 4-period crossover clinical pharmacology study in healthy subjects compared the bioavailability of IDegLira with its monocomponents. Dose proportionality, covariate effects on exposure, and exposure-response for change in glycated hemoglobin were analyzed based on data from a randomized treat-to-target phase 3 study in subjects with type 2 diabetes. Overall, the PK properties of IDeg and liraglutide were preserved for IDegLira. Liraglutide exposure was lower when dosed as IDegLira but met the criterion for equivalence. No relevant deviations from dose proportionality for the IDegLira components were observed. Covariate effects on exposure were consistent with previous results. Glycemic response to IDegLira was larger than with IDeg or liraglutide alone, reflecting their distinct glucose-lowering effects throughout the dose/exposure range.

Cardiovascular effects of basal insulins

Basal insulin is an important component of treatment for both type 1 and type 2 diabetes. One of the principal aims of treatment in patients with diabetes is the prevention of diabetic complications, including cardiovascular disease. There is some evidence, although controversial, that attainment of good glycemic control reduces long-term cardiovascular risk in both type 1 and type 2 diabetes. The aim of this review is to provide an overview of the potential cardiovascular safety of the different available preparations of basal insulin. Current basal insulin (neutral protamine Hagedorn [NPH], or isophane) and basal insulin analogs (glargine, detemir, and the more recent degludec) differ essentially by various measures of pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic effects in the bloodstream, presence and persistence of peak action, and within-subject variability in the glucose-lowering response. The currently available data show that basal insulin analogs have a lower risk of hypoglycemia than NPH human insulin, in both type 1 and type 2 diabetes, then excluding additional harmful effects on the cardiovascular system mediated by activation of the adrenergic system. Given that no biological rationale for a possible difference in cardiovascular effect of basal insulins has been proposed so far, available meta-analyses of publicly disclosed randomized controlled trials do not show any signal of increased risk of major cardiovascular events between the different basal insulin analogs. However, the number of available cardiovascular events in these trials is very small, preventing any clear-cut conclusion. The results of an ongoing clinical trial comparing glargine and degludec with regard to cardiovascular safety will provide definitive evidence.

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.

Insulin degludec/insulin aspart produces a dose-proportional glucose-lowering effect in subjects with type 1 diabetes mellitus

AIMS

To evaluate the pharmacodynamic dose-response relationship of insulin degludec/insulin aspart (IDegAsp), a novel, soluble co-formulation of the ultra-long-acting basal insulin, insulin degludec (IDeg), with the rapid-acting prandial insulin (IAsp), across different doses in patients with type 1 diabetes (T1DM).

METHODS

This was a randomized, single-centre, double-blind, four-period, incomplete block, crossover trial. A cohort of 33 people with T1DM received single doses (0.4, 0.6 or 0.8 U/kg) of IDegAsp or the comparator, biphasic insulin aspart 30, in a randomized sequence of four treatment periods, each separated by a washout of 13-21 days. Pharmacodynamic response was assessed using a 26-h euglycaemic glucose clamp, with blood glucose stabilized at a target of 5.5 mmol/l (100 mg/dl).

RESULTS

A rapid onset of action and a distinct peak attributable to IAsp was observed in the glucose infusion rate (GIR) profile, followed by a separate, flat and stable basal glucose-lowering effect attributable to the IDeg component. The mean area under the GIR curve over 24 h (AUC(GIR,0-24 h)), and the mean maximum GIR (GIR(max)) increased with increasing dose level of IDegAsp. A dose-response relationship for IDegAsp was demonstrated for AUC(GIR,0-24 h) and GIR(max), indicating dose proportionality. A dose-concentration relationship was also observed for both the basal and bolus components of IDegAsp.

CONCLUSIONS

IDegAsp has a clear dose-response relationship, indicating the clinical potential for straightforward titration according to individual patient needs.

Faster-acting insulin aspart: earlier onset of appearance and greater early pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic effects than insulin aspart

AIMS

To evaluate the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of faster-acting insulin aspart and insulin aspart in a randomized, single-centre, double-blind study.

METHODS

Fifty-two patients with type 1 diabetes (mean age 40.3 years) received faster-acting insulin aspart, insulin aspart, or another faster aspart formulation (not selected for further development), each as a single 0.2 U/kg subcutaneous dose, under glucose-clamp conditions, in a three-way crossover design (3-12 days washout between dosing).

RESULTS

Faster-acting insulin aspart had a faster onset of exposure compared with insulin aspart, shown by a 57% earlier onset of appearance [4.9 vs 11.2 min; ratio 0.43, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.36; 0.51], a 35% earlier time to reach 50% maximum concentration (20.7 vs 31.6 min; ratio 0.65, 95% CI 0.59; 0.72) and a greater early exposure within 90 min after dosing. The greatest difference occurred during the first 15 min, when area under the serum insulin aspart curve was 4.5-fold greater with faster-acting insulin aspart than with insulin aspart. Both treatments had a similar time to maximum concentration, total exposure and maximum concentration. Faster-acting insulin aspart had a significantly greater glucose-lowering effect within 90 min after dosing [largest difference: area under the curve for the glucose infusion rate (AUC(GIR), 0-30 min) ratio 1.48, 95% CI 1.13; 2.02] and 17% earlier time to reach 50% maximum glucose infusion rate (38.3 vs 46.1 min; ratio 0.83, 95% CI 0.73; 0.94). The primary endpoint (AUC(GIR, 0-2 h)) was 10% greater for faster-acting insulin aspart, but did not reach statistical significance (ratio 1.10, 95% CI 1.00; 1.22). Both treatments had similar total and maximum glucose-lowering effects, indicating similar overall potency.

CONCLUSIONS

Faster-acting insulin aspart was found to have earlier onset and higher early exposure than insulin aspart, and a greater early glucose-lowering effect, with similar potency.

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.

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.

Degludec: the new ultra-long insulin analogue

The development of extended-action insulin analogues was motivated by the unfavorable pharmacokinetic (PK) profile of the conventional long-acting insulin formulations, generally associated with marked inter and intra patient variability and site- and dose-dependent effect variation. The new ultra-long insulin analogue degludec (IDeg) has the same amino acid sequence as human insulin except for the removal of threonine in the position 30 of the B chain (Des-B30, "De") and the attachment, via a glutamic acid linker ("glu"), of a 16-carbon fatty diacid (hexadecanoic diacid, "dec") to lysine in the position 29 of the B chain. These modifications allow that, after changing from the pharmaceutical formulation to the subcutaneous environment, IDeg precipitates in the subcutaneous tissue, forming a depot that undergoes a highly predictable gradual dissociation. Thus, once-daily dosing of IDeg results in a low peak: trough ratio, with consequent low intra-individual variability and plasmatic concentrations less critically dependent upon the time of injections. The clinical development program of IDeg (BEGIN) was comprised of 9 therapeutic confirmatory trials of longer duration (26-52 weeks) and showed that the efficacy of IDeg is comparable to insulin glargine in type 1 (T1D) and type 2 (T2D) diabetes patients across different age, body mass index and ethnic groups. This new ultra-long insulin analogue presents as advantages flexibility in dose timing and lower risk of hypoglycemia.

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.

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.

Glucose-lowering effect of insulin degludec is independent of subcutaneous injection region

Background and Objectives

Patients with diabetes mellitus inject insulin in different regions of the body. This study investigated the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties of insulin degludec (IDeg), a new-generation once-daily basal insulin with an ultra-long duration of action, after subcutaneous (SC) administration in different injection regions.

Methods

In this study, 20 healthy subjects received single SC doses of IDeg (0.4 U/kg; separated by 13–21 days) in the thigh, abdomen and deltoid in a randomised, open-label, single-centre, single-dose, complete crossover trial. Each dose was followed by a 24-h euglycaemic clamp and 120-h pharmacokinetic blood sampling. The obtained pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic profiles were extrapolated to steady state by simulation using a pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic model.

Results

Total IDeg exposure [area under the IDeg serum concentration–time curve 0–120 h after a single dose (AUC_{IDeg,0–120h,SD})] and maximum serum concentration [maximum IDeg serum concentration after a single dose (C_max,IDeg,SD)] were higher (6–7 and 23–27 %, respectively) following a single SC dose in the deltoid or abdomen, compared with the thigh, as also observed with other insulin preparations. No statistical difference was observed in these measures between deltoid and abdominal administration. No pronounced differences were observed in the glucose-lowering effect of IDeg [area under the glucose infusion rate (GIR) curve 0–24 h after a single dose (AUC_{GIR,0–24h,SD}) and maximum GIR after a single dose (GIR_max,SD)] when injected in the thigh, abdomen or deltoid (AUC_{GIR,0–24h,SD} 2,572, 2,833 and 2,960 mg/kg, respectively). Simulated mean steady-state pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic profiles supported a flat and stable IDeg exposure and effect regardless of injection region, with comparable total glucose-lowering effects [area under the GIR curve at steady state (AUC_GIR,τ,SS)] between the thigh, abdomen and deltoid.

Conclusions

These findings support administering IDeg SC in the thigh, upper arm or abdominal wall without affecting IDeg absorption or effect at steady state.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s40261-014-0218-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

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.

Minimizing Hypoglycemia and Weight Gain with Intensive Glucose Control: Potential Benefits of a New Combination Therapy (IDegLira)

Due to the progressive nature of type 2 diabetes (T2D), the majority of patients require increasing levels of therapy to achieve and maintain good glycemic control. At present, once patients become uncontrolled on oral antidiabetic therapies, the two primary treatment options are glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) or basal insulin, although earlier use of GLP-1RAs has also been advocated. While both of these drug classes have proven efficacy in treating T2D, there can be limitations to their use in some patients, and resistance to further treatment intensification among both patients and physicians. More recently, treatment incorporating both a GLP-1RA and a basal insulin has been used successfully in the clinic and the first such combination product, IDegLira (insulin degludec + liraglutide), has recently been approved for use in Europe. IDegLira combines insulin degludec and the GLP-1RA liraglutide in a single injection. In both insulin-naïve and basal insulin-treated individuals with T2D, IDegLira has demonstrated greater reductions in glycated hemoglobin (HbA_1c) than either of the individual components, with a low rate of hypoglycemia and weight loss. IDegLira may provide a new option for patients requiring treatment intensification but for whom increased weight or a higher risk of hypoglycemia are barriers. This article discusses the rationale behind combining these two drug classes and reviews the available clinical evidence for the efficacy and safety of IDegLira.

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.

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.

Are you ready for more insulin concentrations?

Practitioners need to prepare for a rapid expansion of new concentrated insulins. For many years, the treatment regimens for patients have been limited to 2 concentrations (100 units/mL and 500 units/mL), which pose challenges to both patients and providers. As the new concentrated insulins are at various stages of development, this manuscript reviews the available information on the new concentrated products. This information was obtained from publications, poster presentations, abstracts, and the manufacturers for the products in earlier stages of development. To have a basis for comparison, it is important to understand the activity profile and the challenges with use of the currently available concentrated insulin, regular insulin 500 units/mL (U500R). We also examine how the newer products may assist clinicians and patients with the difficulties faced with the use of U500R.

Low within- and between-day variability in exposure to new insulin glargine 300 U/ml

AIMS

To characterize the variability in exposure and metabolic effect of insulin glargine 300 U/ml (Gla-300) at steady state in people with type 1 diabetes (T1DM).

METHODS

A total of 50 participants with T1DM underwent two 24-h euglycaemic clamps in steady-state conditions after six once-daily administrations of 0.4 U/kg Gla-300 in a double-blind, randomized, two-treatment, two-period, crossover clamp study. Participants were randomized to receive Gla-300 as a standard cartridge formulation in the first treatment period, and as a formulation with enhanced stability through polysorbate-20 addition in the second treatment period, or vice versa. This design allowed the assessment of bioequivalence between formulations and, subsequently, within- and between-day variability.

RESULTS

The cumulative exposure and effect of Gla-300 developed linearly over 24 h, and were evenly distributed across 6- and 12-h intervals. Diurnal fluctuation in exposure (within-day variability) was low; the peak-to-trough ratio of insulin concentration profiles was <2, and both the swing and peak-to-trough fluctuation were <1. Day-to-day reproducibility of exposure was high: the between-day within-subject coefficients of variation for total systemic exposure (area under the serum insulin glargine concentration time curve from time 0 to 24 h after dosing) and maximum insulin concentration were 17.4% [95% confidence interval (CI) 15-21] and 33.4% (95% CI 28-41), respectively. Reproducibility of the metabolic effect was lower than that of exposure.

CONCLUSIONS

Gla-300 provides predictable, evenly distributed 24-h coverage as a result of low fluctuation and high reproducibility in insulin exposure, and appears suitable for effective basal insulin use.

Insulin degludec improves long-term glycaemic control similarly to insulin glargine but with fewer hypoglycaemic episodes in patients with advanced type 2 diabetes on basal-bolus insulin therapy

The aim of the present study was to compare the long-term safety and efficacy of insulin degludec with those of insulin glargine in patients with advanced type 2 diabetes (T2D) over 78 weeks (the 52-week main trial and a 26-week extension). Patients were randomized to once-daily insulin degludec or insulin glargine, with mealtime insulin aspart ± metformin ± pioglitazone, and titrated to pre-breakfast plasma glucose values of 3.9-4.9 mmol/l (70-88 mg/dl). After 78 weeks, the overall rate of hypoglycaemia was 24% lower (p = 0.011) and the rate of nocturnal hypoglycaemia was 31% lower (p = 0.016) with insulin degludec in the extension trial set, while both groups of patients achieved similar glycaemic control. Rates of adverse events and total insulin doses were similar for both groups in the safety analysis set. During 18 months of treatment, insulin degludec + mealtime insulin aspart ± oral antidiabetic drugs in patients with T2D improves glycaemic control similarly, but confers lower risks of overall and nocturnal hypoglycaemia than with insulin glargine treatment.

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.

Investigation of the Physico-Chemical Properties that Enable Co-Formulation of Basal Insulin Degludec with Fast-Acting Insulin Aspart

Purpose

To study the self-association states of insulin degludec and insulin aspart alone and combined in pharmaceutical formulation and under conditions simulating the subcutaneous depot.

Methods

Formulations were made of 0.6 mM degludec at 3 and 5 Zn/6 insulin monomers, and 0.6 mM aspart (2 Zn/6 insulin monomers). Self-association was assessed using size-exclusion chromatography (SEC) monitored by UV and orthogonal reverse-phase chromatography.

Results

Simulating pharmaceutical formulation, degludec eluted as dihexamers, whereas aspart eluted as hexamers and monomers. Combining degludec at low zinc with aspart increased dihexamer content, indicating hybrid hexamer formation. At high zinc concentration, however, there was no evidence of this. Simulating the subcutaneous depot by removing preservative, degludec eluted as multihexamers and aspart as monomers. Aspart was incorporated into the multihexamer structures when combined with degludec at low zinc, but there was no such interaction with high-zinc degludec. SEC using progressively diluted concentrations of phenol and m-cresol showed that dissociation of aspart into monomers occurs before the formation of degludec multihexamers.

Conclusion

Insulins degludec and aspart can be combined without forming hybrid hexamers, but this combinability is dependent on zinc and preservative concentration, and requires that degludec is fully dihexameric before addition of aspart.

Insulin degludec/insulin aspart versus biphasic insulin aspart 30 in Asian patients with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled on basal or pre-/self-mixed insulin: a 26-week, randomised, treat-to-target trial

AIMS

Insulin degludec/insulin aspart (IDegAsp) is a soluble co-formulation of IDeg and IAsp. This pan-Asian, 26-week trial investigated efficacy and safety of IDegAsp vs biphasic insulin aspart 30 (BIAsp 30) in Asian adults with type 2 diabetes (T2DM), inadequately controlled on once- or twice-daily (BID) basal, premixed or self-mixed insulin.

METHODS

Participants (mean age 59.8 years, HbA1c 8.4%, FPG 7.9 mmol/L, BMI 25.4 kg/m(2)) were randomised 2:1 to BID IDegAsp (n=282) or BIAsp 30 (n=142) and continued existing metformin treatment. Insulins were administered with breakfast and main evening meal, titrated to a pre-breakfast and pre-main evening meal self-measured plasma glucose target of 4-5 mmol/L.

RESULTS

IDegAsp achieved the primary endpoint of non-inferiority to BIAsp 30 for mean change in HbA₁c (estimated treatment difference [ETD] IDegAsp-BIAsp 30: 0.05% points [95% CI -0.10; 0.20]). IDegAsp was superior in lowering fasting plasma glucose (FPG) (ETD -1.06 mmol/L, 95% CI -1.43; -0.70, p<0.001), and resulted in a lower final mean daily insulin dose (0.79 U/kg vs 0.99 U/kg, estimated rate ratio [RR] 0.79, 95% CI 0.73; 0.85, p<0.0001). Rates of overall confirmed and severe hypoglycaemia were similar between treatments, while rate of nocturnal confirmed hypoglycaemia was numerically (p=ns) lower with IDegAsp. During the maintenance period there was a trend (p=ns) towards lower hypoglycaemia rates for IDegAsp.

CONCLUSION

In Asian adults with T2DM, IDegAsp BID effectively improves long-term glycaemic control, and compared to BIAsp 30, provides superior reductions in FPG with a lower dose, and numerically less nocturnal hypoglycaemia.

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.

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.

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.

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.

We can change the natural history of type 2 diabetes

As diabetes develops, we currently waste the first ∼10 years of the natural history. If we found prediabetes and early diabetes when they first presented and treated them more effectively, we could prevent or delay the progression of hyperglycemia and the development of complications. Evidence for this comes from trials where lifestyle change and/or glucose-lowering medications decreased progression from prediabetes to diabetes. After withdrawal of these interventions, there was no "catch-up"-cumulative development of diabetes in the previously treated groups remained less than in control subjects. Moreover, achieving normal glucose levels even transiently during the trials was associated with a substantial reduction in subsequent development of diabetes. These findings indicate that we can change the natural history through routine screening to find prediabetes and early diabetes, combined with management aimed to keep glucose levels as close to normal as possible, without hypoglycemia. We should also test the hypothesis with a randomized controlled trial.

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.

Hypoglycemia

Hypoglycemia is a common, potentially avoidable consequence of diabetes treatment and is a major barrier to initiating or intensifying antihyperglycemic therapy in efforts to achieve better glycemic control. Therapy regimen and a history of hypoglycemia are the most important predictors of future events. Other risk factors include renal insufficiency, older age, and history of hypoglycemia-associated autonomic failure. Reported rates of hypoglycemia vary considerably among studies because of differences in study design, definitions used, and population included, among other factors. Although occurring more frequently in type 1 diabetes, hypoglycemia also is clinically important in type 2 diabetes. Symptoms experienced by patients vary among individuals, and many events remain undiagnosed. The incidence of severe events is unevenly distributed, with only a small proportion (∼ 5%) of individuals accounting for >50% of events. Consequently, clinicians must be conscientious in obtaining thorough patient histories, because an accurate picture of the frequency and severity of hypoglycemic events is essential for optimal diabetes management. Severe hypoglycemia in particular is associated with an increased risk of mortality, impairments in cognitive function, and adverse effects on patients' quality of life. Economically, hypoglycemia burdens the healthcare system and adversely affects workplace productivity, particularly after a nocturnal event. Ongoing healthcare reform efforts will result in even more emphasis on reducing this side effect of diabetes treatment. Therefore, improving patients' self-management skills and selecting or modifying therapy to reduce the risk of hypoglycemia will increase in importance for clinicians and patients alike.

Ultra-long pharmacokinetic properties of insulin degludec are comparable in elderly subjects and younger adults with type 1 diabetes mellitus

Background

Management of diabetes in elderly subjects is complex and careful management of glucose levels is of particular importance in this population because of an increased risk of diabetes-related complications and hypoglycaemia.

Objective

The aim of this study was to evaluate the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties of insulin degludec (IDeg), a basal insulin with an ultra-long duration of action, in elderly subjects with type 1 diabetes compared with younger adults.

Methods

This trial was a randomised, double-blind, two-period, crossover trial conducted in a single centre and included both inpatient and outpatient periods. Subjects were men and women aged 18–35 years inclusive (younger adult group) or ≥65 years (elderly group) with type 1 diabetes who received IDeg (0.4 U/kg) via subcutaneous injection in the thigh once-daily for six days. Following 6-day dosing, a 26-hour euglycaemic glucose clamp procedure was conducted to evaluate the steady-state pharmacodynamic effects of IDeg. Blood samples were taken for pharmacokinetic analysis up to 120 h post-dose. Pharmacokinetic endpoints included the total exposure of IDeg, ie the area under the IDeg serum concentration curve during one dosing interval at steady state (AUC_IDeg,τ,SS) (τ = 0–24 h, equal to one dosing interval) and the maximum IDeg serum concentration at steady state (C_max,IDeg,SS). Pharmacodynamic endpoints included the total glucose-lowering effect of IDeg, ie the area under the glucose infusion rate (GIR) curve at steady state (AUC_GIR,τ,SS), and the maximum GIR at steady state (GIR_max,IDeg,SS).

Results

Total exposure (AUC_IDeg,τ,SS) and maximum concentration (C_max,IDeg,SS) of IDeg were comparable between elderly subjects and younger adults. Estimated mean age group ratios (elderly/younger adult) for AUC_IDeg,τ,SS and C_max,IDeg,SS and corresponding two-sided 95 % confidence intervals (CIs) were 1.04 (95 % CI 0.73–1.47) and 1.02 (95 % CI 0.74–1.39), respectively. Mean AUC_{IDeg,0–12h,SS}/AUC_IDeg,τ,SS was 53 % in both younger adult and elderly subjects, showing that in both age groups IDeg exposure was evenly distributed across the first and second 12 h of the 24-hour dosing interval. No statistically significant differences were observed between younger adult and elderly subjects with regard to AUC_GIR,τ,SS (the primary endpoint of this study) and GIR_max,IDeg,SS. Estimated mean age group ratios (elderly/younger adult) for AUC_GIR,τ,SS and GIR_max,IDeg,SS and corresponding two-sided 95 % CIs were 0.78 (95 % CI 0.47–1.31) and 0.80 (95 % CI 0.54–1.17), respectively. Duration of action was beyond the clamp duration of 26 h in all subjects.

Conclusions

The exposure of IDeg at steady state during once-daily dosing was similar in younger adult and elderly subjects. The glucose-lowering effect of IDeg was numerically lower in elderly subjects compared with younger adults, but no significant differences were observed between age groups. The ultra-long pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties of IDeg observed in younger adults were preserved in elderly subjects with type 1 diabetes.

Clinical trials.gov number: NCT00964418

Insulin degludec: pharmacokinetic properties in subjects with hepatic impairment

Background and Objective

Insulin degludec is a basal insulin with a slow and distinct absorption mechanism resulting in an ultra-long, flat, and stable pharmacokinetic profile in patients with diabetes mellitus. The aim of this study was to examine the effect of hepatic impairment on the single-dose pharmacokinetics of insulin degludec.

Methods

Twenty-four subjects, allocated to one of four groups (n = 6 per group) based on level of hepatic impairment (normal hepatic function, Child–Pugh grade A, B, or C), were administered 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 to measure pharmacokinetic parameters.

Results

No difference was observed in pharmacokinetic parameters [area under the 120-h serum insulin degludec concentration–time curve (AUC_120 h), maximum insulin degludec concentration (C_max), and apparent clearance (CL/F)] for subjects with impaired versus normal hepatic function after a single dose of insulin degludec. The geometric mean [coefficient of variation (CV) %] AUC_120 h values were 89,092 (16), 83,327 (15), 88,944 (23), and 79,846 (19) pmol·h/L for normal hepatic function and mild, moderate, and severe hepatic impairment, respectively. Simulated steady-state insulin degludec pharmacokinetic profiles showed an even distribution of exposure across a 24-h dosing interval regardless of hepatic function status.

Conclusions

The ultra-long pharmacokinetic properties of insulin degludec were preserved in subjects with hepatic impairment and there were no statistically significant differences in absorption or clearance compared with subjects with normal hepatic function.

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.

Recent advances with insulin degludec for the treatment of Type 2 diabetes

Type 2 diabetes has been referred to as the global epidemic of the 21st century, and is associated with significant morbidity and premature mortality. Estimates suggest that over 50% of people with Type 2 diabetes will at some point need insulin injections to help treat their diabetes. Once daily insulin injections are being increasingly used to initiate insulin in people with Type 2 diabetes and the development of novel, safe, once daily basal insulins with low rates of hypoglycaemia are important to help achieve internationally recommended glycaemic targets for individual patients. Insulin degludec is a novel once daily basal insulin analogue that has been developed for use in people with Type 2 diabetes. A comprehensive drug development program suggests that it can achieve comparable glycaemic control to existing basal insulins but with reduced rates of hypoglycaemia.

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.

Assessment for ease of use and preference of a new prefilled insulin pen (FlexTouch Degludec U100/U200) versus the SoloSTAR insulin pen by patients with diabetes and healthcare professionals

OBJECTIVE

FlexTouch® (FT) is a new prefilled insulin pen with no push-button extension and a low injection force used to deliver several basal insulins, including insulin degludec across a wide dose range (1 - 80 units with FT 100 IU/ml [FT100] and 2 - 160 units with 200 IU/ml [FT200]). This study was carried out to evaluate whether the novel features of FT affect the preferences of the device among patients with diabetes and healthcare professionals compared with the widely used SoloSTAR® pen.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

A multicenter, randomized, open-label, crossover study compared FT100 and FT200 with SoloSTAR. The study included patients with either type 1 (n = 22) or type 2 diabetes (n = 42), nurses (n = 32) and physicians (n = 32). Subjects were randomized to test each of the FT100, FT200 and SoloSTAR pens in a crossover set up. Subjects performed injections into a foam cushion at 4 - 6 different doses per device (2, 20, 40, 80, 120 and 160 IU).

RESULTS

Overall, a significantly higher proportion of subjects, including dexterity-impaired and pen-naive patients, preferred to use FT100 (93.0%; 119/128) and FT200 (91.4%; 117/128) compared with 2.3% (3/128) and 3.9% (5/128) who preferred SoloSTAR (p < 0.001), respectively.

CONCLUSION

FT100 and FT200 were preferred over SoloSTAR by nurses, physicians and patients with diabetes. This may be due to the novel design of FT, which improves ease of use, preference and confidence in delivering a complete, accurate dose of insulin, even at high doses.

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.