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

Lipidization as a tool toward peptide therapeutics

Peptides, as potential therapeutics continue to gain importance in the search for active substances for the treatment of numerous human diseases, some of which are, to this day, incurable. As potential therapeutic drugs, peptides have many favorable chemical and pharmacological properties, starting with their great diversity, through their high affinity for binding to all sort of natural receptors, and ending with the various pathways of their breakdown, which produces nothing but amino acids that are nontoxic to the body. Despite these and other advantages, however, they also have their pitfalls. One of these disadvantages is the very low stability of natural peptides. They have a short half-life and tend to be cleared from the organism very quickly. Their instability in the gastrointestinal tract, makes it impossible to administer peptidic drugs orally. To achieve the best pharmacologic effect, it is desirable to look for ways of modifying peptides that enable the use of these substances as pharmaceuticals. There are many ways to modify peptides. Herein we summarize the approaches that are currently in use, including lipidization, PEGylation, glycosylation and others, focusing on lipidization. We describe how individual types of lipidization are achieved and describe their advantages and drawbacks. Peptide modifications are performed with the goal of reaching a longer half-life, reducing immunogenicity and improving bioavailability. In the case of neuropeptides, lipidization aids their activity in the central nervous system after the peripheral administration. At the end of our review, we summarize all lipidized peptide-based drugs that are currently on the market.

Functional insulin aspart/insulin degludec-based microneedles for promoting postprandial glycemic control

Insulin aspart (IAsp) and insulin degludec (IDeg), as the third generation of insulin, have a faster onset time or a more durable action period, which may simulate the secretion of insulin under physiological conditions. Microneedles (MNs) are transdermal delivery devices that may allow diabetic patients to easily deploy transdermal insulin therapy while considerably reducing injection pain. In this study, we investigated the combination of dissolving MNs with IAsp or IDeg therapy as an alternative to daily multiple insulin injections, aiming to improve glycemic control and patient compliance. Mechanical properties of the MNs, structural stability of insulin encapsulated in the MNs, and transdermal application characteristics were studied to assess the practicality of insulin-loaded MNs for diabetes therapy. In vivo experiments conducted on diabetic rats demonstrated that the IAsp- and IDeg-loaded MNs have comparable blood glucose control abilities to that of subcutaneous injections. In addition, the therapeutic properties of insulin-loaded MNs under diverse dietary conditions and application strategies were further investigated to provide new information to support future clinical trials. Taken together, the proposed MNs have the potential to improve balances between glycemic control, hypoglycemia risk, and convenience, providing patients with simpler regimens. STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE: 1. The fabricated functional insulin-loaded dissolving microneedles closely matched the glucose rise that occurs in response to meals, demonstrating promising alternatives for multiple daily insulin injections. 2. The hypoglycemic properties of insulin microneedles were investigated under diverse dietary conditions and application strategies, yielding new information to support future clinical trials. 3. Molecular dynamics simulations were utilized to study the interactions between the insulin and microneedle matrix materials, providing a strategy for theoretically understanding drug stability as well as the release mechanism of drug-loaded microneedles.

Evaluation of Tresiba Combined with Six Ingredient Rehmannia Pill in the Treatment of Type 2 Diabetes

OBJECTIVE

Insulin replacement therapy is the main treatment method for type 1 diabetes, and adjuvant comprehensive treatment to reduce the complications of diabetes is still the focus of research. The purpose of this study is to explore the clinical efficacy of Tresiba combined with Ingredient Rehmannia Pill in the treatment of type 1 diabetes.

METHODS

A total of 216 patients with type 2 diabetes admitted to our hospital from January 2019 to July 2019 were enrolled in this study. Patients in the control and observation groups were treated with Tresiba and Tresiba combined with Ingredient Rehmannia Pill, respectively. The change of TCM symptom score, blood glucose level and fasting insulin level before and after treatment were evaluated, and the insulin resistance index was calculated to observe the adverse reactions of patients.

RESULTS

After treatment, the TCM syndrome scores of the two groups decreased significantly, and the TCM syndrome scores of the observation group were significantly lower than those of the control group. The fasting blood glucose, 2 h postprandial blood glucose and insulin resistance index of the observation group were lower than those of the control group. The levels of FBG, 2 hBG and HbA1C in the observation group were significantly lower than those in the control group. The total effective rate of the observation group was 91.7%, which was significantly higher than that of the control group (77.1%). The adverse reactions of patients in the observation group were slightly more than those in the control group.

CONCLUSION

Our study demonstrated that Ingredient Rehmannia Pill combined with Tresiba is effective in the treatment of type 2 diabetes, providing alternative therapies for the treatment of diabetes.

Insulin polymorphism induced by two polyphenols: new crystal forms and advances in macromolecular powder diffraction

This study focuses on the polymorphism of human insulin (HI) upon the binding of the phenolic derivativesp-coumaric acid ortrans-resveratrol over a wide pH range. The determination of the structural behaviour of HI via X-ray powder diffraction (XRPD) and single-crystal X-ray diffraction (SCXRD) is reported. Four distinct polymorphs were identified, two of which have not been reported previously. The intermediate phase transitions are discussed. One of the novel monoclinic polymorphs displays the highest molecular packing among insulin polymorphs of the same space group to date; its structure was elucidated by SCXRD. XRPD data collection was performed using a variety of instrumental setups and a systematic comparison of the acquired data is presented. A laboratory diffractometer was used for screening prior to high-resolution XRPD data collection on the ID22 beamline at the European Synchrotron Radiation Facility. Additional measurements for the most representative samples were performed on the X04SA beamline at the Swiss Light Source (SLS) using the MYTHEN II detector, which allowed the detection of minor previously untraceable impurities and dramatically improved thed-spacing resolution even for poorly diffracting samples.

In Silico Head-to-Head Comparison of Insulin Glargine 300 U/mL and Insulin Degludec 100 U/mL in Type 1 Diabetes

Background: Second-generation long-acting insulin glargine 300 U/mL (Gla-300) and degludec 100 U/mL (Deg-100) provide novel basal insulin therapies for the treatment of type 1 diabetes (T1D). Both offer a flatter pharmacokinetic (PK) profile than the previous generation of long-acting insulins, thus improving glycemic control while reducing hypoglycemic events. This work describes an in silico head-to-head comparison of the two basal insulins on 24-h glucose profiles and was used to guide the design of a clinical trial. Materials and Methods: The Universities of Virginia (UVA)/Padova T1D simulator describes the intra-/interday variability of glucose-insulin dynamics and thus provides a robust bench-test for assessing glucose control for basal insulin therapies. A PK model describing subcutaneous absorption of Deg-100, in addition to the one already available for Gla-300, has been developed based on T1D clinical data and incorporated into the simulator. One hundred in silico T1D subjects received a basal insulin dose (Gla-300 or Deg-100) for 12 weeks (8 weeks uptitration, 4 weeks stable dosing) by morning or evening administration in a basal/bolus regimen. The virtual patients were uptitrated to their individual doses with two different titration rules. Results: The last 2-week simulated continuous glucose monitoring data were used to calculate various outcome metrics for both basal insulin treatments, with primary outcome being the percent time in glucose target (70-140 mg/dL). The simulations show no statistically significant difference for Gla-300 versus Deg-100 in the main endpoints. Conclusions: This work suggests comparable glucose control using either Gla-300 or Deg-100 and was used to guide the design of a clinical trial intended to compare second-generation long-acting insulin analogues.

Superior efficacy with a fixed-ratio combination of insulin degludec and liraglutide (IDegLira) compared with insulin degludec and liraglutide in insulin-naïve Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes in a phase 3, open-label, randomized trial

AIMS

To investigate the efficacy and safety of insulin degludec/liraglutide (IDegLira) compared with its individual components in Japanese people with type 2 diabetes (T2D) uncontrolled on an oral antidiabetic drug (OAD).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This 52-week, open-label, multicentre, treat-to-target trial randomized participants (n = 819) 1:1:1 to IDegLira, liraglutide 1.8 mg or degludec, as add-on to their pre-trial OAD. The maximum IDegLira dose was 50 dose steps (50 U degludec/1.8 mg liraglutide), there was no maximum dose for degludec, and both were titrated based on individual blood glucose measurements.

RESULTS

After 52 weeks, glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) decreased by 26 mmol/mol with IDegLira vs 20 mmol/mol with degludec and liraglutide: estimated treatment differences were -6.91 mmol/mol (95% confidence interval [CI] -8.18; -5.64) and -5.30 mmol/mol (95% CI -6.58; -4.03), confirming non-inferiority of IDegLira to degludec and superiority of IDegLira to liraglutide (P < .0001 for both [primary endpoint]). Mean body weight changes were 2.9 kg, 4.1 kg and -1.0 kg with IDegLira, degludec and liraglutide, respectively, showing superiority of IDegLira versus degludec (P = .0001), but a significant difference in favour of liraglutide (P < .0001). Rates of severe or blood glucose-confirmed hypoglycaemia for IDegLira were lower versus degludec (rate ratio 0.48 [95% CI 0.35; 0.68]; P < .0001), but higher versus liraglutide (rate ratio 37.58 [95% CI 19.80; 71.31]; P < .0001). Mean daily total insulin dose was lower with IDegLira (27.7 U) versus degludec (34.8 U; P < .0001). Overall adverse event (AE) rates were similar. In total, 34.9%, 22.9% and 41.8% of IDegLira-, degludec- and liraglutide-treated participants experienced gastrointestinal AEs.

CONCLUSION

IDegLira was superior to degludec and liraglutide in terms of HbA1c reduction and superior to degludec in terms of body weight change and rates of hypoglycaemia in Japanese people with T2D.

Safety and efficacy of IDegLira titrated once weekly versus twice weekly in patients with type 2 diabetes uncontrolled on oral antidiabetic drugs: DUAL VI randomized clinical trial

AIMS

To compare the safety and efficacy of a simpler titration algorithm for insulin degludec/liraglutide (IDegLira) with that used in previous DUAL trials in insulin-naïve patients with type 2 diabetes.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

This 32-week, open-label, non-inferiority trial randomized adults with type 2 diabetes uncontrolled on metformin ± pioglitazone to receive IDegLira, titrated either once weekly, based on the mean of 2 pre-breakfast plasma glucose (PG) readings (n = 210), or twice weekly, based on the mean of 3 pre-breakfast PG readings (n = 210).

RESULTS

Mean HbA1c decreased from 8.2% (65 mmol/mol) to 6.1% (43 mmol/mol) with once-weekly titration and from 8.1% (65 mmol/mol) to 6.0% (42 mmol/mol) with twice-weekly titration; non-inferiority was confirmed (estimated treatment difference: 0.12% [-0.04; 0.28]_95%CI , 1.30 mmol/mol [-0.41; 3.01]_95%CI ). Approximately 90% of patients achieved HbA1c < 7% in each arm. Mean fasting PG was similar after 32 weeks. Weight change was -1.0 kg vs -2.0 kg for once-weekly vs twice-weekly titration. Rates of severe or blood glucose-confirmed symptomatic hypoglycaemia were low in both arms: 0.16 events/patient-year of exposure (PYE) for once-weekly, 0.76 events/PYE for twice-weekly titration. Mean IDegLira dose at 32 weeks was 41 dose steps (41 U IDeg/1.48 mg Lira) for both arms. Overall adverse event rates were 207.8 and 241.3 events/100 PYE with once-weekly and twice-weekly titration, respectively.

CONCLUSION

A pragmatic titration algorithm with once-weekly adjustments based on 2 PG readings resulted in a safety and glycaemic efficacy profile similar to that with twice-weekly adjustments based on 3 preceding PG values in insulin-naïve patients.

Insulin Formulation Characterization-the Thioflavin T Assays

The insulin molecule was discovered in 1921. Shortly thereafter, its propensity towards amyloid fibril formation, fibrillation, was observed and described in the literature as a "precipitate." In the past decades, the increased incidence of type 2 diabetes has reached global epidemic proportions. This has emphasized the demands for both insulin production and the development of modern insulin products for unmet medical needs. Bringing such new insulin drug products to the market for the benefit of patients requires that many CMC-related processes are understood, described, and controlled. One potential undesired process is insulin fibril formation. The compound thioflavin T (ThT) is known as a fluorescent probe for amyloid fibrils. As such, ThT is utilized in a versatile research assay in microtiter plate format, the ThT assay. This review will describe an experimental set-up using not only a ThT microtiter plate assay but also two orthogonal methods. The use of the ThT assay in research and characterization of insulin analogues, as well as formulations of insulin, is described by cases drawn from the scientific literature and patents. The ThT assay is compared to other physical stability tests and in conclusion the advantages and limitations of the assay are compared.

Insulin Glargine 300 U/mL: A Review in Diabetes Mellitus

Insulin glargine 300 U/mL (Toujeo(®)) is a long-acting basal insulin analogue approved for the treatment of diabetes mellitus. Insulin glargine 300 U/mL has a more stable and prolonged pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic profile than insulin glargine 100 U/mL (Lantus(®)), with a duration of glucose-lowering activity exceeding 24 h. In several 6-month phase III trials, insulin glargine 300 U/mL achieved comparable glycaemic control to that seen with insulin glargine 100 U/mL in patients with type 1 or type 2 diabetes, albeit with consistently higher daily basal insulin requirements. These improvements in glycaemic control were maintained during longer-term (12 months) treatment. Insulin glargine 300 U/mL was generally associated with a lower risk of nocturnal hypoglycaemia than insulin glargine 100 U/mL in insulin-experienced patients with type 2 diabetes, while the risk of nocturnal hypoglycaemia did not significantly differ between treatment groups in insulin-naïve patients with type 2 diabetes or in patients with type 1 diabetes. To conclude, once-daily subcutaneous insulin glargine 300 U/mL is an effective and generally well tolerated basal insulin therapy option for patients with type 1 or type 2 diabetes.

Advances in Basal Insulin Therapy

Objective: To review 2 new basal insulin analogs that have been approved in the United States for use in type 1 and type 2 diabetes—insulin glargine 300 units/mL and insulin degludec 100 units/mL and 200 units/mL. Data Sources: PubMed was searched using the terms “insulin glargine 300 units/mL,” “Gla-300,” “insulin degludec,” “IDeg,” “insulin degludec 200 units/mL,” and “insulin degludec 100 units/mL” for articles published between 1995 and May 2016. Study Selection and Data Extraction: Clinical trials, meta-analyses and subanalyses were identified; review articles were excluded. Relevant citations from identified articles were also reviewed. Data Synthesis: The new basal insulins, insulin glargine 300 units/mL and insulin degludec 100 units/mL and 200 units/mL, have improved pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic profiles compared to insulin glargine 100 units/mL. All demonstrate longer durations of action, beyond 24 hours, and less variability. These improved profiles translate into comparable A1C reductions and comparable, or improved, levels of hypoglycemia compared to insulin glargine 100 units/mL. Conclusions: These benefits may lead to improved glycemic control in a range of patients with type 1 and type 2 diabetes with true once-daily dosing.

Insulin Degludec/Liraglutide: A Review in Type 2 Diabetes

Insulin degludec/liraglutide (Xultophy(®)), a fixed-ratio combination of an ultra-long-acting insulin analogue and a glucagon-like protein-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonist, is available in the EU for the management of inadequately controlled type 2 diabetes. Once-daily subcutaneous insulin degludec/liraglutide as add-on therapy to oral antidiabetics was effective and generally well tolerated in adults with inadequately controlled type 2 diabetes in several well designed 26-week phase III trials. In insulin-naive patients, add-on insulin degludec/liraglutide provided significantly greater improvements in glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) levels than add-on insulin degludec, liraglutide or placebo, or unchanged GLP-1 receptor agonists (i.e. liraglutide or exenatide). In the extension of one of these trials, the efficacy of add-on insulin degludec/liraglutide was maintained for a total of 52 weeks. In insulin-experienced patients, add-on insulin degludec/liraglutide was significantly more effective with regard to improvements in HbA1c levels than add-on insulin degludec (at equivalent doses) or ongoing insulin glargine therapy. Add-on insulin degludec/liraglutide was associated with a lower incidence of confirmed hypoglycaemia than add-on insulin degludec in insulin-naive patients or ongoing insulin glargine in insulin-experienced patients, and a lower initial rate of nausea than add-on liraglutide. Thus, once-daily subcutaneous insulin degludec/liraglutide is a useful add-on therapy option for adult patients with inadequately controlled type 2 diabetes.

Contribution of TyrB26 to the Function and Stability of Insulin: STRUCTURE-ACTIVITY RELATIONSHIPS AT A CONSERVED HORMONE-RECEPTOR INTERFACE

Crystallographic studies of insulin bound to receptor domains have defined the primary hormone-receptor interface. We investigated the role of Tyr(B26), a conserved aromatic residue at this interface. To probe the evolutionary basis for such conservation, we constructed 18 variants at B26. Surprisingly, non-aromatic polar or charged side chains (such as Glu, Ser, or ornithine (Orn)) conferred high activity, whereas the weakest-binding analogs contained Val, Ile, and Leu substitutions. Modeling of variant complexes suggested that the B26 side chains pack within a shallow depression at the solvent-exposed periphery of the interface. This interface would disfavor large aliphatic side chains. The analogs with highest activity exhibited reduced thermodynamic stability and heightened susceptibility to fibrillation. Perturbed self-assembly was also demonstrated in studies of the charged variants (Orn and Glu); indeed, the Glu(B26) analog exhibited aberrant aggregation in either the presence or absence of zinc ions. Thus, although Tyr(B26) is part of insulin's receptor-binding surface, our results suggest that its conservation has been enjoined by the aromatic ring's contributions to native stability and self-assembly. We envisage that such classical structural relationships reflect the implicit threat of toxic misfolding (rather than hormonal function at the receptor level) as a general evolutionary determinant of extant protein sequences.

Insulin degludec/liraglutide (IDegLira) for the treatment of type 2 diabetes

The progressive nature of type 2 diabetes necessitates that treatment is intensified as the disease advances. Several studies have shown that basal insulin and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) can be used in combination to successfully improve glycemic control and this combination is increasingly being considered as an alternative to intensification with prandial insulin. Insulin degludec/liraglutide (IDegLira) is the first fixed-ratio combination of a basal insulin and a GLP-1RA in a single formulation. Here we consider the benefits and potential limitations of such a combination, focusing on the unique modes of action of insulin degludec and the once-daily GLP-1RA liraglutide. IDegLira offers an efficacious combination therapy (mean end-of-trial HbA_1c was 6.4-6.9% across the five completed Phase 3 trials), which was well-tolerated in clinical trials. The complementary modes of action resulted in a low rate of hypoglycemia and no weight gain in insulin-treated patients. As a once-daily injection with effects on both fasting and post prandial hyperglycemia, IDegLira has the potential to help many patients reach glycemic target (60-81% of patients achieved HbA_1c <7% in clinical trials).

Degludec is superior to glargine in terms of daily glycemic variability in people with type 1 diabetes mellitus

To investigate the differences in glycemic variability between the long-acting insulins glargine and degludec using continuous glucose monitoring, we conducted an open-label, multicenter, prospective, observational study that enrolled 21 participants with type 1 diabetes mellitus currently receiving basal-bolus insulin therapy with glargine. To avoid the potential influence of diet and exercise on glycemic control, all participants were housed and monitored within the hospital for the duration of the study. Once glycemic control was achieved with glargine, glycemic variability was evaluated using continuous glucose monitoring for 3 days. Glargine was then replaced by degludec and glycemic variability again assessed via continuous glucose monitoring. The primary outcome measure of mean amplitude of glycemic excursions was significantly reduced with degludec (p = 0.028), as was area under the curve for daily blood glucose level <70 mg/dL (p = 0.046). The required insulin dose was reduced up to 25% in the degludec group, although 24-h mean glucose concentrations were not different between groups. In conclusion, once or twice daily glargine was successfully replaced by a daily injection of degludec. When replacing glargine with degludec, a lower dose should be utilized to avoid hypoglycemia. Degludec is an effective and promising long-acting insulin that reduced hypoglycemia and daily blood glucose variability in participants with type 1 diabetes.

Benefits of combination of insulin degludec and liraglutide are independent of baseline glycated haemoglobin level and duration of type 2 diabetes

AIM

To evaluate, using post hoc analyses, whether the novel combination of a basal insulin, insulin degludec, and a glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist, liraglutide (IDegLira), was consistently effective in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D), regardless of the stage of T2D progression.

METHODS

Using data from the DUAL I extension [insulin-naïve patients uncontrolled on oral antidiabetic drugs (OADs), n = 1660, 52 weeks] and DUAL II (patients uncontrolled on basal insulin plus OADs, n = 398, 26 weeks) randomized trials, the efficacy of IDegLira was investigated with regard to measures of disease progression stage including baseline glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c), disease duration and previous insulin dose.

RESULTS

Across four categories of baseline HbA1c (≤7.5-9.0%), HbA1c reductions were significantly greater with IDegLira (1.1-2.5%) compared with IDeg or liraglutide alone in DUAL I. In DUAL II, HbA1c reductions were significantly greater with IDegLira (0.9-2.5%) than with IDeg in all but the lowest HbA1c category. In DUAL I, insulin dose and hypoglycaemia rate were lower across all baseline HbA1c categories for IDegLira versus IDeg, while hypoglycaemia was higher with IDegLira than liraglutide, irrespective of baseline HbA1c. In DUAL II, insulin dose and hypoglycaemia rate were similar with IDegLira and IDeg (maximum dose limited to 50 U) independent of baseline HbA1c. The reduction in HbA1c with IDegLira was independent of disease duration and previous insulin dose but varied depending on pre-trial OAD treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

IDegLira effectively lowered HbA1c across a range of measures, implying suitability for patients with either early or advanced T2D.

Insulin degludec results in lower rates of nocturnal hypoglycaemia and fasting plasma glucose vs. insulin glargine: A meta-analysis of seven clinical trials

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Basal insulin analogues have a reduced risk of hypoglycaemia compared with NPH insulin, but hypoglycaemia still remains a major impediment to achieving recommended fasting plasma glucose (FPG) targets in patients with diabetes. Insulin degludec (IDeg) is a new basal insulin that forms soluble multihexamers after subcutaneous injection resulting in an ultra-long duration of action and stable glucose-lowering effect. The aim of this analysis was to compare the effect of IDeg on FPG and nocturnal confirmed hypoglycaemia as compared to insulin glargine (IGlar).

METHODS AND RESULTS

Data were included from seven phase 3a, randomised, open-label, treat-to-target clinical trials in which once-daily IDeg was compared with once-daily IGlar. Two trials included a total of 957 patients with type 1 diabetes (T1D) and five trials included a total of 3360 patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D); all trials were 26 or 52 weeks in duration. Confirmed hypoglycaemia was defined as plasma glucose <3.1 mmol/L or severe episodes requiring assistance, and nocturnal hypoglycaemia occurred between 00:01 and 05:59. In all trials, the mean end-of-trial FPG was lower for IDeg than IGlar, reaching statistical significance in three trials. Similarly, IDeg was associated with a lower rate of nocturnal confirmed hypoglycaemia vs. IGlar, which was statistically significant in three trials, regardless of type of diabetes or background therapy.

CONCLUSION

This analysis shows that the lower rate of nocturnal confirmed hypoglycaemia seen with IDeg relative to IGlar is accompanied by a reduced mean FPG, in particular in patients with T2D.

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

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

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.

Contribution of liraglutide in the fixed-ratio combination of insulin degludec and liraglutide (IDegLira)

OBJECTIVE

Insulin degludec/liraglutide (IDegLira) is a novel combination of insulin degludec (IDeg) and liraglutide. This trial investigated the contribution of the liraglutide component of IDegLira versus IDeg alone on efficacy and safety in patients with type 2 diabetes.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

In a 26-week, double-blind trial, patients with type 2 diabetes (A1C 7.5-10.0% [58-86 mmol/mol]) on basal insulin (20-40 units) and metformin with or without sulfonylurea/glinides were randomized (1:1) to once-daily IDegLira + metformin or IDeg + metformin with titration aiming for fasting plasma glucose between 4 and 5 mmol/L. Maximum allowed doses were 50 dose steps (equal to 50 units IDeg plus 1.8 mg liraglutide) and 50 units for IDeg. The primary end point was change in A1C from baseline.

RESULTS

A total of 413 patients were randomized (mean A1C 8.8% [73 mmol/mol]; BMI 33.7 kg/m2). IDeg dose, alone or as part of IDegLira, was equivalent (45 units). A1C decreased by 1.9% (21 mmol/mol) with IDegLira and by 0.9% (10 mmol/mol) with IDeg (estimated treatment difference -1.1% [95% CI -1.3, -0.8], -12 mmol/mol [95% CI -14, -9; P < 0.0001). Mean weight reduction with IDegLira was 2.7 kg vs. no weight change with IDeg, P < 0.0001. Hypoglycemia incidence was comparable (24% for IDegLira vs. 25% for IDeg). Overall adverse events were similar, and incidence of nausea was low in both groups (IDegLira 6.5% vs. IDeg 3.5%).

CONCLUSIONS

IDegLira achieved glycemic control superior to that of IDeg at equivalent insulin doses without higher risk of hypoglycemia and with the benefit of weight loss. These findings establish the efficacy and safety of IDegLira and the distinct contribution of the liraglutide component.

Efficacy and safety of a fixed-ratio combination of insulin degludec and liraglutide (IDegLira) compared with its components given alone: results of a phase 3, open-label, randomised, 26-week, treat-to-target trial in insulin-naive patients with type 2 diabetes

BACKGROUND

A fixed-ratio combination of the basal insulin analogue insulin degludec and the glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) analogue liraglutide has been developed as a once-daily injection for the treatment of type 2 diabetes. We aimed to compare combined insulin degludec-liraglutide (IDegLira) with its components given alone in insulin-naive patients.

METHODS

In this phase 3, 26-week, open-label, randomised trial, adults with type 2 diabetes, HbA1c of 7-10% (inclusive), a BMI of 40 kg/m(2) or less, and treated with metformin with or without pioglitazone were randomly assigned (2:1:1) to daily injections of IDegLira, insulin degludec, or liraglutide (1·8 mg per day). IDegLira and insulin degludec were titrated to achieve a self-measured prebreakfast plasma glucose concentration of 4-5 mmol/L. The primary endpoint was change in HbA1c after 26 weeks of treatment, and the main objective was to assess the non-inferiority of IDegLira to insulin degludec (with an upper 95% CI margin of 0·3%), and the superiority of IDegLira to liraglutide (with a lower 95% CI margin of 0%). This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01336023.

FINDINGS

1663 adults (mean age 55 years [SD 10], HbA1c 8·3% [0·9], and BMI 31·2 kg/m(2) [4·8]) were randomly assigned, 834 to IDegLira, 414 to insulin degludec, and 415 to liraglutide. After 26 weeks, mean HbA1c had decreased by 1·9% (SD 1·1) to 6·4% (1·0) with IDegLira, by 1·4% (1·0) to 6·9% (1·1) with insulin degludec, and by 1·3% (1·1) to 7·0% (1·2) with liraglutide. IDegLira was non-inferior to insulin degludec (estimated treatment difference -0·47%, 95% CI -0·58 to -0·36, p<0·0001) and superior to liraglutide (-0·64%, -0·75 to -0·53, p<0·0001). IDegLira was generally well tolerated; fewer participants in the IDegLira group than in the liraglutide group reported gastrointestinal adverse events (nausea 8·8 vs 19·7%), although the insulin degludec group had the fewest participants with gastrointestinal adverse events (nausea 3·6%). We noted no clinically relevant differences between treatments with respect to standard safety assessments, and the safety profile of IDegLira reflected those of its component parts. The number of confirmed hypoglycaemic events per patient year was 1·8 for IDegLira, 0·2 for liraglutide, and 2·6 for insulin degludec. Serious adverse events occurred in 19 (2%) of 825 patients in the IDegLira group, eight (2%) of 412 in the insulin degludec group, and 14 (3%) of 412 in the liraglutide group.

INTERPRETATION

IDegLira combines the clinical advantages of basal insulin and GLP-1 receptor agonist treatment, resulting in improved glycaemic control compared with its components given alone.

FUNDING

Novo Nordisk.

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.

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.

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

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