Clinical perspectives from the BEGIN and EDITION programmes: Trial-level meta-analyses outcomes with either degludec or glargine 300U/mL vs glargine 100U/mL in T2DM

Effectiveness of switching from first-generation basal insulin to Glargine 300 U/mL in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes: results from the ISPED CARD database

AIMS

Glargine 300 U/mL (Gla-300) has been recently approved for use in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes (T1D). However, real-world effectiveness data are scarce, and aim of this analysis was to assess clinical outcomes in young patients with T1D switching from 1st generation basal insulin (1BI) to Gla-300.

METHODS

ISPED CARD is a retrospective, multicenter study, based on data anonymously extracted from Electronic Medical Records. The study involved a network of 20 pediatric diabetes centers. Data on all patients aged < 18 years with T1D switching from 1BI to Gla-300 were analyzed to assess clinical characteristics at the switch and changes after 6 and 12 months in glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c), fasting blood glucose (FBG), and standardized body mass index (BMI/SDS). Titration of basal and short-acting insulin doses was also evaluated.

RESULTS

Overall, 200 patients were identified. The mean age at the switch to Gla-300 was 13 years, and mean duration of diabetes was 3.9 years. Average HbA1c levels at switch were 8.8%. After 6 months, HbA1c levels decreased by - 0.88% (95% CI - 1.28; - 0.48; p < 0.0001). The benefit was maintained after 12 months from the switch (mean reduction of HbA1c levels - 0.80%, 95% CI - 1.25; - 0.35, p = 0.0006). Trends of reduction in FBG levels were also evidenced both at 6 months and 12 months. No significant changes in short-acting and basal insulin doses were documented.

CONCLUSIONS

The study provides the first real-world evidence of the effectiveness of Gla-300 in children and adolescents with T1D previously treated with 1BI. The benefits in terms of HbA1c levels reduction were substantial, and sustained after 12 months. Additional benefits can be expected by improving the titration of insulin doses.

Treatment intensification following glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists in type 2 diabetes: Comparative effectiveness analyses between different basal insulins. RESTORE-G real-world study

AIM

To compare the effectiveness of different basal insulins (BI) prescribed as an add-on to or switch from glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1 RA) therapy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Retrospective, real-world data from electronic medical records of 32 Italian diabetes clinics were used, after propensity score adjustment, to compare effectiveness after 6 months of treatment with second- versus first-generation BI (2BI vs. 1BI) or glargine 300 U/ml versus degludec 100 U/ml (Gla-300 vs. Deg-100), when added to (ADD-ON) or in substitution of (SWITCH) GLP-1 RA. Only comparisons, including a minimum of 100 patients per group, were performed to ensure adequate robustness of the analyses.

RESULTS

In the ADD-ON cohort (N = 700), greater benefits of 2BI versus 1BI were found in glycated haemoglobin {HbA1c; estimated mean difference: -0.32% [95% confidence interval (CI) -0.62; -0.02]; p = .04} and fasting blood glucose [FBG; -20.73 mg/dl (95% CI -35.62; -5.84); p = .007]. In the SWITCH cohort (N = 2097), greater benefits of 2BI versus 1BI were found in HbA1c [-0.22% (95% CI -0.42; -0.02); p = .03], FBG [-10.15 mg/dl (95% CI -19.04; -1.26); p = .03], and body weight [-0.67 kg (95% CI -1.30; -0.04); p = .04]. In the SWITCH cohort starting 2BI (N = 688), marked differences in favour of Gla-300 versus Deg-100 were documented in HbA1c [-0.89% (95% CI -1.26; -0.52); p < .001] and FBG [-17.89 mg/dl (95% CI -32.45; -3.33); p = .02]. Using propensity score matching as a sensitivity analysis, the benefit on HbA1c was confirmed [-0.55% (95% CI -1.02; -0.08); p = .02]. BI titration was suboptimal in all examined cohorts.

CONCLUSIONS

2BI are a valuable option to intensify GLP-1 RA therapy. Switching to Gla-300 versus Deg-100 was associated with greater HbA1c improvement.

Treatment intensification following glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist in type 2 diabetes: Comparative effectiveness analyses between free vs. fixed combination of GLP-1 RA and basal insulin. RESTORE-G real-world study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Add-on of basal insulin (BI) to intensify the ongoing therapy with glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist (GLP-1 RA) is recommended, but it is unclear if free or fixed combination of BI and GLP-1 RA produce similar outcomes. A retrospective comparative effectiveness analysis of the add-on of glargine 300 U/mL (Gla-300) to ongoing GLP-1 RA vs. switch to fixed ratio combination of degludec and liraglutide (iDegLira) was performed.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Real-world data collected in electronic medical records by 32 Italian diabetes clinics. Propensity score (PS) adjustment was applied to assess changes in glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c), fasting blood glucose (FBG), body weight, and BI dose after 6 months from Gla-300 or iDegLira initiation. Compared to iDegLira group (N = 260), Gla-300+GLP-1 RA group (N = 255) had older age and higher levels of HbA1c (9.1 vs. 8.9%). After 6 months, statistically significant greater FBG improvement [estimated mean difference and 95% confidence intervals: -24.05 mg/dl (-37.04; -11.06; p = 0.0003) and BI dose increase [+0.03 U/kg (95%CI 0.00; 0.06); p = 0.009] were found in the free vs. fixed combination group, although low doses of BI (0.2 U/kg) were reached in both groups. Trends of larger HbA1c and body weight reductions with the free combination were also found, without reaching the statistical significance.

CONCLUSION

Although inertia in insulin initiation and titration was documented in both groups, higher benefit on FBG control was obtained with free vs. fixed combination, likely due to a better titration of BI and GLP-1 RA.

Open questions on basal insulin therapy in T2D: a Delphi consensus

AIMS

The revolution in the therapeutic approach to type 2 diabetes (T2D) requires a rethinking of the positioning of basal insulin (BI) therapy. Given the considerable number of open questions, a group of experts was convened with the aim of providing, through a Delphi consensus method, practical guidance for doctors.

METHODS

A group of 6 experts developed a series of 29 statements on: the role of metabolic control in light of the most recent guidelines; BI intensification strategies: (1) add-on versus switch; (2) inertia in starting and titrating; (3) free versus fixed ratio combination; basal-bolus intensification and de-intensification strategies; second generation analogues of BI (2BI). A panel of 31 diabetologists, by accessing a dedicated website, assigned each statement a relevance score on a 9-point scale. The RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method was adopted to assess the existence of disagreement among participants.

RESULTS

Panelists showed agreement for all 29 statements, of which 26 were considered relevant, one was considered not relevant and two were of uncertain relevance. Panelists agreed that the availability of new classes of drugs often allows the postponement of BI and the simplification of therapy. It remains essential to promptly initiate and titrate BI when required. BI should always, unless contraindicated, be started in addition to, and not as a replacement, for ongoing treatments with cardiorenal benefits. 2BIs should be preferred for their pharmacological profile, greater ease of self-titration and flexibility of administration.

CONCLUSION

In a continuously evolving scenario, BI therapy still represents an important option in the management of T2D patients.

Treatment intensification following glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist treatment in type 2 diabetes: The RESTORE-G real-world study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

To assess intensification approaches with basal insulin (BI) following glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1 RA) treatment in type 2 diabetes (T2D).

METHODS AND RESULTS

Real-world data were collected in electronic medical records by 32 Italian diabetes clinics between 2011 and 2021. Primary endpoint was the proportion of insulin-naïve T2D patients treated with GLP-1 RA who initiated (add-on or switch) BI. Secondary endpoints were: treatment approaches, mean time to BI start, effectiveness and safety. Among 7,962 eligible patients, BI was prescribed to 3,164 (39.7%; 95%CI 38.7; 40.8): 67.6% switched to BI (22.1% also starting 1-3 injections of short-acting insulin), 22.7% added BI while maintaining GLP-1 RA, and 9.7% switched to a fixed-ratio combination of GLP-1 RA and BI (FRC). Median time since the first GLP-1 RA to BI/FRC prescription was 27.4 (IQ range 11.8-53.5) months. In this study 60.3% of patients did not start BI/FRC, among whom 15.2% intensified GLP-1 RA therapy with other oral agents. Effectiveness and safety were documented in all intensification approaches with BI/FRC, but HbA1c level at intensification time of ≥9.0% and suboptimal BI titration suggested clinical inertia. Use of second generation BI and add-on to GLP-1 RA schemes increased over time and effectiveness improved.

CONCLUSION

Clinical inertia should be overcome using innovative insulin options. Timely combination therapy of BI and GLP-1 RA is a valuable choice.

Twenty Years of Insulin Gla-100: A Systematic Evaluation of Its Efficacy and Safety in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus

INTRODUCTION

This systematic review aims to present the current evidence base with respect to the initiation and intensification of insulin therapy with glargine 100 U/mL (Gla-100) compared to other insulins in people with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM).

METHODS

A systematic literature search of PubMed (MEDLINE), EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of controlled clinical trials databases was performed to identify studies published up to September 30, 2020 that compared the effects of Gla-100 to that of other insulin regimens in people with T2DM. Relevant information pertaining to the predefined outcomes of interest was extracted. Glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) change and response rates along with overall hypoglycemia incidence were the primary efficacy and safety outcomes of interest.

RESULTS

Seventy-nine studies (63 interventional and 16 non-interventional) in which Gla-100 was either initiated in previously insulin-naïve patients (n = 57) or used in an intensified regimen (n = 22) were identified and evaluated. In insulin-naïve patients, most studies demonstrated that Gla-100 was significantly better compared with premixed insulins and similar compared with neutral protamine Hagedorn (NPH) insulin, second-generation basal insulins, co-formulations, and other first-generation basal insulins in terms of the primary efficacy parameters. Overall hypoglycemia risk with Gla-100 was significantly lower compared with NPH, premixed, coformulation, and other first-generation basal insulins and significantly higher compared with second-generation basal insulins. In studies with intensified regimens, efficacy outcomes with Gla-100 were significantly better compared with insulin detemir (IDet); similar compared with NPH, second-generation basal insulins, co-formulations; and with premixed insulins. In these studies, overall hypoglycemia risk with Gla-100 was significantly lower compared with IDet and comparable to NPH, premixed insulins, co-formulations, and second-generation basal insulins. In addition, most intensification studies also revealed a significantly lower risk of nocturnal hypoglycemia with Gla-100-based regimens versus NPH and premixed insulins and a significantly greater risk compared to second-generation basal insulins.

CONCLUSIONS

The evidence presented in this review suggests that Gla-100 is an effective option for both insulin initiation and intensification strategies used in the management of T2DM.

Clinical Use of Insulin Glargine 300 U/mL in Adults with Type 2 Diabetes: Hypothetical Case Studies

Type 2 diabetes (T2D) is a progressive disease, with many individuals eventually requiring basal insulin therapy to maintain glycaemic control. However, there exists considerable therapeutic inertia to the prompt initiation and optimal titration of basal insulin therapy due to barriers that include fear of injections, hypoglycaemia, weight gain, and burdensome regimens. Hypoglycaemia is thought to be a major barrier to optimal glycaemic control and is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Newer second-generation basal insulin analogues provide comparable glycaemic control with lower risk of hypoglycaemia compared with first-generation basal insulin analogues. The present review article discusses clinical evidence for one such second-generation basal insulin analogue, insulin glargine 300 U/mL (Gla-300), in the context of hypothetical case studies that are representative of individuals who may attend routine clinical practice. These case studies discuss individualised treatment needs for people with T2D who are insulin-naïve or pre-treated. Clinical characteristics such as older age, frequent nocturnal hypoglycaemia, and renal impairment, which are known risk factors for hypoglycaemia, are also considered.

Expert-Group Practical Advice on Insulin Initiation and Titration for Patients with Type 2 Diabetes in the Gulf Region

The type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) management represents a major challenge in the Gulf region. Hyperglycemia is a major risk factor for microvascular and macrovascular complications and increased mortality. Early dietary and lifestyle changes alongside a step-wise targeted pharmacological approach to achieve a glycated hemoglobin (HbA_1c) level of &#x3c;7% are recommended to limit these complications. However, achievement of this HbA_1c target remains a major challenge, especially in the Gulf region. Both physician and patient-led barriers limit timely initiation and titration of insulin. An expert-group advisory committee reviewed the current guideline recommendations, strategized best practice, and curated clinical practical advices to enable primary-care physicians to optimally initiate and titrate insulin in patients with T2DM.

Clinical outcomes in high‐hypoglycaemia‐risk patients with type 2 diabetes switching to insulin glargine 300 U/mL versus a first‐generation basal insulin analogue in the United States : Results from the DELIVER High Risk real‐world study

Aims

To compare 12‐month clinical effectiveness of insulin glargine 300 units/mL (Gla‐300) versus first‐generation basal insulin analogues (BIAs) (insulin glargine 100 units/mL [Gla‐100] or insulin detemir [IDet]) in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) who were at high risk of hypoglycaemia and switched from one BIA to a different one (Gla‐300 or Gla‐100/IDet) in a real‐world setting.

Methods

DELIVER High Risk was a retrospective observational cohort study of 2550 patients with T2D who switched BIA to Gla‐300 (Gla‐300 switchers) and were propensity score‐matched (1:1) to patients who switched to Gla‐100 or IDet (Gla‐100/IDet switchers). Outcomes were change in glycated haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), attainment of HbA1c goals (<7% and <8%), and incidence and event rates of hypoglycaemia (all‐hypoglycaemia and hypoglycaemia associated with an inpatient/emergency department [ED] contact).

Results

HbA1c reductions were similar following switching to Gla‐300 or Gla‐100/IDet (−0.51% vs. −0.53%; p = .67), and patients showed similar attainment of HbA1c goals. Patients in both cohorts had comparable all‐hypoglycaemia incidence and event rates. However, the Gla‐300 switcher cohort had a significantly lower risk of inpatient/ED‐associated hypoglycaemia (adjusted odds ratio: 0.73, 95% confidence interval: 0.60–0.89; p = .002) and experienced significantly fewer inpatient/ED‐associated hypoglycaemic events (0.21 vs. 0.33 events per patient per year; p < .001).

Conclusion

In patients with T2D at high risk of hypoglycaemia, switching to Gla‐300 or Gla‐100/IDet achieved similar HbA1c reductions and glycaemic goal attainment, but Gla‐300 switchers had a significantly lower risk of hypoglycaemia associated with an inpatient/ED contact during 12 months after switching.

Post Hoc Analysis Evaluating the Impact of Antihyperglycemic Background Therapies on Attainment of A1C Targets Without Hypoglycemia in the ACHIEVE Control Pragmatic, Real-Life Study

BACKGROUND

ACHIEVE Control, a prospective, open-label, randomized, pragmatic, real-life study in insulin-naive people with type 2 diabetes (A1C 8.0-11.0%), demonstrated superiority of insulin glargine 300 units/mL (Gla-300) versus first-generation standard-of-care basal insulin (SOC-BI; glargine 100 units/mL or insulin detemir) in achieving individualized A1C targets without documented symptomatic (glucose ≤3.9 mmol/L [≤70 mg/dL] or <3.0 mmol/L [<54 mg/dL]) or severe hypoglycemia (American Diabetes Association level 3) at 6 months. Noninsulin antihyperglycemic background therapies are commonly used; however, sulfonylureas may increase hypoglycemia risk. This post hoc analysis assessed outcomes according to background therapy.

METHODS

Subgroup analyses were performed per concomitant use/nonuse of sulfonylureas, glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists, dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitors, or sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors. End points (6 and 12 months) included A1C target attainment without documented symptomatic or severe hypoglycemia, A1C target attainment, and absence of documented symptomatic or severe hypoglycemia.

RESULTS

Odds ratios (ORs) at 12 months mostly favored Gla-300 versus SOC-BI across subgroups except in analysis of SGLT2 inhibitors, in which ORs were similar. Among sulfonylurea users, ORs at 12 months strongly favored Gla-300 versus SOC-BI for all end points, particularly A1C target achievement without documented symptomatic hypoglycemia (glucose ≤3.9 mmol/L [≤70 mg/dL]; OR 1.25, 95% CI 1.02-1.53) or severe hypoglycemia and achievement of no documented symptomatic hypoglycemia (glucose <3.0 mmol/L [<54 mg/dL]; OR 1.25, 95% CI 1.02-1.52) or severe hypoglycemia.

CONCLUSION

The results suggest that, in insulin-naive people with type 2 diabetes, Gla-300 is effective with a risk of hypoglycemia that is lower than or similar to that of SOC-BI regardless of background medication. Individuals receiving concomitant sulfonylureas were more likely to remain without symptomatic or severe hypoglycemia with Gla-300.

Target attainment in insulin-naive patients at high risk for hypoglycemia: Results from ACHIEVE Control

AIMS

To better understand outcomes in people with type 2 diabetes at high risk of hypoglycemia, we conducted post hoc analyses in subgroups of participants from the real-world ACHIEVE Control study (NCT02451137) with ≥1 hypoglycemia risk factor.

METHODS

Insulin-naive adults with type 2 diabetes and A1c ≥8% were randomized 1:1 to insulin glargine 300 U/mL (Gla-300) or standard-of-care basal insulin (SOC-BI). Participants had documented history of ≥1 risk factors for hypoglycemia: chronic kidney disease, cardiovascular disease, dementia or blindness, age ≥65 years, or history of hypoglycemia. Outcomes included individualized A1c target attainment without documented symptomatic hypoglycemia (blood glucose [BG] ≤3.9 mmol/L or <3.0 mmol/L) or severe hypoglycemia, A1c target attainment, and absence of documented symptomatic or severe hypoglycemia at 6 and 12 months.

RESULTS

Within subgroups, odds ratios generally showed trends favoring Gla-300 versus SOC-BI, particularly for hypoglycemia avoidance in participants ≥65 years of age (BG ≤3.9 mmol/L; odds ratio, 1.52; 95% confidence interval, 1.14-2.03) and those with chronic kidney disease (BG ≤3.9 mmol/L; odds ratio, 2.28; 95% confidence interval, 1.26-4.12). Results were consistent with the overall population.

CONCLUSIONS

These data suggest potential benefit of Gla-300 versus SOC-BI for avoiding hypoglycemia in participants with ≥1 hypoglycemia risk factor.

A pragmatic randomized clinical trial of insulin glargine 300 U/mL vs first-generation basal insulin analogues in insulin-naïve adults with type 2 diabetes: 6-month outcomes of the ACHIEVE Control study

AIMS

To compare the safety and efficacy of insulin glargine 300 U/mL (Gla-300) versus first-generation standard-of-care basal insulin analogues (SOC-BI; insulin glargine 100 U/mL or insulin detemir) at 6 months.

METHODS

In the 12-month, open-label, multicentre, randomized, pragmatic ACHIEVE Control trial, insulin-naïve adults with type 2 diabetes (T2D) and glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) 64 to 97 mmol/mol (8.0%-11.0%) after ≥1 year of treatment with ≥2 diabetes medications were randomized to Gla-300 or SOC-BI. The composite primary endpoint, evaluated at 6 months, was the proportion of participants achieving individualized HbA1c targets per Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set (HEDIS) criteria without documented symptomatic (blood glucose ≤3.9 mmol/L [≤70 mg/dL]) or severe hypoglycaemia at any time of the day at 6 months.

RESULTS

Of 1651 and 1653 participants randomized to Gla-300 and SOC-BI, respectively, 31.3% and 27.9% achieved the composite primary endpoint at 6 months (odds ratio [OR] 1.19, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.01-1.39; P = 0.03 for superiority); 78.4% and 75.3% had no documented symptomatic or severe hypoglycaemia (OR 1.19, 95% CI 1.01-1.41). Changes from baseline to month 6 in HbA1c, fasting plasma glucose, weight, and BI analogue dose were similar between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Among insulin-naïve adults with poorly controlled T2D, Gla-300 was associated with a statistically significantly higher proportion of participants achieving individualized HEDIS HbA1c targets without documented symptomatic or severe hypoglycaemia (vs SOC-BI) in a real-life population managed in a usual-care setting. The ACHIEVE Control study results add value to treatment decisions and options for patients, healthcare providers, payers and decision makers.

Insulin glargine 300 U/mL versus first-generation basal insulin analogues in insulin-naïve adults with type 2 diabetes: 12-month outcomes of ACHIEVE Control, a prospective, randomized, pragmatic real-life clinical trial

AIM

To report the effectiveness and safety of insulin glargine 300 U/mL (Gla-300) versus standard-of-care basal insulin analogues (SOC-BI) at 12 months in the ACHIEVE Control trial, which is a prospective pragmatic randomized real-life study in insulin-naïve adults with type 2 diabetes (T2D).

METHODS

A total of 3304 insulin-naïve adults with T2D and glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) concentration of 64 to 97 mmol/mol (8.0% to 11.0%) after ≥1 year of treatment with two or more antihyperglycaemic agents were randomized to Gla-300 or SOC-BI. Key secondary endpoints included HbA1c target attainment without documented symptomatic (≤3.9 mmol/L [≤70 mg/dL]) or severe hypoglycaemia at 12 months.

RESULTS

At 12 months, 26.1% (Gla-300) and 23.7% (SOC-BI) of adults achieved HbA1c targets without documented symptomatic (≤3.9 mmol/L [≤70 mg/dL]) or severe hypoglycaemia (odds ratio [OR] 1.14, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.97-1.35); 33.0% and 29.5%, respectively, achieved HbA1c targets without documented symptomatic (<3.0 mmol/L [<54 mg/dL]) or severe hypoglycaemia (OR 1.19, 95% CI 1.02-1.38). The OR for HbA1c target achievement was 1.15 (95% CI 0.99-1.34), and favoured Gla-300 versus SOC-BI for absence of documented symptomatic or severe hypoglycaemia at 12 months for both ≤3.9 mmol/L (≤70 mg/dL; OR 1.21, 95% CI 1.05-1.40) and < 3.0 mmol/L (<54 mg/dL; OR 1.26, 95% CI 1.07-1.48).

CONCLUSION

Gla-300 tended to be associated with lower hypoglycaemia risk than SOC-BI in real-world clinical practice during the 12-month follow-up.

Using 2nd generation basal insulins in type 2 diabetes: Costs and savings in a comparative economic analysis in Italy, based on the BRIGHT study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

To evaluate the economic impact of using 2nd generation basal insulin analogs, Glargine 300 Units/ml (Gla-300) vs Degludec 100 Units/ml (IDeg-100), in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D).

METHODS AND RESULTS

An economic analysis was conducted using findings from the BRIGHT study (the first controlled, head-to-head study comparing Gla-300 vs IDeg-100), and costs for the Italian National Healthcare Service (NHS). A cost-minimization analysis (CMA) and a budget impact analysis (BIA) were conducted. Only pharmacological costs were included in the analysis. The CMA estimated patient treatment costs at 24 weeks and 1 year; the BIA assessed the economic impact of treating the overall Italian population of T2D insulin-naïve patients, who initiated insulin treatment during the period September 2017-August 2018 (N = 55 318). In the BIA, four different scenarios were compared: i) all patients receive IDeg-100 (Scenario A); ii) 61% of patients receive Gla-300, 39% IDeg-100 (Scenario B); iii) 80% of patients receive Gla-300, 20% IDeg-100 (Scenario C); iv) all patients treated with Gla-300 (Scenario D). The average treatment costs per patient were lower with Gla-300 vs IDeg-100 (at 24 weeks: €129 vs €161; at 1 year: €324 vs €409, respectively). Results of the BIA showed that comparing Scenario D vs Scenario A, total savings would amount to €1.76 million at 24 weeks, €4.73 million at 1 year, €5.53 million at 2 years.

CONCLUSION

A larger use of Gla-300 vs IDeg-100 for the treatment of T2D patients would lead to a relevant reduction of therapy costs in Italy.

Insulin glargine 300 U/mL and insulin degludec: A review of the current evidence comparing these two second-generation basal insulin analogues

For most people with type 2 diabetes (T2D), treatment intensification with the addition of basal insulin therapy is required to maintain glycaemic control. However, this often does not happen in real-life practice promoting the development of long-term diabetes-related complications. The second-generation basal insulin analogues glargine 300 U/mL (Gla-300) and degludec (IDeg) provide pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic improvements that may allow them to be more effective in appropriately managing diabetes compared with first-generation basal insulin analogues. Both Gla-300 and IDeg have been extensively studied vs the first-generation basal insulin glargine 100 U/mL, demonstrating comparable efficacy in terms of glycaemic control, and a lower risk of hypoglycaemia. The BRIGHT randomized controlled trial is the first direct comparison of the efficacy and safety profiles of Gla-300 and IDeg in patients with T2D. Moreover, real-world data have been used to assess the effectiveness of these basal insulins during routine clinical practice. Further research is required to determine if the properties of Gla-300 and IDeg may lead to improvements in healthcare-related costs and the quality of life of patients, which are important factors for informing clinical decisions.

Clinical Outcomes of Switching to Insulin Glargine 300 U/ml from Other Basal Insulins in People with Type 2 Diabetes in Italy: A Real-World Study

INTRODUCTION

Primary aim was to provide real-world evidence of the outcomes after the switch to glargine 300 U/ml (Gla-300) from other basal insulins (first or second generation) in Italy.

METHODS

Multicenter, observational, retrospective study based on electronic medical records.

RESULTS

Overall, 953 T2DM insulin ± OAD treated people switched to Gla-300 or Gla-100 from January 2015 to July 2018. Three clinically relevant cohorts were identified: patients switching to Gla-300 from first-generation basal insulin (cohort 1), patients switching to Gla-300 from degludec-100 (Deg-100) (cohort 2), and those switching to Gla-100 from any basal insulin (cohort 3). The three cohorts differed in terms of age, diabetes duration, and metabolic control. HbA1c changes after 6 months from the switch were - 0.27% (95% CI - 0.38; - 0.16), - 0.06% (95% CI - 0.31; 0.19), and - 0.30% (95% CI - 0.51; - 0.09) in the three cohorts, respectively. FPG significantly decreased in cohort 1 (- 14.07 mg/dl, 95% CI - 20.25; - 7.89), while body weight significantly decreased in cohort 2 (- 1.47 kg, 95% CI - 2.55; - 0.39). Doses of insulin marginally changed during the follow-up (+ 0.89 U in basal insulin daily dose in cohort 1 and + 2.07 U in short-acting insulin daily dose in cohort 2).

CONCLUSIONS

Switching to Gla-300 from first-generation basal insulin in the real world is associated with improvements in metabolic control despite a suboptimal titration of both basal and short-acting insulins. Inertia in insulin titration documented in the Gla-100 cohort is also observed with the second-generation basal insulin. The switch to Gla-300 from Deg-100 was associated with a decrease in body weight of - 1.47 kg despite a slight increase in short-acting insulin daily doses of about + 2 U.

Reduced Hypoglycemia Risk in Type 2 Diabetes Patients Switched to/Initiating Insulin Glargine 300 vs 100 U/ml: A European Real-World Study

INTRODUCTION

Randomized controlled trials and real-world data from the USA have shown similar glycemic control with insulin glargine 300 U/ml (Gla-300) and insulin glargine 100 U/ml (Gla-100) and reduced hypoglycemia risk with Gla-300. This real-world study describes the efficacy and safety of Gla-300 and Gla-100 in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) in France, Spain, and Germany.

METHODS

This retrospective chart review analysis used anonymized data for adults with T2D switching basal insulin analog (BIA) therapy to Gla-300 or Gla-100, or insulin-naïve patients initiating Gla-300 or Gla-100. Outcomes included change from baseline to 6-month follow-up in glycated hemoglobin A1c (A1C), total and severe hypoglycemia incidences and events, insulin dose, and reasons for BIA choice.

RESULTS

Six hundred sixty-five physicians (33.8% Spain, 31.7% France, 34.4% Germany) provided chart data for patients switching to Gla-300 (n = 679) or Gla-100 (n = 429) or initiating Gla-300 (n = 719) or Gla-100 (n = 711). After adjustment for baseline characteristics, A1C reductions from baseline were similar for patients switching to Gla-300 or Gla-100 (- 0.87% vs. - 0.93%; p = 0.326) while those switched to Gla-300 vs. Gla-100 had a significantly greater mean reduction in hypoglycemic events (- 1.29 vs. - 0.81 events during 6 months; p = 0.012). Mean insulin doses after titration were 0.43 ± 0.36 and 0.40 ± 0.28 U/kg in Gla-300 and Gla-100 switchers, respectively. Factors that significantly influenced BIA choice included a lower risk of hypoglycemia (for Gla-300) and physician familiarity (for Gla-100). Outcomes for insulin-naïve patients were broadly similar to those of switchers.

CONCLUSIONS

In this real-world European study, patients with T2D who switched therapy to Gla-300 or Gla-100 had improved glycemic control and reduced hypoglycemia at 6 months, with significant hypoglycemia advantages with Gla-300.

Differential glycaemic control with basal insulin glargine 300 U/mL versus degludec 100 U/mL according to kidney function in type 2 diabetes: A subanalysis from the BRIGHT trial

AIMS

Chronic kidney disease (CKD) challenges diabetes management and is associated with increased cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. We examined whether clinical outcomes with insulin glargine 300 U/mL (Gla-300) and insulin degludec 100 U/mL (IDeg-100) are affected by renal function in a prespecified subgroup analysis from the BRIGHT trial.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

BRIGHT (NCT02738151) was a multicentre, open-label, randomized, active-controlled, two-arm, parallel-group, 24-week study in insulin-naïve uncontrolled type 2 diabetes (T2D). Participants were randomized 1:1 to evening Gla-300 (n = 466) or IDeg-100 (n = 463) and stratified based on baseline estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) for this analysis.

RESULTS

Heterogeneity of treatment effect across renal function subgroups was observed (P = .02), reflecting a greater mean glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) reduction from baseline to week 24 with Gla-300 versus IDeg-100 in the eGFR <60 mL/min/1.73 m² subgroup (least squares mean difference: -0.43% [95% confidence interval: -0.74% to -0.12%]), while there were no differences in hypoglycaemia incidence or rates over 24 weeks in that subgroup. HbA1c reductions were similar between treatments in the other eGFR subgroups. However, heterogeneity was observed for annualized rates of anytime (24 hours) or nocturnal (00:00-05:59 hours) confirmed hypoglycaemia (≤70 mg/dL [≤3.9 mmol/L]) over 24 weeks showing less hypoglycaemia with Gla-300 versus IDeg-100 in the ≥90 mL/min/1.73 m² .

CONCLUSIONS

Kidney function seems to affect the glucose-lowering effects of Gla-300 versus IDeg-100 in insulin-naïve T2D. Greater HbA1c reductions with Gla-300 without increase in hypoglycaemia risk, were observed in patients with eGFR <60 mL/min/1.73 m² .

Insulin Therapy in Type 2 Diabetes

BACKGROUND

Since the discovery of insulin, it was the only drug available for the treatment of diabetes until the development of sulfonylureas and biguanides 50 years later. But even with the availability of oral glucose-lowering drugs, insulin supplementation was often needed to achieve good glucose control in type 2 diabetes. Insulin NPH became the basal insulin therapy of choice and adding NPH to metformin and/or sulfonylureas became the standard of care until basal insulin analogs were developed and new glucose-lowering drugs became available.

AREAS OF UNCERTAINTY

The advantages in cost-benefit of insulin analogs and their combination with new glucose-lowering drugs are still a matter of debate. There is no general agreement on how to avoid inertia by prescribing insulin therapy in type 2 diabetes when really needed, as reflected by the diversity of recommendations in the current clinical practice guidelines.

DATA SOURCES

When necessary for this review, a systematic search of the evidence was done in PubMed and Cochrane databases.

THERAPEUTIC ADVANCES

Adding new oral glucose-lowering drugs to insulin such as DPP-4 inhibitors lead to a modest HbA1c reduction without weight gain and no increase in hypoglycemia. When SGLT-2 inhibitors are added instead, there is a slightly higher HbA1c reduction, but with body weight and blood pressure reduction. The downside is the increase in genital tract infections. GLP-1 receptor agonists have become the best alternative when basal insulin fails, particularly using fixed ratio combinations. Rapid-acting insulins via the inhaled route may also become an alternative for insulin supplementation and/or intensification. "Smart insulins" are under investigation and may become available for clinical use in the near future.

CONCLUSIONS

Aggressive weight loss strategies together with the new glucose-lowering drugs which do not cause hypoglycemia nor weight gain should limit the number of patients with type 2 diabetes needing insulin. Nevertheless, because of therapeutic inertia and the progressive nature of the disease, many need at least a basal insulin supplementation and insulin analogs are the best choice as they become more affordable. Fixed ratio combinations with GLP1 receptor agonists are a good choice for intensification of insulin therapy.

Glargine-300: An updated literature review on randomized controlled trials and real-world studies

Despite the availability of a variety of insulins, rates of insulinisation and the acceptance of insulin therapy is suboptimal in real-world clinical settings. Patient and physician concerns with hypoglycaemia and weight gain are the two key issues that serve to impede appropriate insulinisation in patients with diabetes. Recently introduced second-generation basal insulin analogues [for e.g., insulin glargine 300 U/mL (Gla-300) and insulin degludec] are designed to have improved pharmacokinetic profiles with an intention to deliver steady insulin levels over a longer period. Several randomised controlled and real-world studies have proven the resultant advantages of second-generations insulin analogues in lowering intra-individual variability in plasma insulin levels, flexibility in dosing, a sustained glucose-lowering effect, and decreasing the risk of hypoglycaemia. Gla-300 is one of the newer second-generation basal insulin analogues to have been approved for both type 1 and 2 diabetes. In this article, we review the currently available clinical and real-world data of Gla-300.

Current status of insulin degludec in type 1 and type 2 diabetes based on randomized and observational trials

Insulin degludec is a new ultra-long-action basal insulin. Using treat-to-target protocols, controlled trials have shown comparable HbA_1c reductions with insulin degludec and comparators in both type 1 and type 2 diabetes. Most studies identify, however, better control of fasting plasma glucose with insulin degludec vs. either insulin glargine U100 or detemir, and all have consistently demonstrated clinically relevant decreases in (nocturnal) hypoglycaemic episodes. These characteristics have provided added therapeutic value for insulin degludec in clinical practice. Thus, the aim of this review is to discuss, within the context of randomized and observational studies, the clinical effects of insulin degludec use in type 1 and type 2 diabetes.

Improving Type 2 Diabetes Management in General Practice Using a Second-Generation Basal Insulin Analogue Insulin Glargine 300 U/mL: A Practical Guide

Type 2 diabetes management can be improved by the use of second-generation basal insulin analogues as the first choice on commencement of insulin, in this instance focussing on insulin glargine 300 U/mL (Gla-300). The clinical application of the use of Gla-300 include advantages such as less intra- and interpatient variability in glucose control resulting in rather less hypoglycaemia, longer duration of action and greater flexibility in the timing of administration thus suiting a wide range of patient presentations.Funding: Sanofi Australia.

Meta-Analysis and Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Insulin Glargine 100 U/mL Versus Insulin Degludec for the Treatment of Type 2 Diabetes in China

INTRODUCTION

To evaluate the efficacy and safety as well as the long-term cost-effectiveness of insulin glargine 100 U/mL (IGlar) versus insulin degludec (IDeg) for the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) from the Chinese healthcare system perspective.

METHODS

A systematic search of English and Chinese electronic databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing IGlar with IDeg for the treatment of T2DM was performed, followed by a meta-analysis to compare the efficacy and safety of IGlar versus IDeg. The CORE Diabetes Model was used to estimate lifetime costs, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained, and cost-effectiveness of IGlar versus IDeg. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted to assess the underlying parameter uncertainty.

RESULTS

Six RCTs were included in the meta-analysis. The IGlar group showed a statistically significant decrease in glycated hemoglobin (HbA_1c) from baseline compared to the IDeg group (mean difference [MD] 0.08%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.01-0.14%, P = 0.02). Body mass index (BMI) control was numerically better in the IGlar group than in the IDeg group (MD 0.07 kg/m², 95% CI - 0.01 to 0.14 kg/m², P  = 0.08). In terms of hypoglycemia, the incidence of non-severe overall hypoglycemia was comparable between the IDeg and IGlar patient groups (P  > 0.05), while the incidence of non-severe nocturnal hypoglycemia (relative risk [RR 0.79], 95% CI 0.70-0.90, P < 0.01) and the event rates of non-severe overall (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.85-0.97, P < 0.01) and non-severe nocturnal hypoglycemia (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.85-0.97, P < 0.01) were lower in the IDeg group. The incidences and event rates of both severe overall and nocturnal hypoglycemia were similar for the two groups (P  > 0.05). The cost-effectiveness analysis showed that IGlar is the dominant treatment option compared with IDeg, with a lifetime savings of 1004 Chinese yuan in direct medical costs and a net gain of 0.015 QALYs per patient. Both one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of the results.

CONCLUSIONS

IGlar is a cost-saving option with incremental effectiveness compared with IDeg for the treatment of T2DM in China.

FUNDING

Sanofi China.

Comparable glycaemic control and hypoglycaemia in adults with type 2 diabetes after initiating insulin glargine 300 units/mL or insulin degludec: The DELIVER Naïve D real-world study

AIM

To compare glycaemic control, hypoglycaemia and treatment discontinuation of insulin glargine 300 units/mL (Gla-300) and insulin degludec (IDeg) in a real-world study of insulin-naïve adults with type 2 diabetes (T2D).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

DELIVER Naive D was a retrospective observational study that used electronic medical record data from the IBM Watson Health Explorys database. Insulin-naïve adults with T2D who started Gla-300 or IDeg between March 2015 and September 2017 were identified. Patients were active in the system for ≥12 months before and ≥6 months after starting Gla-300 or IDeg and had HbA1c measurements during 6-month baseline and 3- to 6-month follow-up. Outcomes were compared among 1:1 propensity score-matched cohorts.

RESULTS

In the matched cohorts (n = 638 each), the mean age was 59 years, approximately 53% were male, and mean HbA1c was 9.67% (82 mmol/mol). Mean (SD) HbA1c decreases were comparable in the Gla-300 and IDeg cohorts (-1.67% [2.22] and -1.58% [2.20]; P = 0.51), as were HbA1c target attainment [<7% (53 mmol/mol): 23.8% and 27.4%; P = 0.20; <8% (64 mmol/mol): 55.0% and 57.1%; P = 0.63] and treatment discontinuation (29.2% and 32.6%; P = 0.14). Overall and inpatient/emergency department-associated hypoglycaemia incidences and event rates were similar in both cohorts using fixed 6-month or variable on-treatment follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Among real-world insulin-naïve adults with T2D, initiation of Gla-300 or IDeg resulted in comparable improvements in glycaemic control and similar rates of hypoglycaemia. These real-world data complement and confirm a randomized trial and other real-world studies.

Differentiating Basal Insulin Preparations: Understanding How They Work Explains Why They Are Different

Since the introduction of insulin as a life-saving agent for patients with type 1 diabetes, insulin preparations have evolved to approximate physiologic insulin delivery profiles to meet prandial and basal insulin needs. While prandial insulins are designed to have quick time–action profiles that minimize postprandial glucose excursions, basal insulins are designed to have a protracted time–action profile to facilitate basal glucose control over 24 h. Given that all insulins have the same mechanism of action at the target tissue level, the differences in time–action profiles are achieved through different mechanisms of protraction, resulting in different behaviors in the subcutaneous space and different rates of absorption into the circulation. Herein, we evaluate the differences in basal insulin preparations based on their differential mechanisms of protraction, and the resulting clinical action profiles. Multiple randomized control trials and real-world evidence studies have demonstrated that the newer second-generation basal insulin analogs, insulin glargine 300 units/mL and insulin degludec 100 or 200 units/mL, provide stable glycemic control with once-daily dosing and are associated with a reduced risk of hypoglycemia compared with previous-generation basal insulin analogs insulin glargine 100 units/mL and insulin detemir. These advantages can lead to decreased healthcare resource utilization and cost. With this collective knowledge, healthcare providers and payers can make educated and well-informed decisions when determining which treatment regimen best meets the needs of each individual patient.

Funding: Sanofi US, Inc.

Efficacy and safety of the second generation basal insulin analogs in type 2 diabetes mellitus: A critical appraisal

Type 2 diabetes mellitus is a progressive disease, which requires insulin treatment when other management is no longer effective. Although, insulin plays a vital role in the treatment of diabetes, conventional basal insulins have certain limitations, which have led to the development of more stable and peak less analogues.

OBJECTIVES

To analyze the efficacy and safety of second generation vs. first generation basal insulins, and the efficacy and safety of second generation vs. second generation basal insulins, in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus, from the evidence provided by head-to-head randomized controlled trials.

METHODS

The following electronic databases were searched: PubMed and MEDLINE, Scopus, BIOSIS, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov, Google Scholar, and Springer Online Archives Collection, from January 1966 to October 2018. Articles resulting from these searches and relevant references cited in those articles were examined.

RESULTS

The efficacy among insulins evaluated was similar, however, second generation insulins cause a lower risk of hypoglycemia compared to first generation insulins. A single study showed similar metabolic control with subtle differences in the risk of hypoglycemia among second generation insulins.

CONCLUSIONS

The second-generation basal insulins result in metabolic control similar to first generation insulins, with lower risk of hypoglycemia. Second-generation insulins have comparable efficacy, with some differences in the risk of hypoglycemia.

Basal insulin therapy: Unmet medical needs in Asia and the new insulin glargine in diabetes treatment

Diabetes remains a global epidemic and a tremendous health challenge, especially in the Asian population. Dramatic increases in the prevalence of diabetes across different countries or areas in Asia have been reported in recent epidemiological studies. Although clinical guidelines have strengthened appropriate antihyperglycemic medications and lifestyle modifications for optimal diabetes management, inadequate glycemic control still occurs in many patients with an increased risk of developing microvascular and macrovascular complications. Insulin administration is the main therapy for diabetes in response to the inability to secrete insulin, and is recommended in current guidelines to treat patients with type 2 diabetes after failure of oral antidiabetic drugs. Clinical studies have shown that long-acting insulin analogs improve basal glycemic control with reduced risk of hypoglycemia. In the present review, we discuss previous challenges with basal insulin therapy in Asia, the pharmacological development of insulin analogs to overcome the unmet medical needs and recent clinical studies of the new ultra-long-acting insulin analog, insulin glargine U300. Furthermore, relevant findings of current real-world evidence are also included for the comparison of the efficacy and safety of different insulin formulations. Based on the accumulating evidence showing a low incidence of hypoglycemia and technical benefits of dose titration, treatment with glargine U300 can be a promising strategy for Asian diabetes patients to achieve glycemic targets with favorable safety.

Differentiating Basal Insulin Preparations: Understanding How They Work Explains Why They Are Different

Since the introduction of insulin as a life-saving agent for patients with type 1 diabetes, insulin preparations have evolved to approximate physiologic insulin delivery profiles to meet prandial and basal insulin needs. While prandial insulins are designed to have quick time-action profiles that minimize postprandial glucose excursions, basal insulins are designed to have a protracted time-action profile to facilitate basal glucose control over 24 h. Given that all insulins have the same mechanism of action at the target tissue level, the differences in time-action profiles are achieved through different mechanisms of protraction, resulting in different behaviors in the subcutaneous space and different rates of absorption into the circulation. Herein, we evaluate the differences in basal insulin preparations based on their differential mechanisms of protraction, and the resulting clinical action profiles. Multiple randomized control trials and real-world evidence studies have demonstrated that the newer second-generation basal insulin analogs, insulin glargine 300 units/mL and insulin degludec 100 or 200 units/mL, provide stable glycemic control with once-daily dosing and are associated with a reduced risk of hypoglycemia compared with previous-generation basal insulin analogs insulin glargine 100 units/mL and insulin detemir. These advantages can lead to decreased healthcare resource utilization and cost. With this collective knowledge, healthcare providers and payers can make educated and well-informed decisions when determining which treatment regimen best meets the needs of each individual patient.Funding: Sanofi US, Inc.

Improved Glycemic Control with Insulin Glargine 300 U/mL (Toujeo®) in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes: Real-World Effectiveness in Switzerland

INTRODUCTION

Insulin glargine 300 U/mL (Gla-300, Toujeo^®) is a long-acting, once-daily basal insulin with improved-more stable and smoother-pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic profiles compared to insulin glargine 100 U/mL (Gla-100) and insulin degludec (IDeg). These properties have been shown to translate into an effective HbA1c reduction with the advantage of a lower risk of hypoglycemia in randomized controlled trials of Gla-300 versus Gla-100. In this study, we assessed the effectiveness and safety of Gla-300 under real-world conditions in Switzerland.

METHODS

The prospective, observational, open-label, multicenter study TOP-2 explored the effectiveness of Gla-300 in adult patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) uncontrolled (HbA1c 7.5-10%) on their previous basal insulin in Germany, Austria, and Switzerland. The primary endpoints were the percentages of patients achieving a fasting plasma glucose (FPG) of ≤ 6.1 mmol/L after 6 and 12 months. Secondary endpoints included changes in HbA1c, FPG, body weight, and insulin dose as well as hypoglycemia incidence and safety. Here we report the results for the Swiss patient cohort after 12 months of treatment with insulin glargine 300 U/mL.

RESULTS

The 62 patients (33 men) had a mean age of 65 years, a mean diabetes duration of 14 years, a mean body mass index (BMI) of 31 kg/m², and were mainly switched from Gla-100 (44%) to Gla-300. The most common concomitant oral anti-diabetes therapy was metformin (65%). The mean individual HbA1c target chosen by the investigators was 7.4%. After 12 months of therapy, Gla-300 significantly reduced mean HbA1c from 8.2% to 7.6% (p < 0.0001). Likewise, Gla-300 significantly reduced mean FPG from 9.1 mmol/L to 7.4 mmol/L (p < 0.0001). At study end, 32% of patients achieved FPG ≤ 6.1 mmol/L, 55% achieved FPG ≤ 7.2 mmol/L , and 57% achieved their individual HbA1c target. Gla-300 was uptitrated to a mean dose of 40 units per day. Symptomatic hypoglycemia incidence after 12 months was low at 9.7% and a rate of 0.23 events per patient year. Body weight remained stable and was not significantly altered during the study.

CONCLUSION

Upon switching basaI insulin to Gla-300, overall glucose control significantly improved and glycemic targets were achieved with a low rate of hypoglycemia in T2D patients under real-world conditions in Switzerland.

FUNDING

Sanofi-Aventis (Suisse) SA.

More Similarities Than Differences Testing Insulin Glargine 300 Units/mL Versus Insulin Degludec 100 Units/mL in Insulin-Naive Type 2 Diabetes: The Randomized Head-to-Head BRIGHT Trial

OBJECTIVE

To compare insulin glargine 300 units/mL (Gla-300) versus insulin degludec 100 units/mL (IDeg-100) in this first head-to-head randomized controlled trial.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

BRIGHT (NCT02738151) was a multicenter, open-label, active-controlled, two-arm, parallel-group, 24-week, noninferiority study in insulin-naive patients with uncontrolled type 2 diabetes. Participants were randomized 1:1 to evening dosing with Gla-300 (N = 466) or IDeg-100 (N = 463), titrated to fasting self-monitored plasma glucose of 80-100 mg/dL. The primary end point was HbA_1c change from baseline to week 24. Safety end points included incidence and event rates of hypoglycemia.

RESULTS

At week 24, HbA_1c improved similarly from baseline values of 8.7% (72 mmol/mol) in the Gla-300 group and 8.6% (70 mmol/mol) in the IDeg-100 group to 7.0% (53 mmol/mol)-least squares mean difference -0.05% (95% CI -0.15 to 0.05) (-0.6 mmol/mol [-1.7 to 0.6])-demonstrating noninferiority of Gla-300 versus IDeg-100 (P < 0.0001). Hypoglycemia incidence and event rates over 24 weeks were comparable with both insulins, whereas during the active titration period (0-12 weeks) the incidence and rate of anytime (24-h) confirmed hypoglycemia (≤70 and <54 mg/dL) were lower with Gla-300. Both insulins were properly titrated and exhibited no specific safety concerns.

CONCLUSIONS

Gla-300 and IDeg-100 provided similar glycemic control improvements with relatively low hypoglycemia risk. Hypoglycemia incidence and rates were comparable with both insulins during the full study period but lower in favor of Gla-300 during the titration period. The choice between these longer-acting basal insulins may be determined by factors such as access and cost, alongside clinical considerations.

Second-Generation Insulin Analogues - a Review of Recent Real-World Data and Forthcoming Head-to-Head Comparisons

Insulin analogues play a key role in the effective management of type 2 diabetes. However, there are several behavioural barriers to appropriate early initiation of insulin therapy, despite compelling evidence supporting the benefits of this strategy in those patients for whom oral anti-diabetes agents provide insufficient control. The development of second-generation insulin analogues (insulin glargine 300 U/mL and insulin degludec) has provided physicians with agents that can provide comparable glycaemic control to first-generation insulin, but with a reduced risk of hypoglycaemia and modes of action suited to once-daily regimens. These characteristics may help overcome patient and physician concerns about early insulin use in disease management. To date, there have been no head-to-head comparisons of second-generation insulins: here we consider recent real-world evidence and the forthcoming direct comparison in the BRIGHT randomised controlled study, as presented at the recent 11^th International Conference on Advanced Technologies & Treatments for Diabetes (ATTD) 2018.

Glycaemic control and hypoglycaemia during 12 months of randomized treatment with insulin glargine 300 U/mL versus glargine 100 U/mL in people with type 1 diabetes (EDITION 4)

AIMS

Insulin glargine 300 U/mL (Gla-300) offers a flatter pharmacodynamic profile than insulin glargine 100 U/mL (Gla-100). We have compared these insulins over 1 year in people with type 1 diabetes (T1DM).

METHODS

EDITION 4 was a 6-month, multicentre, randomized, open-label phase 3 study. People with T1DM who completed the 6 months continued randomized Gla-300 or Gla-100 once daily, morning or evening, for a further 6 months.

RESULTS

Among 549 participants randomized, 444 completed the 12-month study period (Gla-300, 80%; Gla-100, 82%). Mean HbA1c decreased similarly from baseline to month 12 in the 2 treatment groups (difference, 0.02 [95% CI, -0.13 to 0.17]) %-units [0.2 (-1.5 to 1.9) mmol/mol]), to a mean of 7.86 %-units (62.4 mmol/mol) in both groups. For morning vs evening injection, there was no difference in HbA1c change over 12 months for Gla-100, but a significantly larger decrease in HbA1c was observed in the Gla-300 morning group than in the Gla-300 evening group (difference, -0.25 [-0.47 to -0.04] %-units [-2.7 (-5.2 to -0.4) mmol/mol]). Mean glucose from the 8-point SMPG profiles decreased from baseline, and was similar between the 2 treatment groups. Basal insulin dose was 20% higher with Gla-300 than with Gla-100, while hypoglycaemia event rates, analysed at night, over 24 hours, or according to different glycaemic thresholds, did not differ between treatment groups, regardless of injection time. Adverse event profiles did not differ between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

In T1DM, Gla-300 provides glucose control comparable to that of Gla-100, and can be given at any time of day.