Real-life experience of patients starting insulin degludec. A multicenter analysis of 1064 subjects from the German/Austrian DPV registry

Bridging dose of U-100 glargine with first dose of insulin degludec improves glycaemia in the 48 h after transition in twice-daily glargine users

AIMS

To study the effects of a bridging dose of U-100 glargine (U-100G) with the first dose of degludec in type 1 diabetes (T1D) patients transitioning from glargine to degludec, by comparing the glucose metrics 48 h before and after the transition.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients with T1D on a stable U-100G regimen and with glycated haemoglobin concentration <75 mmol/mol were randomized (double-blind) to one dose of placebo or U-100G with first dose of degludec, administered at 9:00 pm. Patients on once-daily U-100G at baseline received 50% of total U-100G dose (bridging dose), while patients on twice-daily U-100G received 50% of the evening U-100G dose. Participants wore a continuous glucose monitor during the study.

RESULTS

Forty participants were randomized, of whom 37 completed the study. The cohort was 65% male, the mean age was 47 years, duration of T1D 22 years, BMI 26 kg/m2, HbA1c 51 mmol/mol and total daily insulin dose 0.7 units/kg body weight. The bridging group included 19 participants (once-daily U-100G: n = 12; twice-daily U-100G: n = 7) and the placebo group included 18 participants (once-daily U-100G: n = 12; twice-daily U-100G: n = 6). Change in time in range (TIR) was not significantly different between the two treatment groups. In secondary analyses, among twice-daily U-100G users, TIR (3.9-10 mmol/L) increased 8% in the bridging group in the 48 h after first dose of degludec compared to the preceding 48 h, while participants in the placebo group had a 9.5% decrease (p = 0.027).

CONCLUSIONS

A subgroup of well-controlled twice-daily U-100G users transitioning to degludec benefited from a 50% bridging dose of evening U-100G with the first dose of degludec in a small pilot study.

Insulin doses requirements in patients with type 1 diabetes using glargine U300 or degludec in routine clinical practice

There are not many real-world studies evaluating daily insulin doses requirements (DIDR) in patients with type 1 diabetes (T1D) using second-generation basal insulin analogs, and such comparison is necessary. The aim of this study was to compare DIDR in individuals with T1D using glargine 300 UI/mL (IGlar-300) or degludec (IDeg) in real clinical practice. An observational, retrospective study was designed in 412 patients with T1D (males: 52%; median age 37.0±13.4 years, diabetes duration: 18.7±12.3 years) using IDeg and IGla-300 ≥6 months to compare DIDR between groups. Patients using IGla-300 (n=187) were more frequently males (59% vs 45.8%; p=0.004) and had lower glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) (7.6±1.2 vs 8.1%±1.5%; p<0.001) than patients using IDeg (n=225). Total (0.77±0.36 unit/kg/day), basal (0.43±0.20 unit/kg/day) and prandial (0.33±0.23 unit/kg/day) DIDR were similar in IGla-300 and IDeg groups. Patients with HbA1c ≤7% (n=113) used significantly lower basal (p=0.045) and total (p=0.024) DIDR, but not prandial insulin (p=0.241), than patients with HbA1c between 7.1% and 8% and >8%. Patients using IGla-300 and IDeg used similar basal, prandial and total DIDR regardless of metabolic control subgroup. No difference in basal, prandial and total DIDR was observed between patients with T1D using IGla-300 or IDeg during at least 6 months in routine clinical practice.

Reduced Rates of Hypoglycemia in Type 1 or Type 2 Diabetes After Switching to Insulin Degludec: Results from the Italian Cohort of the ReFLeCT Study

INTRODUCTION

To evaluate in an Italian real-world setting the safety and effectiveness of insulin degludec 100 units/mL, given once daily in patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) and type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) after switching from other basal insulins.

METHODS

ReFLeCT was a multicenter, prospective, observational study conducted across seven European countries which involved adult patients whose physician planned to switch their medication from basal insulin to insulin degludec. The primary outcome was the change in the number of hypoglycemic episodes before and after the switch to insulin degludec. Results are expressed as 12-month follow-up/baseline incidence rate ratios (IRRs) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs).

RESULTS

The Italian cohort of the ReFLect study comprised 148 patients with T1DM and 311 patients with T2DM. In patients with T1DM, the switch to insulin degludec was associated with significantly lower rates of overall (IRR 0.69, 95% CI 0.57-0.82), non-severe (IRR 0.72, 95% CI 0.60-0.85), and nocturnal hypoglycemia (IRR 0.46, 95% CI 0.31-0.69). Following the switch, hemoglobin A_1c (HbA_1c) levels decreased significantly by 0.35% (95% CI - 0.50 to  - 0.20), with no significant changes in fasting plasma glucose (FPG) and basal insulin dose. Body weight increased by 0.83 kg (95% CI 0.16-1.50). In patients with T2DM, significant reductions in the rates of overall (IRR 0.40, 95% CI 0.29-0.55), non-severe (IRR 0.47, 95% CI 0.34-0.63), and nocturnal hypoglycemia (IRR 0.27, 95% CI 0.09-0.86) were documented. HbA_1c and FPG decreased significantly by 0.45% (95% CI - 0.58 to - 0.31) and 0.90 mmol/L (95% CI - 1.21 to - 0.59], respectively, with no significant changes in basal insulin dose or body weight. Treatment satisfaction significantly improved in both diabetes types.

CONCLUSION

In Italian routine clinical practice, switching from other basal insulins to insulin degludec reduced the total episodes of hypoglycemia and improved glycemic control and treatment satisfaction in patients with T1DM and T2DM.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02392117.

Insulin/carbohydrates ratio during the first 6-month therapy with insulin degludec in a paediatric population with type 1 diabetes previously treated with insulin glargine. An observational longitudinal study

BACKGROUND

No data exist about the changes induced by the transition from first-generation long-acting insulins to second-generation long-acting analogues in the paediatric population.

OBJECTIVE

To assess changes in insulin/carbohydrate ratio (I:CHO) after the first 6 months of degludec therapy in a paediatric population with type 1 diabetes previously treated with glargine U100.

SUBJECTS

All patients treated with degludec under routine clinical practice conditions were retrospectively analysed.

METHODS

Nonprofit observational retrospective study. Changes during the follow-up in mean CHO/I ratio were assessed using longitudinal linear models for repeated measures. Rate of hypoglycaemia, ketoacidosis and adverse events was evaluated.

RESULTS

Overall, 51 children (mean age 13.8 ± 4.6 years; mean diabetes duration 5.8 ± 3.9 years) started therapy with degludec in the period between April 2017 and April 2018. I:CHO ratio before starting degludec therapy significantly differed among the three meals, being the lowest at breakfast and the highest at dinner. After introducing degludec, I:CHO ratio at lunch (-1.29 95% CI -2.02;-0.57) and at dinner (-3.08 95% CI -4.35;-1.8) significantly decreased, while it slightly increased at breakfast (+1.37 95% CI 0.47;2.28). No episodes of severe hypoglycaemia, ketoacidosis and adverse event were recorded during 6 months.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data show that the use of degludec is associated with a significant change in the I:CHO ratio at the different meals compared to the previous glargine therapy. This could derive from the flat and prolonged pharmacokinetic profile of degludec. This has important clinical implications for daily insulin dose adjustments.

Switching Patients with Type 1 Diabetes to Insulin Degludec from Other Basal Insulins: Real-World Data of Effectiveness and Safety

INTRODUCTION

Real-world evidence on the effectiveness and safety of insulin degludec (IDeg) in patients with diabetes is a priority. We have therefore evaluated the effectiveness and safety of IDeg, including impact on metabolic control, glycemic variability, weight gain and hypoglycemia, in patients with type 1 diabetes under routine clinical practice conditions.

METHODS

This was an observational longitudinal multicenter study. A retrospective chart review of all patients with type 1 diabetes who were switched from basal insulin to IDeg was performed, and temporal trends in clinical outcomes were assessed.

RESULTS

Data obtained from 195 patients, with a median age of 42.8 [interquartile range (IQR) 24.6-56.4] years and a median diabetes duration of 16 (IQR 10.0-28) years, were analyzed. Median follow-up was 9.5 (IQR 7.7-11.3) months. Improvements were found in glycated hemoglobin (- 0.34%; p  < 0.0001), fasting blood glucose (- 24.82 mg/dL; p  < 0.0001), post-prandial glucose (- 17.23 mg/dL; p  = 0.0009), glycemic variability as indicated by standard deviation of blood glucose (- 5.67 mg/dL; p  < 0.0001) and high blood glucose index (- 3.77; p < 0.0001). Body weight and body mass index remained substantially stable during the follow-up (- 0.18 kg; p = 0.56 and - 0.12; p = 0.42, respectively). Risk of nocturnal hypoglycemia decreased by 52% [incidence rate ratio 0.48; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.29-0.77] and risk of total hypoglycemic episodes by 41% (incidence ratio 0.59; 95% CI 0.45-0.83). Basal and short-acting insulin doses decreased by - 1.4 and - 3.1 IU, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Switching patients with type 1 diabetes to IDeg from other basal insulins was associated with relevant improvements in metabolic control and glycemic variability without weight gain; the risk of hypoglycemic episodes also significantly declined.

FUNDING

Novo Nordisk S.p.A. unconditional grant.

Switching to Degludec From Other Basal Insulins Is Associated With Reduced Hypoglycemia Rates: A Prospective Study

CONTEXT

Observational studies of insulin degludec (degludec) with hypoglycemia events prospectively recorded are lacking.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the safety and effectiveness of degludec in patients with type 1 diabetes (T1D) or type 2 diabetes (T2D) switching from other basal insulins in routine care.

DESIGN

Results From Real-World Clinical Treatment With Tresiba® was a multinational, multicenter, prospective, observational, single-arm study comprising a 4-week baseline period (preswitch basal insulin) and 12-month follow-up (degludec).

SETTING

Routine clinical practice.

PATIENTS OR OTHER PARTICIPANTS

Insulin-treated patients (≥18 years) with T1D (n = 556) or T2D (n = 611) with treatment plans to initiate degludec.

INTERVENTIONS

Switching to degludec from other basal insulins.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

Change from baseline in number of overall hypoglycemic events recorded in patient diaries.

RESULTS

In T1D, the 12-month follow-up/baseline rate ratios (95% CI) of overall [0.80 (0.74 to 0.88)], nonsevere [0.83 (0.76 to 0.91)], severe [0.28 (0.14 to 0.56)], and nocturnal [0.61 (0.50 to 0.73)] hypoglycemia suggested significantly lower hypoglycemia rates with degludec (all Ps < 0.001). At 12 months, HbA1c, fasting plasma glucose (FPG), and basal insulin dosage decreased significantly. Body weight increased, and treatment satisfaction improved significantly. In T2D, the hypoglycemia rate ratios were overall [0.46 (0.38 to 0.56)], nonsevere [0.53 (0.44 to 0.64)], and nocturnal [0.35 (0.20 to 0.62)] (all Ps < 0.001; too few events for analysis of severe hypoglycemia). At 12 months, HbA1c and FPG decreased significantly. Body weight and insulin dosages remained unchanged, and treatment satisfaction was significantly improved.

CONCLUSIONS

In a routine clinical care setting, switching to degludec from other basal insulins was associated with significantly lower rates of hypoglycemia, improved glycemic control, and treatment satisfaction in patients with T1D or T2D.

Comparison of pharmacodynamics and pharmacokinetics of insulin degludec and insulin glargine 300 U/mL in healthy cats

Insulin glargine 300 U/mL (IGla-U300) and insulin degludec (IDeg) are synthetic insulin analogs designed as basal insulin formulations. In people, IGla-U300 is more predictable and longer acting compared with glargine 100 U/mL. The duration of action of IDeg in people is > 42 h, allowing flexibility in daily administration. We hypothesized that IDeg would have longer duration of action compared with IGla-U300 in healthy purpose-bred cats. Seven cats received 0.4 U/kg (subcutaneous) of IDeg and IGla-U300 on two different days, >1 wk apart. Exogenous insulin was measured and pharmacodynamic parameters were derived from glucose infusion rates during isoglycemic clamps and suppression of endogenous insulin. The Shapiro-Wilk test was used to assess normality, and normally distributed parameters were compared using paired t-tests. There was no difference between IDeg and IGla-U300 in onset, peak action, or total metabolic effect. On average, time to peak action (T_PEAK) of IGla-U300 was 145 ± 114 min (95% confidence interval [CI] = 25-264) longer than T_PEAK of IDeg (P = 0.03) and duration of action (T_DUR) of IGla-U300 was 250 ± 173 min (95% CI = 68-432) longer than T_DUR of IDeg (P = 0.02). The "flatness" of the time-action profile (as represented by the quotient of peak action/T_DUR) was significantly greater for IGla-U300 compared with IDeg (P = 0.04). Overall, insulin concentration measurements concurred with findings from isoglycemic clamps. Based on these data, IDeg is not suitable for once-daily administration in cats. The efficacy of once-daily IGla-U300 in diabetic cats should be further investigated.

IMPACT OF SWITCHING YOUTH WITH DIABETES TO INSULIN DEGLUDEC IN CLINICAL PRACTICE

OBJECTIVE

Many youth with diabetes struggle to meet glycemic targets. The new ultralong duration of action of insulin degludec (iDeg) holds potential to ameliorate missed doses of basal insulin and improve glycemic control in youth with diabetes.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review was undertaken of youth age 13 to <24 years in our practice with type 1 diabetes (T1D) or type 2 diabetes (T2D) who had been switched from glargine or detemir to iDeg to evaluate the impact of this transition on glycemic control.

RESULTS

Glycated hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) in youth with T1D (n = 82) remained stable during 6 months of treatment with iDeg (10.1 ± 2.11% [87 ± 23 mmol/mol] at start of iDeg compared to 10.1 ± 2.12% [87 ± 23 mmol/mol] at 6 months of treatment), whereas in youth with T2D (n = 16), HbA1c significantly declined from 10.6 ± 2.3% (92 ± 25 mmol/mol) to 8.3 ± 2.2% (67 ± 24 mmol/mol) ( P = .0024).

CONCLUSION

In youth switched to iDeg, which in our practice is commonly due to ineffectiveness of the patient's current regimen, the outcome differences we saw may be due to preserved beta-cell function in youth with T2D. It remains to be seen whether there are benefits of transition to iDeg in youth with T1D beyond glycemic outcomes, such as reduction in ketosis and episodes of diabetic ketoacidosis.

ABBREVIATIONS

DKA = diabetic ketoacidosis; DPV = Diabetes-Patienten-Verlaufsdokumentation (German/Austrian Prospective Diabetes Follow-Up Registry); HbA1c = glycated hemoglobin A1c; iDeg = insulin degludec; T1D = type 1 diabetes; T2D = type 2 diabetes.

Adjustment of insulin doses when switching from glargine 100 U/ml or detemir to degludec: an observational study

BACKGROUND

Degludec is a long-acting insulin with a longer duration of action and a greater day-to-day reproducibility of absorption in comparison with previous long-acting insulin formulations. The aim is the definition of the change in insulin needs in patients switching from detemir/glargine to degludec in real-life conditions.

METHODS

In this retrospective cohort observational study, all outpatients with either type 1 or type 2 diabetes, starting therapy with degludec insulin-after a prior treatment with either detemir or glargine insulin for at least 6 months-were included.

RESULTS

The analysis was performed on 266 patients, 172 and 96 with type 1 and type 2 diabetes, respectively. The equations describing the relationship between baseline and follow-up doses of basal insulin (6 months) were Y = 3.39 + 0.78X and Y = 0.44 + 0.69X, in patients receiving detemir/glargine either once or twice daily, respectively (Y = degludec dose at 6 months and X = basal insulin dose at switch). The corresponding equations for prandial insulin doses were y = 1.83 + 0.83*x and y = 2.85 + 0.80*x for those on pre-switch once or twice-daily basal insulin, respectively. In type 2 diabetes, the switch was associated with a reduction of basal insulin doses only in those with a prior twice-daily treatment with basal insulin. The reduction of prandial insulin reached statistical significance only in patients previously treated with basal insulin once daily.

CONCLUSIONS

The present results provide a suggestion for a simple method for the adjustment of basal and prandial insulin doses in type 1 diabetic patients, switching from glargine or detemir to degludec.

Impact of Insulin Degludec in Type 2 Diabetes: Real-World Data on Effectiveness and Safety

INTRODUCTION

Real-world evidence on effectiveness and safety of insulin degludec (IDeg) in patients with diabetes is a priority. The aim of the study was to evaluate patterns of use and the long-term effectiveness and safety of IDeg in routine clinical practice.

METHODS

This was an observational longitudinal study. A retrospective chart review of all patients with type 2 diabetes treated with IDeg was performed and temporal trends in clinical outcomes were assessed. All data was stratified by treatment modality: the switch group consisted of patients already treated with another basal insulin before initiating IDeg; the add-on group consisted of basal insulin-naïve patients.

RESULTS

Overall, 247 patients were analyzed (55 in the add-on group and 192 in the switch group), mean age 67.0 ± 10.9 years ,and diabetes duration 16.3 ± 8.9 years. Median (interquartile range) follow-up was 9.7 (8.0-11.9) months. In the add-on group, improvements were found in glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) (- 1.68%; p < 0.0001), fasting blood glucose (FBG) (- 64.7 mg/dL; p < 0.0001), post-prandial glucose (PPG) (- 81.1 mg/dl; p < 0.0001), and glycemic variability (i.e., standard deviation of blood glucose) (- 11.6 mg/dl; p = 0.04). Even in the switch group, improvements were found in HbA1c (- 0.57%; p < 0.0001), FBG (- 28.1 mg/dL; p < 0.0001), and PPG (- 22.6 mg/dl; p = 0.001). Body weight increase during the follow-up was not statistically significant vs. baseline in both groups. Benefits on overall, nocturnal, and severe hypoglycemia were found in the switch group.

CONCLUSION

These real-world data documented that initiating IDeg or switching to IDeg from other basal insulins in type 2 diabetes was associated with significant improvement in metabolic control without significant weight gain; a decrease in the risk of hypoglycemia was observed when switching to IDeg from another basal insulin.

Switching From Glargine to Degludec: The Effect on Metabolic Control and Safety During 1-Year of Real Clinical Practice in Children and Adolescents With Type 1 Diabetes

Background/Objective: Insulin degludec (IDeg) is an ultra-long-acting analog with less daily variability compared to other basal insulins. In this retrospective study we examined 1-year efficacy and safety of IDeg in youth with type 1 diabetes (T1D). Subjects/Methods: Thirty-seven patients [11.7 ± 4.22 years; T1D duration 4.97 ± 3.63 years; once-daily glargine (IGlar) by at least 1 year] were switched to once-daily IDeg because of glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) >7.5% and/or reported physical pain at IGlar injection. Changes in HbA1c, 30-day mean fasting plasma glucose (mean FPG), daily insulin dose, and severe hypoglycemia rates were collected at basal insulin switch (T0), 3-months (T1), 6-months (T2), and 12-months (T3) after IDeg was started. Results: In patients with HbA1c >7.5% at T0 we found a decrease in HbA1c values (%) from 8.46 ± 0.53 to 7.89 ± 0.72 at T1 (p = 0.008) and 7.97 ± 0.89 at T2 (p = 0.035). At T3, 38.9% of patients had HbA1c ≤ 7.5%. Mean FPG levels significantly decreased at T2 (p = 0.043). In the overall study population, we documented an increase in IDeg dose (+12.5% at T3; p < 0.001) and a decrease in mealtime insulin dose (-11.6% at T3; p = 0.001) after switch. HbA1c levels were unchanged. No episode of severe hypoglycemia was reported. Conclusions: Our data in children and adolescents with T1D suggest that IDeg dose should be increased by 12% and mealtime insulin doses should be lowered by 11% for patients who previously received IGlar. IDeg might be considered useful and well tolerated and it seems to improve the glycemic control compared to IGlar, mainly in patients with poor glycemic control.