Pen Needle Preference in a Population of Canadians with Diabetes: Results from a Recent Patient Survey

Needle Technology for Insulin Administration: A Century of Innovation

Innovations in syringe and pen needle (PN) technology over the last 100 years have led to important advances in insulin delivery for people with diabetes, paralleling the strides made in developing recombinant DNA human insulin and insulin analogs with varying onset and duration of action. In this review, the history of advances in insulin delivery is described, focusing on progress in syringe, needle, and PN technologies. The early glass and metal syringes that required sterilization by boiling have been replaced by disposable, single-use syringes or pens with clear labeling for precise insulin dosing. The early needles ranging in length from 19 to 26 mm that required manual sharpening against a whetstone have been replaced by syringe needles of 6 mm and PNs of 4 mm in length as slender as 34 gauge. Imaging studies using ultrasound and computed tomography measured the thickness of skin and subcutaneous tissue layers to show feasibility of targeted insulin administration with shorter needles. These developments, coupled with innovations in needle/PN wall and tip structure, have led to improved injection experience for people with diabetes. It is also important to acknowledge the role of injection technique education, together with these advances in injection technology, for improving clinical outcomes and patient satisfaction. With continued projected growth of diabetes prevalence, particularly in developing countries where expensive and complex insulin delivery systems may not be practical, insulin syringes and pens will continue to serve as reliable and cost-effective means of insulin delivery for people with diabetes.

Immunogenicity and Efficacy of Insulin Glargine Biosimilar Ezelin versus Originator Insulin Glargine in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes

PURPOSE

To compare the immunogenicity and efficacy of insulin glargine biosimilar Ezelin (EZL) versus originator insulin glargine Lantus (LAN) as a reference basal insulin in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This was a randomized, multicenter, open-label, 24-week study in insulin-naïve patients with T2D, with HbA1c of >7.0%. We randomly assigned 133 eligible patients to receive either EZL or LAN. Baseline characteristics, including insulin autoantibody (IAA), zinc transporter 8 (ZnT8) antibody, HbA1C, fasting plasma glucose (FPG), 2-hour postprandial plasma glucose (2hPPG), AST, ALT, BUN, eGFR, and oral antidiabetic drugs, were obtained before starting insulin treatment. After starting treatment, insulin dose was titrated to achieve FPG target along with oral antidiabetic drugs. Patients were given home glucometer and assisted to record plasma glucose measurement and adverse event (AE). Every month, patients came to the diabetes clinic and performed a regular physical examination and intensifying treatment if needed. Out of the 133 randomized patients, only 122 completed the study and can be examined for their IAA and ZnT8 after 6 months of treatment. The study was registered in clinicaltrials.gov, NCT03352674.

RESULTS

There is a similar proportion of patients with changes of IAA from baseline: 1 out of 58 (1.7%) patients receiving EZL versus 1 out of 64 (1.6%) patients receiving LAN (p = 1.000). One patient in the EZL group (1.7%) versus none in the LAN group experienced a change of ZnT8 antibody from baseline. Similar glucose control in EZL versus LAN was determined by the change in HbA1c, FPG, and 2hPPG (-2.0%, -67.46 mg/dL, and -76.51 mg/dL in the EZL group versus -1.7%, -58.11 mg/dL, and -70.03 mg/dL in the LAN group). There were six events of documented hypoglycemia in the EZL group versus five events in the LAN group. No patients experienced diabetic ketoacidosis during the study.

CONCLUSION

Overall, insulin glargine biosimilar EZL and originator insulin glargine LAN have shown a similar immunogenicity profile, as well as efficacy in providing glucose control and safety findings in T2D populations.

Insulin Injection Practices in a Population of Canadians with Diabetes: An Observational Study

INTRODUCTION

Proper insulin injection technique has demonstrated positive clinical outcomes in patients with diabetes. A Canadian-based practice reflective was undertaken to evaluate the current state of understanding of injection technique practices by patients administering insulin, and the importance physicians place on proper injection technique.

METHODS

Twenty-four sites across Canada completed a practice profile survey and enrolled adult non-pregnant patients with either type 1 or type 2 diabetes injecting insulin using an insulin pen. Seven areas of proper injection technique to be evaluated were identified by the study steering committee: size of injection site, use of a skin lift, needle reuse, length of the needle, duration of the needle in the skin, injection into lipohypertrophic tissue, and applied injection force. During a scheduled visit, each patient filled out the Injection Technique Survey and the physician documented the answers via an electronic database.

RESULTS

Almost all physicians surveyed agreed (96%) that proper insulin injection technique is important or very important and 80% indicated they were either completely confident or fairly confident in discussing overall insulin injection technique. All patients surveyed were making at least one insulin injection technique error within the following categories: applied injection force (76%), area size of injection site (64%), duration of pen needle in skin (61%), pen needle reuse (39%), performs a skin lift with a 4 or 5 mm needle (38%), uses a longer pen needle than required (34%), and injection of insulin into lipohypertrophic tissue (37%).

CONCLUSION

Patients commonly make insulin injection errors. Patient and physician education on optimal insulin injection technique continues to be an unmet medical need for the treatment of patients with diabetes. Prospective trials examining the impact of new technology, diabetes educational teams, and e-learning as educational interventions are potential avenues to explore in future studies to support improved insulin injection technique.

Evaluating the User Preference and Level of Insulin Self-Administration Adherence in Young Patients With Type 1 Diabetes: Experience With Two Insulin Pen Needle Lengths

Background

Selecting the appropriate insulin pen needle is important to reduce pain and injection-related adverse events like insulin leakage. It also helps to improve medication adherence and glycemic control in patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM).

Objective

This study aimed to compare the 6-mm and 8-mm 32.5-gauge insulin pen needles in terms of glycemic control, pain score, user preference, medication adherence, and injection adverse events in patients with T1DM.

Methods

We conducted a prospective cohort study of 62 patients with T1DM. All patients constituted an experimental group initially and then changed the length of the needle to be part of a self-control group. The glycemic control, visual analog scale (VAS) pain score, Morisky Medication Adherence Scale (MMAS) score, needle attribute score, and injection-related adverse events were measured for all patients with both lengths of needles. Patients were assessed at the baseline visit and followed up for three months. Statistical comparisons were done by the chi-squared test, paired t-test, and paired Wilcoxon test when appropriate with a two-tailed alpha level below 0.05 indicating statistical significance.

Results

With the NanoPass® 32.5-gauge, 6-mm needle (Terumo Corp., Tokyo, Japan), patients had significantly lower glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) compared to 8-mm needles (7.9% vs. 8.3%; p<0.001). The proportions of patients who reported no hypoglycemic episodes were 22/62 and 9/62, with the 6-mm and 8-mm needles, respectively. The 6-mm needles were better in terms of the following parameters compared to 8-mm needles: mean needle attribute scores (36.7 vs. 24.2; p<0.001), median VAS pain scores (20 vs. 55; p<0.001), insulin leakage (6/62 vs. 20/62; p=0.002), and the MMAS score (4.9 vs. 3.4; p<0.001).

Conclusion

This study provided an overview of the safety, adherence, pain score, and glycemic control relating to the 6-mm and 8-mm insulin needle lengths. Insulin injections using the NanoPass 32.5-gauge, 6-mm needle were associated with lower pain score, higher patient adherence, fewer adverse events, and better glycemic control compared to the 8-mm needle. Therefore, we recommend the use of the NanoPass 6-mm needle for patients with T1DM. Further studies are needed to confirm these findings in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM).

Patient Perceptions and Preferences for a Mealtime Insulin Delivery Patch

INTRODUCTION

A basal-bolus insulin regimen is needed to achieve glycated hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) below 7.0% in people with type 1 (T1D) or type 2 (T2D) diabetes who have significant loss of beta-cell function. Nonadherence to therapy is common and negatively affects the ability to reach treatment goals. We examined patient assessment of a new, wearable mealtime insulin-delivery system (patch) relative to their current mealtime insulin-delivery system (syringe, pen, or pump). The patch is designed to deliver only boluses of fast-acting insulin (no basal insulin), mechanically controlled by the patient.

METHODS

Adults (n = 101) with T1D or T2D assessed their current mealtime insulin-delivery system and then assessed simulated (no active medication) patch use over a 3-day period. Participants evaluated mealtime insulin-delivery systems using eight measures from five domains (convenience, interference with daily activities, diabetes-related worry, psychological well-being, and overall satisfaction/preference) on the self-administered Insulin Delivery System Rating Questionnaire. User ratings of their current insulin-delivery systems (syringe, pen, pump) were compared with those for the patch by repeated measure analysis of variance and one-sample t tests.

RESULTS

Participants had significant (p < 0.05) preference for patch over syringe in all eight comparisons, and over pen in five out of eight comparisons, with no significant preference for pen. Although there was a preference for patch over pump in six out of eight comparisons, only one showed a significant preference for patch, and one for pump. Significantly more participants reported that they would like to switch to the patch than continue using a syringe (78% vs 22%) or pen (76% vs 24%) but this difference was not significant for the group using a pump (52% vs 48%).

CONCLUSIONS

Participants preferred using the patch over pens and syringes. Its ease of use and discreet method of insulin delivery may contribute to improved patient adherence to mealtime insulin regimens among people currently using injection devices.

FUNDING

Calibra Medical.

Making Insulin Accessible: Does Inhaled Insulin Fill an Unmet Need?

Glycemic control is fundamental to the management of diabetes. However, studies suggest that a significant proportion of people with diabetes, particularly those using insulin, are not achieving glycemic targets. The reasons for this are likely to be multifactorial. The real and perceived risk of hypoglycemia and the need for multiple daily injections are widely recognized as key barriers to effective insulin therapy. Therefore, there is a clear unmet need for a treatment option which can help mitigate these barriers. Alternative methods of insulin administration have been under investigation for several years, and pulmonary delivery has shown the most promise to date. Inhaled Technosphere(®) Insulin (TI; Afrezza(®); MannKind Corporation) was approved in 2014 for use as prandial insulin in people with diabetes. TI shows a more rapid onset of action and a significantly faster decline in activity than current subcutaneous rapid-acting insulin analogs (RAAs), and TI is more synchronized to the physiologic timing of the postprandial glucose excursion. This results in lower postprandial hypoglycemia with similar glycemic control compared with RAAs, and less weight gain. Together with the ease of use of the TI inhaler and the reduction in the number of daily injections, these findings imply that TI may be useful in helping to overcome patient resistance to insulin, improve adherence and mitigate clinical inertia in health-care providers, with potential beneficial effects on glycemic control.

FUNDING

Writing and editorial support in the preparation of this publication was funded by Sanofi US, Inc., Bridgewater, New Jersey, USA. Funding for the article processing charges for this publication was provided by MannKind Corporation.