Basal weekly insulins: the way of the future!

Enhanced disulphide bond stability contributes to the once-weekly profile of insulin icodec

Insulin icodec is a once-weekly insulin analogue that has a long half-life of approximately 7 days, making it suitable for once weekly dosing. The Insulin icodec molecule was developed based on the hypothesis that lowering insulin receptor affinity and introducing a strong albumin-binding moiety would result in a long insulin half-life, provided that non-receptor-mediated clearance is diminished. Here, we report an insulin clearance mechanism, resulting in the splitting of insulin molecules into its A-chain and B-chain by a thiol-disulphide exchange reaction. Even though the substitutions in insulin icodec significantly stabilise insulin against such degradation, some free B-chain is observed in plasma samples from minipigs and people with type 2 diabetes. In summary, we identify thiol-disulphide exchange reactions to be an important insulin clearance mechanism and find that stabilising insulin icodec towards this reaction significantly contributes to its long pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic profile.

Comparative efficacy and safety of weekly dulaglutide versus weekly insulin in type 2 diabetes: A network meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials

Background

Advancements in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) therapy, notably with weekly agents like glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-RAs) such as dulaglutide, offer promising outcomes in clinical practice. The emergence of once-weekly insulin adds to this therapeutic arsenal. This research aims to explore and compare the efficacy and safety profiles of these agents in diabetes management, facilitating informed decision-making for optimizing their utilization in clinical practice.

Methods

A systematic search of PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane, and Web of Science databases was conducted. The research protocol was registered at OSF registries (https://osf.io/gd67x). The primary outcome of interest was the change in hemoglobin A1C (HbA1c), with secondary outcomes including the change in fasting plasma glucose, body weight, prevalence of hypoglycemia, and treatment discontinuation due to adverse events. The evaluation of bias risk was conducted utilizing the RoB2 tool developed by the Cochrane Collaboration. Statistical analysis was performed using RStudio version 4.3.2 with the meta package version 7.0-0 and the netmeta package version 2.9-0. Confidence in network meta-analysis estimates was evaluated using the CINeMA (Confidence In Network Meta-Analysis). Heterogeneity was assessed by comparing the magnitude of the common between-study variance (τ2) for each outcome with empirical distributions of heterogeneity variances.

Results

Dulaglutide 1.5 mg (mg) weekly demonstrated superior reduction in hemoglobin A1C (HbA1c) compared to insulin, with a mean difference (MD) of -0.35 (95 % CI: -0.51 to -0.19). Additionally, Dulaglutide 1.5 mg exhibited greater weight loss, with an MD of -3.12 (95 % CI: -3.55 to -2.68). However, it also showed a higher rate of adverse events, with an odds ratio (OR) of 1.40 (95 % CI: 1.12 to 1.75) compared to insulin. Both doses of Dulaglutide (1.5 mg and 0.75 mg) had lower prevalence of hypoglycemia compared to insulin, with ORs of 0.60 (95 % CI: 0.41 to 0.87) and 0.59 (95 % CI: 0.41 to 0.86), respectively. There was no significant difference in treatment discontinuation among the treatment groups.

Conclusion

Dulaglutide, particularly at higher doses, demonstrates superior efficacy in lowering hemoglobin A1C and reducing hypoglycemia risk compared to Icodec insulin in type 2 diabetes management. However, its use is also associated with a higher incidence of adverse events. Clinicians should carefully consider these factors when selecting optimal treatment strategies for patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

Clinical perspectives on the frequency of hypoglycemia in treat-to-target randomized controlled trials comparing basal insulin analogs in type 2 diabetes: a narrative review

The objective of this review was to comprehensively present and summarize trends in reported rates of hypoglycemia with one or two times per day basal insulin analogs in individuals with type 2 diabetes to help address and contextualize the emerging theoretical concern of increased hypoglycemic risk with once-weekly basal insulins.Hypoglycemia data were extracted from treat-to-target randomized clinical trials conducted during 2000-2022. Published articles were identified on PubMed or within the US Food and Drug Administration submission documents. Overall, 57 articles were identified: 44 assessed hypoglycemic outcomes in participants receiving basal-only therapy (33 in insulin-naive participants; 11 in insulin-experienced participants), 4 in a mixed population (insulin-naive and insulin-experienced participants) and 9 in participants receiving basal-bolus therapy. For the analysis, emphasis was placed on level 2 (blood glucose <3.0 mmol/L (<54 mg/dL)) and level 3 (or severe) hypoglycemia.Overall, event rates for level 2 or level 3 hypoglycemia across most studies ranged from 0.06 to 7.10 events/person-year of exposure (PYE) for participants receiving a basal-only insulin regimen; the rate for basal-bolus regimens ranged from 2.4 to 13.6 events/PYE. Rates were generally lower with second-generation basal insulins (insulin degludec or insulin glargine U300) than with neutral protamine Hagedorn insulin or first-generation basal insulins (insulin detemir or insulin glargine U100). Subgroup categorization by sulfonylurea usage, end-of-treatment insulin dose or glycated hemoglobin reduction did not show consistent trends on overall hypoglycemia rates. Hypoglycemia rates reported so far for once-weekly basal insulins are consistent with or lower than those reported for daily-administered basal insulin analogs.

The Basis for Weekly Insulin Therapy: Evolving Evidence With Insulin Icodec and Insulin Efsitora Alfa

Basal insulin continues to be a vital part of therapy for many people with diabetes. First attempts to prolong the duration of insulin formulations were through the development of suspensions that required homogenization prior to injection. These insulins, which required once- or twice-daily injections, introduced wide variations in insulin exposure contributing to unpredictable effects on glycemia. Advances over the last 2 decades have resulted in long-acting, soluble basal insulin analogues with prolonged and less variable pharmacokinetic exposure, improving their efficacy and safety, notably by reducing nocturnal hypoglycemia. However, adherence and persistence with once-daily basal insulin treatment remains low for many reasons including hypoglycemia concerns and treatment burden. A soluble basal insulin with a longer and flatter exposure profile could reduce pharmacodynamic variability, potentially reducing hypoglycemia, have similar efficacy to once-daily basal insulins, simplify dosing regimens, and improve treatment adherence. Insulin icodec (Novo Nordisk) and insulin efsitora alfa (basal insulin Fc [BIF], Eli Lilly and Company) are 2 such insulins designed for once-weekly administration, which have the potential to provide a further advance in basal insulin replacement. Icodec and efsitora phase 2 clinical trials, as well as data from the phase 3 icodec program indicate that once-weekly insulins provide comparable glycemic control to once-daily analogues, with a similar risk of hypoglycemia. This manuscript details the technology used in the development of once-weekly basal insulins. It highlights the clinical rationale and potential benefits of these weekly insulins while also discussing the limitations and challenges these molecules could pose in clinical practice.

Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties of once-weekly insulin icodec in individuals with type 1 diabetes

AIMS

To investigate the pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic properties of once-weekly insulin icodec in individuals with type 1 diabetes (T1D).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this randomized, open-label, two-period crossover trial, 66 individuals with T1D (age 18-64 years; glycated haemoglobin ≤75 mmol/mol [≤ 9%]) were to receive once-weekly icodec (8 weeks) and once-daily insulin glargine U100 (2 weeks) at individualized fixed equimolar total weekly doses established during up to 10 weeks' run-in with glargine U100 titrated to pre-breakfast plasma glucose (PG) of 4.4-7.2 mmol/L (80-130 mg/dL). Insulin aspart was used as bolus insulin. Blood sampling for icodec pharmacokinetics was performed from the first icodec dose until 35 days after the last dose. The glucose infusion rate at steady state was assessed in glucose clamps (target 6.7 mmol/L [120 mg/dL]) at 16-52 h and 138-168 h after the last icodec dose and 0-24 h after the last glargine U100 dose. Icodec pharmacodynamics during 1 week were predicted by pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic modelling. Hypoglycaemia was recorded during the treatment periods based on self-measured PG.

RESULTS

Icodec reached pharmacokinetic steady state on average within 2-3 weeks. At steady state, model-predicted daily proportions of glucose infusion rate during the 1-week dosing interval were 14.3%, 19.6%, 18.3%, 15.7%, 13.1%, 10.6% and 8.4%, respectively. Rates and duration of Level 2 hypoglycaemic episodes (PG <3.0 mmol/L [54 mg/dL]) were 32.8 versus 23.9 episodes per participant-year of exposure and 33 ± 25 versus 30 ± 18 min (mean ± SD) for icodec versus glargine U100.

CONCLUSIONS

The pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic properties of icodec suggest its potential to provide basal coverage in a basal-bolus insulin regimen in people with T1D.

Once-weekly insulins: a promising approach to reduce the treatment burden in people with diabetes

Despite the availability of new classes of glucose-lowering drugs that improve glycaemic levels and minimise long-term complications, at least 20-25% of people with type 2 diabetes require insulin therapy. Moreover, a substantial proportion of these individuals do not achieve adequate metabolic control following insulin initiation. This is due to several factors: therapeutic inertia, fear of hypoglycaemia and/or weight gain, poor communication, complexity of insulin titration, and the number of injections needed, with the associated reduced adherence to insulin therapy. Once-weekly insulins provide a unique opportunity to simplify basal insulin therapy and to allow good glycaemic control with a low risk of hypoglycaemia. Several approaches to developing a stable and effective once-weekly insulin have been proposed, but, to date, insulin icodec and basal insulin Fc (insulin efsitora alfa) are the only two formulations for which clinical studies have been reported. The results of Phase I and II studies emphasise both efficacy (in term of glucose levels) and potential risks and adverse events. Phase III studies involving insulin icodec are reassuring regarding the risk of hypoglycaemia compared with daily basal insulin analogues. Despite some concerns raised in ongoing clinical trials, the available data suggest that weekly insulins may also be an option for individuals with type 1 diabetes, especially when adherence is suboptimal. For the first time there is an opportunity to make an important breakthrough in basal insulin therapy, particularly in people with type 2 diabetes, and to improve not only the quality of life of people with diabetes, but also the practice of diabetologists.

What Is the Role of Basal Weekly Insulin in Clinical Practice? The State of the Art

Despite the advent of innovative therapies in the treatment of diabetes, ever-increasing awareness is still directed to the role of insulin since it has continued to be at the centre of diabetes therapy for decades, as a therapeutic integration of innovative agents in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), as the only replacement therapy in type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) and also in gestational diabetes. In this context, the study of molecules such as weekly basal insulins, both for their technological and pharmacodynamic innovation and their manageability and undoubted benefits in compliance with drug therapy, can only be a turning point in diabetes and for all its phenotypes. This review aims to provide insight into the knowledge of basal weekly insulins and their use in type 1 and 2 diabetes mellitus by examining their safety, efficacy, manageability and increased therapeutic compliance.

Bioengineering and vascularization strategies for islet organoids: advancing toward diabetes therapy

Diabetes presents a pressing healthcare crisis, necessitating innovative solutions. Organoid technologies have rapidly advanced, leading to the emergence of bioengineering islet organoids as an unlimited source of insulin-producing cells for treating insulin-dependent diabetes. This advancement surpasses the need for cadaveric islet transplantation. However, clinical translation of this approach faces two major limitations: immature endocrine function and the absence of a perfusable vasculature compared to primary human islets. In this review, we summarize the latest developments in bioengineering functional islet organoids in vitro and promoting vascularization of organoid grafts before and after transplantation. We highlight the crucial roles of the vasculature in ensuring long-term survival, maturation, and functionality of islet organoids. Additionally, we discuss key considerations that must be addressed before clinical translation of islet organoid-based therapy, including functional immaturity, undesired heterogeneity, and potential tumorigenic risks.

Efficacy and safety of once-weekly insulin icodec in type 2 diabetes: A meta-analysis of ONWARDS phase 3 randomized controlled trials

AIM

Insulin icodec is a novel ultra-long action basal insulin analogue designed for once-weekly administration. With the merit of once-a-week administration, it promises better adherence and greater treatment satisfaction because of reduced injection frequency. The purpose of this study was to ascertain the efficacy and safety of once-weekly insulin icodec in comparison with other basal insulin analogues in the management of type 2 diabetes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The PRISMA guidelines were followed during the conduct of this study. For the eligible studies, five databases and ClinicalTrials.gov were screened until July 2023. All randomized controlled trials comparing the efficacy and safety of insulin icodec in type 2 diabetes versus other insulin analogues were included. The extracted data were then analysed for meta-analysis using RevMan 5.3 software.

RESULTS

Five clinical trials with 3764 participants were included. The meta-analysis showed that once-weekly insulin icodec had higher glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) reduction [mean difference -0.17%, 95% confidence interval (CI; -0.28 to -0.06), p = .003], with no significant difference in fasting plasma glucose compared with other insulin analogues. HbA1c achievement <7% [odds ratio 1.51, 95% CI (1.14-1.99), p = .004] and HbA1c achievement <7% without hypoglycaemia [odds ratio 1.45, 95% CI (1.26-1.67), p < .00001] were observed in higher proportions with insulin icodec compared with the comparator group. The percentage of time spent in the target glycaemic range was comparatively similar between insulin icodec and the comparator [mean difference 2.42%, 95% CI (0.01-4.84), p = .05]. There was a significantly higher incidence of level 1 hypoglycaemia with insulin icodec but no significant difference was seen for the incidence of levels 2, 3 and combined 2/3 hypoglycaemia. Any adverse events and adverse events related to basal insulin were comparably similar in insulin icodec and comparators. The subgroup analysis of once-weekly insulin icodec with individual insulin analogues (glargine U100 and degludec) showed that insulin icodec had similar efficacy with insulin glargine U100 but superior efficacy with higher HbA1c reduction with insulin icodec compared with insulin degludec. The safety profile was comparable between insulin icodec and glargine U100, whereas insulin icodec reported higher incidence of hypoglycaemia events and any adverse events when compared with degludec.

CONCLUSION

Once-weekly insulin icodec showed a better HbA1c reduction with a higher proportion of patients achieving HbA1c targets in comparison with once-daily basal insulin analogues. They were no major safety concerns with respect to hypoglycaemia or adverse events.

Recent advances in the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus using new drug therapies

Several recent advances provide multiple health benefits to individuals with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Pharmacological therapy is governed by person-centered factors, including comorbidities and treatment goals. Adults with T2DM who have an established/high risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, heart failure, and/or chronic kidney disease, require a treatment regimen that includes agents that are proven to reduce cardiorenal risk. Weight management plays a key role in reducing glucose for patients with T2DM. A glucose-reduction treatment regimen must consider weight management. Sodium glucose co-transporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors reduce the risk of heart failure, cardiovascular and renal events. Glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists allow better control of glycemia, promote weight loss and reduce the risk of cardiovascular events. Newer Glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide (GIP) and GLP-1 dual agonist, which activate GIP and GLP-1 receptors improve glycemic control and promote greater weight loss than GLP-1 receptor agonists. Several novel drugs are in the clinical development phase. This review pertains to recent advances in pharmacological management of type 2 diabetes.

Protein-based nanoparticles for therapeutic nucleic acid delivery

To realize the full potential of emerging nucleic acid therapies, there is a need for effective delivery agents to transport cargo to cells of interest. Protein materials exhibit several unique properties, including biodegradability, biocompatibility, ease of functionalization via recombinant and chemical modifications, among other features, which establish a promising basis for therapeutic nucleic acid delivery systems. In this review, we highlight progress made in the use of non-viral protein-based nanoparticles for nucleic acid delivery in vitro and in vivo, while elaborating on key physicochemical properties that have enabled the use of these materials for nanoparticle formulation and drug delivery. To conclude, we comment on the prospects and unresolved challenges associated with the translation of protein-based nucleic acid delivery systems for therapeutic applications.

Efficacy and Safety of Once-Weekly Insulin Regimes on Glycemic Control for Type 2 Diabetes: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Randomized controlled trials have found that once-weekly insulin resulted in greater glycemic control compared to once-daily insulin in patients with type 2 diabetes. However, no direct comparisons have been made between different types of once-weekly insulin thus far. This systematic review and network meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the effect of the two most advanced once-weekly insulin analogues, namely insulin icodec and insulin Fc, in patients with type 2 diabetes.

METHODS

We conducted a thorough search in the databases PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. The search included articles published from the beginning to October 10, 2023, with no language limitations. Our aim was to conduct a systematic review of randomized controlled trials that investigated the effectiveness and safety of once-weekly insulin in individuals with type 2 diabetes. Our primary outcome was to evaluate excellent glycemic control, defined as patients achieving glycated hemoglobin levels below 7%.

RESULTS

We identified a total of 7 trials involving 2829 patients. The results showed that once-weekly insulin icodec is more effective than once-weekly insulin Fc (RR 1.59 [95% CI 1.08-2.38]), once-daily degludec (RR 1.43 [95% CI 1.14-1.83]), and once-daily glargine (RR 1.15 [95% CI 1.00-1.41]). Moreover, the incidence of severe hypoglycemia was lower with once-weekly insulin icodec compared to once-daily degludec (RR 0.00016 [95% CI 0 to 0.41]). However, no significant difference in the incidence of severe hypoglycemia was observed between once-weekly insulin icodec and once-daily glargine (RR 0.39 [95% CI 0.03 to 4.83]).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with type 2 diabetes, once-weekly insulin icodec achieved superior glycemic control compared to once-weekly insulin Fc, with no significant difference in the occurrence of hypoglycemia. The ranking probability results have shown that one weekly icodec seems to be the preferred option in patients with type 2 diabetes.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO Identifier: CRD42023470894.

Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties of once-weekly insulin icodec in individuals with type 2 diabetes

AIMS

To characterize the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties of once-weekly insulin icodec in type 2 diabetes (T2D).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In an open-label trial, 46 individuals with T2D (18-75 years; body mass index 18.0-38.0 kg/m2 ; glycated haemoglobin ≤75 mmol/mol [≤9%]; basal insulin-treated) received subcutaneous once-weekly icodec for ≥8 weeks at individualized doses, aiming at a pre-breakfast plasma glucose concentration of 4.4 to 7.0 mmol/L (80-126 mg/dL) on the last three mornings of each weekly dosing interval. Frequent blood sampling to assess total serum icodec concentration (ie, albumin-bound and unbound) occurred from first icodec dose until 35 days after last dose. Icodec trough concentrations following initiation of once-weekly dosing were predicted by pharmacokinetic modelling. During the final 3 weeks of icodec treatment, while at steady state, the icodec glucose-lowering effect was assessed in three glucose clamps (target 7.5 mmol/L [135 mg/dL]): 0 to 36, 40 to 64 and 144 to 168 h post-dose, thus covering the initial, middle and last part of the 1-week dosing interval. Glucose-lowering effect during a complete dosing interval was predicted by pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic modelling.

RESULTS

Model-predicted icodec steady state was attained after 3 to 4 weeks. At steady state, model-predicted daily proportions of glucose-lowering effect on days 1 to 7 of the 1-week dosing interval were 14.1%, 16.1%, 15.8%, 15.0%, 14.0%, 13.0% and 12.0%, respectively. Icodec duration of action was at least 1 week in all participants. Once-weekly icodec was overall safe and well tolerated in the current trial.

CONCLUSIONS

The pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic characteristics of icodec in individuals with T2D support its potential as a once-weekly basal insulin.

Injectable systems for long-lasting insulin therapy

Insulin therapy is the mainstay to treat diabetes characterizedd by hyperglycemia. However, its short half-life of only 4-6 min limits its effectiveness in treating chronic diabetes. Advances in recombinant DNA technology and protein engineering have led to several insulin analogue products that have up to 42 h of glycemic control. However, these insulin analogues still require once- or twice-daily injections for optimal glycemic control and have poor patient compliance and adherence issues. To achieve insulin release for more than one day, different injectable delivery systems including microspheres, in situ forming depots, nanoparticles and composite systems have been developed. Several of these delivery systems have advanced to clinical trials for once-weekly insulin injection. This review comprehensively summarizes the developments of injectable insulin analogs and delivery systems covering the whole field of injectable long-lasting insulin technologies from prototype design, preclinical studies, clinical trials to marketed products for the treatment of diabetes.

Efficacy and safety of once-weekly versus once-daily basal insulin analogues in the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus: A systematic review and meta-analysis

AIM

To summarize the evidence of recently published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) studying efficacy, in terms of glycaemic control, and safety of the newly developed once-weekly basal insulin analogues.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was conducted through Medline (via PubMed), Cochrane Library and Google Scholar until June 30, 2023. Double-independent study selection, data extraction and quality assessment were performed. Results were summarized with random-effects meta-analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 3962 patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) among nine RCTs were analysed. All RCTs had low risk of bias according to the Cochrane Collaboration risk-of-bias tool (RoB2). Once-weekly insulins demonstrated better efficacy in glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) reduction (mean difference [MD] -0.13%, 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.23, -0.03; P = 0.08) and a significantly greater time in range compared with once-daily insulin analogues (MD 3.54%, 95% CI 1.56, 5.53; P = 0.005). Based on subgroup analyses, the reduction in HbA1c and the odds of achieving an end-of-treatment HbA1c <6.5% were significantly greater for icodec compared to the once-daily insulin (MD -0.18%, 95% CI -0.27, -0.09 [P < 0.001] and odds ratio [OR] 1.75, 95% CI 1.34, 2.29 [P < 0.001], respectively). Once-weekly insulins were associated with higher odds of level 1 hypoglycaemia during the 24-hour period (OR 1.3, 95% CI 1.04, 1.64; P = 0.02) but were safer in terms of level 2 or 3 nocturnal hypoglycaemic events (OR 0.74, 95% CI 0.56, 0.97; P = 0.03). No difference was observed regarding serious adverse events between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

The once-weekly basal insulin analogues seem to be at least equally efficient in glycaemic management and safe compared to once-daily injections in people with T2DM. Phase 4 RCTs are expected to shed further light on the effectiveness and safety of once-weekly insulin therapy over the long term.

Diselenide-bond replacement of the external disulfide bond of insulin increases its oligomerization leading to sustained activity

Seleno-insulin, a class of artificial insulin analogs, in which one of the three disulfide-bonds (S-S's) of wild-type insulin (Ins) is replaced by a diselenide-bond (Se-Se), is attracting attention for its unique chemical and physiological properties that differ from those of Ins. Previously, we pioneered the development of a [C7UA,C7UB] analog of bovine pancreatic insulin (SeIns) as the first example, and demonstrated its high resistance against insulin-degrading enzyme (IDE). In this study, the conditions for the synthesis of SeIns via native chain assembly (NCA) were optimized to attain a maximum yield of 72%, which is comparable to the in vitro folding efficiency for single-chain proinsulin. When the resistance of BPIns to IDE was evaluated in the presence of SeIns, the degradation rate of BPIns became significantly slower than that of BPIns alone. Furthermore, the investigation on the intermolecular association properties of SeIns and BPIns using analytical ultracentrifugation suggested that SeIns readily forms oligomers not only with its own but also with BPIns. The hypoglycemic effect of SeIns on diabetic rats was observed at a dose of 150 μg/300 g rat. The strategy of replacing the solvent-exposed S-S with Se-Se provides new guidance for the design of long-acting insulin formulations.

Insulin Therapy for the Management of Diabetes Mellitus: A Narrative Review of Innovative Treatment Strategies

The discovery of insulin was presented to the international medical community on May 3, 1922. Since then, insulin has become one of the most effective pharmacological agents used to treat type 1 and type 2 diabetes mellitus. However, the initiation and intensification of insulin therapy is often delayed in people living with type 2 diabetes due to numerous challenges associated with daily subcutaneous administration. Reducing the frequency of injections, using insulin pens instead of syringes and vials, simplifying treatment regimens, or administering insulin through alternative routes may help improve adherence to and persistence with insulin therapy among people living with diabetes. As the world commemorates the centennial of the commercialization of insulin, the aims of this article are to provide an overview of insulin therapy and to summarize clinically significant findings from phase 3 clinical trials evaluating less frequent dosing of insulin and the non-injectable administration of insulin.

Key indices of glycaemic variability for application in diabetes clinical practice

Near normal glycaemic control in diabetes consists to target daily glucose fluctuations and quarterly HbA1c oscillations in addition to overall glucose exposure. Consequently, the prerequisite is to define simple, and mathematically undisputable key metrics for the short- and long-term variability in glucose homeostasis. As the standard deviations (SD) of either glucose or HbA1c are dependent on their means, the coefficient of variation (CV = SD/mean) should be applied instead as it that avoids the correlation between the SD and mean values. A CV glucose of 36% is the most appropriate threshold between those with stable versus labile glucose homeostasis. However, when near normal mean glucose concentrations are achieved a lower CV threshold of <27 % is necessary for reducing the risk for hypoglycaemia to a minimal rate. For the long-term variability in glucose homeostasis, a CVHbA1c < 5 % seems to be a relevant recommendation for preventing adverse clinical outcomes.

Current Status of Weekly Insulin Analogs and Their Pharmacokinetic/Pharmacodynamic Evaluation by the Euglycemic Clamp Technique

Diabetes mellitus represents a significant global health threat characterized by hyperglycemia caused by inadequate insulin secretion and/or insulin resistance. Exogenous insulin supplements had been recognized as a crucial treatment for achieving successful glycemic control in patients with Type 1 and most patients with Type 2 diabetes. Over the past century, substantial progress has been made in the development of novel insulin formulations, including the super-fast-acting and long-acting basal insulin analogs, of which the latter is indispensable for the management of nocturnal fasting and intraprandial blood glucose within the normal physiological range. Recently, combining chemical and genetic engineering with drug optimization have resulted in a formidable evolution in ultra-long-acting weekly insulin. Here, the current state of once-weekly insulin analogs and the euglycemic clamp technique used in the early clinical development to elucidate the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of this type of novel weekly insulin analogs were systematically overviewed.

Hypoglycaemia frequency and physiological response after double or triple doses of once-weekly insulin icodec vs once-daily insulin glargine U100 in type 2 diabetes: a randomised crossover trial

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS

This study compared the frequency of hypoglycaemia, time to hypoglycaemia and recovery from hypoglycaemia after double or triple doses of once-weekly insulin icodec vs once-daily insulin glargine U100. Furthermore, the symptomatic and counterregulatory responses to hypoglycaemia were compared between icodec and glargine U100 treatment.

METHODS

In a randomised, single-centre (Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Endocrinology and Diabetology, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria), open-label, two-period crossover trial, individuals with type 2 diabetes (age 18-72 years, BMI 18.5-37.9 kg/m2, HbA1c ≤75 mmol/mol [≤9.0%]) treated with basal insulin with or without oral glucose-lowering drugs received once-weekly icodec (for 6 weeks) and once-daily glargine U100 (for 11 days). Total weekly doses were equimolar based on individual titration of daily glargine U100 during the run-in period (target fasting plasma glucose [PG]: 4.4-7.2 mmol/l). Randomisation was carried out by assigning a randomisation number to each participant in ascending order, which encoded to one of two treatment sequences via a randomisation list prepared prior to the start of the trial. At steady state, double and triple doses of icodec and glargine U100 were administered followed by hypoglycaemia induction: first, euglycaemia was maintained at 5.5 mmol/l by variable i.v. infusion of glucose; glucose infusion was then terminated, allowing PG to decrease to no less than 2.5 mmol/l (target PGnadir). The PGnadir was maintained for 15 min. Euglycaemia was restored by constant i.v. glucose (5.5 mg kg-1 min-1). Hypoglycaemic symptoms score (HSS), counterregulatory hormones, vital signs and cognitive function were assessed at predefined PG levels towards the PGnadir.

RESULTS

Hypoglycaemia induction was initiated in 43 and 42 participants after double dose of icodec and glargine U100, respectively, and in 38 and 40 participants after triple doses, respectively. Clinically significant hypoglycaemia, defined as PGnadir <3.0 mmol/l, occurred in comparable proportions of individuals treated with icodec vs glargine U100 after double (17 [39.5%] vs 15 [35.7%]; p=0.63) and triple (20 [52.6%] vs 28 [70.0%]; p=0.14) doses. No statistically significant treatment differences were observed in the time to decline from PG values of 5.5 mmol/l to 3.0 mmol/l (2.9-4.5 h after double dose and 2.2-2.4 h after triple dose of the insulin products). The proportion of participants with PGnadir ≤2.5 mmol/l was comparable between treatments after double dose (2 [4.7%] for icodec vs 3 [7.1%] for glargine U100; p=0.63) but higher for glargine U100 after triple dose (1 [2.6%] vs 10 [25.0%]; p=0.03). Recovery from hypoglycaemia by constant i.v. glucose infusion took <30 min for all treatments. Analyses of the physiological response to hypoglycaemia only included data from participants with PGnadir <3.0 mmol/l and/or the presence of hypoglycaemic symptoms; in total 20 (46.5%) and 19 (45.2%) individuals were included after a double dose of icodec and glargine U100, respectively, and 20 (52.6%) and 29 (72.5%) individuals were included after a triple dose of icodec and glargine U100, respectively. All counterregulatory hormones (glucagon, adrenaline [epinephrine], noradrenaline [norepinephrine], cortisol and growth hormone) increased during hypoglycaemia induction with both insulin products at both doses. Following triple doses, the hormone response was greater with icodec vs glargine U100 for adrenaline at PG3.0 mmol/l (treatment ratio 2.54 [95% CI 1.69, 3.82]; p<0.001), and cortisol at PG3.0 mmol/l (treatment ratio 1.64 [95% CI 1.13, 2.38]; p=0.01) and PGnadir (treatment ratio 1.80 [95% CI 1.09, 2.97]; p=0.02). There were no statistically significant treatment differences in the HSS, vital signs and cognitive function.

CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION

Double or triple doses of once-weekly icodec lead to a similar risk of hypoglycaemia compared with double or triple doses of once-daily glargine U100. During hypoglycaemia, comparable symptomatic and moderately greater endocrine responses are elicited by icodec vs glargine U100.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03945656.

FUNDING

This study was funded by Novo Nordisk A/S.

Antioxidant and Wound Healing Bioactive Potential of Extracts Obtained from Bark and Needles of Softwood Species

Interest in the extraction of phytochemical bioactive compounds, especially polyphenols from biomass, has recently increased due to their valuable biological potential as natural sources of antioxidants, which could be used in a wide range of applications, from foods and pharmaceuticals to green polymers and bio-based materials. The present research study aimed to provide a comprehensive chemical characterization of the phytochemical composition of forest biomass (bark and needles) of softwood species (Picea abies L., H. Karst., and Abies alba Mill.) and to investigate their in vitro antioxidant and antimicrobial activities to assess their potential in treating and healing infected chronic wounds. The DPPH radical-scavenging method and P-LD were used for a mechanistic explanation of the biomolecular effects of the investigated bioactive compounds. (+)-Catechin, epicatechin, rutin, myricetin, 4 hydroxybenzoic and p-cumaric acids, kaempherol, and apigenin were the main quantified polyphenols in coniferous biomass (in quantities around 100 µg/g). Also, numerous phenolic acids, flavonoids, stilbenes, terpenes, lignans, secoiridoids, and indanes with antioxidant, antimicrobial, anti-inflammatory, antihemolytic, and anti-carcinogenic potential were identified. The Abies alba needle extract was more toxic to microbial strains than the eukaryotic cells that provide its active wound healing principles. In this context, developing industrial upscaling strategies is imperative for the long-term success of biorefineries and incorporating them as part of a circular bio-economy.

Insulin biobetters and biosimilars in clinical practice

Insulin injections have never been an entirely satisfactory therapy, and as a result a continuing 'biobetter' technological cascade has driven changes in purity and manufacture, in structure and excipients, and in administration devices. The resulting deck of insulin preparations has to be matched by health-care teams and users with individual need. This latter is itself a complex ranging from ambulatory care in type 1 and type 2 diabetes, the topic generally addressed by guidelines and funding advice, to in-patient care and the newly diagnosed, plus secondary diabetes with very different effects on insulin need, through to co-morbidities and medications interfering with glucose metabolism. In this article the match of different clinical scenarios to the available insulins is discussed in the context of available evidence, quality guidelines, and diabetes best practice. Additionally the role of biosimilars of the insulin analogues is addressed, their limited but useful price advantage, and the management consequences of substitution for the originator product.

Switching to once-weekly insulin icodec versus once-daily insulin degludec in individuals with basal insulin-treated type 2 diabetes (ONWARDS 2): a phase 3a, randomised, open label, multicentre, treat-to-target trial

BACKGROUND

Insulin icodec (icodec) is a once-weekly basal insulin currently under development. ONWARDS 2 aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of once-weekly icodec versus once-daily insulin degludec (degludec) in basal insulin-treated type 2 diabetes.

METHODS

This 26-week, randomised, open-label, active-controlled, multicentre, treat-to-target phase 3a trial was conducted in 71 sites in nine countries. Eligible participants with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled on once-daily or twice-daily basal insulin, with or without non-insulin glucose-lowering agents, were randomly assigned (1:1) to once-weekly icodec or once-daily degludec. The primary outcome was change from baseline to week 26 in HbA_1c; the margin used to establish non-inferiority of icodec compared with degludec was 0·3 percentage points. Safety outcomes (hypoglycaemic episodes and adverse events) and patient-reported outcomes were also assessed. The primary outcome was evaluated in all randomly assigned participants; safety outcomes were evaluated descriptively based on all randomly assigned participants who received at least one dose of trial product, with statistical analyses based on all randomly assigned participants. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04770532, and is now complete.

FINDINGS

Between March 5 and July 19, 2021, 635 participants were screened, of whom 109 were ineligible or withdrew, and 526 were randomly assigned to icodec (n=263) or degludec (n=263). From a mean baseline of 8·17% (icodec; 65·8 mmol/mol) and 8·10% (degludec; 65·0 mmol/mol), HbA_1c was reduced to a greater extent with icodec than degludec (7·20% vs 7·42% [55·2 vs 57·6 mmol/mol], respectively) at week 26. This translates to an estimated treatment difference (ETD) of -0·22 percentage points (95% CI -0·37 to -0·08) or -2·4 mmol/mol (95% CI -4·1 to -0·8), demonstrating non-inferiority (p<0·0001) and superiority (p=0·0028). The estimated mean change from baseline to week 26 in bodyweight was +1·40 kg for icodec and -0·30 kg for degludec (ETD 1·70 [95% CI 0·76 to 2·63]). Overall rates of combined level 2 or level 3 hypoglycaemia were less than one event per patient-year of exposure for both groups (0·73 [icodec] vs 0·27 [degludec]; estimated rate ratio 1·93 [95% CI 0·93 to 4·02]). Overall, 161 (61%) of 262 participants receiving icodec and 134 (51%) of 263 participants receiving degludec experienced an adverse event; 22 (8%) and 16 (6%), respectively, experienced a serious adverse event. One serious adverse event (degludec) was assessed as being possibly related to treatment. No new safety issues were identified in relation to icodec compared with degludec in this trial.

INTERPRETATION

Among adults with basal insulin-treated type 2 diabetes, treatment with once-weekly icodec versus once-daily degludec demonstrated non-inferiority and statistical superiority in HbA_1c reduction after 26 weeks, associated with modest weight gain. Overall rates of hypoglycaemia were low, with numerically but not statistically significantly higher event rates of level 2 or level 3 hypoglycaemia with icodec versus degludec.

FUNDING

Novo Nordisk.

Significant publications in diabetes pharmacotherapy and technology in 2020

INTRODUCTION

The most significant articles on diabetes pharmacotherapy and technology in the peer-reviewed literature from 2020, as determined by a panel of pharmacists with expertise in diabetes care and education, are summarized.

AREAS COVERED

Members of the Association of Diabetes Care and Education Specialists Pharmacy Community of Interest were selected to review articles published in prominent peer-reviewed journals in 2020 that most impacted diabetes pharmacotherapy and technology. A list of 37 nominated articles were compiled (22 in diabetes pharmacotherapy and 15 in diabetes technology). Based on discussion among the authors, the articles were ranked based on significant contribution, impact, and diversity to diabetes pharmacotherapy and technology. The top 10 highest ranked publications (n = 6 for diabetes pharmacotherapy and n = 4 in diabetes technology) are summarized in this article.

EXPERT OPINION

With the significant number of publications in diabetes care and education, it can be challenging and overwhelming to remain current with published literature. This review article may be helpful in identifying key articles in diabetes pharmacotherapy and technology from the year 2020.

Type 2 diabetes

Type 2 diabetes accounts for nearly 90% of the approximately 537 million cases of diabetes worldwide. The number affected is increasing rapidly with alarming trends in children and young adults (up to age 40 years). Early detection and proactive management are crucial for prevention and mitigation of microvascular and macrovascular complications and mortality burden. Access to novel therapies improves person-centred outcomes beyond glycaemic control. Precision medicine, including multiomics and pharmacogenomics, hold promise to enhance understanding of disease heterogeneity, leading to targeted therapies. Technology might improve outcomes, but its potential is yet to be realised. Despite advances, substantial barriers to changing the course of the epidemic remain. This Seminar offers a clinically focused review of the recent developments in type 2 diabetes care including controversies and future directions.

Insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus in older adults: Current status and future prospects

The recent increase in life expectancy has resulted in an increase in the number of older adults with diabetes mellitus. In addition to type 2 diabetes, in which aging is a well‐known risk factor, individuals with type 1 and other types of diabetes are also increasing owing to longevity in the general population and improved prognosis of the disease and comorbidities. Insulin‐dependent state in type 1 diabetes and other types of diabetes, such as diabetes after pancreatectomy, inevitably requires insulin treatment for survival; however, daily injection of insulin is often hampered in older adults due to impaired cognitive function or limited activities of daily living. In this review, we aimed to discuss the current situation of insulin‐dependent diabetes mellitus in older adults and highlight future prospects. Geriatr Gerontol Int 2022; 22: 549–553.