The Durability of Basal Insulin Affects Day-to-Day Glycemic Variability Assessed by Continuous Glucose Monitoring in Type 2 Diabetes Patients: A Randomized Crossover Trial

Once-weekly Insulin Icodec Versus Once-daily Long-acting Insulin for Type II Diabetes: A Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Background

Insulin icodec is a novel basal insulin analog with once-weekly subcutaneous administration. We aim to estimate the efficacy and safety of insulin icodec vs long-acting insulin (insulin glargine and degludec) in type II diabetic patients.

Methods

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis synthesizing randomized controlled trials (RCTs), which were retrieved by systematically searching PubMed, Web of Science, SCOPUS, and Cochrane through May 29, 2023. We used RevMan V. 5.4 to pool dichotomous data using risk ratio (RR) and continuous data using mean difference (MD) with a 95% confidence interval (CI). Our primary outcome was glycated hemoglobin (HbA1C) change.

Results

We included 7 RCTs with a total of 3183 patients. Insulin icodec was associated with significantly decreased HbA1C (MD: -0.15 with 95% CI [-0.24, -0.06], P = .002) and increased percentage of time with glucose in range (TIR) (MD: 4.06 with 95% CI [2.06, 6.06], P = .0001). However, insulin icodec was associated with increased body weight (MD: 0.57 with 95% CI [0.45, 0.70], P = .00001). Also, there was no difference regarding any serious adverse events (AEs) (RR: 0.96 with 95% CI [0.76, 1.20], P = .7) or AEs leading to withdrawal (RR: 1.54 with 95% CI [0.84, 2.82], P = .16). However, insulin icodec was associated with increased any AEs incidence (RR: 1.06 with 95% CI [1.01, 1.12], P = .02).

Conclusion

Insulin icodec was associated with decreased HbA1C, increased TIR, with similar hypoglycemic and serious AEs. However, it was also associated with increased body weight and the incidence of any AEs.

Individualizing Time-in-Range Goals in Management of Diabetes Mellitus and Role of Insulin: Clinical Insights From a Multinational Panel

Diabetes mellitus is a global health concern associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Inadequate control of diabetes leads to chronic complications and higher mortality rates, which emphasizes the importance of achieving glycemic targets. Although glycated hemoglobin (HbA_1c) is the gold standard for measuring glycemic control, it has several limitations. Therefore, in recent years, along with the emergence of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) technology, glycemic control modalities have moved beyond HbA_1c. They encompass modern glucometrics, such as glycemic variability (GV) and time-in-range (TIR). The key advantage of these newer metrics over HbA_1c is that they allow personalized diabetes management with person-centric glycemic control. Basal insulin analogues, especially second-generation basal insulins with properties such as longer duration of action and low risk of hypoglycemia, have demonstrated clinical benefits by reducing GV and improving TIR. Therefore, for more effective and accurate diabetes management, the development of an integrated approach with second-generation basal insulin and glucometrics involving GV and TIR is the need of the hour. With this objective, a multinational group of endocrinologists and diabetologists reviewed the existing recommendations on TIR, provided their clinical insights into the individualization of TIR targets, and elucidated on the role of the second-generation basal insulin analogues in addressing TIR.

Effects of insulin degludec and insulin glargine U300 on glycaemic stability in individuals with type 1 diabetes: A multicentre, randomized controlled crossover study

To compare the effects of insulin degludec (IDeg) and insulin glargine U300 (IGlarU300) on glycaemic stability in subjects with type 1 diabetes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this multicentre, crossover trial, 46 individuals with type 1 diabetes and essentially undetectable circulating C-peptide were randomly assigned to either the IDeg-first/IGlarU300-second group or the IGlarU300-first/IDeg-second group, and were treated with the respective basal insulins for 4-week periods. Data were collected in the last week of each treatment period. The primary aim was to examine the potential non-inferiority of IDeg relative to IGlarU300 with regard to day-to-day variability, as evaluated by the standard deviation (SD) of fasting blood glucose (FBG) levels. Intra-day glycaemic variability and other variables were also determined by continuous glucose monitoring (CGM).

RESULTS

The SD of FBG for IDeg was non-inferior to that for IGlarU300. The mean of FBG, coefficient of variation of FBG, and various glycaemic variability indexes determined by CGM did not differ between the two insulins. Whereas the administered doses of the insulins also did not differ, the mean glycaemic value was lower for IDeg than IGlarU300; the time above the target range (>180 mg/dL [10.0 mmol/L]) and the time below the target range (<70 mg/dL [3.9 mmol/L]) were shorter and longer, respectively, for IDeg than IGlarU300.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data suggest that IDeg and IGlarU300 have comparable glucose-stabilizing effects in individuals with type 1 diabetes. However, the glucose-lowering effect of IDeg may be greater than that of IGlarU300 when titrated with a unit-based protocol.

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.

GlucoTab-guided insulin therapy using insulin glargine U300 enables glycaemic control with low risk of hypoglycaemia in hospitalized patients with type 2 diabetes

AIMS

To investigate efficacy, safety and usability of the GlucoTab system for glycaemic management using insulin glargine U300 in non-critically ill hospitalized patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this open, non-controlled single-arm pilot study, glycaemic control at the general ward of a tertiary care hospital was guided by a mobile decision support system (GlucoTab) for basal-bolus insulin dosing using the novel basal insulin analogue insulin glargine U300 for the first time. Glycaemic control was surveilled with capillary glucose measurements and continuous glucose monitoring (CGM). The primary endpoint was efficacy of glycaemic management, defined as the percentage of blood glucose measurements within the target range of 3.9 to 7.8 mmol/L.

RESULTS

A total of 30 patients with T2D (12 female; age, 67 ± 11 years; HbA1c, 70 ± 26 mmol/mol; BMI, 31.8 ± 5.6 kg/m² ; length of study, 8.5 ± 4.5 days) were included. In total, 894 capillary glucose values and 49 846 data points of CGM were available, of which 56.1% of all measured capillary glucose values and 54.3% of CGM values were within the target area (3.9-7.8 mmol/L). Overall capillary mean glucose was 8.5 ± 1.2 and 8.4 ± 1.2 mmol/L assessed by CGM. Time within glucose target improved continuously during the course of treatment, while time within hypoglycaemia (<3.9 mmol/L) decreased substantially. The GlucoTab-suggested total daily dose was accepted by staff in 97.3% of situations.

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment with GlucoTab using insulin glargine U300 in hospitalized patients with T2D is effective and safe.

Glycaemic variability in diabetes: clinical and therapeutic implications

Glycaemic variability is an integral component of glucose homoeostasis. Although it has not yet been definitively confirmed as an independent risk factor for diabetes complications, glycaemic variability can represent the presence of excess glycaemic excursions and, consequently, the risk of hyperglycaemia or hypoglycaemia. Glycaemic variability is currently defined by a large and increasing number of metrics, representing either short-term (within-day and between-day variability) or long-term glycaemic variability, which is usually based on serial measurements of HbA_1c or other measures of glycaemia over a longer period of time. In this Review, we discuss recent evidence examining the association between glycaemic variability and diabetes-related complications, as well as non-pharmacological and pharmacological strategies currently available to address this challenging aspect of diabetes management.

Nocturnal Glycemic Control with New Insulin Glargine 300 U/mL

Insulin glargine 300 U/mL (Gla-300) is a new generation basal insulin product that has been demonstrated to have more stable pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic characteristics than insulin glargine 100 U/mL (Gla-100). To evaluate the real-world benefits of Gla-300 in reducing nocturnal fluctuations in blood glucose levels and nocturnal hypoglycemia, 10 Taiwanese patients using Gla-100 for insulin therapy were switched to Gla-300 and continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) was applied at nighttime to monitor changes to nocturnal glycemic variability parameters. Glycemic variability parameters measured to assess between- and within-night glycemic variability included mean 6-hour nocturnal (00:00-6:00 AM) glucose levels, standard deviation (SD), and coefficient of variance (CV) of mean nocturnal glucose levels and mean glucose excursion (MAGE). In this study, Gla-300 demonstrated comparable glycemic efficacy to Gla-100 and the potential to further reduce nocturnal hypoglycemia risk. Overall, nocturnal glycemic variability parameters measured during the Gla-300 treatment period were numerically smaller than those measured during the Gla-100 treatment phase although statistical significance was not reached. In terms of within-night glucose management, SD and CV values of mean nocturnal glucose levels were found to be statistically lower during the Gla-300 treatment phase than the Gla-100 treatment phase on nights individuals displayed normal blood glucose level readings at the beginning of the night. In summary, this study represents the first of its kind from Taiwan to evaluate the real-world clinical benefits of switching Taiwanese diabetes patients from Gla-100 to Gla-300 insulin therapy in reducing nighttime glucose variability by means of CGM.

A comparison of the clinical courses of type 2 diabetic patients whose basal insulin preparation was replaced from insulin glargine 100 units/mL to insulin glargine biosimilar or 300 units/mL: a propensity score-matched observation study

Objective: We compared the clinical course of type 2 diabetic patients whose basal insulin preparations were replaced from insulin glargine (IGlar) 100 units/mL (U100) to IGlar biosimilar or IGlar 300 units/mL (U300).

Methods: After propensity score matching, 34 patients whose basal insulin preparation was switched from IGlar U100 to IGlar biosimilar and 102 switched to IGlar U300 were observed for 6 months.

Results: The HbA1c level and body weight did not change significantly after the replacement in the IGlar biosimilar or IGlar U300 groups. In the IGlar biosimilar group, the frequency of subjects who experienced hypoglycemia after the replacement (12%) was not different from before (12%). However, the frequency was significantly lower after the replacement (2%) than before (13%) in the IGlar U300 group. The change in the HbA1c level after the replacement showed a significant association with the HbA1c level at the baseline but not with the kind of IGlar. Hypoglycemia was frequently observed in subjects who had experienced hypoglycemia before the replacement.

Conclusions: IGlar biosimilar and IGlar U300 induced similar HbA1c and body weight changes among type 2 diabetic patients. IGlar biosimilar is a suitable option for patients with a low risk for hypoglycemia.

Type 2 Diabetes and Glycemic Variability: Various Parameters in Clinical Practice

It has become possible to measure blood glucose levels continuously from 24 h to approximately 2 weeks due to the recent development of relevant devices such as continuous glucose monitoring and flash glucose monitoring systems. This has enabled not only medical professionals but also patients to monitor details of glycemic variability (GV) which was not possible in the past. Details of GV for both short and intermediate periods can now be obtained, and it is important in patient care to appropriately evaluate the data obtained. Types of GV in terms of time frame vary from short-term to long-term. Several studies reported that long-term GV was related to micro- and macro-angiopathies in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). However, there are still unknown aspects regarding the relationships of various durations of GV with prognosis. Further clinical trials are required to examine the mechanism of GV and to evaluate whether GV can be a valuable therapeutic target in treatment of patients with T2DM.