A meta-analysis of rate ratios for nocturnal confirmed hypoglycaemia with insulin degludec vs. insulin glargine using different definitions for hypoglycaemia

Scientific advisory on nocturnal hypoglycemia in insulin-treated patients with diabetes: Recommendations from Indian experts

INTRODUCTION

Insulin is one of the commonly prescribed glucose lowering agents in diabetes. Hypoglycemia is the most common complication, and severe hypoglycemia is the most serious complication of insulin therapy. Almost half of all severe hypoglycemia episodes (HEs) occur at night. However, patients are often unaware of their nocturnal hypoglycaemia (NH) risk. Additionally, both healthcare professionals and patients find it difficult to manage NH. The purpose of this expert group meeting is to improve NH awareness and provide guidance for the physicians to recognize and manage NH.

METHOD

The panel of experts in an e-board deliberated extensively upon the available literature and guidelines on hypoglycemia and NH discussed the consensus on definition, detection, reporting, monitoring, treatment, and optimization of therapy in NH.

RESULT

& Conclusion: Though there are many guidelines on the management of HEs in patients with diabetes, very few touch the topic of NH. This scientific advisory on management of NH in insulin treated patients with diabetes is formulated to address this gap in understanding regarding management of NH. The experts provide recommendations for the nocturnal window, defining NH based on blood glucose values, recognition, prevention and management of NH.

Significance of Glycemic Variability in Diabetes Mellitus

The goal of diabetes treatment is to maintain good glycemic control, prevent the development and progression of diabetic complications, and ensure the same quality of life and life expectancy as healthy people. Hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) is used as an index of glycemic control, but strict glycemic control using HbA1c as an index may lead to severe hypoglycemia and cardiovascular death. Glycemic variability (GV), such as excessive hyperglycemia and hypoglycemia, is associated with diabetic vascular complications and has been recognized as an important index of glycemic control. Here, we reviewed the definition and evaluated the clinical usefulness of GV, and its relationship with diabetic complications and therapeutic strategies to reduce GV.

Safety and Efficacy of Long-Acting Insulins Degludec and Glargine Among Asian Patients With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: A Meta-Analysis

Background Global variation in susceptibility to diabetes, insulin sensitivity, and regimen intensity poses a challenge for clinicians regarding the optimal choice of insulin therapy. The current study was carried out to see the relative safety and efficacy of currently available long-acting insulins among the type 2 diabetic Asian population. Methods A systematic literature search was done using various search engines (PubMed, Cochrane, Google Scholar, Scopus, and Embase) and included published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in English before December 2019. Further, a manual search was performed by screening the reference list of the identified articles. Results We included four RCTs with 534 participants (349 in the insulin degludec group and 185 in the insulin glargine group) with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Results show that both insulin glargine and degludec are equally efficacious in reducing fasting blood glucose (mean difference is -4.45, confidence interval -13.32- 4.43, I²=67%) and HbA1c (glycosylated hemoglobin) (mean difference is 0.12, confidence interval -0.12-0.35, I²=0%). However, insulin glargine was associated with lower risks of hypoglycemia (risk ratio = 0.9684, confidence interval- 0.8003- 1.1717, I²=30%). Conclusion Insulin glargine and degludec are comparable in achieving glycemic control with fewer hypoglycemic episodes in the insulin glargine-treated group.

Current treatment options and challenges in patients with Type 1 diabetes: Pharmacological, technical advances and future perspectives

Type 1 diabetes mellitus imposes a significant burden of complications and mortality, despite important advances in treatment: subjects affected by this disease have also a worse quality of life-related to disease management. To overcome these challenges, different new approaches have been proposed, such as new insulin formulations or innovative devices. The introduction of insulin pumps allows a more physiological insulin administration with a reduction of HbA1c level and hypoglycemic risk. New continuous glucose monitoring systems with better accuracy have allowed, not only better glucose control, but also the improvement of the quality of life. Integration of these devices with control algorithms brought to the creation of the first artificial pancreas, able to independently gain metabolic control without the risk of hypo- and hyperglycemic crisis. This approach has revolutionized the management of diabetes both in terms of quality of life and glucose control. However, complete independence from exogenous insulin will be obtained only by biological approaches that foresee the replacement of functional beta cells obtained from stem cells: this will be a major challenge but the biggest hope for the subjects with type 1 diabetes. In this review, we will outline the current scenario of innovative diabetes management both from a technological and biological point of view, and we will also forecast some cutting-edge approaches to reduce the challenges that hamper the definitive cure of diabetes.

Quality of life in patients with type 2 diabetes after switching to insulin degludec: results from a cross-sectional survey

PURPOSE

Five quality of life (QoL) domains are particularly important to patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) using basal insulin-sense of physical well-being, sense of safety regarding hypoglycemia, sense of diabetes as burdensome, feelings of freedom and flexibility, and sleep quality.

METHODS

An online survey assessed these QoL domains in adult patients with T2D in the USA who had switched from a previous basal insulin to insulin degludec (IDeg): modified versions of the World Health Organization (Five) Well-Being Index (WHO-5), Hypoglycemia Attitudes and Behavior Scale (HABS; confidence and anxiety subscales only), and Diabetes Distress Scale (DDS; emotional burden and regimen-related distress subscales only); three items assessing feelings of freedom and flexibility; and one item assessing sleep quality (hours of restful sleep). Patients rated each item for their previous basal insulin and currently while using IDeg. Correlations between sleep quality and the other QoL scales were also assessed.

RESULTS

In total, 152 patients completed the survey and were included in the study sample. Patients reported significantly improved scores while using IDeg on all WHO-5, DDS, HABS, feelings of freedom and flexibility item scores, and total raw/mean subscale scores (P < 0.0001). Patients also reported a significantly greater number of hours of restful sleep [mean (SD) 6.6 (2.0) vs. 5.5 (1.8); P < 0.0001]. Better sleep quality statistically significantly correlated with improved QoL in all other domains assessed.

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment with IDeg after switching from a previous basal insulin was associated with statistically significant improvements in all QoL domains assessed.

Understanding the Clinical Profile of Insulin Degludec, the Latest Basal Insulin Approved for Use in Canada: a Narrative Review

In recent years, the development of basal insulin therapies has focused on insulin analogues that have longer durations of action and more predictable pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) profiles than their human insulin-based predecessors, such as neutral protamine Hagedorn (NPH) insulin. Dosed once-daily, such analogues can provide a more stable glucose-lowering action, which translates clinically into a reduced risk of hypoglycemia. Insulin degludec (degludec) became available in Canada in 2017 and is the first basal insulin analogue to have a half-life exceeding the dosing interval. As well as offering the promise of an exceptionally flat PK/PD profile when at steady state, this characteristic means that insulin degludec can be dosed with some flexibility with regard to time of day and that it need not be taken at the same time each day. However, the approximately 25-h half-life also has some implications concerning dose titration. This article provides an up-to-date review of the study data describing the clinical profile of degludec, and aims to give helpful and practical advice to prescribers about its use. While the clinical benefits of degludec are described, it is also acknowledged that further study is required to better understand how its clinical performance compares with that of insulin glargine 300 units/mL.

Insulin Therapy in Type 2 Diabetes

BACKGROUND

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

AREAS OF UNCERTAINTY

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

DATA SOURCES

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

THERAPEUTIC ADVANCES

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Reporting of hypoglycaemia in clinical trials of basal insulins: A need for consensus

Hypoglycaemia is a common side-effect of diabetes therapies, particularly insulin, and imposes a substantial burden on individuals and healthcare systems. Consequently, regulatory approval of newer basal insulin (BI) therapies has relied on demonstration of a balance between achievement of good glycaemic control and less hypoglycaemia. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are the gold standard for assessing efficacy and safety, including hypoglycaemia risk, of BIs and are invaluable for obtaining regulatory approval. However, their highly selected patient populations and their conditions lead to results that may not be representative of real-life situations. Real-world evidence (RWE) studies are more representative of clinical practice, but they also have limitations. As such, data both from RCTs and RWE studies provide a fuller picture of the hypoglycaemia risk with BI therapies. However, substantial differences exist in the way hypoglycaemia is reported across these studies, which confounds comparisons of hypoglycaemia frequency among different BIs. This problem is ongoing and persists in recent trials of second-generation BI analogues. Although they provide a lower risk of hypoglycaemia when compared with earlier BIs, they do not eliminate it. This review describes differences in the way hypoglycaemia is reported across RCTs and RWE studies of second-generation BI analogues and examines potential reasons for these differences. For studies of BIs, there is a need to standardize aspects of design, analysis and methods of reporting to better enable interpretation of the efficacy and safety of such insulins among studies; such aspects include length of follow-up, glycaemic targets, hypoglycaemia definitions and time intervals for determining nocturnal events.

Appropriate Titration of Basal Insulin in Type 2 Diabetes and the Potential Role of the Pharmacist

A substantial proportion of patients with suboptimal control of their type 2 diabetes experience delays in treatment intensification. Additionally, patients often experience overuse of basal insulin, commonly referred to as "over-basalization," whereby basal insulin continues to be uptitrated in order to meet targets, when addition of a mealtime bolus insulin dose may be a more appropriate option. In order to overcome these challenges, there is a need to develop the capacity of allied healthcare professionals to provide appropriate support to these patients, such as during initiation or titration of basal insulin. Pharmacists play an integral role in healthcare delivery, with patients seeing their pharmacist, on average, seven times more often than their primary care physician. This places pharmacists in a unique position to provide diabetes education and care, which may help patients avoid clinical inertia. Nevertheless, the management of the disease with basal insulin is becoming increasingly complex, with growing numbers of treatment options (such as recent second-generation longer-acting basal insulin formulations) and frequently updated titration algorithms. The two most common titration schedules specify either increasing doses by a set amount every 2-3 days or a treat-to-target strategy. Neither schedule has been shown to be superior, and the decision to use one or the other should be based on a discussion between the clinician and patient after assessment of mental and physical acumen, comfort of both parties, and follow-up plans. This review article discusses basal insulin therapy options and titration algorithms from the unique perspective of the pharmacist in order to help ensure that optimal antidiabetes therapy is initiated, appropriately titrated, and maintained.Funding: Sanofi US, Inc.

A post-hoc pooled analysis to evaluate the risk of hypoglycaemia with insulin glargine 300 U/mL (Gla-300) versus 100 U/mL (Gla-100) over wider nocturnal windows in individuals with type 2 diabetes on a basal-only insulin regimen

The EDITION trials in type 2 diabetes demonstrated comparable glycaemic control with less nocturnal and anytime (24-hour) hypoglycaemia for insulin glargine 300 U/mL (Gla-300) versus glargine 100 U/mL (Gla-100). However, the predefined nocturnal window (0:00-5:59 AM) may not be the most relevant for clinical practice. This post-hoc analysis compared expansions of the predefined nocturnal interval during basal insulin treatment without prandial insulin. Patient-level, 6-month data, pooled from the EDITION 2 and 3 trials and the EDITION JP 2 trial (N = 1922, basal insulin only) were analysed. Accompanying hypoglycaemia during treatment with Gla-300 was compared to that during treatment with Gla-100, using predefined (0:00-5:59 AM) and expanded (10:00 PM-5:59 AM, 0:00-7:59 AM, 10:00 PM to pre-breakfast SMPG) windows. Confirmed (≤3.9 mmol/L [≤70 mg/dL]) or severe hypoglycaemic events were reported most frequently between 6:00 AM and 8:00 AM. Windows expanded beyond 6:00 AM included more events than other windows. The percentage of participants with at least one event was lower with Gla-300 than Gla-100 in all windows examined. Expanding the nocturnal interval allows better assessment of the risk of hypoglycaemia associated with basal insulin. The risk of nocturnal hypoglycaemia was consistently lower with Gla-300 versus Gla-100 using all four windows.

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.

The ratio of the seroprevalence to the egg-positive prevalence of Schistosoma japonicum in China: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Schistosomiasis, caused by Schistosoma japonicum, remains one of the most important parasitic diseases, and detection of S. japonicum infections in humans plays a crucial role in control and treatment. However, comparisons between the parasitological and the immunological examinations in the fields of China are lacking. Therefore we performed a meta-analysis to compare the seroprevalence of Schistosoma japonicum, as determined by IHA or ELISA, with coprological prevalence, as determined by Kato-Katz, and estimate the ratio of the serological to the egg-positive prevalence in order to evaluate the potential threat of egg-negative but worm-positive schistosomiasis.

METHODS

Studies published up to July 2018 on the parasitological and immunological examinations of schistosomiasis in the fields of China were searched in five databases including CNKI, WanFang, VIP, PubMed and Web of Science. The ratio of the serological to the egg-positive prevalence and its 95%CI for each study were calculated, and then point estimates and their 95%CIs of pooled prevalence ratio were meta-analyzed. Subgroup meta-analyses were also performed according to potential influential factors.

RESULTS

A total of 23 articles were included. The prevalence ratio varied from 0.57 to 48.83 for IHA to Kato-Katz and ranged from 0.38 to 13.97 for ELISA to Kato-Katz. The pooled ratio was 4.72 (95%CI: 3.87~ 5.76) for IHA to KK and 4.65 (95%CI: 3.50~ 6.17) for ELISA to KK. Subgroup analyses implied that the ratio of the serological to the egg-positive prevalence may decrease with the endemic levels. The highest prevalence ratio was observed when Kato-Katz was performed with three slides per stool or in hilly and mountainous regions.

CONCLUSIONS

The worm-determined prevalence by IHA or ELISA is 4- to 5-fold higher than the egg-determined prevalence by Kato-Katz, which implied Kato-Katz may largely underestimate the prevalence of S. japonicum in China. The degree of underestimation was greater when Kato-Katz with three slides per stool was carried out, especially in low endemic areas or in hilly and mountainous regions. Therefore, more attention should be paid to those egg-negative but worm-positive patients with the aim of final elimination of S. japonicum in China.

Comparative Benefits and Harms of Basal Insulin Analogues for Type 2 Diabetes: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Basal insulin analogues aim for protracted glycemic control with minimal adverse effects.

PURPOSE

To assess the comparative efficacy and safety of basal insulin analogues for adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM).

DATA SOURCES

Several databases from inception to April 2018 without language restrictions, ClinicalTrials.gov to April 2018, references of reviews, and meeting abstract books.

STUDY SELECTION

Randomized trials lasting at least 12 weeks that compared efficacy (change in hemoglobin A1c [HbA1c] level from baseline [primary outcome]; percentage of patients with HbA1c level <7% at end of study and change in body weight [secondary outcomes]) and safety (hypoglycemia) of basal insulin analogues.

DATA EXTRACTION

Two authors independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias for each outcome. All authors evaluated overall confidence in the evidence.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Thirty-nine trials (26 195 patients) assessed 10 basal insulin analogues. Low- to very-low-quality evidence indicated that thrice-weekly degludec (Deg-3TW) was inferior to most other regimens for reducing HbA1c level, with mean differences ranging from 0.21% (vs. degludec, 100 U/mL [Deg-100]) to 0.32% (vs. glargine, 300 U/mL [Glar-300]). High- to moderate-quality evidence suggested that detemir had a favorable weight profile versus all comparators, and Glar-300 was associated with less weight gain than glargine, 100 U/mL (Glar-100); Deg-100; degludec, 200 U/mL (Deg-200); Deg-3TW; and LY2963016. Low- and very-low-quality evidence suggested that Deg-100, Deg-200, and Glar-300 were associated with lower incidence of nocturnal hypoglycemia than detemir, Glar-100, LY2963016, and neutral protamine lispro (NPL). Incidence of severe hypoglycemia did not differ among regimens, except NPL, which was associated with increased risk versus Deg-100, detemir, Glar-100, and Glar-300.

LIMITATIONS

Results are based mostly on indirect comparisons. Confidence in summary estimates is low or very low due to individual-study limitations, imprecision, or inconsistency.

CONCLUSION

Low-quality evidence suggests that basal insulin analogues for T2DM do not substantially differ in their glucose-lowering effect. Low- and very-low-quality evidence suggests some regimens may be associated with lower risk for nocturnal hypoglycemia (Deg-100, Deg-200, and Glar-300) or less weight gain (detemir and Glar-300).

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

None. (PROSPERO: CRD42016037055).

Comparative safety and efficacy of insulin degludec with insulin glargine in type 2 and type 1 diabetes: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

AIMS

To determine the safety and efficacy of insulin degludec versus glargine in patients with type 1 (T1D) and type 2 (T2D) diabetes mellitus.

METHODS

Databases were searched until July 5, 2017. We included randomized controlled trials comparing degludec with glargine in diabetic patients, each with a minimum of 16 weeks of follow-up.

RESULTS

Eighteen trials with 16,791 patients were included. Degludec was associated with a statistically significant reduction in risk for all confirmed hypoglycemia at the maintenance treatment period [estimated rate ratio (ERR) 0.81; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.72‒0.92; P = 0.001], nocturnal confirmed hypoglycemia at the entire (ERR 0.71; 95% CI 0.63‒0.80; P < 0.001) and maintenance treatment period (ERR 0.65; 95% CI 0.59‒0.71; P < 0.001), all irrespective of the pooled diabetic populations and follow-up durations. The differences in the rate of hypoglycemia were more pronounced in nocturnal period and maintenance period and in T2D than T1D patients. Degludec reduced the incidence of severe hypoglycemia in T2D [ERR 0.65; (0.52; 0.89); P = 0.005] but not T1D patients. HbA1c concentration was slightly higher in degludec over glargine but was not clinically relevant [estimated treatment difference (ETD) 0.03; 95% CI - 0.00 to 0.06%; P = 0.06]. Fasting plasma glucose level was lower in degludec-treated patients (ETD - 0.28 mmol/L; 95% CI - 0.44 to - 0.11 mmol/L; P = 0.001). Several subgroup analyses showed largely consistent findings. The rates of adverse events including total mortality and cardiovascular events were not significantly different between two treatment strategies.

CONCLUSIONS

Insulin degludec appears to have better safety in reducing hypoglycemic events with similar efficacy compared with insulin glargine.

Efficacy and Safety of Insulin Degludec versus Insulin Glargine: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Fifteen Clinical Trials

AIMS

Insulin degludec (IDeg) and insulin glargine (IGlar) are both proved to be effective in diabetes. This study aimed to assess the effects and safety of IDeg versus IGlar.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was conducted using the PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library electronic databases to identify all randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

RESULTS

Fifteen RCTs were identified. The combined data showed that the decrease in the glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) level was slightly different, and the proportion of patients who achieved HbA1c < 7% was similar between the IDeg and IGlar groups. Further, a statistically significant decrease in the fasting plasma glucose level was observed in the IDeg group as compared to the IGlar group. In patients with T2DM, IDeg was associated with lower rates of overall hypoglycemia. Nocturnal hypoglycemia was significantly lower in the case of IDeg than in the case of IGlar in both T1DM and T2DM patients. No statistically significant differences were observed between the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with IGlar, IDeg is associated with equivalent glycemic control and a statistically significantly lower rate of nocturnal hypoglycemia in patients with T1DM and T2DM. In T2DM patients, IDeg also provides better results in terms of overall hypoglycemia.

Rates of hypoglycaemia are lower in patients treated with insulin degludec/liraglutide (IDegLira) than with IDeg or insulin glargine, regardless of the hypoglycaemia definition used

AIMS

To re-analyse, using a series of alternative hypoglycaemia definitions, the data from 2 trials, DUAL I and V, in which the once-daily, fixed ratio combination of insulin degludec/liraglutide (IDegLira) was compared with basal insulin therapy.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Post hoc analyses of the DUAL I (patients uncontrolled on oral antidiabetic drugs) and DUAL V (patients uncontrolled on insulin glargine (IGlar) U100) trials were carried out using different definitions of hypoglycaemia and according to whether treatments were administered in the morning or afternoon. Rates of hypoglycaemia for the definitions of confirmed and American Diabetes Association (ADA)-documented symptomatic hypoglycaemia were compared according to age, gender and body mass index (BMI).

RESULTS

Although hypoglycaemia rates differed according to the alternative hypoglycaemia definitions, rates were consistently lower with IDegLira vs insulin degludec (IDeg) and IGlar U100. Despite glycated haemoglobin concentrations being lower with IDegLira at end of treatment, confirmed and nocturnal-confirmed hypoglycaemia rates were lower for IDegLira vs IDeg and IGlar U100, irrespective of dosing time. The definitions of confirmed and ADA-documented symptomatic hypoglycaemia did not have a significant effect on the treatment difference between IDegLira and IDeg, liraglutide or IGlar U100 when further assessed by baseline age, gender and BMI.

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment with IDegLira, vs IDeg and IGlar U100, resulted in lower rates of hypoglycaemia regardless of dosing time and definition of hypoglycaemia used. The choice of hypoglycaemia definition did not influence the results of analyses when stratified by age, sex and BMI.

Insulin analogues in type 1 diabetes mellitus: getting better all the time

The treatment of type 1 diabetes mellitus consists of external replacement of the functions of β cells in an attempt to achieve blood levels of glucose as close to the normal range as possible. This approach means that glucose sensing needs to be replaced and levels of insulin need to mimic physiological insulin-action profiles, including basal coverage and changes around meals. Training and educating patients are crucial for the achievement of good glycaemic control, but having insulin preparations with action profiles that provide stable basal insulin coverage and appropriate mealtime insulin peaks helps people with type 1 diabetes mellitus to live active lives without sacrificing tight glycaemic control. Insulin analogues enable patients to achieve this goal, as some have fast action profiles, and some have very slow action profiles, which gives people with type 1 diabetes mellitus the tools to achieve dynamic insulin-action profiles that enable tight glycaemic control with a risk of hypoglycaemia that is lower than that with human short-acting and long-acting insulins. This Review discusses the established and novel insulin analogues that are used to treat patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus and provides insights into the future development of insulin analogues.

Efficacy of basal-bolus insulin regimens in the inpatient management of non-critically ill patients with type 2 diabetes: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Hyperglycemia during hospitalization is associated with increased rates of complications and longer hospital stays. Various insulin regimens are used in the inpatient diabetes management of non-critically ill patients. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of basal-bolus insulin therapy (BBI) by summarizing evidence from studies of BBI versus sliding scale insulin therapy (SSI) in the management of hospitalized non-critically ill type 2 diabetes patients. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library for studies comparing BBI therapy with SSI therapy in hospitalized non-critically ill patients with type 2 diabetes. Primary outcome was mean daily blood glucose (BG) during admission. Secondary outcomes were incidence of hypoglycemia and length of hospital stay. Results of included randomized controlled trials (RCT) were pooled and meta-analysed to provide estimates of the efficacy of BBI therapy. Five RCTs and seven observational studies were included in the review. Meta-analysis of RCTs showed significantly lower mean daily BG with BBI than SSI. Mean difference in daily BG between the two regimens ranged from 14 to 29 mg/dl. BBI therapy was associated with increased risk of mild hypoglycemia (BG ≤ 70 mg/dl, RR 5.75; 95% CI 2.79-11.83), (BG ≤ 60 mg/dl, RR 4.21; 95% CI 1.61-11.02) compared with SSI therapy. There was no difference in risk of severe hypoglycemia (BG ≤ 40 mg/dl) and no difference in mean length of stay. In conclusion, basal-bolus insulin in the inpatient diabetes management results in significantly lower mean daily BG than sliding scale insulin but is associated with increased risk of mild hypoglycemia.

Basal and Bolus Insulin Dose Changes after Switching Basal Insulin to Insulin Degludec in Patients with Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus: A Pilot Study

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Ultra-long-acting insulin degludec (DEG) has a longer duration of action and less daily variability relative to other basal insulin (BI), and thus may benefit patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM). We examined the impact of switching BI to DEG on glycemic control and insulin dose in T1DM.

METHODS

T1DM patients (n = 22; six male; mean age: 64.5 ± 12.6 years) receiving basal-bolus insulin therapy were included. Initially, the BI dose was replaced with DEG in a 1:1 ratio; 80-100% of the total dose was replaced with DEG for multiple basal insulin injections. DEG was titrated according to study protocol. Changes in HbA1c, daily insulin dose, glycemic self-monitored blood glucose variations, and hypoglycemia frequency were evaluated for 24 weeks.

RESULTS

Once-daily DEG significantly decreased HbA1c levels when switched from once-daily BI (7.9 ± 0.8 vs. 7.5 ± 0.9%, p = 0.020) and maintained HbA1c when switched from twice-daily BI (8.5 ± 1.6 vs. 8.4 ± 1.2%, p = 0.457). The BI dose decreased by -7.8 ± 13.9% (p = 0.017) and -16.6 ± 16.9% (p = 0.050) when switched from once-daily BI and twice-daily BI, respectively. The total bolus insulin dose significantly decreased when switched from once-daily BI (21.7 ± 8.3 to 19.3 ± 8.8 U/day, p = 0.016) especially in the injection before breakfast and evening meal. Body weight and hypoglycemia frequency was not significantly different.

CONCLUSION

DEG improved glycemic control when switched from once-daily BI and maintained glycemic control when switched from twice-daily BI without increasing hypoglycemia.

A Multinational, Randomized, Open-label, Treat-to-Target Trial Comparing Insulin Degludec and Insulin Glargine in Insulin-Naïve Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus

Introduction

To lower the barrier for initiating insulin treatment and obtain adequate glycemic control in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), new basal insulin preparations with improved pharmacological properties and consequently a lower risk of hypoglycemia are needed. The objective of this trial was to confirm the efficacy and compare the safety of insulin degludec (IDeg) with insulin glargine (IGlar) in a multinational setting with two thirds of subjects enrolled in China.

Methods

This was a 26-week, randomized, open-label, parallel-group, treat-to-target, non-inferiority trial in 833 subjects with T2DM (48 % were female, mean age 56 years, diabetes duration 8 years), inadequately controlled on oral antidiabetic drugs (OADs). Subjects were randomized 2:1 to once-daily IDeg (555 subjects) or IGlar (278 subjects), both with metformin. The primary endpoint was the change from baseline in glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA_1c) after 26 weeks.

Results

The completion rate was high (IDeg 94.2 %; IGlar 91.4 %). Mean HbA_1c decreased from 8.3 to 7.0 % in both groups. Estimated treatment difference (ETD) [95 % confidence interval (CI)] IDeg-IGlar in change from baseline was −0.05 % points [−0.18 to 0.08], confirming the non-inferiority of IDeg to IGlar. The proportion of subjects achieving HbA_1c <7.0 % was 54.2 and 51.4 % with IDeg and IGlar, respectively (estimated odds ratio [95 % CI] IDeg/IGlar: 1.14 [0.84 to 1.54]). The mean decrease in fasting plasma glucose, self-measured plasma glucose profiles, and insulin dose were similar between groups. Numerically lower rates of overall (estimated rate ratio [95 % CI] IDeg/IGlar: 0.80 [0.59 to 1.10]) and nocturnal (0.77 [0.43 to 1.37]) confirmed hypoglycemia were observed with IDeg compared with IGlar. No treatment differences in other safety parameters were found. Subjects were more satisfied with the IDeg device compared with the IGlar device as reflected by the total Treatment Related Impact Measures-Diabetes Device score (ETD [95 % CI] IDeg-IGlar: 2.2 [0.2 to 4.3]).

Conclusion

IDeg provided adequate glycemic control non-inferior to IGlar and a tendency for a lower hypoglycemia rate. IDeg is considered suitable for initiating insulin therapy in T2DM patients on OADs requiring intensified treatment.

Trial Registration

Clinicaltrials.gov NCT01849289.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s40268-016-0134-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Insulin Degludec in Clinical Practice: A Review of Japanese Real-World Data

INTRODUCTION

In this literature review we evaluated the real-world clinical effectiveness of switching Japanese diabetic patients from their current insulin regimen to insulin degludec (IDeg).

METHODS

Studies were identified from Japanese Diabetes Society (JDS) abstracts (2014-2015) and PubMed (2012 onwards). Inclusion criteria were: Japanese population, >15 participants, and studies switching patients from basal or basal-bolus insulin regimens to IDeg. Randomized controlled trials and case reports were excluded. Weighted mean changes in safety and effectiveness endpoints were calculated using the number of patients in each study.

RESULTS

In total, 81 JDS abstracts and seven manuscripts met the search criteria, representing 4238 patients [1028 with type 1 diabetes (T1D), 602 with type 2 diabetes (T2D), 2608 with unspecified or mixed diabetes]. Glycated hemoglobin (HbA_1c) was reported in 93% of studies, with an improvement in 84% of these (51% significant, 33% numerical), no change in 12%, and worsening in 4% (3% numerical, 1% significant). Across all studies, the weighted mean absolute change in HbA_1c was -0.3% (-2.7 mmol/mol). Basal insulin dose was reported in 58% of studies and was lower in 60% of these (30% significant, 30% numerical), numerically unchanged in 26%, and higher in 14% (2% significant, 12% numerical). The weighted mean change in basal insulin dose was -4.8% and -3.0% for all studies and for studies with only significant results, respectively. The weighted mean change in basal dose based on all studies was -8.9, -5.5, and -2.9% for the T1D, T2D, and unspecified patient populations, respectively. Hypoglycemia was recorded in 31% of the studies. After switching treatment to IDeg, 55% of studies reported decreased hypoglycemia, 29% no change, and 16% an increase. Quality of life (QoL) was measured in 11% of studies, of which 82% reported improved QoL after switching, and 18% reported no change in QoL.

CONCLUSION

Switching from a conventional basal insulin to IDeg has the potential to improve HbA_1c with a lower insulin dose. Switching to IDeg may also provide a reduced risk of hypoglycemia and improvement in QoL.

FUNDING

Novo Nordisk.

Effect of adding insulin degludec to treatment in patients with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled with metformin and liraglutide: a double-blind randomized controlled trial (BEGIN: ADD TO GLP-1 Study)

AIM

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of adding insulin degludec (IDeg) to treatment in patients with type 2 diabetes receiving liraglutide and metformin and qualifying for treatment intensification because of inadequate glycaemic control.

METHODS

In this 26-week, double-blind trial, patients who still had inadequate glycaemic control after a 15-week run-in period with initiation and dose escalation of liraglutide to 1.8 mg in combination with metformin (≥1500 mg) were randomized to addition of once-daily IDeg ('IDeg add-on to liraglutide' arm; n = 174) or placebo ('placebo add-on to liraglutide' arm; n = 172), with dosing of both IDeg and placebo based on titration guidelines.

RESULTS

At 26 weeks, the mean change in glycated haemoglobin level was greater in the IDeg add-on to liraglutide arm (-1.04%) than in the placebo add-on to liraglutide arm (-0.16%; p < 0.0001). Similarly, the mean fasting plasma glucose reduction was greater, and self-measured plasma glucose values were lower at all eight time points, with IDeg add-on versus placebo add-on (both p < 0.0001). At 26 weeks, the IDeg dose was 51 U (0.54 U/kg). During the run-in period with liraglutide, body weight decreased by ∼3 kg in both groups. After 26 weeks, the mean change was +2.0 kg (IDeg add-on to liraglutide) and -1.3 kg (placebo add-on to liraglutide). Confirmed hypoglycaemia rates were low in both groups, although higher with IDeg than with placebo (0.57 vs. 0.12 episodes/patient-years of exposure; p = 0.0002). Nocturnal confirmed hypoglycaemia was infrequent in both groups, with no episodes of severe hypoglycaemia, and no marked differences in adverse events with either treatment approach.

CONCLUSION

The addition of liraglutide and IDeg to patients sub-optimally treated with metformin and liraglutide and requiring treatment intensification was found to be effective and well-tolerated.

A meta-analysis of rate ratios for nocturnal confirmed hypoglycaemia with insulin degludec vs. insulin glargine using different definitions for hypoglycaemia

AIMS

A prospective meta-analysis of phase 3 trials showed lower rates of nocturnal hypoglycaemia with insulin degludec vs. insulin glargine. We investigated the consistency of the results across different definitions of hypoglycaemia.

METHODS

This post-hoc, patient-level meta-analysis included six randomized, controlled, 26- or 52-week phase 3a trials in insulin-naïve participants with Type 2 diabetes mellitus (Type 2 diabetesinsulin naïve ), participants with Type 2 diabetes mellitus using basal-bolus therapy (Type 2 diabetesBB ) and those with Type 1 diabetes mellitus. We used three definitions of hypoglycaemia and different timescales for the nocturnal period. Rates were analysed for the entire core trial period, the 'maintenance period' only, and the extension trial set population. Analyses utilized a negative binomial regression model.

RESULTS

In Type 2 diabetesinsulin naïve participants, risk of nocturnal hypoglycaemia was significantly lower with insulin degludec vs. insulin glargine for all hypoglycaemia definitions and trial periods. Risk was also lower for the timescale 21.59-05.59, but not 00.01-07.59. For Type 2 diabetesBB , nocturnal hypoglycaemia rates were lower with insulin degludec vs. insulin glargine across all definitions, timescales and trial periods, with one exception. For individuals with Type 1 diabetes mellitus, nocturnal hypoglycaemia risk was significantly lower with insulin degludec during the maintenance period for the original definition (plasma glucose < 3.1 mmol/l, timescale 00.01-05.59) and in the extension trial set population for all hypoglycaemia definitions except for the nocturnal timescale 00.01-07.59.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with insulin glargine, insulin degludec is associated with lower rates of nocturnal hypoglycaemia in people with Type 2 diabetes mellitus, and similar or lower rates in Type 1 diabetes mellitus, across different definitions.