Randomized, double-blind clinical trial comparing basal insulin peglispro and insulin glargine, in combination with prandial insulin lispro, in patients with type 1 diabetes: IMAGINE 3

Frequency of hypoglycaemia with basal insulin treatments in adults with type 1 diabetes treated with basal-bolus insulin regimens in treat-to-target trials: A narrative review

AIM

To summarise, in a narrative review, published data on hypoglycaemia occurrence with basal insulin therapy in adults with type 1 diabetes treated with basal-bolus insulin regimens in treat-to-target randomised controlled trials.

METHODS

Data were included from 21 eligible trials, which mainly used self-measured blood glucose or plasma glucose to detect hypoglycaemia.

RESULTS

All-day self-measured blood glucose or plasma glucose level 2 (glucose threshold of 3.1 or 3.0 mmol/L) and level 3 (severe, requiring assistance) hypoglycaemic events were reported, respectively, by a range of 69.0%-97.5% and 0%-13.4% adults when receiving basal-bolus insulin therapy, with rates of 10.6-68.1 and 0.0-0.4 events per patient-year of exposure, respectively. Hypoglycaemia rates measured using continuous glucose monitoring (three studies) were numerically, yet consistently, higher than with either other method, except when limiting to symptomatic events. Nocturnal hypoglycaemia rates were generally less than 30% of the equivalent all-day rates.

CONCLUSIONS

Differences across the studies in design (e.g., titration targets) and participant characteristics hindered comparison of hypoglycaemia rates by insulin formulation. Consequently, few trends were identified by insulin formulation, study methodology or individuals' characteristics, suggesting that further research is required to identify treatment strategies that facilitate development of individualised recommendations to lower hypoglycaemia risk. These findings are useful to understand hypoglycaemia risk with available basal insulin therapies when used in a multiple daily injection regimen, as well as to provide context for the results of ongoing and future clinical trials, including those for two once-weekly basal insulins, insulin icodec and basal insulin Fc.

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.

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.

Accurate Collection of Reasons for Treatment Discontinuation to Better Define Estimands in Clinical Trials

BACKGROUND

Reasons for treatment discontinuation are important not only to understand the benefit and risk profile of experimental treatments, but also to help choose appropriate strategies to handle intercurrent events in defining estimands. The current case report form (CRF) commonly in use mixes the underlying reasons for treatment discontinuation and who makes the decision for treatment discontinuation, often resulting in an inaccurate collection of reasons for treatment discontinuation.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We systematically reviewed and analyzed treatment discontinuation data from nine phase 2 and phase 3 studies for insulin peglispro. A total of 857 participants with treatment discontinuation were included in the analysis. Our review suggested that, due to the vague multiple-choice options for treatment discontinuation present in the CRF, different reasons were sometimes recorded for the same underlying reason for treatment discontinuation. Based on our review and analysis, we suggest an intermediate solution and a more systematic way to improve the current CRF for treatment discontinuations.

CONCLUSION

This research provides insight and directions on how to optimize the CRF for recording treatment discontinuation. Further work needs to be done to build the learning into Clinical Data Interchange Standards Consortium standards.

CLINICAL TRIALS

Clinicaltrials.gov numbers: NCT01027871 (Phase 2 for type 2 diabetes), NCT01049412 (Phase 2 for type 1 diabetes), NCT01481779 (IMAGINE 1 Study), NCT01435616 (IMAGINE 2 Study), NCT01454284 (IMAGINE 3 Study), NCT01468987 (IMAGINE 4 Study), NCT01582451 (IMAGINE 5 Study), NCT01790438 (IMAGINE 6 Study), NCT01792284 (IMAGINE 7 Study).

Reduced hypoglycaemia using liver-targeted insulin in individuals with type 1 diabetes

AIM

To investigate whether an increased bolus: basal insulin ratio (BBR) with liver-targeted bolus insulin (BoI) would increase BoI use and decrease hypoglycaemic events (HEv).

PATIENT POPULATION AND METHODS

We enrolled 52 persons (HbA1c 6.9% ± 0.12%, mean ± SEM) with type 1 diabetes using multiple daily injections. Hepatic-directed vesicle (HDV) was used to deliver 1% of peripheral injected BoI to the liver. A 90-day run-in period was used to introduce subjects to unblinded continuous glucose monitoring and optimize standard basal insulin (BaI) (degludec) and BoI (lispro) dosing. At 90 days, BoI was changed to HDV-insulin lispro and subjects were randomized to an immediate 10% or 40% decrease in BaI dose.

RESULTS

At 90 days postrandomization, total insulin dosing was increased by ~7% in both cohorts. The -10% and -40% BaI cohorts were on 7.7% and 13% greater BoI with 6.9% and 30% (P = .02) increases in BBR, respectively. Compared with baseline at randomization, nocturnal level 2 HEv were reduced by 21% and 43%, with 54% and 59% reductions in patient-reported HEv in the -10% and -40% BaI cohorts, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study shows that liver-targeted BoI safely decreases HEv and symptoms without compromising glucose control. We further show that with initiation of liver-targeted BoI, the BBR can be safely increased by significantly lowering BaI dosing, leading to greater BoI usage.

Using principal stratification in analysis of clinical trials

The ICH E9(R1) addendum (2019) proposed principal stratification (PS) as one of five strategies for dealing with intercurrent events. Therefore, understanding the strengths, limitations, and assumptions of PS is important for the broad community of clinical trialists. Many approaches have been developed under the general framework of PS in different areas of research, including experimental and observational studies. These diverse applications have utilized a diverse set of tools and assumptions. Thus, need exists to present these approaches in a unifying manner. The goal of this tutorial is threefold. First, we provide a coherent and unifying description of PS. Second, we emphasize that estimation of effects within PS relies on strong assumptions and we thoroughly examine the consequences of these assumptions to understand in which situations certain assumptions are reasonable. Finally, we provide an overview of a variety of key methods for PS analysis and use a real clinical trial example to illustrate them. Examples of code for implementation of some of these approaches are given in Supplemental Materials.

Estimating the treatment effect for adherers using multiple imputation

Randomized controlled trials are considered the gold standard to evaluate the treatment effect (estimand) for efficacy and safety. According to the recent International Council on Harmonization (ICH)-E9 addendum (R1), intercurrent events (ICEs) need to be considered when defining an estimand, and principal stratum is one of the five strategies to handle ICEs. Qu et al. (2020, Statistics in Biopharmaceutical Research 12:1-18) proposed estimators for the adherer average causal effect (AdACE) for estimating the treatment difference for those who adhere to one or both treatments based on the causal-inference framework, and demonstrated the consistency of those estimators; however, this method requires complex custom programming related to high-dimensional numeric integrations. In this article, we implemented the AdACE estimators using multiple imputation (MI) and constructed confidence intervals (CIs) through bootstrapping. A simulation study showed that the MI-based estimators provided consistent estimators with the nominal coverage probabilities of CIs for the treatment difference for the adherent populations of interest. As an illustrative example, the new method was applied to data from a real clinical trial comparing two types of basal insulin for patients with type 1 diabetes.

One hundred years of insulin therapy

At the time of its first clinical application 100 years ago, insulin was presented as the cure for people with diabetes mellitus. That transpired to be an overstatement, yet insulin has proven to be the lifesaver for people with type 1 diabetes mellitus and an essential therapy for many with type 2 diabetes mellitus or other forms of diabetes mellitus. Since its discovery, insulin (a molecule of only 51 amino acids) has been the subject of pharmaceutical research and development that has paved the way for other protein-based therapies. From purified animal-extracted insulin and human insulin produced by genetically modified organisms to a spectrum of insulin analogues, pharmaceutical laboratories have strived to tailor the preparations to the needs of patients. Nonetheless, overall glycaemic control often remains poor as exogenous insulin is still not able to mimic the physiological insulin profile. Circumventing subcutaneous administration and the design of analogues with profiles that mimic that of physiological insulin are ongoing areas of research. Novel concepts, such as once-weekly insulins or glucose-dependent and oral insulins, are on the horizon but their real-world effectiveness still needs to be proven. Until a true cure for type 1 diabetes mellitus is found and the therapeutic arsenal for other forms of diabetes mellitus is expanded, insulin will remain central in the treatment of many people living with diabetes mellitus.

Future directions in insulin therapy

Insulin therapy has a long history at the cutting edge of technological development through purification, extended-action, molecular chemistry, and devices, and in support technologies including self-measurement and patient education. But unmet needs remain large. Today's therapy cannot deliver minute-to-minute control of glucose levels, and cannot imitate the reflex/incretin driven physiological insulin delivery at mealtimes. Further it depends on a raft of devices for administration several times a day, devices liked for their functionality, but disliked as an intrusive reminder of the condition, several times a day. Approaches to overcoming these barriers include closed-loop systems and further modification of insulin formulations, but are limited by fundamental underlying difficulties. While clinical studies of oral insulin are in progress, the barriers to success look daunting. Development of small-molecule approaches (insulin-mimetic tablets) appears to have stalled, while concepts for glucose-responsive insulin as yet fail to deliver the necessary insulin-to-glucose gradient. Gene therapy, feasible in animals in preliminary studies, is not capable of providing feedback control. Transplantation of cultured islets and islet B-cells from stem cells thus looks to the be the best long-term prospect for insulin delivery in terms of overcoming the above barriers, but is a true biotechnological tour-de-force which will take time to mature.

Insulin therapy development beyond 100 years

The first insulin preparation capable of consistently lowering blood glucose was developed in 1921. But 100 years later, blood glucose control with insulin in people with diabetes is nearly universally suboptimal, with essentially the same molecule still delivered by the same inappropriate subcutaneous injection route. Bypassing this route with oral administration appears to have become technologically feasible, accelerating over the past 50 years, either with packaged insulin peptides or by chemical insulin mimetics. Some of the problems of prospective unregulated absorption of insulin into the circulation from subcutaneous depots might be overcome with glucose-responsive insulins. Approaches to these problems could be modification of the peptide by adducts, or the use of nanoparticles or insulin patches, which deliver insulin according to glucose concentration. Some attention has been paid to targeting insulin preferentially to different organs, either by molecular engineering of insulin, or with adducts. But all these approaches still have problems in even beginning to match the responsiveness of physiological insulin delivery to metabolic requirements, both prandially and basally. As would be expected, for all these technically complex approaches, many examples of abandoned development can be found. Meanwhile, it is becoming possible to change the duration of action of subcutaneous injected insulin analogues to act even more rapidly for meals, and towards weekly insulin for basal administration. The state of the art of all these approaches, and the barriers to success, are reviewed here.

Why ITT analysis is not always the answer for estimating treatment effects in clinical trials

For many years there has been a consensus among the Clinical Research community that ITT analysis represents the correct approach for the vast majority of trials. Recent worldwide regulatory guidance for pharmaceutical industry trials has allowed discussion of alternatives to the ITT approach to analysis; different treatment effects can be considered which may be more clinically meaningful and more relevant to patients and prescribers. The key concept is of a trial "estimand", a precise description of the estimated treatment effect. The strategy chosen to account for patients who discontinue treatment or take alternative medications which are not part of the randomised treatment regimen are important determinants of this treatment effect. One strategy to account for these events is treatment policy, which corresponds to an ITT approach. Alternative equally valid strategies address what the treatment effect is if the patient actually takes the treatment or does not use specific alternative medication. There is no single right answer to which strategy is most appropriate, the solution depends on the key clinical question of interest. The estimands framework discussed in the new guidance has been particularly useful in the context of the current COVID-19 pandemic and has clarified what choices are available to account for the impact of COVID-19 on clinical trials. Specifically, an ITT approach addresses a treatment effect that may not be generalisable beyond the current pandemic.

Long-Term Efficacy and Safety of Ultra Rapid Lispro (URLi) in Adults with Type 1 Diabetes: The PRONTO-T1D Extension

INTRODUCTION

The PRONTO-T1D study, which evaluated the efficacy and safety of ultra rapid lispro (URLi) versus lispro in adults with type 1 diabetes (T1D), met the primary endpoint of noninferiority of HbA1c change from baseline compared to lispro at 26 weeks. We present results of an additional 26-week treatment phase evaluating long-term efficacy and safety of URLi.

METHODS

In this phase 3, treat-to-target study, subjects were randomized to double-blind mealtime URLi, lispro, or open-label postmeal URLi with insulin degludec or glargine for 26 weeks. Subjects in the double-blind URLi (n = 451) and lispro (n = 442) groups continued for another 26 weeks to assess long-term efficacy and safety.

RESULTS

HbA1c increased marginally during the long-term maintenance period (week 26-52) in both groups to 7.47% (URLi) and 7.54% (lispro). At week 52, there were no statistically significant treatment differences in change from baseline HbA1c with a least-squares mean treatment difference (95% confidence interval) of - 0.06% (- 0.16, 0.03). Proportions of patients with HbA_1c < 7% at week 52 were similar (URLi, 26.8%; lispro, 24.5%). Self-monitored blood glucose (SMBG) showed that 1-h (9.23 versus 10.14 mmol/L) and 2-h (8.40 versus 9.53 mmol/L) postmeal daily mean glucose was statistically significantly (p < 0.001) lower with URLi than lispro. The rate and incidence of severe, documented, and postprandial hypoglycemia (< 54 mg/dl [3.0 mmol/L]) were similar between treatments, but URLi demonstrated a 31% lower rate in the period more than 4 h after meals, (p = 0.023). Injection site reactions were reported by 3.3% of patients on URLi and 0.9% on lispro. The incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events was similar between treatments.

CONCLUSION

Overall glycemic control and improved postprandial glucose via SMBG were maintained after 52 weeks with URLi versus lispro, suggesting that the efficacy of URLi is preserved during long-term treatment in patients with T1D. No long-term safety issues were identified with URLi.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03214367.

Improving the treatment of patients with diabetes using insulin analogues: current findings and future directions

Introduction: The aim of insulin replacement in insulin-deficient people (type 1 diabetes, pancreatic causes of diabetes, long-standing type 2 diabetes) is to approximate the physiologic insulin action profile as closely as possible. However, short-acting human insulins start too slow and act too long, causing postprandial hyperglycemia and delayed hypoglycemia, while the insulin action profile of long-acting human insulins is too variable in duration and strength of action, leading to insufficient basal insulin covering and peak insulin levels after injection causing early nocturnal hypoglycemia. Insulin analogues were designed to overcome these shortcomings. In insulin-resistant people (type 2 diabetes), insulin analogues contribute to more efficient and safer insulin supplementation. Areas covered: In this review, we describe the unmet needs for insulin therapy, the currently available short- and long-acting insulin analogues and some considerations on cardiovascular outcomes, use in special populations, and cost-effectiveness. Finally, we discuss what is new in the field of insulin analogues. Expert opinion: The development of insulin analogues is an important step in diabetes treatment. Despite many patients meeting their glycemic targets with the newest analogues, hypoglycemic episodes remain a major problem. More physiologic insulin regimens, with glucose-sensitive or organ-targeting insulin analogues may be the answer to these issues.

Defining estimands using a mix of strategies to handle intercurrent events in clinical trials

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are the gold standard for evaluation of the efficacy and safety of investigational interventions. If every patient in an RCT were to adhere to the randomized treatment, one could simply analyze the complete data to infer the treatment effect. However, intercurrent events (ICEs) including the use of concomitant medication for unsatisfactory efficacy, treatment discontinuation due to adverse events, or lack of efficacy may lead to interventions that deviate from the original treatment assignment. Therefore, defining the appropriate estimand (the appropriate parameter to be estimated) based on the primary objective of the study is critical prior to determining the statistical analysis method and analyzing the data. The International Council for Harmonisation (ICH) E9 (R1), adopted on November 20, 2019, provided five strategies to define the estimand: treatment policy, hypothetical, composite variable, while on treatment, and principal stratum. In this article, we propose an estimand using a mix of strategies in handling ICEs. This estimand is an average of the "null" treatment difference for those with ICEs potentially related to safety and the treatment difference for the other patients if they would complete the assigned treatments. Two examples from clinical trials evaluating antidiabetes treatments are provided to illustrate the estimation of this proposed estimand and to compare it with the estimates for estimands using hypothetical and treatment policy strategies in handling ICEs.

Implementation of tripartite estimands using adherence causal estimators under the causal inference framework

Intercurrent events (ICEs) and missing values are inevitable in clinical trials of any size and duration, making it difficult to assess the treatment effect for all patients in randomized clinical trials. Defining the appropriate estimand that is relevant to the clinical research question is the first step in analyzing data. The tripartite estimands, which evaluate the treatment differences in the proportion of patients with ICEs due to adverse events, the proportion of patients with ICEs due to lack of efficacy, and the primary efficacy outcome for those who can adhere to study treatment under the causal inference framework, are of interest to many stakeholders in understanding the totality of treatment effects. In this manuscript, we discuss the details of how to estimate tripartite estimands based on a causal inference framework and how to interpret tripartite estimates through a phase 3 clinical study evaluating a basal insulin treatment for patients with type 1 diabetes.

The Peripheral Peril: Injected Insulin Induces Insulin Insensitivity in Type 1 Diabetes

Insulin resistance is an underappreciated facet of type 1 diabetes that occurs with remarkable consistency and considerable magnitude. Although therapeutic innovations are continuing to normalize dysglycemia, a sizable body of data suggests a second metabolic abnormality-iatrogenic hyperinsulinemia-principally drives insulin resistance and its consequences in this population and has not been addressed. We review this evidence to show that injecting insulin into the peripheral circulation bypasses first-pass hepatic insulin clearance, which leads to the unintended metabolic consequence of whole-body insulin resistance. We propose restructuring insulin therapy to restore the physiological insulin balance between the hepatic portal and peripheral circulations and thereby avoid the complications of life-long insulin resistance. As technology rapidly advances and our ability to ensure euglycemia improves, iatrogenic insulin resistance will become the final barrier to overcome to restore normal physiology, health, and life in type 1 diabetes.

Estimation of group means using Bayesian generalized linear mixed models

Generalized linear mixed models (GLMM) are commonly used to model the treatment effect over time while controlling for important clinical covariates. Standard software procedures often provide estimates of the outcome based on the mean of the covariates; however, these estimates will be biased for the true group means in the GLMM. Implementing GLMM in the frequentist framework can lead to issues of convergence. A simulation study demonstrating the use of fully Bayesian GLMM for providing unbiased estimates of group means is shown. These models are very straightforward to implement and can be used for a broad variety of outcomes (eg, binary, categorical, and count data) that arise in clinical trials. We demonstrate the proposed method on a data set from a clinical trial in diabetes.

Peripherally delivered hepatopreferential insulin analog insulin-406 mimics the hypoglycaemia-sparing effect of portal vein human insulin infusion in dogs

AIMS

We previously quantified the hypoglycaemia-sparing effect of portal vs peripheral human insulin delivery. The current investigation aimed to determine whether a bioequivalent peripheral vein infusion of a hepatopreferential insulin analog, insulin-406, could similarly protect against hypoglycaemia.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Dogs received human insulin infusions into either the hepatic portal vein (PoHI, n = 7) or a peripheral vein (PeHI, n = 7) for 180 minutes at four-fold the basal secretion rate (6.6 pmol/kg/min) in a previous study. Insulin-406 (Pe406, n = 7) was peripherally infused at 6.0 pmol/kg/min, a rate determined to decrease plasma glucose by the same amount as with PoHI infusion during the first 60 minutes. Glucagon was fixed at basal concentrations, mimicking the diminished α-cell response seen in type 1 diabetes.

RESULTS

Glucose dropped quickly with PeHI infusion, reaching 41 ± 3 mg/dL at 60 minutes, but more slowly with PoHI and Pe406 infusion (67 ± 2 and 72 ± 4 mg/dL, respectively; P < 0.01 vs PeHI for both). The hypoglycaemic nadir (c. 40 mg/dL) occurred at 60 minutes with PeHI infusion vs 120 minutes with PoHI and Pe406 infusion. ΔAUC_epinephrine during the 180-minute insulin infusion period was two-fold higher with PeHI infusion compared with PoHI and Pe406 infusion. Glucose production (mg/kg/min) was least suppressed with PeHI infusion (Δ = 0.79 ± 0.33) and equally suppressed with PoHI and Pe406 infusion (Δ = 1.16 ± 0.21 and 1.18 ± 0.17, respectively; P = NS). Peak glucose utilization (mg/kg/min) was highest with PeHI infusion (4.94 ± 0.17) and less with PoHI and Pe406 infusion (3.58 ± 0.58 and 3.26 ± 0.08, respectively; P < 0.05 vs Pe for both).

CONCLUSIONS

Peripheral infusion of hepatopreferential insulin can achieve a metabolic profile that closely mimics portal insulin delivery, which reduces the risk of hypoglycaemia compared with peripheral insulin infusion.

[Insulin therapy-new insulin analogues]

A multitude of short-acting and long-acting insulin analogues are currently available for the treatment of diabetes mellitus, which mimic physiological insulin secretion better than normal insulins. By the use of ultrarapid insulin analogues postprandial glucose increases can be significantly reduced. Newer long-acting insulin analogues have a very stable action profile and reduce the rate of hypoglycemia, especially nocturnal hypoglycemia, even more than first generation long-acting insulin analogues. Future developments focus on a further acceleration of prandial insulin effects with a simultaneous shorter effect time and an even more prolonged action of long-acting insulin analogues.

Basal insulin peglispro increases lipid oxidation, metabolic flexibility, thermogenesis and ketone bodies compared to insulin glargine in subjects with type 1 diabetes mellitus

AIMS

When treated with basal insulin peglispro (BIL), patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) exhibit weight loss and lower prandial insulin requirements versus insulin glargine (GL), while total insulin requirements remain similar. One possible explanation is enhanced lipid oxidation and improved ability to switch between glucose and lipid metabolism with BIL. This study compared the effects of BIL and GL on glucose and lipid metabolism in subjects with T1DM.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Fifteen subjects with T1DM were enrolled into this open-label, randomised, crossover study, and received once-daily stable, individualised, subcutaneous doses of BIL and GL for 4 weeks each. Respiratory quotient (RQ) was measured using whole-room calorimetry, and energy expenditure (EE) and concentrations of ketone bodies (3-hydroxybutyrate) and acylcarnitines were assessed.

RESULTS

Mean sleep RQ was lower during the BIL (0.822) than the GL (0.846) treatment period, indicating greater lipid metabolism during the post-absorptive period with BIL. Increases in carbohydrate oxidation following breakfast were greater during BIL than GL treatment (mean change in RQ following breakfast 0.111 for BIL, 0.063 for GL). Furthermore, BIL treatment increased total daily EE versus GL (2215.9 kcal/d for BIL, 2135.5 kcal/d for GL). Concentrations of ketone bodies and acylcarnitines appeared to be higher following BIL than GL treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

BIL increased sleeping fat oxidation, EE, ketone bodies, acylcarnitines and post-prandial glucose metabolism when switching from conventional insulin, thus, restoring metabolic flexibility and increasing thermogenesis. These changes may explain the previously observed weight loss with BIL versus GL.

Relationship of Glucose Variability With Glycated Hemoglobin and Daily Mean Glucose: A Post Hoc Analysis of Data From 5 Phase 3 Studies

BACKGROUND

The association of glucose variability (GV) with other glycemic measures is emerging as a topic of interest. The aim of this analysis is to study the correlation between GV and measures of glycemic control, such as glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) and daily mean glucose (DMG).

METHODS

Data from 5 phase 3 trials were pooled into 3 analysis groups: type 2 diabetes (T2D) treated with basal insulin only, T2D treated with basal-bolus therapy, and type 1 diabetes (T1D). A generalized boosted model was used post hoc to assess the relationship of the following variables with glycemic control parameters (HbA1c and DMG): within-day GV, between-day GV (calculated using self-monitored blood glucose and fasting blood glucose [FBG]), hypoglycemia rate, and certain baseline characteristics.

RESULTS

Within-day GV (calculated using standard deviation [SD]) was found to have a significant influence on endpoints HbA1c and DMG in all 3 patient groups. Between-day GV from FBG (calculated using SD), within-day GV (calculated using coefficient of variation), and hypoglycemia rate were found to significantly influence the endpoint HbA1c in the T2D basal-only group.

CONCLUSIONS

Lower within-day GV was significantly associated with improvement in DMG and HbA1c. This finding suggests that GV could be a marker in the early phases of new antihyperglycemic therapy development for predicting clinical outcomes in terms of HbA1c and DMG.

Attenuated suppression of lipolysis explains the increases in triglyceride secretion and concentration associated with basal insulin peglispro relative to insulin glargine treatment in patients with type 1 diabetes

AIMS

To test the hypothesis that, as well as lowering weight and increasing plasma triglyceride (TG) levels and hepatic fat compared with insulin glargine (GL) in patients with type 1 diabetes, the attenuated peripheral effects of basal insulin peglispro (BIL) may include increased free fatty acid flux to the liver, causing increased very-low-density lipoprotein (VLDL)-TG secretion and lipid oxidation, and decreased TG adipose tissue deposition.

METHODS

In this open-label, randomized, 2-period crossover study, 14 patients with type 1 diabetes received once-daily, individualized, stable BIL or GL doses for 3 weeks. Palmitate flux was assessed using [9,10-³ H]palmitate infusion. VLDL-TG secretion, clearance and oxidation rate were assessed using primed-constant infusion of ex vivo labelled [1-¹⁴ C]VLDL-TG, while VLDL-TG storage rate was assessed using [9,10-³ H]VLDL-TG bolus injection.

RESULTS

The VLDL-TG concentration and secretion rate, and palmitate flux were statistically significantly higher during BIL than during GL treatment (58%, 51% and 35%, respectively). The ratios of least squares (LS) geometric means for VLDL-TG clearance and oxidation were 0.92 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.72, 1.17) and 1.31 (95% CI 0.91, 1.90), respectively. The difference in LS means for VLDL-TG storage rate was -0.36 (95% CI -0.83, 0.12).

CONCLUSIONS

BIL-treated patients had higher effective lipolysis, VLDL-TG secretion and VLDL-TG concentration compared with GL-treated patients, explaining the increased plasma TG concentrations reported previously. Data support attenuated effects of BIL on lipolysis, in addition to the recently described hepato-preferential glucodynamic effects.

Effects of hepato-preferential basal insulin peglispro on nuclear magnetic resonance biomarkers lipoprotein insulin resistance index and GlycA in patients with diabetes

AIM

To characterize the effects of hepato-preferential basal insulin peglispro (BIL) and insulin glargine on insulin resistance (lipoprotein insulin resistance index [LP-IR]) and inflammation (GlycA), and to explore the biological implications.

METHODS

This substudy included 847 patients with Type 1 diabetes (T1D) or Type 2 diabetes (T2D) in four cohorts of the BIL development program. LP-IR and GlycA were measured before and after insulin treatment. Correlations between LP-IR, GlycA, clinical parameters and liver biomarkers were assessed.

RESULTS

LP-IR and GlycA were higher in T2D than T1D. LP-IR increased in patients switched from basal insulins to BIL but not in insulin-naive patients. GlycA decreased in T2D patients treated with BIL and T1D patients treated with glargine.

CONCLUSION

These exploratory analyses help to characterize differences in biological effects between BIL and glargine treatment.

Dose Unit Establishment for a New Basal Insulin Using Joint Modeling of Insulin Dose and Glycemic Response

BACKGROUND

For new insulin analogs with properties that vary from human insulin, defining activity in units of human insulin based on glycemic lowering efficacy may be challenging. Here we present a new method that can be used to quantify a unit dose of an experimental insulin when the traditional euglycemic clamp method is not adequate.

METHODS

Joint modeling of insulin dose and the glycemic outcome variable hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), where both were response variables, was used to evaluate insulin unit potency for basal insulin peglispro (BIL). The data were from the Phase 3 program for BIL, which included greater than 5500 patients with type 1 or type 2 diabetes who were treated for 26 or 52 weeks with BIL or a comparator insulin. Both basal-bolus and basal insulin only studies were included, and some type 2 diabetes patients were insulin-naïve.

RESULTS

The analysis showed that 1 unit of BIL, composed of 9 nmol of active ingredient, had similar or slightly greater potency compared to 1 unit insulin glargine or NPH insulin for all populations.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite some limitations, the joint modeling of HbA1c and insulin dose provides a reasonable approach to estimate the relative potency of a new basal insulin versus an established basal insulin.

Cytokeratin-18 and enhanced liver fibrosis scores in type 1 and type 2 diabetes and effects of two different insulins

Data on cytokeratin-18 (K-18) and enhanced liver fibrosis (ELF) score in insulin-treated diabetes patients with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) are limited. This study analyzed phase III data comparing basal insulin peglispro (BIL) and insulin glargine in type 1 (T1D), and type 2 diabetes (T2D) (insulin-naïve and insulin-treated). Alanine aminotransferase (ALT), K-18, ELF scores and liver fat content (LFC), measured by MRI, were obtained longitudinally. Baseline K-18 (U/L) was higher in T2D (range: 207‒247) than T1D (range: 148‒183), correlated with ALT in all populations (r (range) 0.264‒0.637, p<0.05), but with LFC only in T2D (r (range) 0.474‒0.586, p<0.05). K-18 increased significantly from baseline in BIL-treated, but not glargine-treated patients. Change from baseline (CFB) K-18 was significantly correlated with CFB in ALT in BIL-treated T2D populations. Baseline ELF scores were higher in T2D (range: 9.12‒9.20) than T1D (range: 8.24‒8.36), correlated with ALT in T1D only (0.209, p<0.05), and not correlated with LFC in any population. ELF scores increased significantly from baseline in BIL-treated but not glargine-treated patients. There were no correlations between CFB in LFC and ELF score at week 52 in any treatment group/population. In all BIL-treated populations, CFB in ALT and CFB in ELF score at week 52 were positively correlated. These data characterize associations of K-18 and ELF score with ALT and LFC in insulin-treated patients with T1D and T2D. Hepatopreferential insulins may be associated with increased K-18 and ELF scores but mechanisms and clinical significance are unknown. ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers are NCT01481779, NCT01435616, NCT01454284 and NCT01582451.

Non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) prevalence and its metabolic associations in patients with type 1 diabetes and type 2 diabetes

We investigated non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) prevalence and its metabolic associations in patients with type 1 diabetes (T1D), and in insulin-naïve and insulin-treated patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D). Baseline data from patients who had liver fat content (LFC) evaluated by magnetic resonance imaging in four phase 3 studies of basal insulin peglispro (BIL) were analysed. Associations of NAFLD with clinical characteristics, glycaemic control and diabetes therapy were evaluated. The prevalence of NAFLD (defined as LFC ≥ 6%) was low in T1D (8.8%) but high in T2D, with greater prevalence in insulin-naïve (75.6%) vs insulin-treated (61.7%) T2D patients. LFC (mean ± SD) was higher in T2D patients (insulin-naïve, 13.0% ± 8.4%; insulin-treated, 10.2% ± 7.8%) than in T1D patients (3.2% ± 3.2%). In T2D, NAFLD was associated with several markers of insulin resistance. In all three populations, there was an absence of association of HbA1c with LFC, but insulin doses were higher in patients with NAFLD.

Hypoglycemia Risk Related to Double Dose Is Markedly Reduced with Basal Insulin Peglispro Versus Insulin Glargine in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus in a Randomized Trial: IMAGINE 8

BACKGROUND

Basal insulin peglispro (BIL) has a peripheral-to-hepatic distribution of action that resembles endogenous insulin and a prolonged duration of action with a flat pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic profile at steady state, characteristics that tend to reduce hypoglycemia risk compared to insulin glargine (GL). The primary objective was to demonstrate that clinically significant hypoglycemia (blood glucose ≤54 mg/dL [3.0 mmol/L] or symptoms of severe hypoglycemia) occurred less frequently within 84 h after a double dose (DD) of BIL than a DD of GL.

METHODS

This was a randomized, double-blind, two-period crossover study in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) previously treated with insulin (N = 68). For the first 3 weeks of each of the two crossover periods, patients received an individualized dose of BIL or GL once nightly (stable dose for 2 weeks/period). Then, during a 7-day inpatient stay with frequent blood glucose monitoring and standardized meals, one DD of study insulin was given. Glucose was infused if blood glucose was ≤54 mg/dL (3.0 mmol/L) or for symptoms of severe hypoglycemia.

RESULTS

Within 84 h after the DD, a significantly smaller proportion of patients experienced clinically significant hypoglycemia with BIL compared to GL (BIL, 6.6%; GL, 35.5%; odds ratio for BIL/GL 0.13 [95% confidence interval 0.04-0.39]; P < 0.001). Adverse event profiles were similar for the two insulins. Serum alanine aminotransferase and triglyceride levels were significantly higher with BIL versus GL.

CONCLUSIONS

BIL has a markedly lower risk of hypoglycemia than GL when replicating a double-dose error in patients with T2D.

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.

The effects of basal insulin peglispro vs. insulin glargine on lipoprotein particles by NMR and liver fat content by MRI in patients with diabetes

Background

In Phase 2/3 studies of basal insulin peglispro (BIL) compared to insulin glargine, patients with type 1 or type 2 diabetes previously treated with insulin and randomized to BIL had an increase in serum triglycerides (TGs). To further understand lipoprotein changes, a lipid substudy which included liver fat content was designed to assess relationships among the measured variables for each diabetes cohort and compare the hepato-preferential insulin BIL to glargine.

Methods

In three cohorts of patients with diabetes (type 1, type 2 insulin naïve, and type 2 previously on insulin; n = 652), liver fat content (LFC) was determined by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and blood lipids were analyzed by nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) spectroscopy at baseline, 26 and 52 weeks of treatment. Apolipoproteins, adiponectin, and other lipid parameters were also measured. Descriptive statistics were done, as well as correlation analyses to look for relationships among LFC and lipoproteins or other lipid measures.

Results

In patients with type 1 diabetes treated with BIL, but not glargine, small LDL and medium and large VLDL subclass concentrations increased from baseline. In patients with type 2 diabetes previously on insulin and treated with BIL, large VLDL concentration increased from baseline. In insulin naïve patients with type 2 diabetes treated with BIL, there were very few changes, while in those treated with glargine, small LDL and large VLDL decreased from baseline. Baseline LFC correlated significantly in one or more cohorts with baseline large VLDL, small LDL, VLDL size, and Apo C3. Changes in LFC by treatment showed generally weak correlations with lipoprotein changes, except for positive correlations with large VLDL and VLDL size. Adiponectin was higher in patients with type 1 diabetes compared to patients with type 2 diabetes, but decreased with treatment with both BIL and glargine.

Conclusions

The lipoprotein changes were in line with the observed changes in serum TGs; i.e., the cohorts experiencing increased TGs and LFC with BIL treatment had decreased LDL size and increased VLDL size. These data and analyses add to the currently available information on the metabolic effects of insulins in a very carefully characterized cohort of patients with diabetes.

Clinicaltrials.gov registration numbers and dates NCT01481779 (2011), NCT01435616 (2011), NCT01454284 (2011), NCT01582451 (2012)

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12933-017-0555-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Novel hepato-preferential basal insulin peglispro (BIL) does not differentially affect insulin sensitivity compared with insulin glargine in patients with type 1 and type 2 diabetes

AIMS

Basal insulin peglispro (BIL) is a novel PEGylated basal insulin with a flat pharmacokinetic and glucodynamic profile and reduced peripheral effects, which results in a hepato-preferential action. In Phase 3 trials, patients with T1DM treated with BIL had lower prandial insulin requirements, yet improved prandial glucose control, relative to insulin glargine (GL). We hypothesized that this may be because of an enhanced sensitivity to prandial insulin with BIL resulting from lower chronic peripheral insulin action.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Two open-label, randomized, 2-period crossover clinical studies were conducted in 28 patients with T1DM and 24 patients with T2DM. In each study period, patients received once-daily, individualized, stable, subcutaneous doses of BIL or GL for 5 weeks before a euglycaemic 2-step hyperinsulinemic clamp procedure (with [6,6- ² H₂ ]-glucose in 12 of the patients with T1DM). M-values were derived from the clamp procedure for all patients, with rate of glucose appearance (Ra) and disappearance (Rd) and insulin sensitivity index (SI) determined from the clamps with [6,6- ² H₂ ]-glucose.

RESULTS

There were no statistically significant differences between BIL and GL in key measures of hepatic (% Ra suppression during the low-dose insulin infusion; 78.7% with BIL, 81.8% with GL) or peripheral (M-value and M/I during the high-dose insulin infusion, Rd and SI) insulin sensitivity in patients with T1DM or T2DM.

CONCLUSIONS

The need to reduce prandial insulin observed with BIL during phase 3 trials cannot be explained by the differential effects of BIL and GL on sensitivity to prandial insulin in either T1DM or T2DM.

Randomized double-blind clinical trial comparing basal insulin peglispro and insulin glargine, in combination with prandial insulin lispro, in patients with type 2 diabetes: IMAGINE 4

AIMS

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of basal insulin peglispro (BIL) with those of insulin glargine, both in combination with prandial insulin lispro, in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D).

METHODS

In this phase III, multicentre, double-blind, 26-week study, we randomized patients with T2D [glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) ≥7 and <12%, on ≥1 insulin injections daily) to BIL (n = 691) or glargine (n = 678), in combination with lispro.

RESULTS

At week 26, the primary objective of non-inferiority of BIL versus glargine for HbA1c reduction was achieved (least squares mean difference -0.21%; 95% confidence interval -0.31 to -0.11%), with statistical superiority of BIL with multiplicity adjustment (p < 0.001). HbA1c at baseline was 8.4% versus 8.5% for BIL versus glargine and at 26 weeks it was 6.8% versus 7.0%. At 26 weeks, more patients reached HbA1c <7% with BIL than with glargine (63.3% vs 53.3%; p < 0.001), the nocturnal hypoglycaemia rate (≤3.9 mmol/l) was lower with BIL (0.51 vs 0.92 events/30 days; p < 0.001), but the daytime hypoglycaemia rate was higher with BIL (5.47 vs 4.53 events/30 days; p < 0.001). The total hypoglycaemia relative rate was 1.10 (p = 0.053). At 26 weeks, patients in the BIL group had lower fasting serum glucose levels, higher basal insulin dosing, with no statistically significant difference in prandial or total insulin dosing, reduced glucose variability and less weight gain (1.3 kg vs 2.2 kg) compared with the glargine group. The BIL group had higher mean triglyceride and aminotransferase levels.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with T2D, BIL with insulin lispro provided greater improvement in glycaemic control with less nocturnal hypoglycaemia, lower glucose variability and less weight gain compared with glargine. The daytime hypoglycaemia rate and mean triglyceride and aminotransferase levels were higher with BIL.

Lipid changes during basal insulin peglispro, insulin glargine, or NPH treatment in six IMAGINE trials

Basal insulin peglispro (BIL) is a novel basal insulin with hepato-preferential action resulting from reduced peripheral effects. This report provides an integrated summary of lipid changes at 26 weeks with BIL and comparator insulins (glargine, NPH) from phase III studies in type 1 diabetes (T1D), insulin-naïve patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D), patients with T2D on basal insulin only and patients with T2D on basal-bolus therapy. BIL treatment had little effect on HDL cholesterol and LDL cholesterol in all patients. The effect of both BIL and glargine treatment on triglycerides (TG) depended on whether patients had been previously treated with insulin. When BIL replaced conventional insulin glargine or NPH treatments, increases in TG levels were observed. When BIL or comparator insulins were given for 26 weeks to insulin-naïve patients with T2D, TG levels were unchanged from baseline with BIL but decreased with either glargine or NPH. The decreased peripheral action of BIL may reduce suppression of lipolysis in peripheral adipose tissue resulting in increased free fatty acid delivery to the liver and, hence, increased hepatic TG synthesis and secretion.

Reduced nocturnal hypoglycaemia with basal insulin peglispro compared with insulin glargine: pooled analyses of five randomized controlled trials

Basal insulin peglispro (BIL) is a novel basal insulin with hepato-preferential action, resulting from reduced peripheral effects. This report summarizes hypoglycaemia data from five BIL phase III studies with insulin glargine as the comparator, including three double-blind trials. Prespecified pooled analyses (n = 4927) included: patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) receiving basal insulin only, those with T2D on basal-bolus therapy, and those with type 1 diabetes (T1D). BIL treatment resulted in a 36-45% lower nocturnal hypoglycaemia rate compared with glargine, despite greater reduction in glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) and higher basal insulin dosing. The total hypoglycaemia rate was similar in patients with T2D on basal treatment only, trended towards being higher (10%) in patients with T2D on basal-bolus treatment (p = .053), and was 15% higher (p < .001) with BIL versus glargine in patients with T1D, with more daytime hypoglycaemia in the T1D and T2D groups who were receiving basal-bolus therapy. In T1D, during the maintenance treatment period (26-52 weeks), the total hypoglycaemia rate was not significantly different. There were no differences in severe hypoglycaemia in the T1D or T2D pooled analyses. BIL versus glargine treatment resulted in greater HbA1c reduction with less nocturnal hypoglycaemia in all patient populations, higher daytime hypoglycaemia with basal-bolus therapy in the T1D and T2D groups, and an associated increase in total hypoglycaemia in the patients with T1D.

Basal insulin peglispro: Overview of a novel long-acting insulin with reduced peripheral effect resulting in a hepato-preferential action

Basal insulin peglispro (BIL) is a novel basal insulin with a flat, prolonged activity profile. BIL has been demonstrated in a dog model, in healthy men and in patients with type 1 diabetes (T1D) to have significant hepato-preferential action resulting from reduced peripheral activity. In the IMAGINE-Phase 3 clinical trial program, more than 6000 patients were included, of whom ~3900 received BIL. Of the 7 pivotal IMAGINE trials, 3 studies were double-blinded and 3 were in T1D patients. BIL consistently demonstrated a greater HbA1c reduction, less glycaemic variability and a clinically relevant reduction in the rates of nocturnal hypoglycaemia across comparator [glargine and isophane insulin (NPH)] studies. Trials using basal/bolus regimens had higher rates of total hypoglycaemia with BIL due to higher rates of daytime hypoglycaemia. Severe hypoglycaemia rates were similar to comparator among both patients with T1D or type 2 diabetes (T2D). T1D patients lost weight compared with glargine (GL). Patients with T2D tended to gain less weight with BIL than with glargine. Compared to glargine, BIL was associated with higher liver fat, triglycerides and alanine aminotransferase (ALT) levels, including a higher frequency of elevation of ALT ≥3 times the upper limit of normal, but without severe, acute drug-induced liver injury. Injection site reactions, primarily lipohypertrophy, were more frequent with BIL. In conclusion, BIL demonstrated better glycaemic control with reduced glucose variability and nocturnal hypoglycaemia but higher triglycerides, ALT and liver fat relative to conventional comparator insulin. The hepato-preferential action of BIL with reduced peripheral activity may account for these findings.

Different effects of basal insulin peglispro and insulin glargine on liver enzymes and liver fat content in patients with type 1 and type 2 diabetes

AIMS

To compare effects of basal insulin peglispro (BIL), a hepatopreferential insulin, to insulin glargine (glargine) on aminotransferases and liver fat content (LFC) in patients with type 1 and type 2 diabetes (T1D, T2D).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Data from two Phase 2 and five Phase 3 randomized trials comparing BIL and glargine in 1709 T1D and 3662 T2D patients were integrated for analysis of liver laboratory tests. LFC, measured by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) at baseline, 26 and 52 weeks, was analyzed in 182 T1D patients, 176 insulin-naïve T2D patients and 163 T2D patients previously treated with basal insulin.

RESULTS

Alanine aminotransferase (ALT) increased in patients treated with BIL, was higher than in glargine-treated patients at 4-78 weeks (difference at 52 weeks in both T1D and T2D: 7 international units/litre (IU/L), P < .001), and decreased after discontinuation of BIL. More BIL patients had ALT ≥3× upper limit of normal (ULN) than glargine. No patient had ALT ≥3× ULN with bilirubin ≥2× ULN that was considered causally related to BIL. In insulin-naїve T2D patients, LFC decreased with glargine but was unchanged with BIL. In T1D and T2D patients previously treated with basal insulin, LFC was unchanged with glargine but increased with BIL. In all three populations, LFC was higher after treatment with BIL vs glargine (difference at 52 weeks: 2.2% to 5.3%, all P < .01).

CONCLUSIONS

Compared to glargine, patients treated with BIL had higher ALT and LFC at 52-78 weeks. No severe drug-induced liver injury was apparent with BIL treatment for up to 78 weeks.

Reduced peripheral activity leading to hepato-preferential action of basal insulin peglispro compared with insulin glargine in patients with type 1 diabetes

AIMS

Basal insulin peglispro (BIL), a novel PEGylated basal insulin with a large hydrodynamic size, has a delayed absorption and reduced clearance that prolongs the duration of action. The current study compared the effects of BIL and insulin glargine (GL) on endogenous glucose production (EGP), glucose disposal rate (GDR) and lipolysis in patients with type 1 diabetes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was a randomized, open-label, four-period, crossover study. Patients received intravenous infusions of BIL and GL, each at two dose levels selected for partial and maximal suppression of EGP, during an 8 to 10 h euglycemic clamp procedure with d-[3-³ H] glucose.

RESULTS

Following correction for equivalent human insulin concentrations (EHIC), low-dose GL infusion resulted in similar EGP at the end of the clamp compared to low-dose BIL infusion (GL/BIL ratio of 1.03) but a higher GDR (GL/BIL ratio of 2.42), indicating similar hepatic activity but attenuated peripheral activity of BIL. Consistent with this, the EHIC-corrected GDR/EGP at the end of the clamp was 1.72-fold greater for GL than BIL following low-dose administration. At the lower dose of BIL and GL (concentrations in the therapeutic range), BIL produced less suppression of lipolysis compared with GL as indicated by free fatty acid and glycerol levels at the end of the clamp.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with GL, BIL restored the hepato-peripheral insulin action gradient seen in normal physiology via its peripherally restricted action on target tissues related to carbohydrate and lipid metabolism.

A randomized clinical trial comparing basal insulin peglispro and insulin glargine, in combination with prandial insulin lispro, in patients with type 1 diabetes: IMAGINE 1

AIMS

The primary objective was to demonstrate that basal insulin peglispro (BIL) was non-inferior compared with insulin glargine (GL) for haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) at 26 weeks with a non-inferiority margin of 0.4%.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

IMAGINE 1 was a Phase 3, open-label, parallel-arm study conducted in nine countries. Adults with type 1 diabetes (n = 455) were randomized (2:1) to bedtime BIL or GL in combination with prandial insulin lispro for 78 weeks, with a primary endpoint of 26 weeks. An electronic diary facilitated data capture and insulin dosing calculations for intensive insulin management.

RESULTS

At 26 weeks, mean HbA1c was 7.06% ± 0.04% and 7.43% ± 0.06% for patients assigned to BIL (N = 295) and GL (N = 160), respectively (difference -0.37% [95% CI: -0.50 to -0.23], P < .001); more patients on BIL achieved HbA1c <7% (44.9% vs 27.5%, P < .001). Compared with GL, patients using BIL lost weight, with lower fasting serum glucose and between-day fasting blood glucose variability, and 36% less nocturnal hypoglycemia, 29% more total hypoglycemia and more severe hypoglycemia. Total and prandial insulin doses were lower with BIL; basal insulin doses were higher. Alanine aminotransferase increased with BIL, with more patients having elevations ≥3 × ULN. BIL treatment was associated with more frequent injection site reactions and an increase from baseline in serum triglycerides.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with type 1 diabetes, treatment with BIL compared to GL for 26 weeks was associated with lower HbA1c, less nocturnal hypoglycemia, lower glucose variability and weight loss. Increases in total and severe hypoglycemia, triglycerides, aminotransferases and injection site reactions were also noted.

Similar HbA1c reduction and hypoglycaemia with variable- vs fixed-time dosing of basal insulin peglispro in type 1 diabetes: IMAGINE 7 study

AIMS

To compare 24-hour fixed-time basal insulin peglispro (BIL) dosing with 8- to 40-hour variable-time BIL dosing for glycaemic control and safety in patients with type 1 diabetes. Primary outcome was non-inferiority of BIL variable-time dosing compared with fixed-time dosing for glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) change after 12-week treatment (margin = 0.4%).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This Phase 3, open-label, randomized, cross-over study (N = 212) was conducted at 20 centres in the United States. During the 12-week lead-in phase, patients received BIL daily at fixed-times. Two 12-week randomized cross-over treatment phases followed, where patients received BIL dosed at either fixed- or variable-times. During the 4-week safety follow-up, patients received conventional insulins.

RESULTS

During the lead-in period, least-squares mean HbA1c decreased from 7.5% to 6.8%. For BIL, variable-time dosing was non-inferior to fixed-time dosing for HbA1c change [least-squares mean difference = 0.06%, 95% confidence interval (-0.01, 0.13)]. In both regimens, HbA1c increased slightly during the cross-over periods, but remained significantly below baseline. Variable- and fixed-time dosing regimens had similar rates of total hypoglycaemia (10.4 ± 0.62 and 10.5 ± 0.67 events/patient/30 days, P = .947) and nocturnal hypoglycaemia (1.3 ± 0.11 and 1.5 ± 0.13 events/patient/30days, P = .060). Comparable proportions of patients achieved HbA1c < 7.0% with variable- [91 (54.5%)] and fixed-time dosing [101 (60.5%)].

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment with BIL allows patients to use flexible dosing intervals from 8 to 40 hours. Glycaemic efficacy (HbA1c), glycaemic variability and hypoglycaemia are similar to fixed-time dosing, suggesting that BIL could potentially provide flexibility in dosing for patients who miss their daily basal insulin.