Identification of barriers to insulin therapy and approaches to overcoming them

Reduced Rate of Hospitalizations for Acute Diabetes Events Before and After FreeStyle Libre® System Initiation in Some People With Type 2 Diabetes on Insulin-Secretagogue Oral Drug Therapy Without Insulin in France

Objective: Glycemic management in people with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) on insulin-secretagogue regimens without insulin is of importance, as this group still represents a significant proportion of patients. Risks for acute diabetes events (ADEs), including diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) or hypoglycemia, using insulin-secretagogue drugs are well established. Few studies have suggested that continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) could be useful for monitoring glucose dynamics associated with the use of such therapies. To document this point an exploratory analysis was conducted in a group of individuals with noninsulin treated T2DM in France who are managed with oral insulin-secretagogues and initiating the FreeStyle Libre® system (FSL). Methods: A retrospective study of the French national SNDS reimbursement claims database (≈66 million French people) was conducted to identify people with T2DM on oral insulin-secretagogues and receiving a first reimbursement of FSL between August 1, 2017 and December 31, 2018. The analysis included data for the 12 months before and up to 24 months after FSL initiation. Hospitalizations for diabetes-related acute events were identified using ICD-10 codes as main or related diagnosis, for: hypoglycemic events; DKA events; comas; and hyperglycemia-related admissions. Results: A total of 1272 people with T2DM on insulin-secretagogues without insulin initiated FSL during the selection period. Of these, 7.15% had at least one hospitalization for any ADE in the year before FSL initiation, compared with 2.52% at 12 months and 2.83% at 24 months following FSL initiation. Reductions in ADEs were driven by -73% fewer admissions for ADEs related to diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) or other hyperglycemia-related events. These patterns of reduced ADEs persisted after 2 years. Conclusions: This study suggests the value of the FSL system in reducing ADEs in some people with T2DM in France being treated with insulin-secretagogues without insulin. Characteristics of these patients remain to be documented.

Continuous glucose monitoring for the routine care of type 2 diabetes mellitus

Although continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) devices are now considered the standard of care for people with type 1 diabetes mellitus, the uptake among people with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) has been slower and is focused on those receiving intensive insulin therapy. However, increasing evidence now supports the inclusion of CGM in the routine care of people with T2DM who are on basal insulin-only regimens or are managed with other medications. Expanding CGM to these groups could minimize hypoglycaemia while allowing efficient adaptation and escalation of therapies. Increasing evidence from randomized controlled trials and observational studies indicates that CGM is of clinical value in people with T2DM on non-intensive treatment regimens. If further studies confirm this finding, CGM could soon become a part of routine care for T2DM. In this Perspective we explore the potential benefits of widening the application of CGM in T2DM, along with the challenges that must be overcome for the evidence-based benefits of this technology to be delivered for all people with T2DM.

DCRM 2.0: Multispecialty practice recommendations for the management of diabetes, cardiorenal, and metabolic diseases

The spectrum of cardiorenal and metabolic diseases comprises many disorders, including obesity, type 2 diabetes (T2D), chronic kidney disease (CKD), atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD), heart failure (HF), dyslipidemias, hypertension, and associated comorbidities such as pulmonary diseases and metabolism dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease and metabolism dysfunction-associated steatohepatitis (MASLD and MASH, respectively, formerly known as nonalcoholic fatty liver disease and nonalcoholic steatohepatitis [NAFLD and NASH]). Because cardiorenal and metabolic diseases share pathophysiologic pathways, two or more are often present in the same individual. Findings from recent outcome trials have demonstrated benefits of various treatments across a range of conditions, suggesting a need for practice recommendations that will guide clinicians to better manage complex conditions involving diabetes, cardiorenal, and/or metabolic (DCRM) diseases. To meet this need, we formed an international volunteer task force comprising leading cardiologists, nephrologists, endocrinologists, and primary care physicians to develop the DCRM 2.0 Practice Recommendations, an updated and expanded revision of a previously published multispecialty consensus on the comprehensive management of persons living with DCRM. The recommendations are presented as 22 separate graphics covering the essentials of management to improve general health, control cardiorenal risk factors, and manage cardiorenal and metabolic comorbidities, leading to improved patient outcomes.

Once-weekly insulin icodec versus once-daily long-acting insulins for type 2 diabetes mellitus: Systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Insulin icodec is a novel, long-acting, once-weekly basal insulin analog. Its comparative efficacy and safety with basal once-daily insulins in type 2 diabetes mellittus is uncertain.

Objective

Evaluate potential efficacy, benefits and risks associated with icodec compared to once-daily basal insulin analogs (degludec or glargine).

Methods

We systematically searched PubMed, Cochrane, and Embase for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published until June 2023 comparing icodec versus long-acting insulin analogs (degludec and glargine) in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) with at least 12 weeks of follow-up. Binary endpoints were assessed with risk ratios (RRs) and continuous endpoints were compared using mean differences (MDs), with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). The protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42023452468).

Results

A total of seven RCTs and 3286 patients with T2DM were included, of whom 1509 (60.6%) received icodec treatment. The follow-up period ranged from 16 to 78 weeks. Compared with once-daily basal insulin analogs, icodec led to a greater improvement in HbA1c (MD -0.15%; 95% CI -0.21, -0.10; p < 0.0001; I2 = 0%) and time in range (TIR) (MD 2.83%; 95%CI 0.94; 4.71; p = 0.003; I2 = 22%). Body weight was increased with icodec treatment (MD 0.78 Kg; 95%CI 0.42, 1.15; p < 0.01; I2 = 86%). There was also a higher rate of injection site reactions (RR 1.89; 95%CI 1.12, 3.18; p = 0.016; I2 = 0%) and nasopharyngitis (RR 1.94; 95%CI 1.11, 3.38; p = 0.020; I2 = 0%) in the icodec group, compared with once-daily regimens. There was no significant difference between groups in fasting plasma glucose.

Conclusions

In this meta-analysis of RCTs, insulin icodec led to better control of HbA1c and TIR as compared with once-daily insulin regimens, albeit with increased weight gain and a higher rate of injection site reaction in the Icodec group.

Barriers to the Use of Insulin Therapy and Potential Solutions: A Narrative Review of Perspectives from the Asia-Pacific Region

The rising prevalence of type 2 diabetes (T2D) is posing major challenges for the healthcare systems of many countries, particularly in the Asia-Pacific Region, in which T2D can present at younger ages and lower body mass index when compared with Western nations. There is an important role for insulin therapy in the management of T2D in these nations, but available evidence suggests that insulin is under-utilized and often delayed, to the detriment of patient prognosis. The authors of this article gathered as an advisory panel (representative of some of the larger Asia-Pacific nations) to identify their local barriers to insulin use in T2D, and to discuss ways in which to address these barriers, with their outputs summarized herein. Many of the key barriers identified are well-documented issues of global significance, including a lack of healthcare resources or of an integrated structure, insufficient patient education, and patient misconceptions about insulin therapy. Barriers identified as more innate to Asian countries included local inabilities of patients to afford or gain access to insulin therapy, a tendency for some patients to be more influenced by social media and local traditions than by the medical profession, and a willingness to switch care providers and seek alternative therapies. Strategies to address some of these barriers are provided, with hypothetical illustrative case histories.

Open questions on basal insulin therapy in T2D: a Delphi consensus

AIMS

The revolution in the therapeutic approach to type 2 diabetes (T2D) requires a rethinking of the positioning of basal insulin (BI) therapy. Given the considerable number of open questions, a group of experts was convened with the aim of providing, through a Delphi consensus method, practical guidance for doctors.

METHODS

A group of 6 experts developed a series of 29 statements on: the role of metabolic control in light of the most recent guidelines; BI intensification strategies: (1) add-on versus switch; (2) inertia in starting and titrating; (3) free versus fixed ratio combination; basal-bolus intensification and de-intensification strategies; second generation analogues of BI (2BI). A panel of 31 diabetologists, by accessing a dedicated website, assigned each statement a relevance score on a 9-point scale. The RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method was adopted to assess the existence of disagreement among participants.

RESULTS

Panelists showed agreement for all 29 statements, of which 26 were considered relevant, one was considered not relevant and two were of uncertain relevance. Panelists agreed that the availability of new classes of drugs often allows the postponement of BI and the simplification of therapy. It remains essential to promptly initiate and titrate BI when required. BI should always, unless contraindicated, be started in addition to, and not as a replacement, for ongoing treatments with cardiorenal benefits. 2BIs should be preferred for their pharmacological profile, greater ease of self-titration and flexibility of administration.

CONCLUSION

In a continuously evolving scenario, BI therapy still represents an important option in the management of T2D patients.

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

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

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

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

Expert Opinion on Current Trends in the Use of Insulin in the Management of People with Type 2 Diabetes from the South-Eastern European Region and Israel

Despite the availability of various antihyperglycaemic therapies and comprehensive guidelines, glycaemic control in diabetes management has not improved significantly during the last decade in the real-world clinical setting. Treatment inertia arising from a complex interplay among patient-, clinician- and healthcare-system-related factors is the prime reason for this suboptimal glycaemic control. Also, the key factor leading to inadequate glycaemic levels remains limited communication between healthcare professionals (HCPs) and people with type 2 diabetes (PwT2D). Early insulin administration has several advantages including reduced glucotoxicity, high efficacy and preserved β-cell mass/function, leading to lowering the risk of diabetes complications. The current publication is based on consensus of experts from the South-Eastern European region and Israel who reviewed the existing evidence and guidelines for the treatment of PwT2D. Herein, the experts emphasised the timely use of insulin, preferably second-generation basal insulin (BI) analogues and intensification using basal-plus therapy, as the most-potent glucose-lowering treatment choice in the real-world clinical setting. Despite an increase in the use of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs), the experts urged timely insulin initiation for inadequate glycaemic control in PwT2D. Furthermore, the combination of BI and GLP-1 RA addressing both fasting plasma glucose and post-prandial excursions as a free- or fixed-ratio combination was identified to reduce treatment complexity and burden. To minimise discontinuation and improve adherence, the experts reiterated quality, regular interactions and discussions between HCPs and PwT2D/carers for their involvement in the diabetes management decision-making process. Clinicians and HCPs should consider the opinions of the experts in accordance with the most recent recommendations for diabetes management.

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

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

Impact of Participant Characteristics on Clinical Outcomes with iGlarLixi in Type 2 Diabetes: Post Hoc Analysis of SPARTA Japan

INTRODUCTION

The real-world SPARTA Japan study confirmed the effectiveness and safety of the fixed-ratio combination of insulin glargine 100 U/mL plus lixisenatide (iGlarLixi) once daily over 6 months in Japanese people with type 2 diabetes (T2D). This post hoc analysis examined the impact of participant characteristics on the achievement of age-defined glycaemic targets with iGlarLixi therapy.

METHODS

The retrospective, observational SPARTA Japan study included adults with T2D who initiated iGlarLixi. In this analysis, data from insulin-naïve and insulin-experienced participants were separately assessed to compare glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c), body weight and safety outcomes between those who achieved ('achieved' group) and those who did not achieve ('not-achieved' group) age-defined glycaemic targets after 6 months of iGlarLixi. The not-achieved group was further stratified by whether or not their iGlarLixi dose was increased during treatment.

RESULTS

In total, 418 participants were included in this analysis (138 insulin naïve and 280 insulin experienced). Among both insulin-naïve and insulin-experienced participants, those in the achieved group were older and had lower baseline HbA1c than those in the not-achieved group. Compared with the not-achieved group, the achieved group showed significantly greater HbA1c reductions from baseline (in both insulin-naïve and insulin-experienced participants) and significantly greater body weight reductions (in insulin-naïve participants), despite some participants in the not-achieved group receiving significantly higher insulin glargine doses than those in the achieved group. In both insulin-naïve and insulin-experienced participants, the incidence of hypoglycaemia and gastrointestinal-related adverse events was similar in the achieved and not-achieved groups. In a multivariate analysis, glycaemic target achievement was significantly more likely in older individuals and those who lost weight during iGlarLixi treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Achievement of age-defined glycaemic targets with iGlarLixi treatment for 6 months was significantly affected by increased age and body weight loss, regardless of prior insulin exposure.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

UMIN-CTR Trials Registry, UMIN000044126; registered 10 May 2021.

Evaluating Patient and Provider Preferences for a Once-Weekly Basal Insulin in Adults with Type 2 Diabetes

Purpose

The global burden of disease of type 2 diabetes (T2D) is significant, and insulin currently plays a central role in T2D management. This study sought to assess the preferences of patients with T2D and healthcare providers (HCPs) involved in T2D care regarding a hypothetical once-weekly basal insulin in comparison to current basal insulin options.

Patients and Methods

In a survey-based study in the United States that included a discrete choice experiment (DCE), patients with T2D (insulin naïve and current insulin users) and providers who treat individuals with T2D were asked to evaluate current basal insulins and identify attributes of importance regarding a hypothetical once-weekly basal insulin. A regression analysis was conducted to identify drivers of preference by relevant demographics, attitudes, and behaviors.

Results

Most respondents (91% of patients with T2D and 89% of HCPs in the base case scenario) would choose a once-weekly basal insulin product over another type of basal insulin. Both patients with T2D and HCPs rated insulin type and delivery method to be attributes of highest importance in the discrete choice exercise. Current basal insulin users ("insulin experienced") reported higher levels of confidence that a once-weekly insulin would help them to achieve their desired blood sugar levels compared to their current basal insulin (5.7 vs 5.2 on a 7-point Likert scale). Most insulin-experienced respondents (88%) were likely to inquire about once-weekly basal insulin, and most HCPs (85%) indicated willingness to educate patients on management of their T2D using a once-weekly basal insulin.

Conclusion

Discussing preferences for T2D medication management is important for patients and HCPs to ensure treatments are offered for patients based on their preferences. This study showed that patient and provider preferences are similar towards a once-weekly basal insulin over current basal insulin preparations.

The Short-Term Cost-Effectiveness of a Fixed-Ratio Combination of Insulin Degludec and Aspart: A Cost of Control Analysis in Australia and India

OBJECTIVES

The real-world ARISE study demonstrated initiation of fixed-ratio combination insulin degludec and aspart (IDegAsp) led to improvements in people achieving key glycemic control targets compared with prior therapies in Australia and India. This study evaluated the short-term cost-effectiveness of IDegAsp in these countries, in terms of the cost per patient achieving these targets.

METHODS

A model was developed to evaluate the cost of control (treatment costs divided by the proportion of patients achieving each target) of IDegAsp versus prior therapies received in ARISE for 2 endpoints: glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) <7.0%, and HbA1c less than a predefined individual treatment target. Costs, expressed from a healthcare payer perspective, were captured in 2022 Australian dollars (AUD) and 2022 Indian rupees (INR).

RESULTS

The number of patients needed to treat to bring one to endpoints of HbA1c <7.0% and less than an individualized target with IDegAsp was 51% and 87% lower, respectively, than with prior therapies in Australia, and 52% and 66% lower, respectively, versus prior therapies in India. Cost of control was AUD 2449 higher and AUD 64 863 lower with IDegAsp versus prior therapies for endpoints of HbA1c <7.0% and less than an individualized target, respectively, in Australia and INR 211 142 and INR 537 490 lower with IDegAsp compared with prior therapies in India.

CONCLUSIONS

IDegAsp was estimated to be cost-effective versus prior therapies when considering an individualized HbA1c target in Australia, and when considering an individualized HbA1c target and HbA1c <7.0% in India.

Initial Combination Therapy in Type 2 Diabetes

Type 2 diabetes (T2D) is a progressive disease in which it is challenging to achieve long-term durable glycemic control. However, intensive glycemic control is crucial for preventing diabetes-related complications. Previous studies showed that monotherapy with a stepwise add-on approach was seldom effective for long-term durable glycemic control. Combination therapy, which refers to the use of two or more drugs to control hyperglycemia, has multiple benefits, including the ability to target a variety of pathophysiological processes underlying hyperglycemia. In clinical trials, initial combination therapy showed better glycemic control than monotherapy or a stepwise approach. Emerging evidence indicates that initial combination therapy is associated with preserved β-cell function and fewer complications in T2D. However, cost-effectiveness and adverse events with combination therapy are issues that should be considered. Therefore, initial combination therapy is an important option for patients with T2D that clinicians should consider with a view toward balancing benefits and potential harms. In this review, we summarize the literature addressing initial combination therapy in T2D, and we suggest optimal strategies based on clinical situations and patient characteristics.

Effect of delay in treatment intensification in people with type 2 diabetes and suboptimal glycaemia after basal insulin initiation: A real-world observational study

AIM

Despite global recommendations for type 2 diabetes mellitus treatment to maintain optimal glycaemic targets, a significant proportion of people remain in suboptimal glycaemic control. Our objective was to investigate the impact of intensification delay after basal insulin (BI) initiation on long-term complications in people with suboptimal glycaemia.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study in individuals with type 2 diabetes mellitus initiated on BI. Those with suboptimal glycaemia (glycated haemoglobin ≥7% or ≥53 mmol/mol) within 12 months of BI initiation were divided into early (treatment intensified within 5 years), or late (≥5 years) intensification groups. We estimated the age-stratified risks of micro- and macrovascular complications among these groups compared with those with optimal glycaemia (glycated haemoglobin <7%).

RESULTS

Of the 13 916 people with suboptimal glycaemia, 52.5% (n = 7304) did not receive any treatment intensification. In those aged <65 years, compared with the optimal glycaemia group late intensification was associated with a 56% higher risk of macrovascular complications (adjusted hazard ratio 1.56; 95% confidence intervals 1.08, 2.26). In elderly people (≥65 years), late intensification was associated with a higher risk of cardiovascular-related death (1.62; 1.03, 2.54) and a lower risk of microvascular complications (0.26; 0.08, 0.83).

CONCLUSIONS

Those who had late intensification were at an increased risk of cardiovascular death if they were ≥65 years and an increased risk of macrovascular complications if they were <65 years. These findings highlight the critical need for earlier intensification of treatment and adopting personalized treatment strategies to improve patient outcomes.

Feasibility and acceptability of the use of flash glucose monitoring encountered by Indigenous Australians with type 2 diabetes mellitus: initial experiences from a pilot study

BACKGROUND

Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is highly prevalent within the Indigenous Australian community. Novel glucose monitoring technology offers an accurate approach to glycaemic management, providing real-time information on glucose levels and trends. The acceptability and feasibilility of this technology in Indigenous Australians with T2DM has not been investigated.

OBJECTIVE

This feasibility phenomenological study aims to understand the experiences of Indigenous Australians with T2DM using flash glucose monitoring (FGM).

METHODS

Indigenous Australians with T2DM receiving injectable therapy (n = 8) who used FGM (Abbott Freestyle Libre) for 6-months, as part of a clinical trial, participated in semi-structured interviews. Thematic analysis of the interviews was performed using NVivo12 Plus qualitative data analysis software (QSR International).

RESULTS

Six major themes emerged: 1) FGM was highly acceptable to the individual; 2) FGM's convenience was its biggest benefit; 3) data from FGM was a tool to modify lifestyle choices; 4) FGM needed to be complemented with health professional support; 5) FGM can be a tool to engage communities in diabetes management; and 6) cost of the device is a barrier to future use.

CONCLUSIONS

Indigenous Australians with T2DM had positive experiences with FGM. This study highlights future steps to ensure likelihood of FGM is acceptable and effective within the wider Indigenous Australian community.

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

AIMS

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

MATERIALS AND METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Impact of a multicomponent integrated care delivery program on diabetes care goals achievement: a primary care quality improvement initiative

AIM

To evaluate the impact of multicomponent integrated care (MIC) delivery program in a primary care real-life setting on diabetes care goals.

METHODS

Patients with T2D and usual primary care from the public health system in Mexico were invited to participate in a five-month ambulatory MIC quality initiative (DIAbetes Empowerment and Improvement of Care program, DIABEMPIC).

RESULTS

841 patients who finished the program and with complete data were analyzed. The patients had a mean decrease in hemoglobin A1c, systolic and diastolic pressure, and LDL-cholesterol of 2.4%, 9 mmHg, 3 mmHg, and 22.5 mg/dL, respectively (p < 0.001). The achievement of the optimal triple target goal increased from 1.8% to 26.7% (p < 0.001). In the adjusted analysis, the diabetes knowledge and global self-care behavior score post-intervention, as well as the increment of global self-care behavior score were associated with the optimal composite risk factor control achievement.

CONCLUSION

The incorporation of diabetes therapeutic education interventions to improve self-care behaviors along with adequate treatment intensification in diabetes care are fundamental to attaining optimal risk factor control and attenuating disease burden.

A framework for integrating artificial intelligence for clinical care with continuous therapeutic monitoring

The complex relationships between continuously monitored health signals and therapeutic regimens can be modelled via machine learning. However, the clinical implementation of the models will require changes to clinical workflows. Here we outline ClinAIOps ('clinical artificial-intelligence operations'), a framework that integrates continuous therapeutic monitoring and the development of artificial intelligence (AI) for clinical care. ClinAIOps leverages three feedback loops to enable the patient to make treatment adjustments using AI outputs, the clinician to oversee patient progress with AI assistance, and the AI developer to receive continuous feedback from both the patient and the clinician. We lay out the central challenges and opportunities in the deployment of ClinAIOps by means of examples of its application in the management of blood pressure, diabetes and Parkinson's disease. By enabling more frequent and accurate measurements of a patient's health and more timely adjustments to their treatment, ClinAIOps may substantially improve patient outcomes.

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.

Safety and Clinical Outcomes of Insulin Degludec in Korean Patients with Diabetes in Real-World Practices: A Prospective, Observational Study

INTRODUCTION

To investigate the safety and effectiveness of insulin degludec (IDeg) in a real-world population of Korean patients with diabetes requiring insulin therapy.

METHODS

This was a multicenter, prospective, single-arm, open-label, non-interventional study. Patients aged ≥ 12 months and treated with previous glucose-lowering medications were eligible to switch to IDeg. The primary endpoint was the incidence of adverse events (AEs), and the secondary endpoints were changes in glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c), fasting plasma glucose (FPG), postprandial glucose (PPG), and target HbA1c < 7.0%.

RESULTS

In total, 3225 and 2450 patients were included in the safety analysis set (SAS) and effectiveness analysis set (EAS), respectively. The mean baseline HbA1c and duration of diabetes were 9.4% and 13.0 years, respectively. Adverse events were reported in 740 patients (22.9%); the majority were mild and resolved. Significant improvements were observed in HbA1c, FPG, and PPG at week 26 (all p < 0.0001). The target of HbA1c < 7% was achieved in 22.2% of patients at week 26.

CONCLUSION

In real-world clinical practice, 26 weeks of IDeg treatment resulted in significant reductions in glycemic parameters with a low incidence of AEs in Korean patients with diabetes. No new safety signals were observed.

CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRY AND REGISTRATION NUMBER

This trial is registered under ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02779413) and the universal trial number is [U1111-1176-2287].

Evaluating the clinical effectiveness and safety of insulin glargine 300 U/mL in individuals with type 2 diabetes uncontrolled on basal insulin: A real-world evidence study from Saudi Arabia (EVOLUTION)

AIM

To evaluate the effectiveness and safety profile of switching to insulin glargine 300 U/mL (Gla-U300) in patients with uncontrolled type 2 diabetes (T2D) on basal insulin in Saudi Arabia.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We conducted a multicentre retrospective study that retrieved the medical records of adult T2D patients switched to Gla-U300 because of poor glycaemic control on their basal insulin. Data covering 6 months ± 30 days before and after the switch were retrieved.

RESULTS

Data from 718 patients were analysed. The mean HbA1c decreased significantly 6 months after switching to Gla-U300, with a mean reduction of 0.7% (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.6%-0.9%; P < .001). The percentage of patients with HbA1c levels of less than 7% increased from 6.4% before switching to 10.3% after switching to Gla-U300. The percentage of patients achieving the predefined individualized HbA1c goal increased from 8.6% before switching to 17.3% after switching to Gla-U300. The mean daily insulin dose decreased from a baseline level of 32.2 (± 14.7) to 31.0 (± 15) U (P = .09). About 36.1 of the patients required adjustment to the initial dose. Gla-300 was well tolerated; 4.5% of the patients experienced overall confirmed or symptomatic hypoglycaemia, compared with 15.3% before switching to Gla-U300. The incidence of severe hypoglycaemia after switching was 0.6% (n = 4 patients), compared with 1% before switching.

CONCLUSIONS

Real-world evidence supports the effectiveness of switching to Gla-U300 from first-generation basal insulin in T2D in Saudi Arabia.

Factors associated with therapeutic inertia in individuals with type 2 diabetes mellitus started on basal insulin

AIM

In this study we aim to identify the factors associated with treatment inertia in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) who have been recently started on basal insulin (BI).

METHODS

Using UK CPRD GOLD, we identified adults with T2DM with suboptimal glycaemia (HbA1c within 12 months of BI ≥ 7% (≥53 mmol/mol)). We used multivariable Cox regression model to describe the association between patient characteristics and the time to treatment intensification.

RESULTS

A total of 12,556 patients were analysed. Compared to individuals aged < 65 years, those aged ≥ 65 years had lower risk of treatment intensification (HR: 0.69; 95% CI: 0.64-0.73). Other factors included being female (0.93, 0.89-0.99), longer T2DM duration (0.99, 0.98-0.99), living in the most deprived areas (0.90, 0.83-0.98), being a current smoker (0.91, 0.84-0.98), having one (0.91, 0.85-0.97) or more than one comorbidity (0.88, 0.82-0.94), and patients who were on metformin (0.71, 0.63-0.80), or 2nd generation sulphonylureas (0.85; 0.79-0.92) or DPP4 inhibitors (0.87, 0.82-0.93) compared to those who were not.

CONCLUSION

Therapeutic inertia still remains a major barrier, with multiple factors associated with delay in intensification. Interventions to overcome therapeutic inertia need to be implemented at both patient and health care professional level.

Ertugliflozin Delays Insulin Initiation and Reduces Insulin Dose Requirements in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes: Analyses From VERTIS CV

CONTEXT

VERTIS CV evaluated the cardiovascular safety of ertugliflozin in patients with type 2 diabetes and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD).

OBJECTIVE

The aim of these analyses was to assess the insulin requirements of VERTIS CV patients over the trial duration.

METHODS

Patients received ertugliflozin 5 mg, 15 mg, or placebo once daily; mean follow-up was 3.5 years. Time to insulin initiation in patients who were insulin naïve at baseline, change in insulin dose in patients receiving baseline insulin, and hypoglycemia incidence in both patient groups were assessed.

RESULTS

In VERTIS CV, mean duration of type 2 diabetes was 13.0 years; glycated hemoglobin was 8.2%. Among 4348 (53%) insulin-naïve patients, the likelihood of insulin initiation was significantly reduced with ertugliflozin vs placebo (ertugliflozin 5 mg: hazard ratio [HR] 0.70, 95% CI 0.58-0.84; ertugliflozin 15 mg: HR 0.64, 95% CI 0.53-0.78). Time to insulin initiation was delayed with ertugliflozin; the estimated delay in reaching a 10% cumulative incidence of new insulin initiations vs placebo was 399 days with ertugliflozin 5 mg and 669 days with ertugliflozin 15 mg. Among 3898 (47%) patients receiving baseline insulin, the likelihood of requiring a ≥20% increase in insulin dose was significantly reduced with ertugliflozin vs placebo (ertugliflozin 5 mg: HR 0.62, 95% CI 0.52-0.75; ertugliflozin 15 mg: HR 0.51, 95% CI 0.41-0.62). The incidence of hypoglycemia events was not increased with ertugliflozin treatment.

CONCLUSION

In VERTIS CV patients, ertugliflozin reduced the likelihood of insulin initiation, delayed the time to insulin initiation by up to ∼1.8 years, and reduced insulin dose requirements vs placebo, without increasing hypoglycemia events.

[Unmet needs in the therapy of type 2 diabetes mellitus. How can barriers to insulin therapy be overcome?]

According to the current treatment guidelines, the therapy of type 2 diabetes mellitus should follow a stepwise therapy adjustment and intensification approach as soon as blood glucose control is no longer achieved with preceding diabetes treatment. However, clinical practice shows that the recommended steps for therapy escalation are often not followed, and treatment intensification is delayed. Especially the initiation with insulin and its intensification is often considerably delayed, even though the patient has high blood glucose levels, remaining above target even for years. In addition, treatment adherence is often lower with insulin therapy than with other antidiabetic treatment. This is problematic in terms of the risks for morbidity and mortality due to microvascular and macrovascular complications. The phenomenon known as therapeutic inertia occurs mainly with chronic diseases. The reasons thereof are complex and can be related to the person with diabetes and/or the healthcare professional. Main reasons are the frequency of insulin injections and a rigid treatment regimen, which are perceived as inconvenient and restrictive. Also, the complexity of insulin treatment, the required training, and its negative image of insulin as "last option" are negatively perceived. Results from surveys show that patients and physicians would prefer injections to be administered less frequently. Experience with once-weekly glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1-RA) has been encouraging in terms of efficacy, adherence, and patient satisfaction. Intensive research is currently being conducted on novel insulin analogues with once-weekly application.

The diabetes insulin self-management education (DIME) intervention for people with type 2 diabetes starting insulin: a pilot feasibility randomised controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

To determine the feasibility and acceptability of a diabetes insulin self-management education (DIME) group intervention for people with type 2 diabetes starting insulin.

DESIGN

Single-centre parallel randomised pilot trial.

SETTING

Primary care, South London, UK.

SUBJECTS

Adults with type 2 diabetes, requiring insulin treatment, on maximum tolerated dose of 2 or more oral antidiabetic drugs with HbA1c > / = 7.5% (58 mmol/mol) on 2 occasions. We excluded people who were non-fluent in English; morbid obesity (BMI > / = 35 kg/m²); in employment that contraindicates insulin treatment; and those with severe depression, anxiety disorders, psychotic disorders, personality disorders, or cognitive impairment.

METHODS

Participants were randomised using blocks of 2 or 4 to 3, 2-h group, face-to-face, DIME sessions or standard insulin group education sessions (control). We assessed feasibility according to consent to randomisation and attendance at intervention (DIME) and standard group insulin education sessions. Acceptability of the interventions was determined using exit interviews. We additionally measured change in self-reported insulin beliefs, diabetes distress and depressive symptoms between baseline and 6-month post-randomisation.

RESULTS

There were 28 potentially eligible participants, of which 17 consented to randomisation, 9 were allocated to the DIME group intervention and 8 were allocated to the standard group insulin education. Three people withdrew from the study (1 from DIME and 2 from standard insulin education) before the start of the first session and did not complete baseline questionnaires. Of the remaining participants (n = 14), all DIME participants (n = 8) completed all 3 sessions, and all standard insulin education participants (n = 6) completed at least 1 standard insulin education session. The median group size was 2, the mean age of participants was 57.57 (SD 6.45) years, and 64% were female (n = 9). Exit interviews demonstrated that all participants (n = 7) found the group sessions acceptable, and thematic analysis of interview transcripts indicated social support, the content of group sessions and post-group experiences were positive, especially amongst DIME participants. There was improvement on self-report questionnaires.

CONCLUSIONS

The DIME intervention was acceptable and feasible to deliver to participants with type 2 diabetes starting insulin in South London, UK.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

International Study Registration Clinical Trial Network (ISRCTN registration number 13339678).

Descriptive study of a clinical and educational telemedicine intervention in patients with diabetes receiving glargine 300 U/ml (Toujeo) in Spain: results of the T-Coach programme

Background

Diabetes is one of the most prevalent chronic diseases worldwide, and innovative patient support programmes can help and inform patients about their disease and improve their quality of life. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of the T-Coach programme in terms of improvement of disease knowledge, self-management and adherence to treatment in a real-world setting in Spain between July 2016 and October 2018.

Methods

We analyzed data from the T-Coach programme, a telephone platform that gives support to patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus treated with insulin glargine 300 U/ml (Gla-300). Support was provided by diabetes care nurses. Patients followed their treatment and aimed to achieve fasting blood glucose targets through diabetes education.

Results

A total of 479 patients were included in the programme. The mean (SD) dose of Gla-300 was 28.5 (16.3) U at baseline and 31.8 (16.1) U, 31.4 (16.4) U and 32.2 (16.3) U, respectively, at 3, 6 and 12 months. A satisfaction survey was completed by 240 (50.1%) patients, who, on average, were very highly satisfied with the programme, general assistance provided, recommendations received, and calls from nurses.

Conclusions

T-Coach could be an effective tool to help patients achieve their optimal dose of Gla-300 insulin and manage their blood glucose levels. It could also act as an effective support for diabetes education.

COMBINSI (COMBat to INSufficient Insulin therapy) - A Portuguese project in type 2 diabetes

BACKGROUND

Inadequate glycemic control in type 2 diabetes (T2D) increases the risk of diabetes-related complications. Insulin initiation is often delayed for several years. This study aims to estimate the adequacy of insulin therapy prescription to people living with T2D in a primary care setting.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This was a cross-sectional study based on adults with T2D in a Portuguese local health unit between January 2019 and January 2020. Subjects under insulin therapy were compared with non-insulin-treated subjects with Hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) ≥9% regarding clinical and demographic characteristics. The proportion of insulin-treated subjects in both of these groups was defined as insulin therapy index.

RESULTS

Our study included 13,869 adults living with T2D, among whom 11.5% were treated with insulin therapy and 4.1% had HbA1c ≥ 9% and were not under insulin therapy. Insulin therapy index was 73.9%. When comparing with non-insulin-treated subjects with HbA1c ≥ 9%, insulin-treated subjects were significantly older (75.8 vs 66.2 years p < 0.001), had lower HbA1c (8.3 vs 10.3% p < 0.001), lower estimated glomerular filtration rate (66.4 vs 74.0 ml/min/1.73 m²p < 0.001), lower LDL-cholesterol (87.1 vs 105.8 mg/dl), and higher rates of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (32.7 vs 16.7% p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Insulin therapy is underprescribed in T2D, with over 1-in-4 people living with T2D not being prescribed insulin despite deficient glycemic control. These findings highlight the need for insulin therapy when glycemic control is inadequate under other interventions.

Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties of the novel basal insulin Fc (insulin efsitora alfa), an insulin fusion protein in development for once-weekly dosing for the treatment of patients with diabetes

AIM

To assess the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PK) and pharmacodynamics (PD) of basal insulin Fc (BIF; LY3209590), a fusion protein combining a novel single-chain insulin variant together with human IgG2 Fc domain, following single and multiple once-weekly BIF administration.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The single ascending dose, 15-day study assessed four BIF doses (5-35 mg) in healthy participants and people with type 2 diabetes (T2D). In the 6-week multiple ascending dose study, people with T2D, previously treated with basal insulin, received insulin glargine daily or a one-time loading dose of BIF followed by 5 weeks of once-weekly dosing (1-10 mg). Safety, tolerability and PK and glucose PD were examined.

RESULTS

Mean ages of people with T2D (N = 57) and healthy participants (N = 16) in the single-dose study were 58.4 and 35.8 years, respectively; mean body mass index values were 29.5 and 26.1 kg/m² . BIF had a PK half-life of approximately 17 days, which led to a sustained, dose-dependent decrease in fasting blood glucose for 5 days or longer. No severe hypoglycaemia was observed. The 6-week ascending dose study included 33 people with T2D aged 40-69 years. BIF showed a low peak-to-trough ratio of 1.14 after the last dose at week 6 (steady state). Over 6 weeks, BIF seven-point glucose profiles remained constant and were similar to insulin glargine. Rates and duration of BIF hypoglycaemic events were similar to insulin glargine.

CONCLUSIONS

BIF was well tolerated and the PK/PD profile enabled once-weekly dosing with minimal variation in exposure in a treatment interval of 1 week. The findings suggest BIF is suitable for further development as a weekly basal insulin in people with diabetes.

Fixed-ratio Combinations (basal Insulin Plus GLP-1RA) In Type 2 Diabetes. an Analytical Review Of Pivotal Clinical Trials

In type 2 diabetes, therapeutic failure to the oral anti diabetics is frequent, the use of schemes with basal insulin or with multiple doses of insulin (basal insulin and short-acting insulins) are a widely accepted way to intensify therapy. The use of GLP-1 receptor agonists is another intensification strategy. The fixedratio combinations with molecules such as insulin degludec + liraglutide, and insulin glargine + lixisenatide have proven useful in intensifying treatment of individuals with type 2 diabetes. The purpose of this review was to evaluate and analyze the results of pivotal studies with both fixed-ratio combinations in individuals with type 2 diabetes, finding that, they are capable of achieving better glycemic control when compared with each of its components separately (with a lower risk of hypoglycemia vs basal insulin and lower risk of gastrointestinal adverse effects vs GLP-1 receptor agonists) in various clinical scenarios, especially in individuals who do not achieve control with oral antidiabetics or who do not achieve control with basal insulin (associated with oral antidiabetics) or in those under management with GLP-1RA plus oral antidiabetics.

Time to Reach Glycaemic and Body Weight Loss Thresholds with Tirzepatide in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes: A Pre-planned Exploratory Analysis of SURPASS-2 and SURPASS-3

INTRODUCTION

Tirzepatide, a once-weekly glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide/glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist, provides clinically meaningful improvements in glycaemic control and body weight loss in people with type 2 diabetes. The early efficacy profile of tirzepatide after treatment initiation is of interest. In this exploratory pre-planned analysis, we evaluated the time to achieve glycaemic control and body weight loss thresholds with tirzepatide.

METHODS

In two randomised studies, we compared time to achieve HbA1c (< 7.0% and ≤ 6.5%) and weight loss (≥ 5%, SURPASS-2 only) thresholds among people treated with tirzepatide (5, 10, and 15 mg), semaglutide 1 mg in SURPASS-2, and titrated insulin degludec in SURPASS-3. Longitudinal logistic regression models were used to explore the proportion of participants achieving HbA1c and body weight loss thresholds at 4, 12, and 24 weeks. The time to achieve these thresholds was analysed and compared between groups using the Cox proportional-hazards model.

RESULTS

Overall, greater proportions of participants achieved the HbA1c and body weight loss thresholds at 4, 12, and 24 weeks with tirzepatide compared with semaglutide 1 mg and insulin degludec. The median time to achieve HbA1c < 7.0% (8.1 weeks with each tirzepatide dose, 12.0 weeks with semaglutide 1 mg, and 12.1 weeks with insulin degludec) and ≤ 6.5% (12.1, 15.7, and 24.1 weeks, respectively) was faster with tirzepatide than semaglutide 1 mg and insulin degludec. In SURPASS-2, the median time to first achieve a body weight loss of ≥ 5% was faster with tirzepatide 5 mg (16.0 weeks) and 10 and 15 mg (12.4 weeks) than with semaglutide 1 mg (24.0 weeks).

CONCLUSION

Analyses of data from SURPASS-2 and -3 revealed that tirzepatide treatment enabled more people with type 2 diabetes to achieve glycaemic thresholds and these were achieved faster than with semaglutide 1 mg or insulin degludec. Tirzepatide-treated participants also achieved a body weight loss of ≥ 5% significantly faster with tirzepatide than with semaglutide 1 mg.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS

NCT03987919; NCT03882970.

Comparison of two titration programmes for adding insulin detemir to oral antidiabetic drugs in patients with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes mellitus

AIM

To explore the effect of active insulin titration versus usual titration on glycaemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus uncontrolled with oral antidiabetic drugs (OADs).

METHODS

In a 24-week, prospective and randomized study, 172 patients with uncontrolled type 2 diabetes were randomly assigned to either active titration or usual titration. Efficacy and safety outcomes included changes in glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) and fasting plasma glucose, percentage of individuals achieving HbA1c<53 mmol/mol, and hypoglycaemic events.

RESULTS

At Week 24, change in HbA1c was -1.08% ± 1.60% in the active titration group and -0.95% ± 1.34% in the usual titration group (P = 0.569). The percentages of individuals achieving HbA1c<53 mmol/mol were 29.4% and 16.1% in the active and usual titration groups, respectively (P = 0.037). There was no significant difference in the incidence of hypoglycaemia between the two groups. Multivariate logistic regression indicated that, with active titration, baseline HbA1c levels and postprandial glucose excursion were significantly associated with achieving HbA1c<53 mmol/mol.

CONCLUSION

Addition of basal insulin using active titration for 24 weeks provided a higher rate of HbA1c target achievement without significant hypoglycaemia compared to usual titration in individuals with uncontrolled type 2 diabetes.

Safety and efficacy of once-weekly basal insulin Fc in people with type 2 diabetes previously treated with basal insulin: a multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 2 study

BACKGROUND

The burden of daily basal insulins often causes hesitancy and delays in the initiation of insulin therapy. Basal insulin Fc (BIF, insulin efsitora alfa), designed for once-weekly administration, is a fusion protein combining a novel single-chain insulin variant with a human immunoglobulin G (IgG) Fc domain. In this study, we explored the safety and efficacy of BIF in people with type 2 diabetes who had been previously treated with basal insulin.

METHODS

For this phase 2, 44-site (clinical research centres and hospitals), randomised, open-label, comparator-controlled, 32-week study in the USA, Puerto Rico, and Mexico, we enrolled participants with type 2 diabetes. Eligible participants had to be adults (aged ≥18 years) and to have been treated with basal insulin and up to three oral antidiabetic medicines. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to subcutaneous administration of BIF (BIF treatment group 1 [BIF-A1] or 2 [BIF-A2]) or insulin degludec. Randomisation was stratified by country, baseline HbA_1c values (<8·5% or ≥8·5%; <69·4 or ≥69·4 mmol/mol), use of sulfonylureas (yes or no), and baseline BMI (<30 or ≥30 kg/m²). The randomisation scheme was performed using an interactive web-response system, which ensured balance between treatment groups. Different fasting glucose targets for the BIF-A1 (≤7·8 mmol/L or ≤140 mg/dL; titrated every 2 weeks), BIF-A2 (≤6·7 mmol/L or ≤120 mg/dL; titrated every 4 weeks), and degludec (≤5·6 mmol/L or ≤100 mg/dL) groups were selected. Patients randomly assigned to BIF received a one-time loading dose ranging from 1·5-3 times their calculated weekly dose. The first weekly dose was administered 1 week after the loading dose. We used interstitial fasting glucose measurements from the Dexcom G6 continuous glucose monitoring system to titrate the basal insulin. The primary measure of glycaemic control was change in HbA_1c from baseline to week 32 for BIF. BIF was also compared with degludec (with a non-inferiority margin of 0·40%). The efficacy analysis set consisted of data from all randomised study participants who received at least one dose of the study medication and participants were analysed according to the treatment they were assigned. The safety population was the same as the efficacy analysis set. The completed trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03736785).

FINDINGS

Between Nov 15, 2018 and Feb 18, 2020, 399 participants were enrolled and randomised to BIF-A1 (n=135), BIF-A2 (n=132), or degludec (n=132); 202 (51%) were female and 197 (49%) were male. 379 were analysed for the primary outcome (BIF-A1: n=130; BIF-A2: n=125; degludec: n=124). Mean HbA1c change from baseline to week 32, the primary outcome, was -0·6% (SE 0·1%) for BIF-A1 and BIF-A2. Degludec achieved a change from baseline of -0·7% (0·1%). The pooled BIF analysis achieved non-inferiority versus degludec for the treatment difference in HbA1c (0·1% [90% CI -0·1 to 0·3]). The hypoglycaemia (≤3·9 mmol/L or ≤70 mg/dL) event rates (hypoglycaemia events per patient per year) in the BIF groups were 25% lower than those in the degludec group (treatment ratio BIF-A1 vs degludec was 0·75 [0·61-0·93]; and BIF-A2 vs degludec was 0·74 [0·58-0·94]). BIF was well tolerated; treatment-emergent adverse events were similar across groups.

INTERPRETATION

Weekly BIF achieved a similar efficacy compared with degludec despite higher fasting glucose targets in the BIF groups. Higher fasting glucose targets and lower glucose variability might have contributed to lower hypoglycaemia rates for BIF compared with degludec. These findings support continued development of BIF as a once-weekly insulin treatment for people with diabetes.

FUNDING

Eli Lilly and Company.

Transparent machine learning suggests a key driver in the decision to start insulin therapy in individuals with type 2 diabetes

AIMS

The objective of this study is to establish a predictive model using transparent machine learning (ML) to identify any drivers that characterize therapeutic inertia.

METHODS

Data in the form of both descriptive and dynamic variables collected from electronic records of 1.5 million patients seen at clinics within the Italian Association of Medical Diabetologists between 2005-2019 were analyzed using logic learning machine (LLM), a "clear box" ML technique. Data were subjected to a first stage of modeling to allow ML to automatically select the most relevant factors related to inertia, and then four further modeling steps individuated key variables that discriminated the presence or absence of inertia.

RESULTS

The LLM model revealed a key role for average glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) threshold values correlated with the presence or absence of insulin therapeutic inertia with an accuracy of 0.79. The model indicated that a patient's dynamic rather than static glycemic profile has a greater effect on therapeutic inertia. Specifically, the difference in HbA1c between two consecutive visits, what we call the HbA1c gap, plays a crucial role. Namely, insulin therapeutic inertia is correlated with an HbA1c gap of <6.6 mmol/mol (0.6%), but not with an HbA1c gap of >11 mmol/mol (1.0%).

CONCLUSIONS

The results reveal, for the first time, the interrelationship between a patient's glycemic trend defined by sequential HbA1c measurements and timely or delayed initiation of insulin therapy. The results further demonstrate that LLM can provide insight in support of evidence-based medicine using real world data.

Factors influencing insulin initiation in primary care facilities in Cape Town, South Africa

BACKGROUND

Type 2 diabetes (T2DM) is a leading cause of mortality in South Africa and resistance to the use of insulin is common. This study aimed to explore factors that influence the initiation of insulin in patients with T2DM in primary care facilities in Cape Town, South Africa.

METHODS

An exploratory descriptive qualitative study was conducted. Seventeen semi-structured interviews were held with patients eligible for insulin, on insulin and primary care providers. Participants were selected by maximum variation purposive sampling. Data were analysed using the framework method in Atlas-ti.

RESULTS

Factors related to the health system, service delivery, clinical care and patients. Systemic issues related to the required inputs of workforce, educational materials, and supplies. Service delivery issues related to workload, poor continuity and parallel coordination of care. Clinical issues related to adequate counselling. Patient factors included a lack of trust, concerns about injections, impact on lifestyle and disposal of needles.

CONCLUSION

Although resource constraints are likely to remain, district and facility managers can improve supplies, educational materials, continuity and coordination. Counselling must be improved and may require innovative alternative approaches to support clinicians who face high number of patients. Alternative approaches using group education, telehealth and digital solutions should be considered.Contribution: This study identified key factors influencing insulin initiation in patients with T2DM in primary care. These can be addressed by those responsible for clinical governance, service delivery and in further research.

iGlarLixi versus basal plus Rapid-Acting insulin in adults with type 2 diabetes advancing from basal insulin therapy: The SoliSimplify Real-World study

AIM

For people with suboptimally controlled type 2 diabetes (T2D) on basal insulin (BI), guidelines recommend several treatment advancement options. This study compared the clinical effectiveness of once-daily iGlarLixi versus a multiple-injection BI + rapid acting insulin (RAI) regimen in adults with T2D advancing from BI therapy in real-world clinical practice.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Electronic medical records from the Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership (OMOP) database were analysed retrospectively using propensity score matching to compare therapy advancement with iGlarLixi or BI + RAI in US adults ≥18 years with T2D on BI who had ≥1 valid glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) value at baseline and at the 6-month follow-up. The primary objective was non-inferiority of iGlarLixi to BI + RAI in HbA1c change from baseline to 6 months (margin 0.3%).

RESULTS

Propensity score matching generated cohorts with balanced baseline characteristics (N = 814 in each group). HbA1c reduction from baseline to 6 months with iGlarLixi was non-inferior to BI + RAI [mean difference (95% confidence interval): 0.1 (-0.1, 0.2)%; one-sided p = .0032]. At 6 months, weight gain was significantly lower with iGlarLixi than with BI + RAI [-0.8 (-1.3, -0.2) kg; two-sided p = .0069]. Achievement of HbA1c <7% without hypoglycaemia and weight gain were similar between groups [odds ratio (95% confidence interval): 1.15 (0.81, 1.63); p = .4280]. Hypoglycaemia was low in both groups, probably because of underreporting.

CONCLUSIONS

In real-world clinical practice, glycaemic outcomes 6 months after treatment advancement from BI are similar for people with T2D using iGlarLixi versus BI + RAI, with iGlarLixi leading to less weight gain.

Barriers and Attitudes of Primary Healthcare Physicians to Insulin Initiation and Intensification in Saudi Arabia

Saudi Arabia is a country with high prevalence of diabetes, uncontrolled diabetes, and diabetes-related complications. Poor glycemic control is multifactorial and could be explained in part by physician and patient reluctance toward insulin or insulin inertia. This study aimed to address physician barriers toward insulin therapy in primary care settings. It included 288 physicians from 168 primary healthcare centers (PHC) in the Jazan region of Saudi Arabia. Participants responded to questionnaire investigating physicians' attitude and barriers to insulin initiation and intensification in PHCs. In physician opinion, the most common barriers among their patients were fear of injection, lack of patient education, fear of hypoglycemia, and difficult administration. Physicians were reluctant to initiate insulin for T2D patients mostly due to patient non-adherence to blood sugar measurement, non-adherence to appointment or treatment, elderly patients, or due to patient refusal. Physicians' fear of hypoglycemia, lack of staff for patient education, and lack of updated knowledge were the primary clinician-related barriers. Exaggerated fears of insulin side effects, patient non-adherence, limited staff for patient's education, patient refusal, and inadequate consultation time were the main barriers to insulin acceptance and prescription.

Improved patient-reported outcomes with iGlarLixi versus premix BIAsp 30 in people with type 2 diabetes in the SoliMix trial

AIM

To assess patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in the SoliMix trial, which compared the efficacy and safety of iGlarLixi versus BIAsp 30 in people with type 2 diabetes (T2D).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

SoliMix (EudraCT: 2017-003370-13), a 26-week, open-label study, randomized (1:1) 887 adults with T2D and HbA1c ≥7.5%-≤10.0% (≥58-≤86 mmol/mol) on basal insulin plus oral antihyperglycaemic drugs (OADs) to once-daily iGlarLixi or twice-daily premix insulin, BIAsp 30. PROs were assessed using the Treatment-Related Impact Measure Diabetes (TRIM-D) and Global Treatment Effectiveness Evaluation (GTEE) questionnaires.

RESULTS

Over 26 weeks, iGlarLixi showed greater improvement from baseline versus BIAsp 30 in total TRIM-D score (least squares mean difference [95% confidence interval]: 5.08 [3.69, 6.47]; effect size: 0.32) and in each TRIM-D domain, with the greatest differences seen in diabetes management (8.47 [6.11, 10.84]) and treatment burden (6.95 [4.83, 9.07]). GTEE scores showed a greater proportion of participants and physicians rated a complete or marked improvement of diabetes control with iGlarLixi (80.5%, 82.8%) versus BIAsp 30 (63.3%, 65.1%) at week 26. Post hoc analyses showed that after adjusting for HbA1c, body weight and hypoglycaemia outcomes, iGlarLixi continued to show greater improvements in TRIM-D total scores versus BIAsp 30.

CONCLUSIONS

In addition to better glycaemic control, weight benefit and less hypoglycaemia, once-daily iGlarLixi provided improved diabetes management, treatment burden and perceived effectiveness versus twice-daily premix BIAsp 30, further supporting iGlarLixi as an advanced treatment option in people with suboptimally controlled T2D on basal insulin plus OADs.

Adherence to antidiabetic treatment in primary health care in individuals with type 2 diabetes. A survey including socio-demographic, patient related and clinical factors

BACKGROUND

Adherence to medications is a critical element in diabetes management.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate patient-related factors associated with adherence to antidiabetic treatment in patients with type 2 diabetes in primary health-care units.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study among patients receiving diabetes care in 18 primary care units in Mexico City was conducted. Data were collected from medical records and medical interviews. Adherence to antidiabetic therapy and patient-related factors associated with adherence were evaluated through a self-administered questionnaire. Socio-demographic, clinical, behavioral (self-care activities including a healthy diet, exercise or physical activity, self-monitoring of blood glucose testing, and foot care), and patients-adherence-related factors (health-care provider-patient communication; daily and social activities, and support network; alternative treatment beliefs; comorbidity, diabetes symptoms, and treatment; side effects and treatment access) were compared between the adherent and non-adherent group.

RESULTS

Of 319 outpatients, 48.3% were adherent to their antidiabetic therapy. In the adjusted analysis, patient-related factors associated to adherence were exercise and physical activity self-care behavior (OR=1.26; 95%CI 1.09-1.46), treatment interference with daily activities (OR=0.27; 95%CI 0.14-0.52), not satisfied with resolution of questions by the physician (OR=0.42; 95%CI 0.19-0.94), independently to increased cardiovascular risk and insulin treatment.

CONCLUSION

A low proportion of outpatients with T2D with regular primary care were adherent to diabetes treatment and this was associated with patient-related factors like answering patients' treatment-related questions by the physician. This information may be useful to identify patients at risk for low adherence, and to guide the design of quality-of-care strategies, like diabetes education programs to address suboptimal adherence in patients, and health-care professional communication skills training, particularly in primary care health systems.

Hypoglycaemia events with iGlarLixi versus premix biphasic insulin aspart 30 (BIAsp 30) in people with type 2 diabetes advancing from basal insulin: An analysis of the SoliMix trial

AIMS

To explore details of the incidence and rates of daytime and nocturnal hypoglycaemia, levels of hypoglycaemia, and relationship to glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c), when comparing iGlarLixi versus premixed biphasic insulin aspart 30 (BIAsp 30) in the SoliMix randomized controlled trial.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This exploratory analysis of SoliMix used logistic regression and negative binomial regression analyses to assess between-treatment differences in the incidence and rates of hypoglycaemia by time of day. A negative binomial model was used to derive estimated annualized hypoglycaemia rates as a function of HbA1c.

RESULTS

iGlarLixi was associated with lower incidence and rates of American Diabetes Association Level 2 (<54 mg/dL [<3.0 mmol/L]) hypoglycaemia during both night and day versus BIAsp 30. Incidence and rates of Level 1 (<70 to ≥54 mg/dL [<3.9 to ≥3.0 mmol/L]) hypoglycaemia were also mostly shown to be reduced with iGlarLixi versus BIAsp 30. Severe (Level 3) events were too few for analysis (n = 3). iGlarLixi was associated with lower modelled event rates of Level 2 and Level 1 hypoglycaemia over a wide range of HbA1c levels versus BIAsp 30.

CONCLUSIONS

These results show that the lower HbA1c levels and weight benefit seen with iGlarLixi versus premixed BIAsp 30 in people with type 2 diabetes advancing their basal insulin therapy in the SoliMix trial are also accompanied by a lower risk of hypoglycaemia at any time of day and across a broad range of HbA1c levels.

Targeting the liver in dementia and cognitive impairment: Dietary macronutrients and diabetic therapeutics

Many people living with dementia and cognitive impairment have dysfunctional mitochondrial and insulin-glucose metabolism resembling type 2 diabetes mellitus and old age. Evidence from human trials shows that nutritional interventions and anti-diabetic medicines that target nutrient-sensing pathways overcome these deficits in glucose and energy metabolism and can improve cognition and/or reduce symptoms of dementia. The liver is the main organ that mediates the systemic effects of diets and many diabetic medicines; therefore, it is an intermediate target for such dementia interventions. A challenge is the efficacy of these treatments in older age. Solutions include the targeted hepatic delivery of diabetic medicines using nanotechnologies and titration of macronutrients to optimize hepatic energy metabolism.

Comparing a daily versus weekly titration algorithm in people with type 2 diabetes switching from basal insulin to iGlarLixi in the LixiLan ONE CAN randomized trial

AIM

To compare the efficacy and safety of a simple daily titration algorithm compared with a weekly dose adjustment of iGlarLixi in people with type 2 diabetes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

LixiLan ONE CAN (NCT03767543), a randomized, 26-week, open-label, multicentre phase 3 trial conducted in Canada, involved 265 people with type 2 diabetes and an HbA1c of ≥7.5% to ≤ 10.5% or less (≥58 to ≤91 mmol/mol) on basal insulin for 6 months or longer. Participants were randomized 1:1 with instructions to self-titrate iGlarLixi daily (1 unit/day) or once weekly (2 or 4 units/week) to a common target fasting plasma glucose of 4.4 to 5.6 mmol/L (79 to 101 mg/dl). The primary objective was to show non-inferiority of the daily versus weekly titration algorithm.

RESULTS

At 26 weeks, daily titration of iGlarLixi was not inferior to a weekly titration for both the prespecified primary endpoint of change in HbA1c from baseline (least square [LS] mean change: -1.24% vs. -0.92%, respectively; LS mean difference: 0.32%; 95% CI [0.07, 0.57]; P < .0001) and for the secondary endpoint of change in weight from baseline (LS mean change: -0.22 vs. +0.81 kg, respectively; LS mean difference: 1.03 kg; 95% CI [0.01, 2.06]; P < .0001). Indeed, for both the primary and secondary outcome, the daily titration of iGlarLixi was superior. There were no statistically significant differences in hypoglycaemia incidence between the two titration strategies during the 26-week study.

CONCLUSION

A daily titration algorithm for switching basal insulin to iGlarLixi was shown to be non-inferior and superior for glycaemic control and weight compared with weekly titration.

Use of Concurrent Anti-diabetes Medications in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes in Clinical Practice in the United States

PURPOSE

This report describes the use of combination therapy in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) who had been initially prescribed metformin in the United States.

METHODS

Retrospective claims data from a de-identified database were used to identify individuals aged ≥18 years with ≥1 claim for a metformin-containing regimen dated between January 1, 2018, and December 31, 2018. Demographics, insurance type, and prescriber type were compared among subgroups receiving two (dual) or three or more (triple+) anti-diabetes therapies. All analyses were descriptive; no formal comparisons were conducted.

FINDINGS

Data from 353,062 patients were included. Demographic and other baseline characteristics were similar between the groups receiving dual or triple+ therapy (n = 213,871 and 139,191, respectively). A small age difference was observed between patients receiving dual versus triple+ therapy (mean [SD], 66.5 [11.8] and 65.8 [10.8] years, respectively). Mean (SD) glycosylated hemoglobin levels were lower among patients receiving dual therapy versus triple+ therapy: 7.6% (1.7) versus 8.0% (1.7). The most frequent combination was metformin plus a sulfonylurea (33.4%). The percentage receiving combination therapy with newer treatments was relatively low, and slightly greater in younger patients. Total health care costs were similar with dual and triple+ therapies.

IMPLICATIONS

The current descriptive analysis demonstrated generally similar features, with regard to the evaluated factors, in cohorts receiving dual versus triple+ T2DM therapy. However, differences between unmeasured factors could exist and require further evaluation. These findings, based on data from a cohort of patients from clinical practice who had initially been prescribed metformin, provide a useful snapshot of current prescribing practices and can be used to inform future research and evidence-based policy decisions.

Cost-Effectiveness of iGlarLixi Versus Premix BIAsp 30 in People with Type 2 Diabetes Suboptimally Controlled by Basal Insulin in the US

INTRODUCTION

Many people with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) experience suboptimal glycemic control and require therapy advancement. This cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted to compare iGlarLixi (insulin glargine 100 U/mL plus lixisenatide) versus BIAsp 30 (biphasic insulin aspart 30) in people with T2DM suboptimally controlled with basal insulin.

METHODS

The IQVIA Core Diabetes Model was used to estimate lifetime costs and outcomes for people with T2DM from a US healthcare payer perspective. Initial clinical data were based on the phase 3 randomized, open-label, active-controlled SoliMix clinical study, which compared the efficacy and safety of once-daily iGlarLixi with twice-daily BIAsp 30. Lifetime costs (US$) and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were predicted, and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for iGlarLixi versus BIAsp 30 was estimated; the willingness-to-pay threshold was considered to be $50,000. A subgroup analysis considered people with T2DM aged ≥ 65 years.

RESULTS

Estimated QALYs gained were slightly higher with iGlarLixi compared with BIAsp 30 (9.3 vs. 9.2), with lower costs for iGlarLixi ($117,854 vs. $120,109); the ICER for iGlarLixi was therefore considered dominant over BIAsp 30 in the base case. Key drivers for cost savings were the higher dose and twice-daily administration for BIAsp 30 versus once-daily administration for iGlarLixi. The robustness of the base-case results was confirmed by sensitivity and scenario analyses. Results were similar in a subgroup of people with T2DM aged ≥ 65 years.

CONCLUSION

In people with T2DM with suboptimal glycemic control on basal insulin, iGlarLixi confers improved QALYs and reduced costs compared with BIAsp 30.

Insulin: evolution of insulin formulations and their application in clinical practice over 100 years

The first preparation of insulin extracted from a pancreas and made suitable for use in humans after purification was achieved 100 years ago in Toronto, an epoch-making achievement, which has ultimately provided a life-giving treatment for millions of people worldwide. The earliest animal-derived formulations were short-acting and contained many impurities that caused adverse reactions, thereby limiting their therapeutic potential. However, since then, insulin production and purification improved with enhanced technologies, along with a full understanding of the insulin molecule structure. The availability of radio-immunoassays contributed to the unravelling of the physiology of glucose homeostasis, ultimately leading to the adoption of rational models of insulin replacement. The introduction of recombinant DNA technologies has since resulted in the era of both rapid- and long-acting human insulin analogues administered via the subcutaneous route which better mimic the physiology of insulin secretion, leading to the modern basal-bolus regimen. These advances, in combination with improved education and technologies for glucose monitoring, enable people with diabetes to better meet individual glycaemic goals with a lower risk of hypoglycaemia. While the prevalence of diabetes continues to rise globally, it is important to recognise the scientific endeavour that has led to insulin remaining the cornerstone of diabetes management, on the centenary of its first successful use in humans.

Efficacy and safety benefits of iGlarLixi versus insulin glargine 100 U/mL or lixisenatide in Asian Pacific people with suboptimally controlled type 2 diabetes on oral agents: The LixiLan-O-AP randomized controlled trial

AIMS

To compare the efficacy and safety of iGlarLixi with insulin glargine 100 units/mL (iGlar) and lixisenatide (Lixi), in Asian Pacific people with suboptimally controlled type 2 diabetes (T2D) on metformin with or without a second oral antihyperglycaemic drug (OAD).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

LixiLan-O-AP (NCT03798054) was a 24-week multicentre study in adults (n = 878, mean age 56.0 years, mean body mass index 26.0 kg/m² ) with glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) levels ≥53 mmol/mol (7%) and ≤97 mmol/mol (11%) on OAD(s), randomized (2:2:1) to open-label once-daily iGlarLixi, iGlar or Lixi while on continued metformin ± sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors. The primary efficacy endpoint was change in HbA1c.

RESULTS

After 24 weeks, greater reductions in HbA1c from baseline (67 mmol/mol; 8.3%) were seen with iGlarLixi (-21 mmol/mol; -1.9%) compared with iGlar (-16 mmol/mol; -1.4%; P < 0.0001) and Lixi (-10 mmol/mol; -0.9%; P < 0.0001). Greater proportions of participants achieved HbA1c <53 mmol/mol (<7%) with iGlarLixi versus iGlar or Lixi (79%, 60% and 30%, respectively), overall and as composite endpoints including weight and hypoglycaemia. iGlarLixi improved 2-hour postprandial glucose versus iGlar and Lixi and mitigated the weight gain seen with iGlar (least squares mean difference -1.1 kg; P < 0.0001). Documented ≤3.9 mmol/L (≤70 mg/dL) hypoglycaemia was similar between iGlarLixi and iGlar (both 3.38 events per participant-year). The incidence rates of nausea and vomiting were lower with iGlarLixi (14% and 6%) than Lixi (21% and 11%).

CONCLUSIONS

iGlarLixi achieved significant HbA1c reductions, to near-normoglycaemic levels, compared with iGlar or Lixi, with no meaningful additional risk of hypoglycaemia and mitigated body weight gain versus iGlar, with fewer gastrointestinal adverse events versus Lixi. iGlarLixi with specifically adapted ratios may provide an efficacious and well-tolerated treatment option for Asian Pacific people with T2D.

Preclinical Characterization of LY3209590, a Novel Weekly Basal Insulin Fc-fusion Protein

The benefit of once-weekly basal insulin is less frequent dosing, which has the potential to reduce the barrier to injection therapy and impact patient activation, adherence/compliance, quality of life, and outcomes. Basal Insulin Fc (BIF, LY3209590, or insulin efsitora alfa) is a once-weekly basal insulin in clinical testing for type 1 and type 2 diabetes mellitus. BIF is comprised of a novel single-chain variant of insulin fused to a human IgG2 Fc domain using a peptide linker. The in vitro binding affinity of BIF for the human insulin receptor (IR) was two orders of magnitude weaker relative to human insulin. BIF stimulated IR phosphorylation in cells with reduced potency, yet full agonism, and exhibited a significantly faster dephosphorylation kinetic profile than human insulin or AspB10 insulin. BIF stimulated de novo lipogenesis in 3T3-L1 adipocytes and cell proliferation in SAOS-2 and H4IIE cells with {greater than or equal to}70-fold reduction in in vitro potency compared to human insulin. BIF possessed markedly reduced binding to hIGF-1R making definitive measurements unattainable. In vivo pharmacology studies using streptozotocin-treated diabetic rats demonstrated a significant decrease in blood glucose compared to vehicle-treated animals 24h post-injection, persisting through 336h following subcutaneous administration. In streptozotocin-treated rats, BIF reached T_max at 48h and possessed a clearance rate of ~0.85 mL/hr/kg, with a t_1/2 of ~120h following subcutaneous administration. These results demonstrate BIF has an in vitro pharmacological profile similar to native insulin, with significantly reduced potency and an extended time-action profile in vivo that supports QW dosing in humans. Significance Statement BIF is a novel basal insulin Fc-fusion protein designed for once-weekly dosing. In this study we demonstrate that BIF has an in vitro pharmacological profile similar to human insulin, but with weaker potency across assays for IR binding and activity. BIF has a PD and PK profile in STZ-treated rats supportive of weekly dosing in humans.

Real-World Effectiveness and Safety of Insulin Glargine 300 U/mL in Insulin-Naïve People with Type 2 Diabetes: the ATOS Study

INTRODUCTION

The clinical benefits of insulin glargine 300 U/mL (Gla-300) have been confirmed in randomised clinical trials (EDITION programme and BRIGHT) and real-world studies in the USA and Western Europe. ATOS evaluated the real-world effectiveness and safety of Gla-300 in wider geographic regions (Asia, the Middle East, North Africa, Latin America and Eastern Europe).

METHODS

This prospective observational, international study enrolled adults (≥ 18 years) with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) uncontrolled [haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) > 7% to ≤ 11%] on one or more oral anti-hyperglycaemic drugs (OADs) who had been advised by their treating physician to add Gla-300 to their existing treatment. The primary endpoint was achievement of a pre-defined individualised HbA1c target at month 6.

RESULTS

Of the 4550 participants included, 4422 (51.8% female) were eligible for assessment. The mean ± standard deviation (SD) age was 57.2 ± 10.8 years, duration of diabetes was 10.2 ± 6.2 years and baseline HbA1c was 9.28 ± 1.0%. The proportion of participants reaching their individualised glycaemic target was 25.2% [95% confidence interval (CI) 23.8-26.6%] at month 6 and 44.5% (95% CI 42.9-46.1%) at month 12. At months 6 and 12, reductions were observed in HbA1c (-1.50% and -1.87%) and fasting plasma glucose (-3.42 and -3.94 mmol/L). Hypoglycaemia incidence was low, and body weight change was minimal. Adverse events were reported in 283 (6.4%) participants, with 57 (1.3%) experiencing serious adverse events.

CONCLUSION

In a real-world setting, initiation of Gla-300 in people with T2DM uncontrolled on OADs resulted in improved glycaemic control and low rates of hypoglycaemia with minimal weight change.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinicaltrials.gov number NCT03703869.