The importance of titrating starting insulin regimens in patients with type 2 diabetes

Comparison of Efficacy and Adherence of Patient-Preferred (1 Unit Daily) and ADA/EASD Guideline-Recommended (2 Units Every 3 Days) Basal Insulin Titration Algorithms: Multicenter, Randomized, Clinical Study

Aim

Insulin titration often faces inertia, hindering glycemic control. A patient-centered approach empowers patients to overcome this inertia. This study aims to compare the effectiveness of patient-preferred and guideline-recommended self-titration algorithms in achieving glycemic targets and improving adherence.

Methods

Outpatients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) who did not respond to oral antihyperglycemic drugs (OAD) were assessed. They were randomly assigned to patient-preferred and guideline-recommended groups. In the patient-preferred group, individuals selected an algorithm to self-adjust their insulin glargine dosage by 2 units every 3 days if the mean fasting blood glucose (FBG) over the past 3 consecutive days was ≥7.0 mmol/L, or by 1 unit daily if the FBG on the same day was ≥7.0 mmol/L. In the guideline-recommended group, insulin glargine was titrated by 2 units every 3 days if the mean FBG over the past 3 consecutive days was ≥7.0 mmol/L. The FBG target was set below <7.0 mmol/L.

Results

Thirty-nine participants in the patient-preferred group and 42 in the guideline-recommended group completed the study. The cumulative rates of achieving the FBG target in the patient-preferred group compared to the guideline-recommended group were 69.2% vs 54.8% (χ²=1.792, p=0.181) in week 1, 89.7% vs 73.8% (χ²=3.403, p = 0.065) in week 2, 94.9% vs 76.2% (χ²=17.638, p=0.000) in week 3, and 100.0% vs 88.1% (χ²=4.405, p=0.036) in week 4. Adherence rates were significantly higher in the patient-preferred group (97.4%, 37/38) compared to the guideline-recommended group (66.7%, 28/42) (χ²=12.688, p=0.000). Insulin glargine dosage at FBG target achievement was 21.2±4.3 U in the patient-preferred group and 18.8±6.7 U in the guideline-recommended group (t=1.888, p=0.063). Hypoglycemia was reported in 1 patient in the guideline-recommended group, with no instances in the patient-preferred group.

Conclusion

The patient-preferred self-titration algorithm demonstrates a higher rate of reaching glucose targets and improved adherence.

Trial Registration Number

ChiCTR2100050805.

Survey of Pancreatic Enzyme Replacement Therapy Dosing Experiences in Adults with Exocrine Pancreatic Insufficiency

OBJECTIVES

Pancreatic enzyme replacement therapy (PERT) is essential for treating exocrine pancreatic insufficiency (EPI), a condition where the pancreas does not produce adequate enzymes for digestion. This study delves into the real-world experiences of individuals with EPI regarding their PERT usage.

METHODS

A study was executed using a tailored survey targeting individuals with EPI. Quantitative data analysis assessed factors such as age, duration of EPI, elastase levels, choice of PERT, perceived effectiveness of titration, and the time taken for effective titration.

RESULTS

The study comprised 111 participants, predominantly female (93%) and hailing from North America (79%). Of these, 36.7% had been diagnosed with EPI for 3 or more years. A significant 72% felt they were not consistently consuming adequate enzymes, with only 22% believing their intake was sufficient. There were 44 participants (42%) still in the process of adjusting their enzyme doses. In contrast, 17 participants (16%) took a few weeks, 21 (20%) a few months, 11 (10%) over six months, 10 (9%) more than a year, and 3 (3%) several years for dose adjustment. Regarding enzyme titration advice, 30 participants (29%) received vague guidance, while 22 (21%) found the advice beneficial.

CONCLUSIONS

This study underscores the pressing need for enhanced PERT dosing guidance. The insights gleaned spotlight the prevalent undertreatment across the entire EPI demographic, including in those with lesser-studied co-conditions.

Use of Insulin Degludec/Insulin Aspart in the Management of Diabetes Mellitus: Expert Panel Recommendations on Appropriate Practice Patterns

Insulin degludec/insulin aspart (IDegAsp) is a fixed-ratio co-formulation of insulin degludec (IDeg), which provides long-lasting basal insulin coverage, and insulin aspart (IAsp), which targets post-prandial glucose. This expert panel aimed to provide a practical and implementable guidance document to assist clinicians in prescribing IDegAsp in the diabetes management with respect to different patient populations including children and adults with type 1 diabetes (T1D) or type 2 diabetes (T2D) as well as pregnant, elderly and hospitalized patients and varying practice patterns (insulin-naive, insulin-treated, switching from basal, basal bolus and premix regimens). The experts recommended that IDegAsp can be used in insulin-naive T2D patients with poor glycemic control (HbA1c >8.5%) despite optimal oral antidiabetic drugs (OADs) as well as in insulin-treated T2D patients by switching from basal insulin, basal-bolus therapy or premixed insulins in relation to lower risk of nocturnal hypoglycemia, fewer injections and lower intraday glycemic variability, respectively. The experts considered the use of IDegAsp in children with T2D as a basal bolus alternative rather than as an alternative to basal insulin after metformin failure, use of IDegAsp in adult T1D patients as a simplified basal bolus regimen with lesser nocturnal hypoglycemia, fewer injections and better fasting plasma glucose control and in children with T1D as an alternative insulin regimen with fewer injection to increase treatment adherence. The proposed expert opinion provides practical information on use of IDegAsp in different patient populations and practice patterns to assist clinicians, which seems to compensate the need for easily implementable guidance on this novel insulin regimen.

Real-world outcomes of treatment with insulin glargine 300 U/mL versus standard-of-care in people with uncontrolled type 2 diabetes mellitus

Objective: To compare real-world outcomes with newer (insulin glargine 300 U/mL; Gla-300) versus standard of care (SoC) basal insulins (BIs) in the REACH (insulin-naïve; NCT02967224) and REGAIN (basal insulin-treated; NCT02967211) studies in participants with uncontrolled type 2 diabetes (T2DM) in Europe and Brazil.Methods: In these open-label, parallel-group, pragmatic studies, patients (HbA_1c > 7.0%) were randomized to Gla-300 or SoC BI for a 6-month treatment period (to demonstrate non-inferiority of Gla-300 vs SoC BIs for HbA_1c change [non-inferiority margin 0.3%]) and a 6-month extension period (continuing with their assigned treatment). Insulin titration/other medication changes were at investigator/patient discretion post-randomization.Results: Overall, 703 patients were randomized to treatment in REACH (Gla-300, n = 352; SoC, n = 351) and 609 (Gla-300, n = 305, SoC, n = 304) in REGAIN. The primary outcome, non-inferiority of Gla-300 versus SoC for HbA_1c change from baseline to month 6, was met in REACH (least squares [LS] mean difference 0.12% [95% CI -0.046 to 0.281]) but not REGAIN (LS mean difference 0.17% [0.015-0.329]); no between-treatment difference in HbA_1c change was shown after 12 months in either study. BI dose increased minimally from baseline to 12 months in REACH (Gla-300, +0.17 U/kg; SoC, +0.15 U/kg) and REGAIN (Gla-300, +0.11 U/kg; SoC, +0.07 U/kg). Hypoglycemia incidence was low and similar between treatment arms in both studies.Conclusions: In both REACH and REGAIN, no differences in glycemic control or hypoglycemia outcomes with Gla-300 versus SoC BIs were seen over 12 months. However, the suboptimal insulin titration in REACH and REGAIN limits comparisons of outcomes between treatment arms and suggests that more titration instruction/support may be required for patients to fully derive the benefits from newer basal insulin formulations.

The Diabetes Unmet Need with Basal Insulin Evaluation (DUNE) study in type 2 diabetes: Achieving HbA1c targets with basal insulin in a real-world setting

AIMS

To describe in a real-world setting the achievement of physician-selected individualized HbA1c targets in individuals with type 2 diabetes, newly or recently initiated with basal insulin, and the association of hypoglycaemia with target achievement.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A 12-week, prospective, single-arm, observational study of adults with type 2 diabetes, either newly initiated with any basal insulin or start on basal insulin within the preceding 12 months. At enrollment, eligible participants from 28 countries were treated with or without oral antihyperglycaemic drugs and/or GLP-1 receptor agonists.

RESULTS

Individualized targets for almost all of the 3139 evaluable participants (99.7%) had been set by their physicians, with 57% of participants having HbA1c targets between 7.0% and <7.5% (53 and <58 mmol/mol). By week 12, 28% and 27% of newly and previously initiated participants, respectively, achieved individualized HbA1c targets with modest average increases in daily insulin dose of 9 and 5 U (0.10 and 0.06 U/kg), respectively, from baseline (14 and 23 U [0.17 and 0.29 U/kg], respectively). Overall, 16% of participants experienced at least one episode of hypoglycaemia. Both the incidence and frequency of hypoglycaemia, but not the severity, were positively associated with a higher likelihood of achieving individualized HbA1c targets (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

In this prospective real-world study, most participants using basal insulin did not achieve the individualized HbA1c targets set by their physicians. Participants who experienced symptomatic hypoglycaemia were more likely to achieve HbA1c targets than those who did not.

A Greek registry of current type 2 diabetes management, aiming to determine core clinical approaches, patterns and strategies

BACKGROUND

To analyze data in terms of the glycaemic control and therapeutic regimens used for Type-2 Diabetes Mellitus (T2DM) management in Greece, identify factors that influence clinical decisions and determine the level of compliance of T2DM management with the latest international and local guidelines.

METHODS

'AGREEMENT' was a national-multicenter, non-interventional, cross-sectional disease registry. A total of 1191 adult T2DM patients were enrolled consecutively from 59 sites of the National Health System (NHS) or University Hospitals, representing the majority of Diabetes centers or Diabetes outpatient clinics in Greece with a broad geographic distribution. Patients were stratified by gender and analysis was done according to 3 treatment strategies: A (lifestyle changes or use of one oral antidiabetic agent), B (up to 3 antidiabetic agents including injectables but not insulin) and C (any regimens with insulin).

RESULTS

Mean (±SD) HbA1c % of the total population was 7.1 (±1.2) while mean (±SD) FPG (mg/dl) was measured at 136 (±42). The proportion of patients who achieved HbA1c < 7% was 53% and ranged from 74.2% for group A, to 60.6% for group B and 35.5% for group C. Median age of the studied population was 65.0 year old (Interquartile Range-IQR 14.0) with an equal distribution of genders between groups. Patients on insulin therapy (treatment strategy C) were older (median age: 67 years vs 63 or 65 for A and B, respectively) with longer diabetes duration (mean duration: 15.3 years vs 5.2 and 10.1 for A and B, respectively). Patients who received insulin presented poor compliance. There was a consensus for a series of decision criteria and factors that potentially influence clinical decisions, used by physicians for selection of the therapeutic strategy among the three groups. Compliance with international and Greek guidelines received a high score among groups A, B and C. No significant differences were presented as per sites' geographic areas, NHS or University centers and physicians' specialty (endocrinologists, diabetologists and internists).

CONCLUSIONS

The presented findings suggest the need for improvement of the glycaemic control rate, especially among insulin treated patients as this group seems to achieve low glycaemic control, by setting appropriate HbA1c targets along with timely and individualised intensification of treatment as well as post-therapy evaluation of the compliance with the proposed treatment.

Lack of coordination between partners: investigation of Physician-Preferred and Patient-Preferred (4P) basal insulin titration algorithms in the real world

BACKGROUND

Patient-centered care is respectful to a patient's preference. All prior clinical trials on patient self-titration algorithms for basal insulin were decided by physicians. We hypothesized that patients and physicians have different preferences.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Physicians and diabetes patients were asked to choose their preferred insulin glargine self-titration algorithm among 5 algorithms. Algorithm 1, 1 U increase once daily; algorithm 2, 2 U increase every 3 days; algorithm 3, 3 U increase every 3 days; algorithm 4, titration every 3 days according to fasting blood glucose, and algorithm 5, weekly titration 2-8 U based on 3-day mean fasting blood glucose levels.

RESULTS

Eleven (5.2%) out of 210 physicians and 180 (90.9%) out of 198 patients preferred algorithm 1 (χ²=300.4, p=0.000). In contrast, 195 (92.9%) physicians and 18 (9.1%) patients preferred algorithm 2 (χ²=286.6, p=0.000). In addition, 4 (1.9%) physicians but no patients preferred algorithm 3 (χ²=2.099, p=0.124). Neither physicians nor patients chose algorithms 4 or 5. Most physicians preferred algorithm 2 since it is recommended by guidelines, but most patients preferred algorithm 1 for its simplicity.

CONCLUSION

Patients had different preferences compared with physicians. Attention should be given to patients' preferences to increase adherence and improve glycemic control.

Insulin treatment increases myocardial ceramide accumulation and disrupts cardiometabolic function

Background

States of hyperinsulinemia, particularly insulin resistance and type 2 diabetes mellitus, are becoming remarkably common, with roughly half a billion people likely to suffer from the disorder within the next 15 years. Along with this rise has been an associated increased burden of cardiovascular disease. Considering type 2 diabetics treated with insulin are more likely to suffer from heart complications, we sought to determine the specific effect of insulin on ceramide-dependent cardiometabolic risk factors, including insulin resistance and altered heart mitochondrial physiology.

Methods

H9c2 cardiomyocytes and adult mice were treated with insulin with or without myriocin to inhibit ceramide biosynthesis. Insulin and glucose changes were tracked throughout the study and mitochondrial bioenergetics was determined in permeabilized cardiomyocytes and myocardium.

Results

Herein, we demonstrate that insulin is sufficient to disrupt heart mitochondrial respiration in both isolated cardiomyocytes and whole myocardium, possibly by increasing mitochondrial fission. Further, insulin increases ceramide accrual in a time-dependent manner, which is necessary for insulin-induced alterations in heart mitochondrial respiration and insulin resistance.

Conclusions

Collectively, these observations have two implications. First, they indicate a pathological role of insulin in heart complications stemming from mitochondrial disruption. Second, they identify ceramide as a possible mediator of insulin-related heart disorders.

Common standards of basal insulin titration in type 2 diabetes

Type 2 diabetes mellitus has become a worldwide major health problem, and the number of people affected is steadily increasing. Thus, not all patients suffering from the disease can be treated by specialized diabetes centers or outpatient clinics, but by primary care physicians. The latter, however, might have time constraints and have to deal with many kinds of diseases or with multimorbid patients, so their focus is not so much on lowering high blood glucose values. Thus, the physicians, as well as the patients themselves, are often reluctant to initiate and adjust insulin therapy, although basal insulin therapy is considered the appropriate strategy after oral antidiabetic drug failure, according to the latest international guidelines. A substantial number of clinical studies have shown that insulin initiation and optimization can be managed successfully by using titration algorithms-even in cases where patients themselves are the drivers of insulin titration. Nevertheless, tools and strategies are needed to facilitate this process in the daily life of both primary health care professionals and patients with diabetes.