Comparison of pharmacokinetics and dynamics of the long-acting insulin analogs glargine and detemir at steady state in type 1 diabetes: a double-blind, randomized, crossover study

Evolution of biosynthetic human insulin and its analogues for diabetes management

Hormones play a crucial role in maintaining the normal human physiology. By acting as chemical messengers that facilitate the communication between different organs, tissues and cells of the body hormones assist in responding appropriately to external and internal stimuli that trigger growth, development and metabolic activities of the body. Any abnormalities in the hormonal composition and balance can lead to devastating health consequences. Hormones have been important therapeutic agents since the early 20th century, when it was realized that their exogenous supply could serve as a functional substitution for those hormones which are not produced enough or are completely lacking, endogenously. Insulin, the pivotal anabolic hormone in the body, was used for the treatment of diabetes mellitus, a metabolic disorder due to the absence or intolerance towards insulin, since 1921 and is the trailblazer in hormone therapeutics. At present the largest market share for therapeutic hormones is held by insulin. Many other hormones were introduced into clinical practice following the success with insulin. However, for the six decades following the introduction the first therapeutic hormone, there was no reliable method for producing human hormones. The most common source for hormones were animals, although semisynthetic and synthetic hormones were also developed. However, none of these were optimal because of their allergenicity, immunogenicity, lack of consistency in purity and most importantly, scalability. The advent of recombinant DNA technology was a game changer for hormone therapeutics. This revolutionary molecular biology tool made it possible to synthesize human hormones in microbial cell factories. The approach allowed for the synthesis of highly pure hormones which were structurally and biochemically identical to the human hormones. Further, the fermentation techniques utilized to produce recombinant hormones were highly scalable. Moreover, by employing tools such as site directed mutagenesis along with recombinant DNA technology, it became possible to amend the molecular structure of the hormones to achieve better efficacy and mimic the exact physiology of the endogenous hormone. The first recombinant hormone to be deployed in clinical practice was insulin. It was called biosynthetic human insulin to reflect the biological route of production. Subsequently, the biochemistry of recombinant insulin was modified using the possibilities of recombinant DNA technology and genetic engineering to produce analogues that better mimic physiological insulin. These analogues were tailored to exhibit pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties of the prandial and basal human insulins to achieve better glycemic control. The present chapter explores the principles of genetic engineering applied to therapeutic hormones by reviewing the evolution of therapeutic insulin and its analogues. It also focuses on how recombinant analogues account for the better management of diabetes mellitus.

Insulin therapy in type 2 diabetes: Insights into clinical efficacy, patient-reported outcomes, and adherence challenges

Insulin therapy plays a crucial role in the management of type 2 diabetes as the disease progresses. Over the past century, insulin formulations have undergone significant modifications and bioengineering, resulting in a diverse range of available insulin products. These products show distinct pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic profiles. Consequently, various insulin regimens have em-erged for the management of type 2 diabetes, including premixed formulations and combinations of basal and bolus insulins. The utilization of different insulin regimens yields disparate clinical outcomes, adverse events, and, notably, patient-reported outcomes (PROs). PROs provide valuable insights from the patient's perspective, serving as a valuable mine of information for enhancing healthcare and informing clinical decisions. Adherence to insulin therapy, a critical patient-reported outcome, significantly affects clinical outcomes and is influenced by multiple factors. This review provides insights into the clinical effectiveness of various insulin preparations, PROs, and factors impacting insulin therapy adherence, with the aim of enhancing healthcare practices and informing clinical decisions for individuals with type 2 diabetes.

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.

Clinical impact after implementing an insulin protocol involving a switch to insulin glargine 300 U/ml as basal insulin for inpatient glycaemic control: A retrospective single-centre study

AIMS

To evaluate the benefit and safety of a switch in the basal insulin protocol to glargine 300 U/ml (Gla-300) on inpatients' overall dysglycemic events. Efficacy and safety data on insulin Gla-300 in the inpatient setting are limited.

METHODS

Retrospective observational study conducted on 7455 patients admitted to acute care (n = 5414) or geriatric and social healthcare (n = 2041) units of the Regional Hospital of Amposta (Spain) between January 2017 and December 2020 who received basal insulin during hospitalization. Hypo- and hyperglycaemic events were indirectly assessed through hospital pharmacy usage of intravenous glucose and vials of rapid-acting intravenous insulin for 27 months after the switch, and the impact on overall dysglycemic events was analysed.

RESULTS

After protocol implementation, patients were mostly treated with Gla-300 (83.06 % in acute care; and 83.44 % in geriatric and social healthcare), and presented a significant decrease in the use of intravenous insulin (-60.80 %, P = 0.005) and glucose (-62.13 %, P < 0.001), which translated into a significantly reduced overall dysglycemic events (-62.25 %, P < 0.001), with a good safety and tolerability profile.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall inpatient dysglycemic events were improved upon the introduction of the new insulin protocol, which calls for the use of Gla-300 as one of the choices of basal insulin for inpatient care.

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.

How to Achieve Sufficient Endogenous Insulin Suppression in Euglycemic Clamps Assessing the Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics of Long-Acting Insulin Preparations Employing Healthy Volunteers

The therapeutic effect of basal insulin analogs will be sustained at a rather low insulin level. When employing healthy volunteers to assess the pharmacokinetics (PK) and pharmacodynamics (PD) of long-acting insulin preparations by euglycemic clamp techniques, endogenous insulin cannot be ignored and sufficient endogenous insulin inhibition is crucial for the PD and/or PK assessment. This study aimed to explore a way to sufficiently inhibit endogenous insulin secretion. Healthy Chinese male and female volunteers were enrolled. After a subcutaneous injection of insulin glargine (IGlar) (LY2963016 or Lantus) (0.5 IU/kg), they underwent a manual euglycemic clamp for up to 24 h where the target blood glucose (BG) was set as 0.28 mmol/L below the individual’s baseline. Blood samples were collected for analysis of PK/PD and C-peptide. The subjects fell into two groups according to the reduction extent of postdose C-peptide from baseline. After matching for the dosage proportion of Lantus, there were 52 subjects in group A (C-peptide reduction&lt;50%) and 26 in group B (C-peptide reduction≥50%), respectively. No significant difference was detected in age, body mass index, the proportion of Latus treatment and female participants. A lower basal BG was observed in group B compared to group A (4.35 ± 0.26 vs. 4.59 ± 0.22 mmol/L, p &lt; 0.05). The clamp studies were all conducted with high quality (where BG was consistently maintained around the target and exhibited a low variety). The binary logistic regression analysis indicated low basal BG as an independent factor for the success of sufficient endogenous insulin suppression. In conclusion, setting a lower sub-baseline target BG (e.g., 10% instead of 5% below baseline) might be an approach to help achieve sufficient endogenous insulin suppression in euglycemic clamps with higher basal BG levels (e.g., beyond 4.60 mmol/L).

Insulin analogs in the treatment of type II diabetes and future perspectives

The discovery of insulin by Banting and Best marked 100 years in 2021, and it was a life-saving treatment modality for type II diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Insulin is a natural hormone that has been used extensively in T2DM patients since its discovery. Currently, insulin analogs are also available in different formulations for T2DM management, overcoming the limitations of human insulin with better safety and side effect profiles. The insulin analogs like the rapid-acting analogs (Aspart, lispro, glulisine), the long-acting basal analogs (Glargine, detemir), the ultra-long acting (Insulin degludec), and the premixed insulin analog formulations (75% Neutral protamine lispro, 25% lispro; 50% neutral protamine lispro, 50% lispro; 70% protamine aspart, 30% aspart) have been prepared through genetic engineering while preserving the basic insulin profile. A large number of studies have demonstrated their clinical effects on glycated hemoglobin test (HbA1c) in achieving glycemic control and thereby lowering the microvascular and macrovascular complications of T2DM with less traditional side effects of regular human insulin, mainly the risk of hypoglycemia, postprandial glycemic excursions, and weight gain. This review explores the currently available insulin analogs, their clinical implications, pharmacokinetics (PK), pharmacodynamics (PD), safety profile, and cost-effectiveness. We also discuss the future developments in the management of T2DM, especially the scientific advancements surrounding the novel insulin formulations, including the biosimilar insulin, and the innovative insulin delivery methods, such as oral and inhaled insulin.

Effects of Unsuppressed Endogenous Insulin on Pharmacokinetics and/or Pharmacodynamics of Study Insulin in the Healthy: A Retrospective Study

C‐peptide, a marker of endogenous insulin, should be consistently inhibited during euglycemic clamping, while an elevated postdosing C‐peptide (CP_postdosing) is not an occasional phenomenon. This was a retrospective study that included 33 men who underwent a manual euglycemic clamp with a subcutaneous injection of insulin aspart (IAsp) aiming to describe the effects of insufficient suppression of endogenous insulin on estimates of the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of injected insulin. The time profiles of whole blood glucose, human insulin, glucose infusion rate (GIR), and C‐peptide were recorded. The subjects were divided into 2 groups at a ratio of 2:1: group A ([CP_postdosing]_max>baseline CP [CP_baseline]), group B ([CP_postdosing]_max ≤ CP_baseline). The endogenous insulin was approximately equal to the measured value of human insulin or calculated from the C‐peptide. The basal glucose, CP_baseline, basal human insulin, homeostatic model assessment of insulin resistance, IAsp dose, and demographic statistics were all comparable between the 2 groups except the “clamped” glucose. The average clamped glucose was 99.7% (group A) and 94.9% (group B) of baseline. After correction for clamped glucose, GIR area under the concentration‐time curve from time 0 to 8 hours was higher in group A (P < .05) under comparable IAsp exposure. Endogenous insulin area under the concentration‐time curve from time 0 to 8 hours calculated from C‐peptide was different from that measured from human insulin in group A (P < .05), whereas no statistical difference between these measures was observed in group B. Hence, blood glucose should be controlled below the baseline to ensure the inhibition of endogenous insulin. Unsuppressed endogenous insulin may contribute to observed GIR, and the endogenous insulin–corrected pharmacokinetics estimated by C‐peptide may be inaccurate with insufficient endogenous insulin suppression.

Insulin Centennial: Milestones influencing the development of insulin preparations since 1922

During 1921 to 1922, a team effort by Banting, Macleod, Collip and Best isolated and purified insulin and demonstrated its life-giving properties, giving rise to the birth of insulin therapy. In the early years (1922-1950), priorities revolved around the manufacture of insulin to meet demand, improving purity to avoid allergic reactions, establishing insulin standards and increasing its duration of action to avoid multiple daily injections. Shortly after the emergence of insulin, Joslin and Allen advocated the need to achieve and maintain good glycaemic control to realize its full potential. Although this view was opposed by some during a dark period in the history of insulin, it was subsequently endorsed some 60 years later endorsed by the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial and United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study. Major scientific advances by the Nobel Laureates Sanger, Hodgkin, Yalow and Gilbert and also by Steiner have revolutionized the understanding of diabetes and facilitated major advances in insulin therapy. The more recent advent of recombinant technology over the last 40 years has provided the potential for unlimited source of insulin, and the ability to generate various insulin 'analogues', in an attempt to better replicate normal insulin secretory patterns. The emerging biosimilars now provide the opportunity to improve availability at a lower cost.

Low fasting glucose-to-estimated average glucose ratio was associated with superior response to insulin degludec/aspart compared with basal insulin in patients with type 2 diabetes

AIMS/INTRODUCTION

The benefits of once-daily insulin degludec/aspart (IDegAsp) compared with basal insulin in type 2 diabetes patients have not been established.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was a retrospective observational study. From a basal insulin cohort from three referral hospitals, patients were enrolled who initiated once-daily IDegAsp. A control group maintaining basal insulin was selected by propensity score matching. Glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) changes over a period of 6 months and associated clinical factors were evaluated.

RESULTS

The IDegAsp group and the control group comprised of 87 patients, respectively. Baseline HbA1c was comparable between the two groups (8.7 ± 0.9 vs 8.6 ± 0.9%, mean and standard deviation). After 6 months with matched insulin doses, HbA1c in the IDegAsp group was lower than that in the control group (8.1 ± 1.0 vs 8.4 ± 1.1%, P = 0.029). Among baseline variables, fasting plasma glucose (FPG) and fasting C-peptide in the IDegAsp were lower than that in the control (FPG 124.2 ± 38.4 vs 148.0 ± 50.6 mg/dL, P < 0.001). Considering that the lower FPG despite the comparable HbA1c could be related with the efficacy of IDegAsp, subgroup analysis was carried out according to a ratio of FPG-to-estimated average glucose, which is calculated from HbA1c. When compared with each control group, the superiority of IDegAsp in the reduction of HbA1c was significant only in the patients with a lower FPG-to-estimated average glucose ratio (0.49 ± 0.09), but not in those with a higher FPG-to-estimated average glucose ratio (0.79 ± 0.20).

CONCLUSIONS

We observed that IDegAsp was more effective than basal insulin in patients with an FPG lower than predicted by HbA1c, which might be related with insulin deficiency and postprandial hyperglycemia in patients on basal insulin therapy.

One hundred years of insulin therapy

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

Insulin and insulin analogs as antidiabetic therapy: A perspective from clinical trials

The discovery of insulin in 1921 and the progress achieved in the ensuing century highlight the promise and challenge of biochemically modifying the molecule to achieve optimization of its delivery and therapeutic efficacy. Normal endogenous insulin secretion consists of a highly orchestrated physiologic loop wherein multiple metabolic signals trigger the pancreatic β cells to secrete the precise amount of insulin into the portal system required to maintain euglycemia. Accordingly, in the treatment of diabetes, attempting to replicate this complex physiology with exogenous insulin therapy given subcutaneously presents a clinical challenge. In this context, recombinant DNA-based technology has enabled the development of insulin analogs that have been specifically designed to confer advantageous pharmacodynamic features that can better mimic endogenous insulin secretion. In this review, we discuss the development of the most widely available insulin preparations and provide evidence-based insight into their use in clinical practice.

Pharmacokinetic and Pharmacodynamic Head-to-Head Comparison of Clinical, Equivalent Doses of Insulin Glargine 300 units · mL-1 and Insulin Degludec 100 units · mL-1 in Type 1 Diabetes

OBJECTIVE

To prove equivalence of individual, clinically titrated basal insulin doses of glargine 300 units ⋅ mL^-1 (Gla-300) and degludec 100 units ⋅ mL^-1 (Deg-100) under steady state conditions in a single-blind, randomized, crossover study, on the glucose pharmacodynamics (PD) in people with type 1 diabetes (T1D).

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

Subjects with T1D (N = 22, 11 men, age 44.3 ± 12.4 years, disease duration 25.5 ± 11.7 years, A1C 7.07 ± 0.63% [53.7 ± 6.9 mmol ⋅ mL^-1], BMI 22.5 ± 2.7 kg · m^-2), naïve to Gla-300 and Deg-100, underwent 24-h euglycemic clamps with individual clinical doses of Gla-300 (0.34 ± 0.08 units ⋅ kg^-1) and Deg-100 (0.26 ± 0.06 units ⋅ kg^-1), dosing at 2000 h, after 3 months of optimal titration of basal (and bolus) insulin.

RESULTS

At the end of 3 months, Gla-300 and Deg-100 reduced slightly and, similarly, A1C versus baseline. Clamp average plasma glucose (0-24 h) was euglycemic with both insulins. The area under curve of glucose infused (AUC-GIR_{[0-24 h]}) was equivalent for the two insulins (ratio 1.04, 90% CI 0.91-1.18). Suppression of endogenous glucose production, free fatty acids, glycerol, and β-hydroxybutyrate was 9%, 14%, 14%, and 18% greater, respectively, with Gla-300 compared with Deg-100 during the first 12 h, while glucagon suppression was no different. Relative within-day PD variability was 23% lower with Gla-300 versus Deg-100 (ratio 0.77, 90% CI 0.63-0.92).

CONCLUSIONS

In T1D, individualized, clinically titrated doses of Gla-300 and Deg-100 at steady state result in similar glycemic control and PD equivalence during euglycemic clamps. Clinical doses of Gla-300 compared with Deg-100 are higher and associated with quite similar even 24-h distribution of PD and antilipolytic effects.

Factors Influencing Insulin Absorption Around Exercise in Type 1 Diabetes

International charities and health care organizations advocate regular physical activity for health benefit in people with type 1 diabetes. Clinical expert and international diabetes organizations' position statements support the management of good glycemia during acute physical exercise by adjusting exogenous insulin and/or carbohydrate intake. Yet research has detailed, and patients frequently report, variable blood glucose responses following both the same physical exercise session and insulin to carbohydrate alteration. One important source of this variability is insulin delivery to the circulation. With modern insulin analogs, it is important to understand how different insulins, their delivery methods, and inherent physiological factors, influence the reproducibility of insulin absorption from the injection site into circulation. Furthermore, contrary to the adaptive pancreatic response to exercise in the person without diabetes, the physiological and metabolic shifts with exercise may increase circulating insulin concentrations that may contribute to exercise-related hyperinsulinemia and consequent hypoglycemia. Thus, a furthered understanding of factors underpinning insulin delivery may offer more confidence for healthcare professionals and patients when looking to improve management of glycemia around exercise.

The Evolution of Insulin and How it Informs Therapy and Treatment Choices

Insulin has been available for the treatment of diabetes for almost a century, and the variety of insulin choices today represents many years of discovery and innovation. Insulin has gone from poorly defined extracts of animal pancreata to pure and precisely controlled formulations that can be prescribed and administered with high accuracy and predictability of action. Modifications of the insulin formulation and of the insulin molecule itself have made it possible to approximate the natural endogenous insulin response. Insulin and insulin formulations had to be designed to produce either a constant low basal level of insulin or the spikes of insulin released in response to meals. We discuss how the biochemical properties of endogenous insulin were exploited to either shorten or extend the time-action profiles of injectable insulins by varying the pharmacokinetics (time for appearance of insulin in the blood after injection) and pharmacodynamics (time-dependent changes in blood sugar after injection). This has resulted in rapid-acting, short-acting, intermediate-acting, and long-acting insulins, as well as mixtures and concentrated formulations. An understanding of how various insulins and formulations were designed to solve the challenges of insulin replacement will assist clinicians in meeting the needs of their individual patients.

Basal-Bolus Insulin Regimen for Hospitalised Patients with COVID-19 and Diabetes Mellitus: A Practical Approach

BACKGROUND AND AIM

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak has rapidly crossed international boundaries and placed increasing demands on healthcare facilities worldwide. Patients with diabetes and uncontrolled blood glucose levels are at increased risk for poor clinical outcomes and in-hospital mortality related to COVID-19. Therefore, achieving good glycaemic control is of paramount importance among hospitalised patients with COVID-19. Basal-bolus insulin therapy is a safe and effective intervention for the management of hyperglycaemia in hospitalised patients. The aim of this article is to provide a practical guidance for the use of the basal-bolus insulin regimen in hospitalised patients with COVID-19 and diabetes mellitus.

METHODS

This guidance document was formulated based on the review of available literature and the combined personal experiences of the authors. We provide a comprehensive review on the use of the basal-bolus insulin regimen, including its principles, rationale, indications, prerequisites, initiation, and dose titration, and also suggest targets for blood glucose control and different levels of capillary blood glucose monitoring. Various case scenarios are used to illustrate how optimal glucose control can be achieved, such as through adjustments in doses of prandial and basal insulin, the use of correctional insulin dosing and changes in the timing and content of major and minor meals.

CONCLUSION

The practical guidance for the use of the basal-bolus insulin regimen in hospitalised patients with COVID-19 and diabetes mellitus presented here can be used for patients admitted to hospital for indications other than COVID-19 and for those in ambulatory care.

Are newer insulin analogues better for people with Type 1 diabetes?

Achieving optimal blood glucose control in Type 1 diabetes is a delicate balance between ensuring tight glycaemic control and achieving this without the expense of hypoglycaemia and weight gain, two major factors impacting quality of life. This is a real challenge for people with Type 1 diabetes and underpins many of the struggles they face in self-managing on a day-to-day basis. The main goals of insulin delivery are to try to simulate the physiology of β-cell insulin secretion as closely as possible and to overcome the challenges of peripheral insulin administration by achieving rapidity of onset with mealtime insulins and stability of the glucose-lowering effects of long-acting insulins. Since the early days of human insulin use, there have been many developments in insulin formulations that aim to achieve these goals as much as possible, thus contributing to better glycaemic control whilst minimizing hypoglycaemia. In the present review we discuss the currently available insulin analogues and the challenges of achieving glucose control using current analogues in those on multiple daily injections, and appraise the evidence base for newer-generation insulin analogues, such as insulin degludec, glargine U300, faster-acting insulin aspart and BioChaperone lispro. We also highlight new insulins in development and unmet needs in people with Type 1 diabetes.

Insulin Therapy in Adults with Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus: a Narrative Review

Here, we review insulin management options and strategies in nonpregnant adult patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM). Most patients with T1DM should follow a regimen of multiple daily injections of basal/bolus insulin, but those not meeting individual glycemic targets or those with frequent or severe hypoglycemia or pronounced dawn phenomenon should consider continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion. The latter treatment modality could also be an alternative based on patient preferences and availability of reimbursement. Continuous glucose monitoring may improve glycemic control irrespective of treatment regimen. A glycemic target of glycated hemoglobin < 7% (53 mmol/mol) is appropriate for most nonpregnant adults. Basal insulin analogues with a reduced peak profile and an extended duration of action with lower intraindividual variability relative to neutral protamine Hagedorn insulin are preferred. The clinical advantages of basal analogues compared with older basal insulins include reduced injection burden, better efficacy, lower risk of hypoglycemic episodes (especially nocturnal), and reduced weight gain. For prandial glycemic control, any rapid-acting prandial analogue (aspart, glulisine, lispro) is preferred over regular human insulin. Faster-acting insulin aspart is a relatively new option with the advantage of better postprandial glucose coverage. Frequent blood glucose measurements along with patient education on insulin dosing based on carbohydrate counting, premeal blood glucose, and anticipated physical activity is paramount, as is education on the management of blood glucose under different circumstances.Plain Language Summary: Plain language summary is available for this article.

Greater Suppression of Glucagon, Lipolysis, and Ketogenesis with Insulin Glargine U300 as Compared with Glargine U100 in Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus

The aim of this study was to establish the effects of clinical doses of Gla-300 versus Gla-100 on suppression of glucagon, lipolysis, and ketogenesis in type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM). Eighteen persons with T1DM (age 40 ± 12 years, diabetes duration 26 ± 12 years, body mass index 23.4 ± 2 kg/m², A1C 7.19% ± 0.52% [55 ± 6 mmol/mol]) were studied after 3 months of titration with Gla-300 and Gla-100 (randomized, crossover design) with a 24-h euglycemic clamp (s.c. injection of individual insulin daily doses used by subjects for previous 2 weeks, Gla-300 0.35 ± 0.08 and Gla-100 0.28 ± 0.07 U/kg). Gla-300 resulted in (1) less increase in insulin concentration for 0-12 h, but greater insulin concentration in 12-24 h (no differences for 24 h); (2) greater glucagon suppression; (3) greater prehepatic insulin-to-glucagon molar ratio, primarily in 12-24 h (ratio 1.78, 90% confidence intervals [CIs] 1.5-2.1); and (4) lower 24-h free fatty acid (0.81; 90% CI 0.73-0.89), glycerol (0.78; 90% CI 0.65-0.94), and β-hydroxybutyrate (0.72; 90% CI 0.58-0.90). Over the 24 h postinjection, as compared with Gla-100, clinical doses of Gla-300 exhibit greater suppressive effects on glucagon, lipolysis, and ketogenesis, whereas the effects on glucose metabolism are equivalent.

Insulin Detemir Versus Insulin Glargine in the Hospital: Do Hypoglycemia Rates Differ?

IN BRIEF Several studies have compared the safety and efficacy of insulin detemir and insulin glargine; however, most have been conducted in the ambulatory care setting. This retrospective cohort study compared hypoglycemia rates between the two basal insulin analogs in hospitalized patients with diabetes. No difference was found between the two insulin cohorts in the proportion of patients who experienced hypoglycemic events.

Adjustment of insulin doses when switching from glargine 100 U/ml or detemir to degludec: an observational study

BACKGROUND

Degludec is a long-acting insulin with a longer duration of action and a greater day-to-day reproducibility of absorption in comparison with previous long-acting insulin formulations. The aim is the definition of the change in insulin needs in patients switching from detemir/glargine to degludec in real-life conditions.

METHODS

In this retrospective cohort observational study, all outpatients with either type 1 or type 2 diabetes, starting therapy with degludec insulin-after a prior treatment with either detemir or glargine insulin for at least 6 months-were included.

RESULTS

The analysis was performed on 266 patients, 172 and 96 with type 1 and type 2 diabetes, respectively. The equations describing the relationship between baseline and follow-up doses of basal insulin (6 months) were Y = 3.39 + 0.78X and Y = 0.44 + 0.69X, in patients receiving detemir/glargine either once or twice daily, respectively (Y = degludec dose at 6 months and X = basal insulin dose at switch). The corresponding equations for prandial insulin doses were y = 1.83 + 0.83*x and y = 2.85 + 0.80*x for those on pre-switch once or twice-daily basal insulin, respectively. In type 2 diabetes, the switch was associated with a reduction of basal insulin doses only in those with a prior twice-daily treatment with basal insulin. The reduction of prandial insulin reached statistical significance only in patients previously treated with basal insulin once daily.

CONCLUSIONS

The present results provide a suggestion for a simple method for the adjustment of basal and prandial insulin doses in type 1 diabetic patients, switching from glargine or detemir to degludec.

Efficacy and safety of insulin glargine 300 U/mL vs insulin degludec in patients with type 2 diabetes: A randomized, open-label, cross-over study using continuous glucose monitoring profiles

AIMS/INTRODUCTION

Compared with glargine 100 U/mL (Gla100), glargine 300 U/mL (Gla300) and degludec (Deg) - the ultralong-acting insulins - reportedly have more stable effects and reduce the risk of hypoglycemia. Currently, they are considered to be the most useful basal insulins. The present study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of Gla300 and Deg on glycemic control using continuous glucose monitoring.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this single-center, open-label, parallel-group, two-period, cross-over study, 30 patients with type 2 diabetes were randomized to once-daily Gla300 followed by Deg with the same units (n = 15) or vice versa (n = 15). The primary end-points of this study were the mean percentage of time within the target glucose range of 70-180 mg/dL as efficacy and hypoglycemia of <70 mg/dL as safety indicators, as measured using continuous glucose monitoring during each treatment period.

RESULTS

The mean percentage of time within the target glucose range was not different between Gla300 and Deg (77.8 ± 19.2 vs 76.9 ± 18.3%, P = 0.848). However, the mean percentage of time of hypoglycemia with Gla300 was significantly lower than that of Deg (1.3 ± 2.7 vs 5.5 ± 6.4%, P = 0.002). In the secondary safety end-points, the mean percentage of time of severe hypoglycemia (<54 mg/dL) or nocturnal hypoglycemia with Gla300 was also significantly lower than that of Deg.

CONCLUSIONS

The present study showed the comparable efficacy of Gla300 and Deg on glycemic control; however, the risk of hypoglycemia was markedly lower for Gla300 than for Deg.

Premix insulins in type 1 diabetes: the coming of degludec/aspart

INTRODUCTION

Although premixed fixed ratio NPH insulin products are commonly used in type 2 diabetes patients, the advent of Glargine insulin which cannot be formulated together with a rapid-acting insulin (basal-bolus) has largely eliminated premixed insulin from use in type 1 diabetes. Degludec insulin can be formulated together with Aspart insulin in a 70/30 fixed ratio product. We review the potential use of Degludec-Aspart in type 1 diabetes. Areas covered: A historical search of the development and use of premixed insulin preparations was performed relying on Pubmed, FDA, and European Union records. Expert opinion: Degludec is a once daily insulin. There appears to be little advantage to administration of Degludec-Aspart twice daily, and basal bolus injections have proved superior to premixed insulin in type 1 diabetes. There may still be a role for this premixed fixed ratio formulation in patients who have opted to use Technosphere inhaled insulin prior to and post meals. In such patients, the use of a single injection of Degludec-Aspart prior to the largest meal of the day might provide an anchor to allow patients to then self-administer multiple inhalations around mealtimes.

Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic differences of new generation, longer-acting basal insulins: potential implications for clinical practice in type 2 diabetes

The treatment of type 2 diabetes (T2D) is often complicated by factors such as patient co-morbidities, complex drug-drug interactions, and management of adverse events. In addition, some of these factors are highly dependent on the nature of the treatment regimen and the molecular and physical properties of the drugs being used to treat patients with this disease. This calls for a better understanding of how the properties of individual drugs affect the overall outcome for patients with diabetes. Clinical pharmacology studies to assess the pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic (PD) characteristics of new diabetes drugs play an important role in advancing our understanding of the interactions between a drug and the human body. Specific PK and PD techniques such as the glucose clamp test can be applied to assess the properties of drugs used for the treatment of diabetes. Basal insulin analogs are a common treatment option for the maintenance of glycemic control in patients with T2D. These drugs work by mimicking endogenous insulin secretion within the body and provide stable and prolonged insulin action to achieve optimal glucose levels. Insulin glargine 300 U/mL (Gla-300) and insulin degludec (IDeg) 100 U/mL and 200 U/mL represent a new generation of longer-acting basal insulins. These drugs demonstrate improved PK and PD properties compared with previous basal insulins, allowing them to more closely mimic physiological basal insulin secretion. Here we review the methods used to evaluate the PK and PD profiles of Gla-300 and IDeg and describe studies that have investigated the PK/PD properties of these drugs in type 1 diabetes. The aim of this review is to inform primary care physicians of the value and limitations of data from clinical pharmacology studies when prescribing these agents for the management of T2D.

Pharmacokinetics, Pharmacodynamics, and Modulation of Hepatic Glucose Production With Insulin Glargine U300 and Glargine U100 at Steady State With Individualized Clinical Doses in Type 1 Diabetes

OBJECTIVE

This study characterized the pharmacokinetics (PK), pharmacodynamics (PD), and endogenous (hepatic) glucose production (EGP) of clinical doses of glargine U300 (Gla-300) and glargine U100 (Gla-100) under steady-state (SS) conditions in type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM).

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

T1DM subjects (N = 18, age 40 ± 12 years, T1DM duration 26 ± 12 years, BMI 23.4 ± 2 kg/m², A1C 7.19 ± 0.52% [55 ± 5.7 mmol · mol-1^-1]) were studied after 3 months of Gla-300 or Gla-100 (evening dosing) titrated to fasting euglycemia (random, crossover) with the euglycemic clamp using individualized doses (Gla-300 0.35 ± 0.08, Gla-100 0.28 ± 0.07 units · kg^-1).

RESULTS

Plasma free insulin concentrations (free immunoreactive insulin area under the curve) were equivalent over 24 h with Gla-300 versus Gla-100 (point estimate 1.11 [90% CI 1.03; 1.20]) but were reduced in the first 6 h (0.91 [90% CI 0.86; 0.97]) and higher in the last 12 h postdosing (1.38 [90% CI 1.21; 1.56]). Gla-300 and Gla-100 both maintained 24 h euglycemia (0.99 [90% CI 0.98; 1.0]). The glucose infusion rate was equivalent over 24 h (1.03 [90% CI 0.88; 1.21]) but was lower in first (0.77 [90% CI 0.62; 0.95]) and higher (1.53 [90% CI 1.23; 1.92]) in the second 12 h with Gla-300 versus Gla-100. EGP was less suppressed during 0-6 h but more during 18-24 h with Gla-300. PK and PD within-day variability (fluctuation) was 50% and 17% lower with Gla-300.

CONCLUSIONS

Individualized, clinical doses of Gla-300 and Gla-100 resulted in a similar euglycemic potential under SS conditions. However, Gla-300 exhibited a more stable profile, with lower variability and more physiological modulation of EGP compared with Gla-100.

Evaluation of Unit Equivalency of Insulin Glargine to Insulin Detemir in an Acute Care Setting

Background: Insulin glargine and insulin detemir are the most commonly prescribed basal insulins in the United States. While these analogs chemically differ, clinical trials have established no significant difference in efficacy. However, controversy remains as to whether the 2 agents are comparable with regard to unit equivalency. Objectives: To determine the ratio of glucose lowering between insulin detemir and insulin glargine. Methods: This institutional review board-approved, single-center, retrospective, case-crossover study was conducted in patients with diabetes mellitus with inpatient admissions between June 30, 2014, to July 1, 2015. Patients must have received both insulin detemir and insulin glargine on either the same or separate hospital visits. A blood glucose–lowering ratio for both insulin glargine and insulin detemir was calculated for each patient based off of up to 5 days of fasting blood glucose values and the total number of units of insulin administered. Results: Fifty-two patients were included in this study. No significant difference was found in the blood glucose–lowering ratio between insulin glargine (0.23 mg/dL/unit) as compared with insulin detemir (0.16 mg/dL/unit; P = .08). Conclusion: No difference was found in the blood glucose–lowering ratio between insulin glargine and insulin detemir. The results of this study suggest that conversion between insulin glargine and insulin detemir using a 1:1 ratio in an acute care setting may be appropriate.

Comparison of the dose-response pharmacodynamic profiles of detemir and glargine in severely obese patients with type 2 diabetes: A single-blind, randomised cross-over trial

Background

Despite their widespread use in this population, data on the pharmacodynamic (PD) properties of the insulin analogs detemir and glargine in severely obese patients with type 2 diabetes are lacking.

Methods

The primary objective of the study was to compare the PD properties of two different doses of the basal insulin analogs detemir and glargine in patients with type 2 diabetes and a BMI > 35 kg/m². PD data were derived from euglycemic clamp studies over 30 hours and each subject was studied for four times after the subcutaneous injection of a lower (0.8 U/kg body weight) and higher (1.6 U/kg body weight) dose of both detemir and glargine using a single-blind, randomised cross-over design.

Results

Six male and four female patients with type 2 diabetes and a mean BMI of 43.2±5.1 kg/m² (mean age 55.7±2 years, mean HbA1c 7.2±0.3%) completed the study. The total GIR_AUC0-30 (mean difference 1224 mg/kg, 95%CI 810–1637, p = 0.00001), GIR_AUC0-24 (mean difference 1040 mg/kg, 95%CI 657–1423; p = 0.00001), GIR_AUC24-30 (mean difference 181 mg/kg, 95%CI 64–298; p = 0.004), GIR_max (mean difference 0.93 mg/kg/min, 95%CI 0.22–1.64, p = 0.01) and time to GIR_max (+1.9 hours, 95%CI 0.5–3.2; p = 0.009) were higher after the higher doses of both insulins, without significant differences between detemir and glargine. However, during the last 6 hours of the clamp the GIR_AUC24-30 was significantly increased with glargine (mean difference 122 mg/kg, 95%CI 6–237, p = 0.043), reflecting a more pronounced late glucose lowering effect.

Conclusions

A clear dose-response relationship can be demonstrated for both insulin analogs, even at very high doses in severely obese patients with type 2 diabetes. Compared to detemir, glargine has a more pronounced late glucose lowering effect 24–30 h after its injection.

Trial registration

Controlled-Trials.comISRCTN57547229.

Basal insulin for the management of diabetic ketoacidosis

Due to its pharmacokinetic properties, it has been suggested that long-acting insulin analogues may have a role in facilitating the transition from continuous intravenous insulin infusion to subcutaneous maintenance therapy in patients with DKA for prevention of rebound hyperglycemia, particularly if there are high insulin requirements. Concomitant administration of basal insulin analogues with regular insulin infusion accelerates ketoacidosis resolution and prevents rebound hyperglycemia. Several studies have investigated the use of basal insulin in the management of DKA. Studies have been instituted on pediatric patients and adult patients. These studies reveal that co-administration of basal insulin in combination with an insulin infusion in the acute management of DKA is feasible. Basal insulin co-administration with regular insulin infusion was well tolerated, associated with faster resolution of acidosis without any adverse effects; patients required a shorter duration of intravenous insulin infusion and had a lower total dose of intravenous insulin and significantly decreased hyperglycemia after discontinuation of the intravenous insulin. This could potentially lead to a shorter ICU length of stay and reduced costs in the treatment of DKA. However, this approach may be associated with an increased risk of hypokalemia. The current literature on this management approach is incomplete, due to its many limitations (retrospective nature, small sample size, nonrandomized design). Additional prospective randomized studies are needed on this new therapeutic approach in the management patients with DKA.

The role of the new basal insulin analogs in addressing unmet clinical needs in people with type 1 and type 2 diabetes

BACKGROUND

Despite improvements in anti-hyperglycemic therapies, there are many unmet clinical needs that hinder successful glycemic control in people being treated with current basal insulin analogs.

OBJECTIVE

This paper reviews the unmet needs associated with current basal insulin therapy and describes the most recent basal insulins for the treatment of diabetes.

METHODS

PubMed was searched for articles on basal insulin analogs published between 2000 and April 2016.

RESULTS

Although long-acting insulin analogs, such as insulin glargine 100 units/mL and insulin detemir, have come towards approximating physiologic basal insulin levels, limitations such as hypoglycemia and intra- and inter-individual variability are associated with their use resulting in glycemic fluctuations. Some basal insulins lack 24 hour coverage, requiring some patients to split their dose, increasing the number of injections required to maintain glycemic control. Fear of hypoglycemia and the need for additional injections often leads to poor compliance and suboptimal glycemic control. Long-acting insulin analogs, such as insulin glargine 300 units/mL and insulin degludec, have improved upon the shortcomings of the current basal insulin analogs. Improved pharmacodynamic/pharmacokinetic profiles afford lower intra-patient variability and an extended duration of action, providing full and stable 24 hour basal insulin coverage with once daily dosing, and comparable efficacy to insulin glargine with lower rates of hypoglycemia.

CONCLUSION

The improved pharmacodynamic/pharmacokinetic profiles of new long-acting insulin formulations provide greater glycemic control with once daily dosing. With the growing number of therapeutic choices available, physicians have more scope to individualize patient options for basal insulin therapy.

United States experience of insulin degludec alone or in combination for type 1 and type 2 diabetes

Insulin degludec has been the product of a sophisticated and systematic biochemical engineering program which began with the release of insulin detemir. The goal was to produce a long-lasting basal insulin with low individual variability. Certainly, this goal has been achieved. Degludec has a duration of action approaching twice that of glargine. Another advantage of degludec is in its lack of unpredictable copolymerization of added aspart. In several studies, degludec has shown lower rates of nocturnal hypoglycemia than glargine. Degludec can be administered flexibly with a very flat insulin concentration curve at any time of day. Initial US Food and Drug Administration concerns about a possible increase in cardiac events in degludec-treated patients have been allayed by the results of a study targeting individuals with high cardiac risk. Degludec is now marketed in the US competing with glargine. Despite the long duration of action of degludec, attempted administration three times weekly resulted in less effective lowering of glycated hemoglobin and an increased incidence of hypoglycemia compared to daily glargine. Conversely the coformulation of degludec and liraglutide has proven very successful in reducing glycated hemoglobin levels with less hypoglycemia and less weight gain than with degludec alone and with less gastrointestinal symptoms than with liraglutide alone. A large study comparing glargine insulin and degludec in patients with increased cardiac risk is now ongoing. This study may or may not prove superiority of one or the other insulin, but, with the coming of biosimilar glargine insulin, cost factors may be dominant in determining which basal insulin is to be used. Nonetheless, the coformulation with liraglutide will likely insure the future of degludec insulin in the treatment of type 2 diabetes.

Improved treatment satisfaction in patients with type 1 diabetes treated with insulin glargine 100U/mL versus neutral protamine Hagedorn insulin: An exploration of key predictors from two randomized controlled trials

AIM

Investigate contributors to treatment satisfaction in type 1 diabetes (T1D).

METHODS

Post-hoc analysis using the Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire status version (DTSQs) in 771 T1D patients from two 28-week trials comparing once-daily insulin glargine 100U/mL (Gla-100) with once- or twice-daily NPH neutral protamine Hagedorn (NPH) insulin.

RESULTS

Gla-100 was associated with a significant improvement in treatment satisfaction versus NPH (overall population adjusted mean [standard error] DTSQs change from baseline: +1.13 [0.30] versus -0.04 [0.31]; p=0.006). In the overall population, treatment satisfaction improvement with all insulin regimens was related to less frequent severe hypoglycemia (coefficient-0.077; p=0.040) and HbA1c reduction (-0.066; p=0.082). By treatment regimen, relationships between treatment satisfaction and these outcomes approached or attained statistical significance for NPH insulin, but not Gla-100. In the overall population, predictors of treatment satisfaction improvement included: Gla-100 treatment (estimate 1.17, p=0.006), lower baseline DTSQs (-0.57, p<0.001), study (-1.01, p=0.019), lower severe hypoglycemia rate (0.17, p=0.012), and higher baseline HbA1c (0.44, p=0.014). By treatment regimen, these predictors remained significant for NPH insulin.

CONCLUSIONS

Gla-100 resulted in a significant improvement in treatment satisfaction versus NPH insulin, independent of baseline disease characteristics and clinical outcomes.

A randomized crossover study of the efficacy and safety of switching from insulin glargine to insulin degludec in children with type 1 diabetes

This study implemented a randomized crossover design to evaluate the efficacy and safety of switching from insulin glargine (IGlar) to insulin degludec (IDeg) in 18 children (11 males, 7 females; age 11.0 ± 0.5 years) with type 1 diabetes. All subjects had previously used IGlar once daily at bedtime. We compared fasting plasma glucose (FPG) and HbA1c levels, frequencies of overall and nocturnal (2200 h - 0659 h) hypoglycemia, and basal insulin dose at the baseline with those measured during a 24-week period during which IGlar or IDeg was administered in combination with pre-meal rapid acting insulin analogues. IDeg was initially given at the same dose as IGlar but was subsequently titrated to achieve FPG levels of 90-140 mg/dL. There were no significant changes in FPG and HbA1c levels from the baseline during the 24-week study period with IGlar or IDeg. The daily basal insulin dose did not significantly differ with IGlar or IDeg. Although the frequencies of overall hypoglycemia were similar, nocturnal hypoglycemia significantly decreased at 12 and 24 weeks from the baseline with IDeg use (2 ± 0.4 vs. 0 ± 0.3, 0 ± 0.5 episodes/month, both P <0.05), whereas no significant change in the frequency of nocturnal hypoglycemia was observed with IGlar. No severe hypoglycemia occurred during the study period with either basal insulin analogues. These results suggest that IDeg, injected once at bedtime, may provide similar glycemic control as IGlar while better reducing the risk of nocturnal hypoglycemia in children with type 1 diabetes.

Switching from twice-daily glargine or detemir to once-daily degludec improves glucose control in type 1 diabetes. An observational study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Degludec is an ultralong-acting insulin analogue with a flat and reproducible pharmacodynamic profile. As some patients with type 1 diabetes (T1D) fail to achieve 24-h coverage with glargine or detemir despite twice-daily injections, we studied the effect of switching T1D patients from twice-daily glargine or detemir to degludec.

METHODS AND RESULTS

In this prospective observational study, T1D patients on twice-daily glargine or detemir were enrolled. At baseline and 12 weeks after switching to degludec, we recorded HbA1c, insulin dose, 30-day blood glucose self monitoring (SMBG) or 14-day continuous glucose monitoring (CGM), treatment satisfaction (DTSQ), fear of hypoglycemia (FHS). We included 29 patients (mean age 34 ± 11 years; diabetes duration 18 ± 10 years). After switching to degludec, HbA1c decreased from 7.9 ± 0.6% (63 ± 6 mmol/mol) to 7.7 ± 0.6% (61 ± 6 mmol/mol; p = 0.028). SMBG showed significant reductions in the percent and number of blood glucose values <70 mg/dl and in the low blood glucose index (LBGI) during nighttime. CGM showed a significant reduction of time spent in hypoglycemia, an increase in daytime spent in target 70-180 mg/dl, and a reduction in glucose variability. Total insulin dose declined by 17% (p < 0.001), with 24% reduction in basal and 10% reduction in prandial insulin. DTSQ and FHS significantly improved.

CONCLUSION

Switching from twice-daily glargine or detemir to once daily degludec improved HbA1c, glucose profile, hypoglycemia risk and treatment satisfaction, while insulin doses decreased. ClinicalTrials.govNCT02360254.

Advances in Basal Insulin Therapy

Objective: To review 2 new basal insulin analogs that have been approved in the United States for use in type 1 and type 2 diabetes—insulin glargine 300 units/mL and insulin degludec 100 units/mL and 200 units/mL. Data Sources: PubMed was searched using the terms “insulin glargine 300 units/mL,” “Gla-300,” “insulin degludec,” “IDeg,” “insulin degludec 200 units/mL,” and “insulin degludec 100 units/mL” for articles published between 1995 and May 2016. Study Selection and Data Extraction: Clinical trials, meta-analyses and subanalyses were identified; review articles were excluded. Relevant citations from identified articles were also reviewed. Data Synthesis: The new basal insulins, insulin glargine 300 units/mL and insulin degludec 100 units/mL and 200 units/mL, have improved pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic profiles compared to insulin glargine 100 units/mL. All demonstrate longer durations of action, beyond 24 hours, and less variability. These improved profiles translate into comparable A1C reductions and comparable, or improved, levels of hypoglycemia compared to insulin glargine 100 units/mL. Conclusions: These benefits may lead to improved glycemic control in a range of patients with type 1 and type 2 diabetes with true once-daily dosing.

Addition of 20-kDa PEG to Insulin Lispro Alters Absorption and Decreases Clearance in Animals

PURPOSE

Determine the pharmacokinetics of insulin peglispro (BIL) in 5/6-nephrectomized rats and study the absorption in lymph duct cannulated (LDC) sheep.

METHODS

BIL is insulin lispro modified with 20-kDa linear PEG at lysine B28 increasing the hydrodynamic size to 4-fold larger than insulin lispro. Pharmacokinetics of BIL and insulin lispro after IV administration were compared in 5/6-nephrectomized and sham rats. BIL was administered IV or SC into the interdigital space of the hind leg, and peripheral lymph and/or serum samples were collected from both LDC and non-LDC sheep to determine pharmacokinetics and absorption route of BIL.

RESULTS

The clearance of BIL was similar in 5/6-nephrectomized and sham rats, while the clearance of insulin lispro was 3.3-fold slower in 5/6-nephrectomized rats than in the sham rats. In non-LDC sheep, the terminal half-life after SC was about twice as long vs IV suggesting flip-flop pharmacokinetics. In LDC sheep, bioavailability decreased to <2%; most of the dose was absorbed via the lymphatic system, with 88% ± 19% of the dose collected in the lymph after SC administration.

CONCLUSION

This work demonstrates that increasing the hydrodynamic size of insulin lispro through PEGylation can impact both absorption and clearance to prolong drug action.

A pilot study comparing the CGM-assessed glycemic profiles of patients with type 1 diabetes on insulin degludec and insulin glargine

Aims

To compare the diurnal glycemic profiles obtained with basal insulin degludec (InsDeg) and basal insulin glargine (InsGla) in patients with type 1 diabetes using continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) in an outpatient setting.

Methods

Twenty Japanese patients with type 1 diabetes who were using once-daily InsGla before supper as part of their multiple daily insulin injections were consecutively recruited. CGM was initiated before supper on day 1, and InsGla was switched to InsDeg at the same dose on day 3. The average CGM glucose profile obtained on days 1 and 2 was compared with the corresponding profile for days 5 and 6. The bolus insulin regimen was not changed during the study period.

Results

CGM glucose was significantly higher (p < 0.05) from 19:30 to 22:30 and significantly lower (p < 0.05) from 6:30 to 8:00 with basal InsDeg than with basal InsGla. The duration of hypoglycemia (<70 mg/dl) was the same regardless of whether basal InsDeg or basal InsGla was used.

Conclusions

The peak in the action profile of InsDeg lasts longer and is possibly stronger than that of InsGla.

Euglycaemic glucose clamp: what it can and cannot do, and how to do it

The hyperinsulinaemic-euglycaemic glucose clamp has always been regarded as the "gold standard" for the assessment of pharmacodynamic (PD) properties of insulin preparations; however, there has been controversy over a variety of methodogical details, such as study population, dosing time and the initial stabilization of blood glucose (BG) concentrations at the clamp target level, among clamp groups. As the impact of these details on PD results is unclear, the present review provides an overview of different methodological approaches for both the manual and the automated hyperinsulinaemic-euglycaemic glucose clamp. The advantages and limitations of several methodological details are discussed as well as the relevance of clamp results for the prediction of clinical outcomes. Overall, the best method strongly depends on the exact objective of the trial. If, for instance, duration of action is the primary objective, studies should be carried out in patients with type 1 diabetes to avoid any interference of endogenous insulin. This is less important for variables such as onset of action or early metabolic activity. The hyperinsulinaemic-euglycaemic glucose clamp has a high sensitivity to detect even minor differences between different insulin preparations. The practical relevance of potential differences, however, needs to be investigated in clinical studies. A major prerequisite for obtaining reliable glucose clamp results is the attainment of high clamp quality (i.e. keeping BG concentrations close to the clamp target throughout the experiments). Unfortunately, measures of clamp quality are often under-reported, as is the variability in PD profiles, although these might explain some unconfirmed extreme results obtained in a few clamp studies.

The past, present, and future of basal insulins

Insulin production by the pancreas follows a basic pattern where basal levels of insulin are secreted during fasting periods, with prandial increases in insulin associated with food ingestion. The aim of insulin therapy in patients with diabetes is to match the endogenous pattern of insulin secretion as closely as possible without causing hypoglycaemia. There are several optimal pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties of long-acting basal insulins that can help to achieve this aim, namely, as follows: activity that is flat and as free of peaks as possible, a duration of action of ≥24-h, and as little day-to-day variation as possible. The long-acting basal insulins are a fundamental therapy for patients with type 1 and type 2 diabetes, and those that are currently available have many benefits; however, the development of even longer-acting insulins and improved insulin delivery techniques may lead to better glycemic control for patients in the future. Established long-acting basal insulins available in the United States and Europe include insulin glargine 100 units/mL and insulin detemir, both of which exhibit similar glycemic control to that of the intermediate-acting neutral protamine Hagedorn insulin, but with a reduction in hypoglycaemia. Newer insulin products available include new insulin glargine 300 units/mL (United States and Europe) and the ultra-long-acting insulin degludec (Europe) with basal insulin peglispro currently in development. These new insulins demonstrate different pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic profiles and longer durations of action (>24 h) compared with insulin glargine 100 units/mL, which may lead to potential benefits. The introduction of biosimilar insulins may also broaden access to insulins by reducing treatment costs. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Interactions between kidney disease and diabetes: dangerous liaisons

BACKGROUND

Type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM) globally affects 18-20 % of adults over the age of 65 years. Diabetic kidney disease (DKD) is one of the most frequent and dangerous complications of DM2, affecting about one-third of the patients with DM2. In addition to the pancreas, adipocytes, liver, and intestines, the kidneys also play an important role in glycemic control, particularly due to renal contribution to gluconeogenesis and tubular reabsorption of glucose.

METHODS

In this review article, based on a report of discussions from an interdisciplinary group of experts in the areas of endocrinology, diabetology and nephrology, we detail the relationship between diabetes and kidney disease, addressing the care in the diagnosis, the difficulties in achieving glycemic control and possible treatments that can be applied according to the different degrees of impairment.

DISCUSSION

Glucose homeostasis is extremely altered in patients with DKD, who are exposed to a high risk of both hyperglycemia and hypoglycemia. Both high and low glycemic levels are associated with increased morbidity and shortened survival in this group of patients. Factors that are associated with an increased risk of hypoglycemia in DKD patients include decreased renal gluconeogenesis, deranged metabolic pathways (including altered metabolism of medications) and decreased insulin clearance. On the other hand, decrease glucose filtration and excretion, and inflammation-induce insulin resistance are predisposing factors to hyperglycemic episodes.

CONCLUSION

Appropriate glycaemic monitoring and control tailored for diabetic patients is required to avoid hypoglycaemia and other glycaemic disarrays in patients with DM2 and kidney disease. Understanding the renal physiology and pathophysiology of DKD has become essential to all specialties treating diabetic patients. Disseminating this knowledge and detailing the evidence will be important to initiate breakthrough research and to encourage proper treatment of this group of patients.

Concentrated insulins: the new basal insulins

INTRODUCTION

Insulin therapy plays a critical role in the treatment of type 1 and type 2 diabetes mellitus. However, there is still a need to find basal insulins with 24-hour coverage and reduced risk of hypoglycemia. Additionally, with increasing obesity and insulin resistance, the ability to provide clinically necessary high doses of insulin at low volume is also needed.

AREAS COVERED

This review highlights the published reports of the pharmacokinetic (PK) and glucodynamic properties of concentrated insulins: Humulin-R U500, insulin degludec U200, and insulin glargine U300, describes the clinical efficacy, risk of hypoglycemic, and metabolic changes observed, and finally, discusses observations about the complexity of introducing a new generation of concentrated insulins to the therapeutic market.

CONCLUSION

Humulin-R U500 has a similar onset but longer duration of action compared with U100 regular insulin. Insulin glargine U300 has differential PK/pharmacodynamic effects when compared with insulin glargine U100. In noninferiority studies, glycemic control with degludec U200 and glargine U300 is similar to insulin glargine U100 and nocturnal hypoglycemia is reduced. Concentrated formulations appear to behave as separate molecular entities when compared with earlier U100 insulin analog compounds. In the review of available published data, newer concentrated basal insulins may offer an advantage in terms of reduced intraindividual variability as well as reducing the injection burden in individuals requiring high-dose and large volume insulin therapy. Understanding the PK and pharmacodynamic properties of this new generation of insulins is critical to safe dosing, dispensing, and administration.

Management of diabetes mellitus in individuals with chronic kidney disease: therapeutic perspectives and glycemic control

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the therapeutic options for diabetes treatment and their potential side effects, in addition to analyzing the risks and benefits of tight glycemic control in patients with diabetic kidney disease. For this review, a search was performed using several pre-defined keyword combinations and their equivalents: "diabetes kidney disease" and "renal failure" in combination with "diabetes treatment" and "oral antidiabetic drugs" or "oral hypoglycemic agents." The search was performed in PubMed, Endocrine Abstracts and the Cochrane Library from January 1980 up to January 2015. Diabetes treatment in patients with diabetic kidney disease is challenging, in part because of progression of renal failure-related changes in insulin signaling, glucose transport and metabolism, favoring both hyperglycemic peaks and hypoglycemia. Additionally, the decline in renal function impairs the clearance and metabolism of antidiabetic agents and insulin, frequently requiring reassessment of prescriptions. The management of hyperglycemia in patients with diabetic kidney disease is even more difficult, requiring adjustment of antidiabetic agents and insulin doses. The health team responsible for the follow-up of these patients should be vigilant and prepared to make such changes; however, unfortunately, there are few guidelines addressing the nuances of the management of this specific population.

Efficacy and safety of switching from insulin glargine to insulin degludec in young people with type 1 diabetes

We evaluated the efficacy and safety of switching to insulin degludec (IDeg) from insulin glargine (IGlar) as basal-bolus therapy in young people with type 1 diabetes. The subjects were 36 patients, 21.3±1.0 years of age, with type 1 diabetes. IGlar had previously been injected once daily in 25 patients and twice daily in 11. They were then switched from IGlar to once-daily injection of IDeg. Both fasting plasma glucose (FPG) and HbA1c levels decreased significantly from 134±3.9 mg/dL and 7.9±0.2% at baseline to 116±2.2 mg/dL and 7.4±0.2% at 12 months after starting IDeg (P<0.0001 and P≤0.001, respectively). Overall and nocturnal hypoglycemia (PG<70 mg/dL) frequencies also decreased significantly from 4.9±0.7 and 2.0±0.3 times/month to 2.4±0.3 and 0.4±0.1 times/month at 12 months after starting IDeg (P≤0.005 and P<0.0005, respectively). The daily basal insulin dose was significantly reduced from 0.48±0.04 units/kg/day at baseline to 0.38±0.03 units/kg/day at the end of the study period (P<0.0001), which corresponded to 79.2% of the baseline value. Trends were similar in patients receiving the once-daily injection and those given twice-daily injections, but basal-insulin value reductions from baseline were more marked in patients receiving twice-daily injections of basal insulin (76.0% vs. 82.6% of the baseline value). These results suggest that switching from IGlar to an appropriate dose of IDeg may effectively control hyperglycemia while reducing the frequency of hypoglycemia episodes in young Japanese people with type 1 diabetes.

Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics of NPH Insulin in Type 1 Diabetes: The Importance of Appropriate Resuspension Before Subcutaneous Injection

OBJECTIVE

Crystalline NPH insulin comes in a two-phase solution with either a solvent or a rapid-acting insulin (in premixed formulations) and needs adequate mixing for complete resuspension before injection. The aim of this study was to establish pharmacokinetics (PK) and pharmacodynamics (PD) after injection of appropriately resuspended versus nonresuspended NPH insulin.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

PK and PD were assessed after subcutaneous injection of NPH insulin 0.35 units/kg at steady state by pen either resuspended (R+, tipping of insulin pen 20 times) or nonresuspended (pen maintained in fixed position either horizontally [R- horizontal] or vertically with tip up [R- up] or tip down [R- down]). Eleven subjects with type 1 diabetes (age 31.5 ± 12 years, diabetes duration 17.5 ± 7.7 years, BMI 22.9 ± 1.5 kg/m2, A1C 7.2 ± 0.4% [55.2 ± 4.4 mmol/mol]) were studied (euglycemic clamp) with a randomized crossover design.

RESULTS

Compared with resuspended NPH insulin (R+), nonresuspended NPH insulin resulted in profound PK/PD differences with either reduced (R- horizontal and R- up) or increased (R- down) plasma insulin concentrations [FIRI_AUC(0-end of study) (free immunoreactive insulin area under the concentration-time curve between 0 and end of study)] and PD activity [glucose infusion rate (GIR)_AUC(0-end of study)] (all P < 0.05). Duration of NPH insulin action was shorter in R- up (9.4 ± 1.7 h) but longer in R- down (15.4 ± 2.3 h) compared with R+ (11.8 ± 2.6 h) (P < 0.05). Within-subject variability (percent coefficient of variation) among studies was as high as 23% for PK [FIRI_AUC(0-end of study)] and 62% for PD [GIR_AUC(0-end of study)].

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with resuspended NPH insulin, lack of resuspension profoundly alters PK/PD and may importantly contribute to day-to-day glycemic variability of type 1 diabetes.