Prevention of hypoglycemia while achieving good glycemic control in type 1 diabetes: the role of insulin analogs

Solid lipid nanoparticles: a promising tool for insulin delivery

INTRODUCTION

Insulin plays a critical role in metabolism modulation including carbohydrate, lipid, and protein metabolism. There is room to improve insulin delivery but optimizing the best carrier remains challenging. Traditional and conventional approaches for insulin delivery do not emulate the normal fate of insulin release in the body. Despite extensive research attempts to overcome this and other challenges, the goal of achieving optimal insulin delivery that emulates the natural system remains unresolved.

AREAS COVERED

Solid Lipid Nanoparticles (SLNs) may provide a solution, because they are nontoxic, biocompatible, and straightforward to formulate thus providing a promising platform for achieving targeted and controlled delivery of various therapeutic agents. This review aims to provide an overview on the suitability and application of SLNs for insulin delivery. A special emphasis is placed on the biopharmaceutical aspects of insulin loaded SLNs which have not been explored in detail to date.

EXPERT OPINION

SLNs have proven to be safe and versatile drug delivery systems suitable for insulin delivery and capable of improving the efficacy and pharmacokinetic profile of encapsulated insulin. There is still some work to be done to fully explore SLNs' true potential as drug delivery and specifically insulin delivery vehicles suitable for clinical use.

The physiological basis of insulin therapy in people with diabetes mellitus

Insulin therapy has been in use now for 100 years, but only recently insulin replacement has been based on physiology. The pancreas secretes insulin at continuously variable rates, finely regulated by sensitive arterial glucose sensing. Pancreatic insulin is delivered directlyin the portal blood to insulinize preferentially the liver. In the fasting state, insulin is secreted at a low rate to modulate hepatic glucose output. After liver extraction (50%), insulin concentrations in peripheral plasma are 2.4-4 times lower than in portal, but still efficacious to restrain lipolysis. In the prandial condition, insulin is secreted rapidly in large amounts to increase portal and peripheral concentrations to peaks 10-20 times greater vs the values of fasting within 30-40 min from meal ingestion. The prandial portal hyperinsulinemia fully suppresses hepatic glucose production while peripheral hyperinsulinemia increases glucose utilization, thus limitating the post-prandial plasma glucose elevation. Physiology of insulin indicates that insulin should be replaced in people with diabetes mimicking the pancreas, i.e. in a basal-bolus mode, for fasting and prandial state, respectively. Despite the presently ongoing limitations (subcutaneous and peripheral rather than portal and intravenous insulin delivery), basal-bolus insulin allows people with diabetes to achieve A1c in the range with minimal risk of hypoglycaemia, to prevent vascular complications and to ensure good quality of life.

The barriers against initiating insulin therapy among patients with diabetes living in Yazd, Iran

INTRODUCTION

The decision to start insulin therapy is often difficult. Determining the barriers against insulin therapy initiation can facilitate care and treatment strategies. The aim of this study was to evaluate the barriers against initiating insulin therapy among patients with diabetes living in Yazd, Iran.

METHODS

This descriptive study was conducted on 214 patients referred to the Diabetes Center of Yazd University of Medical Sciences in 2015. Participants were randomly selected, and then they completed the insulin noncompliance questionnaire (20 questions). The percentage of adherence and the factors contributing to nonadherence to insulin therapy were analyzed using descriptive statistics, the Kruskal-Wallis test, and the Mann-Whitney test.

RESULTS

The most prevalent reason for insulin therapy refusal was expecting a new method of diabetes treatment (54.7%), followed by requiring someone else to administer the injection (19.2%), fear of needles, cost, traveling (18.7%), and stress/emotional problems (18.2%). Lack of trust in the physician was the least restrictive reason for nonadherence to insulin therapy.

CONCLUSION

The most common reason given for insulin therapy refusal was the lack of adequate education. Therefore, specialized educational interventions can help minimize barriers and improve patients' outcomes.

Prevention and Management of Severe Hypoglycemia and Hypoglycemia Unawareness: Incorporating Sensor Technology

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

In addition to assisting in achieving improved glucose control, continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) sensor technology may also aid in detection and prevention of hypoglycemia. In this paper, we report on the current scientific evidence on the effectiveness of this technology in the prevention of severe hypoglycemia and hypoglycemia unawareness.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent studies have found that the integration of CGM with continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) therapy, a system known as sensor-augmented pump (SAP) therapy, very significantly reduces the occurrence of these conditions by providing real-time glucose readings/trends and automatically suspending insulin infusion when glucose is low (LGS) or, even, before glucose is low but is predicted to soon be low (PLGS). Initial data indicate that even for patients with type 1 diabetes treated with multiple daily injections, real-time CGM alone has been found to reduce both severe hypoglycemia and hypoglycemia unawareness. Closed loop systems (artificial pancreas) comprised of CGM and CSII without patient intervention to adjust basal insulin, which automatically reduce, increase, and suspend insulin delivery, represent a potential new option that is moving toward becoming a reality in the near future. Sensor technology promises to continue to improve patients' lives not only by attaining glycemic control but also by reducing hypoglycemia, a goal best achieved in conjunction with structured individualized patient education.

Different insulin concentrations in resuspended vs. unsuspended NPH insulin: Practical aspects of subcutaneous injection in patients with diabetes

AIMS

This study measured the insulin concentration (Ins_[C]) of NPH insulin in vials and cartridges from different companies after either resuspension (R+) or not (R-; in the clear/cloudy phases of unsuspended NPH).

METHODS

Measurements included Ins_[C] in NPH(R+) and in the clear/cloudy phases of NPH(R-), and the time needed to resuspend NPH and time for NPH(R+) to separate again into clear/cloudy parts.

RESULTS

In vials of NPH(R+) (assumed to be 100%), Ins_[C] in the clear phase of NPH(R-) was<1%, but 230±41% and 234±54% in the cloudy phases of Novo Nordisk and Eli Lilly NPH, respectively. Likewise, in pen cartridges, Ins_[C] in the clear phase of NPH(R-) was<1%, but 182±33%, 204±22% and 229±62% in the cloudy phases of Novo, Lilly and Sanofi NPH. Time needed to resuspend NPH (spent in tipping) in vials was brief with both Novo (5±1s) and Lilly NPH (6±1s), but longer with all pen cartridges (50±8s, 40±6s and 30±4s from Novo, Lilly and Sanofi, respectively; P=0.022). Time required for 50% separation into cloudy and clear parts of NPH was longer with Novo (60±7min) vs. Lilly (18±3min) in vials (P=0.021), and affected by temperature, but not by the different diameter sizes of the vials. With pen cartridges, separation into clear and cloudy parts was significantly faster than in vials (P<0.01).

CONCLUSION

Ins_[C] in NPH preparations varies depending on their resuspension or not. Thus, subcutaneous injection of the same number of units of NPH in patients with diabetes may deliver different amounts of insulin depending on its prior NPH resuspension.

Association between mild and severe hypoglycemia in people with type 2 diabetes initiating insulin

AIMS

Primary objective: Identify risk factors associated with severe hypoglycemia (SH) and investigate the association between mild hypoglycemia and SH in people with type 2 diabetes starting insulin. Secondary objectives: Investigate the association of demographics and clinical factors with SH incidence.

METHODS

Integrated trial database data were obtained for 3 randomized controlled trials that included insulin-naïve people with type 2 diabetes initiating basal (insulin glargine) versus biphasic (insulin lispro mixture) insulin. Standard definitions were used for SH; mild hypoglycemia was defined as all non-SH. Cox regression identified risk factors associated with SH and the correlation between SH and mild hypoglycemia.

RESULTS

Data were pooled (N=2931). During 24-48weeks' treatment, 2127 (72.6%) participants experienced ≥1 mild hypoglycemic event but no SH (mean mild hypoglycemia rate=2.33/month). 56 participants (1.9%) experienced ≥1 SH event plus mild hypoglycemia (mean mild hypoglycemia rate=3.95/month); 748 participants (25.5%) had no hypoglycemia. Among factors tested, only mild hypoglycemia rate/month was associated with SH. SH risk was higher (HR=4.24; 95%CI=2.57-6.99;p<0.0001) for participants experiencing multiple mild hypoglycemic events/month compared with those experiencing ≤1 mild hypoglycemic event/month.

CONCLUSIONS

Mild hypoglycemia may predict the first SH event, which is important because SH is a strong and consistent risk factor for morbidity/mortality.

A patient with clear consciousness even with a glucose level of 5 mg/dL (0.2 mmol/L)

A 74-year-old man noted dysarthria and right hemiparesis. His history included a gastric ulcer 2 years previously, and he had gradually lost 10 kg over a 2-year period due to appetite loss. He daily consumed 120 mg of alcohol. Upon arrival, he had clear consciousness and stable vital signs. He was malnourished. Neurologic findings included a positive finding of Barre sign in the right hand and dysarthria. A venous blood gas analysis demonstrated the following: pH 7.059; PCO2, 21.5 mm Hg; PO2, 59.1 mm Hg; HCO(3-), 5.8 mmol/L; base excess, -22.7 mmol/L; lactate,17 mmol/L; and glucose, 4 mg/dL. After the administration of an infusion of thiamine and glucose, his abnormal neurologic findings subsided completely. Head magnetic resonance image (MRI; diffusion weighted image) disclosed 3 spotty, high-intensity signals in the brain. The main results of biochemical analyses of the blood collected on arrival were as follows: hemoglobin, 5.5 g/dL; glucose, 5 mg/dL; aspartate aminotransferase, 89 IU/L. He was admitted for further examination and was diagnosed as having alcoholic ketoacidosis with hypoglycemic encephalopathy and anemia due to colon cancer.

Minimizing Hypoglycemia in Diabetes

Hypoglycemia caused by treatment with a sulfonylurea, a glinide, or insulin coupled with compromised defenses against the resulting falling plasma glucose concentrations is a problem for many people with diabetes. It is often recurrent, causes significant morbidity and occasional mortality, limits maintenance of euglycemia, and impairs physiological and behavioral defenses against subsequent hypoglycemia. Minimizing hypoglycemia includes acknowledging the problem; considering each risk factor; and applying the principles of intensive glycemic therapy, including drug selection and selective application of diabetes treatment technologies. For diabetes health-care providers treating most people with diabetes who are at risk for or are suffering from iatrogenic hypoglycemia, these principles include selecting appropriate individualized glycemic goals and providing structured patient education to reduce the incidence of hypoglycemia. This is typically combined with short-term scrupulous avoidance of hypoglycemia, which often will reverse impaired awareness of hypoglycemia. Clearly, the risk of hypoglycemia is modifiable.

Hemoglobin A1c Levels and risk of severe hypoglycemia in children and young adults with type 1 diabetes from Germany and Austria: a trend analysis in a cohort of 37,539 patients between 1995 and 2012

BACKGROUND

Severe hypoglycemia is a major complication of insulin treatment in patients with type 1 diabetes, limiting full realization of glycemic control. It has been shown in the past that low levels of hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), a marker of average plasma glucose, predict a high risk of severe hypoglycemia, but it is uncertain whether this association still exists. Based on advances in diabetes technology and pharmacotherapy, we hypothesized that the inverse association between severe hypoglycemia and HbA1c has decreased in recent years.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

We analyzed data of 37,539 patients with type 1 diabetes (mean age ± standard deviation 14.4 ± 3.8 y, range 1-20 y) from the DPV (Diabetes Patienten Verlaufsdokumentation) Initiative diabetes cohort prospectively documented between January 1, 1995, and December 31, 2012. The DPV cohort covers an estimated proportion of >80% of all pediatric diabetes patients in Germany and Austria. Associations of severe hypoglycemia, hypoglycemic coma, and HbA1c levels were assessed by multivariable regression analysis. From 1995 to 2012, the relative risk (RR) for severe hypoglycemia and coma per 1% HbA1c decrease declined from 1.28 (95% CI 1.19-1.37) to 1.05 (1.00-1.09) and from 1.39 (1.23-1.56) to 1.01 (0.93-1.10), respectively, corresponding to a risk reduction of 1.2% (95% CI 0.6-1.7, p<0.001) and 1.9% (0.8-2.9, p<0.001) each year, respectively. Risk reduction of severe hypoglycemia and coma was strongest in patients with HbA1c levels of 6.0%-6.9% (RR 0.96 and 0.90 each year) and 7.0%-7.9% (RR 0.96 and 0.89 each year). From 1995 to 2012, glucose monitoring frequency and the use of insulin analogs and insulin pumps increased (p<0.001). Our study was not designed to investigate the effects of different treatment modalities on hypoglycemia risk. Limitations are that associations between diabetes education and physical activity and severe hypoglycemia were not addressed in this study.

CONCLUSIONS

The previously strong association of low HbA1c with severe hypoglycemia and coma in young individuals with type 1 diabetes has substantially decreased in the last decade, allowing achievement of near-normal glycemic control in these patients. Please see later in the article for the Editors' Summary.

Identifying factors associated with hypoglycemia-related hospitalizations among elderly patients with T2DM in the US: a novel approach using influential variable analysis

OBJECTIVE

Healthcare providers managing older patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) face a complex milieu of medical conditions and comorbidities, which increase the risk of unintended treatment consequences. The objective of this study was to understand factors associated with hypoglycemia-related hospitalizations among adults with T2DM with an emphasis on older patients.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

A large retrospective cohort study using claims data from the United States was undertaken identifying actively registered patients diagnosed with T2DM and at least one diabetes medication prescription.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The main outcomes included hypoglycemia-related hospitalization and frequency of comorbidities.

RESULTS

Of patients with T2DM and hospitalization records (n = 887,182), 52.3% were male and 30.7% were aged ≥65 years. At baseline, the proportion of patients taking metformin was 52.4%, insulin 7.3%, and sulfonylurea 26.4%. Among those with diabetes-related hospitalizations, the incidence of hospitalization-related hypoglycemia in patients ≥65 years of age was greater than in patients <65 years of age (0.59 compared to 0.16 per 1000 person years). Using boosted regression tree modeling, age (older vs. younger), sulfonylurea use, insulin use, and renal disease were variables most associated with predicting hospitalizations associated with hypoglycemia. Elderly patients prescribed both insulin and sulfonylurea were most likely to experience hypoglycemia-related hospitalizations (odds ratio = 4.7; 95% CI 3.7-6.1).

CONCLUSIONS

Older patients using both insulin and sulfonylurea were most likely to experience a hypoglycemia-related hospitalization. Age, sulfonylurea use, insulin use, renal disease, a history of hypoglycemia-related hospitalization and general hospitalization were the leading variables associated with hypoglycemia-related hospitalization. Glucagon-like peptide and dipeptidyl peptidase-4 medication use was not significantly associated with hypoglycemia-related hospitalizations. The strength of this analysis, compared to similar studies, lies in the large and generalizable sample size and statistical methodology, which control for the interdependence of predictive variables. Limitations include lack of information, such as dietary intake and exercise habits, which are known to influence the rate of hypoglycemia in certain patients. Given the frequency of use of insulin and sulfonylurea in a population at risk for hypoglycemia (older patients with diabetes), care should be taken when balancing cost and efficacy against safety and increased risk of hospitalization due to hypoglycemia.

Severe hypoglycemia and ketoacidosis over one year in Italian pediatric population with type 1 diabetes mellitus: a multicenter retrospective observational study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Evaluation of incidence and correlates of severe hypoglycemia (SH) and diabetes ketoacidosis (DKA) in children and adolescents with T1DM.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Retrospective study conducted in 29 diabetes centers from November 2011 to April 2012. The incidence of SH and DKA episodes and their correlates were assessed through a questionnaire administered to parents of patients aged 0-18 years. Incidence rates and incident rate ratios (IRRs) were estimated through multivariate Poisson regression analysis and multilevel analysis. Overall, 2025 patients were included (age 12.4 ± 3.8 years; 53% males; diabetes duration 5.6 ± 3.5 years; HbA1c 7.9 ± 1.1%). The incidence of SH and DKA were of 7.7 and 2.4 events/100 py, respectively. The risk of SH was higher in females (IRR = 1.44; 95%CI 1.04-1.99), in patients using rapid acting analogues as compared to regular insulin (IRR = 1.48; 95%CI 0.97-2.26) and lower for patients using long acting analogues as compared to NPH insulin (IRR = 0.40; 95%CI 0.19-0.85). No correlations were found between SH and HbA1c levels. The risk of DKA was higher in patients using rapid acting analogues (IRR = 4.25; 95%CI 1.01-17.86) and increased with insulin units needed (IRR = 7.66; 95%CI 2.83-20.74) and HbA1c levels (IRR = 1.63; 95%CI 1.36-1.95). Mother's age was inversely associated with the risk of both SH (IRR = 0.95; 95%CI 0.92-0.98) and DKA (IRR = 0.94; 95%CI 0.88-0.99). When accounting for center effect, the risk of SH associated with the use of rapid acting insulin analogues was attenuated (IRR = 1.48; 95%CI 0.97-2.26); 33% and 16% of the residual variance in SH and DKA risk was explained by center effect.

CONCLUSION

The risk of SH and DKA is mainly associated with treatment modalities and strongly depends on the practice of specialist centers.

Comparison of human insulin and insulin analogues on hypoglycaemia and metabolic variability in type 1 diabetes using standardized measurements (HYPO score and Lability Index)

To evaluate whether treatment with insulin analogues is associated with a lower risk of hypoglycaemia (HYPO score) and less glycaemic variability (Lability Index) than treatment with human insulin in patients with type 1 diabetes. In a 6-month prospective, open-labelled trial, we randomized 47 patients treated with human insulin to receive treatment with human insulin (n = 21) or insulin analogues (n = 26). HYPO score, Lability Index (LI), and hypoglycaemic episode characteristics were assessed at baseline and at the end of follow-up. A 72-h, continuous glucose monitoring was performed at the end in a subgroup of patients. Groups were compared with nonparametric tests. Significance was defined as P < 0.05. HYPO score (71.5 [36.0-162] vs. 260 [52.0-676], P < 0.05), nocturnal hypoglycaemia (0.4 vs. 1.4 events/patient/4-week, P < 0.05), and <2.5 mmol/l hypoglycaemic events were lower in insulin analogue group after 6 months. There was a trend towards a lower LI in insulin analogue group (74.3 [51.3-133] vs. 123 [76.4-171] mmol/l(2)/h week(-1), P = 0.064). HbA1c and insulin dose were comparable between groups. In type 1 diabetes, insulin analogues were associated with a lower hypoglycaemic risk and a trend towards reduced glycaemic variability compared with human insulin. These effects occurred despite comparable metabolic control.

Reduction in intrasubject variability in the pharmacokinetic response to insulin after subcutaneous co-administration with recombinant human hyaluronidase in healthy volunteers

BACKGROUND

This study was designed to test the hypothesis that co-administration of recombinant human hyaluronidase (rHuPH20) with regular insulin or insulin lispro will reduce intrasubject variability in pharmacokinetic end points compared with lispro alone.

METHODS

Healthy adult volunteers (18-55 years old) were enrolled in this phase 1, randomized, double-blind, crossover study. Subjects were administered two injections, each on a separate occasion, of three treatments during six euglycemic clamps. Treatments were 0.15 U/kg insulin lispro, 0.15 U/kg insulin lispro with 5 μg/mL rHuPH20, and 0.15 IU/kg regular insulin with 5 μg/mL rHuPH20. Insulin formulations were administered at a concentration of 40 U/mL. Serum immunoreactive insulin levels, blood glucose concentration, and glucose infusion rate determinations were made at baseline and for approximately 8 h after study drug administration. Intrasubject variability was assessed using a general linear mixed model with a fixed effect for treatment using a compound symmetric covariance matrix.

RESULTS

Co-injection of rHuPH20 with lispro significantly reduced intrasubject root mean square differences in time to peak serum insulin, time to early 50% peak serum insulin (t(50%)), and time to late t(50%) levels compared with lispro alone. Also, the intrasubject coefficient of variation for percentage of total area under the plasma concentration-versus-time curve for early time intervals compared with lispro alone was reduced. Intrasubject variability for regular insulin with rHuPH20 for most pharmacokinetic parameters was similar to the variability of lispro alone, although variability in early exposure was significantly reduced.

CONCLUSIONS

Co-administration of rHuPH20 with lispro significantly reduced the variability of insulin pharmacokinetics relative to insulin lispro alone.

Recognition, prevention, and proactive management of hypoglycemia in patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus

Hypoglycemia is the key barrier that prevents patients from optimizing glycemic control with the use of pharmacotherapeutic interventions. Optimal glycemic control for patients with type 1 diabetes (T1DM) includes methods that provide glucose-regulated physiologic insulin replacement or secretion in association with glucose monitoring methods designed to predict and prevent acute extreme changes in glycemic variability. Patients with T1DM experience an average of 2 episodes of symptomatic hypoglycemia each week and at least 1 episode of severe, disabling hypoglycemia annually. Asymptomatic hypoglycemia is common, as shown in studies using continuous glucose monitoring (CGM). Episodes of hypoglycemia (symptomatic and asymptomatic) impair counterregulatory defenses against subsequent events, resulting in the inability to respond to and recover from serious hypoglycemia. This defective counterregulation is known as hypoglycemic-associated autonomic failure. When patients are prescribed a more intensive medication regimen or reinforcing lifestyle interventions, such as medical nutrition therapy and exercise therapy, providers should also assess their ability to proactively identify and manage hypoglycemia. Although self-monitoring of blood glucose regimens, such as pre- and post-meal and periodic middle-of-the-night glucose testing, can help predict the risk of developing hypoglycemia, CGM technology allows patients to receive real-time notification of impending events either through preset alarms or simply by looking at the device display. This review explores the utility of initiating CGM within the primary care setting for patients at high risk for developing hypoglycemia.

Potential of education-based insulin therapy for achievement of good metabolic control: a real-life experience

AIMS

Achievement of good metabolic control in Type 1 diabetes is a difficult task in routine diabetes care. Education-based flexible intensified insulin therapy has the potential to meet the therapeutic targets while limiting the risk for severe hypoglycaemia. We evaluated the metabolic control and the rate of severe hypoglycaemia in real-life clinical practice in a centre using flexible intensified insulin therapy as standard of care since 1990.

METHODS

Patients followed for Type 1 diabetes (n = 206) or those with other causes of absolute insulin deficiency (n = 17) in our outpatient clinic were analysed in a cross-sectional study. Mean age (± standard deviation) was 48.9 ± 15.7 years, with diabetes duration of 21.4 ± 14.4 years. Outcome measures were HbA(1c) and frequency of severe hypoglycaemia.

RESULTS

Median HbA(1c) was 7.1% (54 mmol/mol) [interquartile range 6.6-7.8 (51-62 mmol/mol)]; a good or acceptable metabolic control with HbA(1c) < 7.0% (53 mmol/mol) or 7.5% (58 mmol/mol) was reached in 43.5 and 64.6% of the patients, respectively. The frequency of severe hypoglycaemic episodes was 15 per 100 patient years: 72.3% of the patients did not experience any such episodes during the past 5 years.

CONCLUSIONS

Good or acceptable metabolic control is achievable in the majority of patients with Type 1 diabetes or other causes of absolute insulin deficiency in routine diabetes care while limiting the risk for severe hypoglycaemia.

Drug-induced hypoglycaemia: an update

Drugs are the most frequent cause of hypoglycaemia in adults. Although hypoglycaemia is a well known adverse effect of antidiabetic agents, it may occasionally develop in the course of treatment with drugs used in everyday clinical practice, including NSAIDs, analgesics, antibacterials, antimalarials, antiarrhythmics, antidepressants and other miscellaneous agents. They induce hypoglycaemia by stimulating insulin release, reducing insulin clearance or interfering with glucose metabolism. Several drugs may also potentiate the hypoglycaemic effect of antidiabetic agents. Administration of these agents to individuals with diabetes mellitus is of most concern. Many of these drugs, and depending on clinical setting, may also induce hyperglycaemia. Drug-induced hepatotoxicity and nephrotoxicity may lead in certain circumstances to hypoglycaemia. Some drugs may also induce hypoglycaemia by causing pancreatitis. Drug-induced hypoglycaemia is usually mild but may be severe. Effective clinical management can be handled through awareness of this drug-induced adverse effect on blood glucose levels. Herein, we review pertinent clinical information on the incidence of drug-induced hypoglycaemia and discuss the underlying pathophysiological mechanisms, and prevention and management.

An approach to diabetes mellitus in hospice and palliative medicine

Abstract Hospice and palliative medicine practitioners frequently encounter diabetes and associated complications as comorbidities in end-of-life patients. As the patient with diabetes approaches end-of-life, there comes a time when tight glycemic control can not only prove of questionable benefit, but has the potential to cause harm. The medical literature offers little guidance on managing these complications appropriately. This article identifies three distinct classifications of patients with diabetes approaching the ends of their lives due to advanced illnesses. The authors propose a specific framework to guide management in patients with diabetes and advanced disease who are relatively stable, experiencing impending death or organ failure, or actively dying. The authors provide comprehensive information on commonly used diabetic medications, with necessary considerations and dose adjustments for these populations. The goal of the approach is to address individual patient needs, provide guidance for patients and caregivers, and ultimately maximize outcomes for patients with diabetes in the palliative care setting.

Hypoglycemia in type 1 diabetes mellitus

Iatrogenic hypoglycemia, typically the result of the interplay of therapeutic hyperinsulinemia and compromised defenses resulting in hypoglycemia-associated autonomic failure (HAAF) in diabetes, is a problem for people with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM). It causes recurrent morbidity is sometimes fatal, leads to recurrent hypoglycemia, and precludes euglycemia over a lifetime of T1DM. Risk factors include those that result in relative or absolute insulin excess and those indicative of HAAF in diabetes. Elimination of hypoglycemia from the lives of people with T1DM will likely be accomplished by new treatment methods that provide plasma glucose-regulated insulin replacement or secretion.

Comparison of insulin lispro protamine suspension and insulin detemir in basal-bolus therapy in patients with Type 1 diabetes

AIMS

The efficacy of two basal insulins, insulin lispro protamine suspension (ILPS) and insulin detemir, was compared in basal-bolus regimens in Type 1 diabetes.

METHODS

In this 32-week, multinational, parallel-group, randomized, controlled trial, adult patients with Type 1 diabetes received ILPS or insulin detemir, injected twice daily (before breakfast and bedtime) and prandial insulin lispro three times daily. The primary outcome was change in glycated haemoglobin (HbA(1c)) from baseline to endpoint.

RESULTS

Least squares mean (+/-se) changes in HbA(1c) were similar between groups, meeting non-inferiority (margin, 0.4%): -0.69 +/- 0.07% for ILPS and -0.59 +/- 0.07% for insulin detemir [between-treatment difference -0.10%; 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.29, 0.10]. Standard deviation of fasting blood glucose was similar (non-inferiority margin 0.8 mmol/l): 2.74 +/- 0.14 mmol/l for ILPS and 2.38 +/- 0.14 mmol/l for insulin detemir (CI -0.03, 0.75). Patients on ILPS gained more weight (1.59 +/- 0.23 kg vs. 0.62 +/- 0.24 kg; CI 0.34, 1.60; margin 1.5 kg). Weight-adjusted daily total and prandial insulin doses were lower for ILPS (prandial insulin, 0.38 +/- 0.01 U/kg/day for ILPS, 0.44 +/- 0.01 U/kg/day for insulin detemir; P = 0.004); daily basal insulin dose was similar. All hypoglycaemia incidence and rate and nocturnal hypoglycaemia incidence were similar between groups; nocturnal hypoglycaemia rate was lower for insulin detemir (mean +/- sd 0.79 +/- 1.23 for ILPS, 0.49 +/- 0.85 for insulin detemir; P = 0.001). Severe hypoglycaemia rate was 0.03 +/- 0.11 for ILPS and 0.02 +/- 0.10 for insulin detemir (P = 0.37).

CONCLUSIONS

ILPS-treated patients with Type 1 diabetes achieved similar glycaemic control as insulin detemir-treated patients after 32 weeks. Glucose variability was similar. While weight gain and nocturnal hypoglycaemia rate were statistically higher with ILPS, the clinical relevance is unclear.

Addressing hyperglycemia from hospital admission to discharge

BACKGROUND

This review examines glycemia management practices in hospitalized patients. Optimal glycemic control remains a challenge among hospitalized patients. Recent studies have questioned the benefit of tight glycemic control and have raised concerns regarding the safety of this approach. As a result, medical societies have updated glycemic targets and have published new consensus guidelines for management of glycemia in hospitalized patients. This review highlights recent inpatient glycemic trials, the new glycemic targets and recommended strategies for management of glycemia in hospitalized patients.

METHODS

Medline and PubMed searches (diabetes, hyperglycemia, hypoglycemia, intensive therapy insulin, tight glycemic control, and hospital patients) were performed for English-language articles on treatment of diabetes, insulin therapy, hyperglycemia or hypoglycemia in hospitalized patients published from 2004 to present. Earlier works cited in these papers were surveyed. Clinical studies, reviews, consensus/guidelines statements, and meta-analyses relevant to the identification and management of diabetes and hyperglycemia in hospitalized patients were included and selected. This is not an exhaustive review of the published literature.

RESULTS

Insulin remains the most appropriate agent for a majority of hospitalized patients. In critically ill patients insulin is given as a continuous intravenous (IV) infusion and in non-critically ill inpatients hyperglycemia is best managed using scheduled subcutaneous (SC) basal-bolus insulin regimens supplemented with correction doses as needed and adjusted daily with the guidance of frequent blood glucose monitoring. Prevention of hypoglycemia is equally as important to patient outcomes and is an equally necessary part of any effective glucose control program. Modern insulin analogs offer advantages over the older human insulins (e.g., regular and neutral protamine Hagedorn [NPH] insulin) because their time-action profiles more closely correspond to physiological basal and prandial insulin requirements, and have a lower propensity for inducing hypoglycemia than human insulin formulations. Long-acting basal insulin analogs (glargine, detemir) are suitable and preferred for the basal component of therapy; rapid-acting insulin analogs (aspart, lispro, glulisine) are recommended for bolus and correction doses. Sliding-scale insulin (SSI) regimens are not effective and should not be used, especially as this excludes a basal insulin component from the therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Optimal glycemic management in the hospital setting requires judicious treatment of hyperglycemia while avoiding hypoglycemia. Insulin is the most appropriate agent for management of hyperglycemia for the majority of hospitalized patients. Intravenous insulin infusion is still preferred during and immediately after surgery, but s.c. basal insulin analogs with prandial or correction doses should be used after the immediate post-operative period, and also should be used in non-critically ill patients. Frequent and effective glucose monitoring is critical for avoiding wide deviations from acceptable glucose levels, which under a recently promulgated consensus guideline currently range between 140 mg/dL and 180 mg/dL. Glucose targets near 140 mg/dL are recommended as being the most appropriate for all hospitalized patients.

Lower fasting blood glucose, glucose variability and nocturnal hypoglycaemia with glargine vs NPH basal insulin in subjects with Type 1 diabetes

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

To compare switching from NPH insulin (NPH) to insulin glargine (glargine) with continuing NPH for changes in fasting blood glucose (FBG) in patients with Type 1 diabetes on basal-bolus therapy with insulin lispro as bolus insulin. Secondary objectives included self-monitoring blood glucose, mean daily blood glucose (MDBG) and mean amplitude glucose excursion (MAGE) values alongside changes in HbA(1c) and safety profiles.

METHODS AND RESULTS

This was a 30-week, parallel, open-label, multicentre study. Seven-point profiles were used to calculate MDBG and MAGE. Hypoglycaemia and adverse events were recorded by participants. FBG improved significantly with both glargine (baseline-endpoint change: -28.0 mg/dL; 95% CI: -37.3, -18.7 mg/dL; p<0.001) and NPH (-9.8 mg/dL; 95% CI: -19.1, -0.5 mg/dL; p=0.0374). The improvement was significantly greater with glargine than NPH (mean difference: -18.2 mg/dL; 95% CI: -31.3, -5.2 mg/dL; p=0.0064). MDBG (-10.1 mg/dL; 95% CI: -18.1, -2.1 mg/dL; p=0.0126) and MAGE (-20.0 mg/dL; 95% CI: -34.5, -5.9 mg/dL; p=0.0056) decreased significantly with glargine, but not NPH although endpoint values were no different with the two insulins. Baseline to endpoint change in HbA(1c) was similar (-0.56 vs -0.56%) with no differences at endpoint. Overall hypoglycaemia was no different, but glargine reduced nocturnal hypoglycaemia ("serious episodes" with BG < 42 mg/dl, p=0.006) whereas NPH did not (p=0.123), although endpoint values were no different.

CONCLUSION

Switching from NPH to glargine is well tolerated and results into lower FBG, and lower glucose variability while reducing nocturnal hypoglycaemia. These data provide a rationale for more aggressive titration to target with glargine in Type 1 diabetes.

Accelerated pharmacokinetics and glucodynamics of prandial insulins injected with recombinant human hyaluronidase

BACKGROUND

This phase 1 study investigated the pharmacokinetics (PK) and glucodynamics of insulin lispro (Humalog; Eli Lilly and Co., Indianapolis, IN) or regular human insulin (Humulin R; Eli Lilly and Co.) administered with or without (+/-) recombinant human hyaluronidase (rHuPH20).

METHODS

Healthy male volunteers (n = 26), 18-55 years old with body mass index 18-28 kg/m(2), weight >70 kg, and normal fasting glucose, were randomized to a crossover sequence of two subcutaneous injections, each followed by a 6-h euglycemic clamp targeting glucose 90-110 mg/dL: Cohort 1 received 20 U of Humalog +/- 300 U of rHuPH20 (11.3 microg/mL), whereas Cohort 2 received 20 U of Humulin R +/- 240 U of rHuPH20 (10 microg/mL). Pharmacokinetic parameters included peak serum insulin concentration (C(max)), time to C(max) (t(max)), and area under the curve (AUC) of serum concentration versus time. Glucodynamic parameters included time to maximal glucose infusion rate (tGIR(max)) and area under the GIR-versus-time curve (G).

RESULTS

For Humalog and Humulin R, respectively, rHuPH20 co-administration reduced t(max) by 51% (P = 0.0006) and 58% (P = 0.0002), increased C(max) by 90% (P = 0.0003) and 142% (P < 0.0001), increased early exposure (AUC(0-2h)) by 85% (P < 0.0001) and 211% (P < 0.0001), and reduced late exposure (AUC(4-6h)) by 41% (P < 0.0001) and 48% (P < 0.0001). Similarly, rHuPH20 reduced tGIR(max) by 41% (P = 0.006) and 35% (P = 0.01), increased early metabolism (G(0-2h)) by 52% (P = 0.001) and 127% (P < 0.0001), and reduced late metabolism (G(4-6h)) by 29% (P = 0.002) and 26% (P = 0.03) for Humalog and Humulin R, respectively. Injections were well tolerated.

CONCLUSIONS

Co-administration of rHuPH20 accelerated the PK and glucodynamics of both insulin formulations. Additional studies are necessary to evaluate the clinical relevance of these findings in patients with diabetes.

Evaluation and management of adult hypoglycemic disorders: an Endocrine Society Clinical Practice Guideline

OBJECTIVE

The aim is to provide guidelines for the evaluation and management of adults with hypoglycemic disorders, including those with diabetes mellitus.

EVIDENCE

Using the recommendations of the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system, the quality of evidence is graded very low (plus sign in circle ooo), low (plus sign in circle plus sign in circle oo), moderate (plus sign in circle plus sign in circle plus sign in circle o), or high (plus sign in circle plus sign in circle plus sign in circle plus sign in circle).

CONCLUSIONS

We recommend evaluation and management of hypoglycemia only in patients in whom Whipple's triad--symptoms, signs, or both consistent with hypoglycemia, a low plasma glucose concentration, and resolution of those symptoms or signs after the plasma glucose concentration is raised--is documented. In patients with hypoglycemia without diabetes mellitus, we recommend the following strategy. First, pursue clinical clues to potential hypoglycemic etiologies--drugs, critical illnesses, hormone deficiencies, nonislet cell tumors. In the absence of these causes, the differential diagnosis narrows to accidental, surreptitious, or even malicious hypoglycemia or endogenous hyperinsulinism. In patients suspected of having endogenous hyperinsulinism, measure plasma glucose, insulin, C-peptide, proinsulin, beta-hydroxybutyrate, and circulating oral hypoglycemic agents during an episode of hypoglycemia and measure insulin antibodies. Insulin or insulin secretagogue treatment of diabetes mellitus is the most common cause of hypoglycemia. We recommend the practice of hypoglycemia risk factor reduction--addressing the issue of hypoglycemia, applying the principles of intensive glycemic therapy, and considering both the conventional risk factors and those indicative of compromised defenses against falling plasma glucose concentrations--in persons with diabetes.

Beyond the era of NPH insulin--long-acting insulin analogs: chemistry, comparative pharmacology, and clinical application

The new rDNA and DNA-derived "basal" insulin analogs, glargine and detemir, represent significant advancement in the treatment of diabetes compared with conventional NPH insulin. This review describes blood glucose homeostasis by insulin in people without diabetes and outlines the physiological application of exogenous insulin in patients with type 1 and type 2 diabetes. The requirements for optimal basal insulin treatment are discussed and the methods used in the evaluation of basal insulins are presented. An essential criterion in the development of an "ideal" basal insulin preparation is that the molecular modifications made to the human insulin molecule do not compromise safety. It is also necessary to obtain a clear understanding of the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic characteristics of the two currently available basal insulin analogs. When comparing glargine and detemir, the different molar concentration ratios of the two insulin formulations should be considered along with the nonspecificity of assay systems used to determine insulin concentrations. However, euglycemic clamp studies in crossover study design provide a good basis for comparing the pharmacodynamic responses. When the latter is analyzed by results of intervention clinical trials, it is concluded that both glargine and detemir are superior to NPH in type 1 and type 2 diabetes. However, there is sufficient evidence to demonstrate that these two long-acting insulin analogs are different in both their pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic profiles. These differences should be taken into consideration when the individual analogs are introduced to provide basal insulin supplementation to optimize blood glucose control in patients with type 1 and type 2 diabetes as well. PubMed-Medline was searched for articles relating to pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of glargine and detemir. Articles retrieved were reviewed and selected for inclusion if (1) the euglycemic clamp method was used with a duration >or=24 h, (2) a single subcutaneous dose of glargine/detemir was used, and (3) area under the curve for insulin concentrations or glucose infusion rates were calculated.

Effect of oral amino acids on counterregulatory responses and cognitive function during insulin-induced hypoglycemia in nondiabetic and type 1 diabetic people

OBJECTIVE

Amino acids stimulate glucagon responses to hypoglycemia and may be utilized by the brain. The aim of this study was to assess the responses to hypoglycemia in nondiabetic and type 1 diabetic subjects after ingestion of an amino acid mixture.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

Ten nondiabetic and 10 diabetic type 1 subjects were studied on three different occasions during intravenous insulin (2 mU . kg(-1) . min(-1)) plus variable glucose for 160 min. In two studies, clamped hypoglycemia (47 mg/dl plasma glucose for 40 min) was induced and either oral placebo or an amino acid mixture (42 g) was given at 30 min. In the third study, amino acids were given, but euglycemia was maintained.

RESULTS

Plasma glucose and insulin were no different in the hypoglycemia studies with both placebo and amino acids (P > 0.2). After the amino acid mixture, plasma amino acid concentrations increased to levels observed after a mixed meal (2.4 +/- 0.13 vs. placebo study 1.7 +/- 0.1 mmol/l, P = 0.02). During clamped euglycemia, ingestion of amino acids resulted in transient increases in glucagon concentrations, which returned to basal by the end of the study. During clamped hypoglycemia, glucagon response was sustained and increased more in amino acid studies versus placebo in nondiabetic and diabetic subjects (P < 0.05), but other counter-regulatory hormones and total symptom score were not different. Beta-OH-butyrate was less suppressed after amino acids (200 +/- 15 vs. 93 +/- 9 micromol/l, P = 0.01). Among the cognitive tests administered, the following indicated less deterioration after amino acids than placebo: Trail-Making part B, PASAT (Paced Auditory Serial Addition Test) (2 s), digit span forward, Stroop colored words, and verbal memory tests for nondiabetic subjects; and Trail-Making part B, digit span backward, and Stroop color tests for diabetic subjects.

CONCLUSIONS

Oral amino acids improve cognitive function in response to hypoglycemia and enhance the response of glucagon in nondiabetic and diabetic subjects.