Faster Aspart Versus Insulin Aspart as Part of a Basal-Bolus Regimen in Inadequately Controlled Type 2 Diabetes: The onset 2 Trial

Are New Ultra-Rapid-Acting Insulins Associated with Improved Glycemic Control and Reduced Hypoglycemia in Comparison to Conventional Rapid-Acting Insulins for Individuals with Type 1 and Type 2 Diabetes? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Introduction: This study aimed to compare efficacy and safety of ultra-rapid-acting insulin analogs (URAIs; faster aspart [FAsp], ultra-rapid lispro [URLi], and technosphere insulin [TI]) with rapid-acting insulin analogs (RAI) in individuals with type 1 (T1D) or type 2 diabetes (T2D). Methods: Searching for randomized control trial comparing the effects of URAI versus RAI that lasted at least 12 weeks, we initially selected 15 studies for analysis. Three studies involving TI were excluded due to a high degree of heterogeneity. The final meta-analysis included only 12 studies with either FAsp or URLi. Results: Mealtime URAI significantly reduced overall early 1 h postprandial glycemia in individuals with T1D (-20.230 mg/dL [95% confidence interval, 95% CI -24.040 to -16.421]; P < 0.001; I2 = 33.42%) and those with T2D (-9.138 mg/dL [95% CI -12.612 to -5.663]; P < 0.001; I2 = 0%). However, the significant reduction in 2 h postprandial glucose remained only in individuals with T1D (-17.620 mg/dL [95% CI -26.047 to -9.193]; P < 0.001; I2 = 65.88%). These benefits were lost when URAI was administered postmeal. At 24-26 weeks, there was no significant difference in HbA1c between groups, but at 52 weeks, a slight reduction in HbA1c with mealtime URAI was observed (-0.080% [95% CI -0.147 to -0.013]; P = 0.019; I2 = 0%). No difference in weight or the rate of severe or confirmed hypoglycemia was observed. Only individuals with T1D showed a small, but significant increase in early 1-h hypoglycemia with URAI (1.468 [95% CI 1.235 to 1.747]; P < 0.001; I2 = 0%). Conclusion: Mealtime URAI improves 1 and 2 h postprandial glycemic control compared to RAI without increasing hypoglycemia or weight gain.

The Role of Ultra-Rapid-Acting Insulin Analogs in Diabetes: An Expert Consensus

Ultra-rapid-acting insulin analogs (URAA) are a further development and refinement of rapid-acting insulin analogs. Because of their adapted formulation, URAA provide an even faster pharmacokinetics and thus an accelerated onset of insulin action than conventional rapid-acting insulin analogs, allowing for a more physiologic delivery of exogenously applied insulin. Clinical trials have confirmed the superiority of URAA in controlling postprandial glucose excursions, with a safety profile that is comparable to the rapid-acting insulins. Consequently, many individuals with diabetes mellitus may benefit from URAA in terms of prandial glycemic control. Unfortunately, there are only few available recommendations from authoritative sources for use of URAA in clinical practice. Therefore, this expert consensus report aims to define populations of people with diabetes mellitus for whom URAA may be beneficial and to provide health care professionals with concrete, practical recommendations on how best to use URAA in this context.

Faster-acting insulin aspart versus insulin aspart in the treatment of type 1 or type 2 diabetes during pregnancy and post-delivery (CopenFast): an open-label, single-centre, randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Faster-acting insulin aspart (faster aspart) is considered safe for use during pregnancy and breastfeeding but has not been evaluated in this population. We aimed to evaluate the effect of faster aspart versus insulin aspart on fetal growth, in women with type 1 or type 2 diabetes during pregnancy and post-delivery.

METHODS

This open-label, single-centre, superiority trial was conducted at Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark. Participants aged 18 years or older with type 1 or type 2 diabetes were stratified by diabetes type and insulin treatment modality (multiple daily injections or insulin pump), randomly assigned 1:1 to faster aspart or insulin aspart, from 8 weeks and 0 days (8+0) of gestation to 13+6 weeks of gestation, and followed up until 3 months post-delivery. Primary outcome was infant birthweight SD score. Secondary outcomes included HbA1c as well as maternal and fetal outcomes in all participants during the trial. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03770767.

FINDINGS

Between Nov 11, 2019 and May 10, 2022, 109 participants were included in the faster aspart group and 107 in the insulin aspart group. Primary outcome data were available in 203 (94%) of 216 participants, and no participants discontinued treatment during the trial. Mean birthweight SD score was 1·0 (SD 1·4) in the faster aspart group versus 1·2 (1·3) in the insulin aspart group; estimated treatment difference -0·22 [-0·58 to 0·14]; p=0·23. At 33 weeks of gestation, mean HbA1c was 42 mmol/mol (SD 6 mmol/mol; 6·0% [SD 0·9%]) versus 43 mmol/mol (SD 7 mmol/mol; 6·1% [SD 1·2%]); estimated treatment difference -1·01 (-2·86 to 0·83), p=0·28. No additional safety issues were observed with faster aspart compared with insulin aspart.

INTERPRETATION

Treatment with faster aspart resulted in similar fetal growth and HbA1c, relative to insulin aspart, in women with type 1 or type 2 diabetes. Faster aspart can be used in women with type 1 or type 2 diabetes during pregnancy and post-delivery with no additional safety issues.

FUNDING

Novo Nordisk.

TRANSLATION

For the Danish translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.

Personalized Prediction of Change in Fasting Blood Glucose Following Basal Insulin Adjustment in People With Type 2 Diabetes: A Proof-of-Concept Study

AIMS

For people with type 2 diabetes treated with basal insulin, suboptimal glycemic control due to clinical inertia is a common issue. Determining the optimal basal insulin dose can be difficult, as it varies between individuals. Thus, insulin titration can be slow and cautious which may lead to treatment fatigue and non-adherence. A model that predicts changes in fasting blood glucose (FBG) after adjusting basal insulin dose may lead to more optimal titration, reducing some of these challenges.

OBJECTIVE

To predict the change in FBG following adjustment of basal insulin in people with type 2 diabetes using a machine learning framework.

METHODS

A multiple linear regression model was developed based on 786 adults with type 2 diabetes. Data were divided into training (80%) and testing (20%) sets using a ranking approach. Forward feature selection and fivefold cross-validation were used to select features.

RESULTS

Participants had a mean age of approximately 59 years, a mean duration of diabetes of 12 years, and a mean HbA1c at screening of 65 mmol/mol (8.1%). Chosen features were FBG at week 2, basal insulin dose adjustment from week 2 to 7, trial site, hemoglobin level, and alkaline phosphatase level. The model achieved a relative absolute error of 0.67, a Pearson correlation coefficient of 0.74, and a coefficient of determination of 0.55.

CONCLUSIONS

A model using FBG, insulin doses, and blood samples can predict a five-week change in FBG after adjusting the basal insulin dose in people with type 2 diabetes. Implementation of such a model can potentially help optimize titration and improve glycemic control.

Insulin Tregopil: An Ultra-Fast Oral Recombinant Human Insulin Analog: Preclinical and Clinical Development in Diabetes Mellitus

Insulin therapy is indispensable for achieving glycemic control in all patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus and many patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Insulin injections are associated with negative connotations in patients owing to administration discomfort and adverse effects such as hypoglycemia and weight gain. Insulin administered orally can overcome these limitations by providing a convenient and effective mode of delivery with a potentially lower risk of hypoglycemia. Oral insulin mimics the physiologic process of insulin secretion, absorption into the portal circulation, and subsequent peripheral delivery, unlike the subcutaneous route that results in peripheral hyperinsulinemia. Insulin tregopil (IN-105), a new generation human recombinant insulin, methoxy (polyethylene glycol) hexanoyl human recombinant insulin, is developed by Biocon as an ultra-fast onset short-acting oral insulin analog. This recombinant oral insulin is a single short-chain amphiphilic oligomer modified with the covalent attachment of methoxy-triethylene-glycol-propionyl moiety at Lys-β29-amino group of the B-chain via an amide linkage. Sodium caprate, an excipient in the insulin tregopil formulation, is a permeation enhancer that increases its absorption through the gastrointestinal tract. Also, meal composition has been shown to non-significantly affect its absorption. Several global randomized, controlled clinical trials have been conducted in type 1 and type 2 diabetes patients towards the clinical development of insulin tregopil. The formulation shows post-prandial glucose control that is more effective than placebo throughout the meal period; however, compared with an active comparator insulin aspart, the post-prandial control is more effective mainly in the early post-meal period. It shows a good safety profile with a lower incidence of clinically significant hypoglycemia. This review covers the overall clinical development of insulin tregopil establishing it as an ultra-fast onset, short-acting oral insulin analog for optimizing post-prandial glucose.

[Diagnosis and insulin therapy of type 1 diabetes mellitus (Update 2023)]

This guideline summarizes diagnosis of type 1 diabetes, including accompanying autoimmune disorders, insulin therapy regimens and glycemic target values.

An Indirect Comparison of Basal Insulin Plus Once-Weekly Semaglutide and Fully Optimised Basal-Bolus Insulin in Type 2 Diabetes

INTRODUCTION

To date, there have been few head-to-head comparisons between semaglutide once-weekly (OW) and short-acting meal-time insulin in participants with type 2 diabetes (T2D) treated with basal insulin and requiring treatment intensification. This indirect comparison evaluated the effects of these regimens on glycated haemoglobin (HbA_1c), body weight, hypoglycaemia, and other clinically relevant outcomes.

METHODS

A post-hoc, unanchored, individual participant data meta-analysis was conducted on the basis of data from single treatment arms in the SUSTAIN 5 and DUAL 7 trials. Semaglutide 0.5 mg OW and 1.0 mg OW plus basal insulin were compared with an optimised (treat-to-target) basal-bolus regimen of insulin glargine and insulin aspart over 26 weeks, using regression adjustment to account for baseline differences between the trials.

RESULTS

Over 26 weeks, semaglutide 1.0 mg OW plus basal insulin reduced mean HbA_1c by significantly more than the basal-bolus regimen (treatment difference: - 0.36%; p = 0.003), while semaglutide 0.5 mg OW plus basal insulin was comparable with basal-bolus insulin (treatment difference: 0.08%, p = 0.53). Both doses of semaglutide were associated with significant weight loss relative to insulin intensification (treatment differences: 6.8-9.4 kg; p < 0.001). At both doses, semaglutide intensification required less basal insulin per day than bolus intensification, and more participants on semaglutide met HbA_1c targets of < 7.0% and ≤ 6.5% without hypoglycaemia or weight gain (odds ratio [OR] for < 7.0%, 21.9; OR for ≤ 6.5%, 16.2; both p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

In T2D uncontrolled by basal insulin, intensification with semaglutide 1.0 mg OW was associated with better glycaemic control, weight loss, and reduced hypoglycaemia versus a basal-bolus regimen, while limiting the treatment burden associated with frequent injections. Clinicians could consider treatment intensification with semaglutide when T2D is uncontrolled by basal insulin, especially when weight management is a priority. Effective glycaemic control coupled with weight management can alleviate the burden of diabetes-associated complications.

Pharmacotherapy of type 2 diabetes: An update and future directions

Type 2 diabetes (T2D) is a widely prevalent disease with substantial economic and social impact for which multiple conventional and novel pharmacotherapies are currently available; however, the landscape of T2D treatment is constantly changing as new therapies emerge and the understanding of currently available agents deepens. This review aims to provide an updated summary of the pharmacotherapeutic approach to T2D. Each class of agents is presented by mechanism of action, details of administration, side effect profile, cost, and use in certain populations including heart failure, non-alcoholic fatty liver disease, obesity, chronic kidney disease, and older individuals. We also review targets of novel therapeutic T2D agent development. Finally, we outline an up-to-date treatment approach that starts with identification of an individualized goal for glycemic control then selection, initiation, and further intensification of a personalized therapeutic plan for T2D.

Comparative assessment of modern parameters of glycemic control in children with type 1 diabetes after switching to fast-acting insulin aspart using Flash Glucose Monitoring in real clinical practice

BACKGROUND: Postprandial hyperglycaemia contributes significantly to the lack of glycaemic control in patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus (DM1). At least a quarter of patients forget to inject insulin before meals once a week, and more than 40% of them inject bolus insulin immediately before meals, which does not correspond to the pharmacokinetic effects of ultrashort insulins and determines the need to use insulins with better imitations of physiological insulin secretion.

AIM: To assess the effect of fast acting insulin aspart (FIAsp) on the current parameters of glycaemic control in children with DM1 after switching from insulin Asp (iAsp) using continuous glucose monitoring.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: A multicenter observational 12-week prospective open-label uncontrolled comparative study was initiated. A group of insufficiently controlled patients were identified (n = 48) including a group on multiple insulin injections therapy (MII) (insulin degludec and IAsp) and a group on continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) of iAsp. Three 14-day flash glucose monitoring (FMG) were performed: before transferring patients to FiAsp and after 2 and 12 weeks of the transfer. Key endpoints: HbA1c after 2 and 12 weeks on FiAsp relative to baseline, analysis of 5 FMG target glucose ranges, presented as an ambulatory glycemic profile. Additional indicators: dynamics of insulin daily dose, frequency of glucose self- monitoring, the number of severe hypoglycemia, adverse events that occurred during treatment.

RESULTS: 2 weeks after the transfer from IAsp to FIAsp, TIR increased in the entire group of patients: from 53% [44.3; 66.5] to 57% [47.4; 71.0] (p-value = 0.010) and TAR decreased from 38% [24.8; 50.2] to 30.5% [22.0; 45, 0] (p-value = 0.0124). Maintaining and increase time spent in the target glucose ranges during a 12-week observation period, in parallel with a significant decrease in hypoglycemic episodes <3.9 mmol / L per week, on FIAsp therapy naturally leads to an improvement in diabetes control: a decrease in HbA1c from 8.15% up to 7.75% (p-value = 0.0224), more pronounced in the group of patients on CSII — from 7.9% to 7.5% (p-value = 0.028).

CONCLUSION: Switching from IAsp to BDIAsp in routine clinical practice in the MII and CSII regimen in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes allows achieving better glycemic control compared to the previous generation prandial insulin analog Iasp. The better diabetes control is associated with an increase or a trend towards an increase in TIR and a decrease or a trend towards a decrease in TAR and TBR, as well as a significant decrease in episodes of hypoglycemia.

American Association of Clinical Endocrinology Clinical Practice Guideline: Developing a Diabetes Mellitus Comprehensive Care Plan-2022 Update

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this clinical practice guideline is to provide updated and new evidence-based recommendations for the comprehensive care of persons with diabetes mellitus to clinicians, diabetes-care teams, other health care professionals and stakeholders, and individuals with diabetes and their caregivers.

METHODS

The American Association of Clinical Endocrinology selected a task force of medical experts and staff who updated and assessed clinical questions and recommendations from the prior 2015 version of this guideline and conducted literature searches for relevant scientific papers published from January 1, 2015, through May 15, 2022. Selected studies from results of literature searches composed the evidence base to update 2015 recommendations as well as to develop new recommendations based on review of clinical evidence, current practice, expertise, and consensus, according to established American Association of Clinical Endocrinology protocol for guideline development.

RESULTS

This guideline includes 170 updated and new evidence-based clinical practice recommendations for the comprehensive care of persons with diabetes. Recommendations are divided into four sections: (1) screening, diagnosis, glycemic targets, and glycemic monitoring; (2) comorbidities and complications, including obesity and management with lifestyle, nutrition, and bariatric surgery, hypertension, dyslipidemia, retinopathy, neuropathy, diabetic kidney disease, and cardiovascular disease; (3) management of prediabetes, type 2 diabetes with antihyperglycemic pharmacotherapy and glycemic targets, type 1 diabetes with insulin therapy, hypoglycemia, hospitalized persons, and women with diabetes in pregnancy; (4) education and new topics regarding diabetes and infertility, nutritional supplements, secondary diabetes, social determinants of health, and virtual care, as well as updated recommendations on cancer risk, nonpharmacologic components of pediatric care plans, depression, education and team approach, occupational risk, role of sleep medicine, and vaccinations in persons with diabetes.

CONCLUSIONS

This updated clinical practice guideline provides evidence-based recommendations to assist with person-centered, team-based clinical decision-making to improve the care of persons with diabetes mellitus.

What is the value of faster acting prandial insulin? Focus on ultra rapid lispro

Rapid-acting insulins (RAIs) have been instrumental in the management of diabetes because of their improved postprandial glucose (PPG) control compared with regular human insulin. However, their absorption rate and time action following subcutaneous administration still falls short of the normal physiological response to meal consumption, increasing the risk of early postmeal hyperglycaemia and late postmeal hypoglycaemia. Increased demand for faster acting insulins, which can quickly control PPG excursions without increasing the risk of late hypoglycaemia, led to the development of ultra-rapid-acting insulins, including ultra-rapid lispro (URLi). URLi is a novel formulation of insulin lispro with accelerated absorption driven by two excipients: treprostinil, which increases local vasodilation, and citrate, which increases local vascular permeability. Clinical pharmacology studies consistently showed an earlier onset and shorter duration of action with URLi compared with Lispro. In a head-to-head study with Faster aspart, Aspart and Lispro, URLi was absorbed faster, provided earlier insulin action, and more closely matched physiological glucose response than the other insulins tested. URLi's unique pharmacokinetic properties increase its potential for improved PPG control beyond that achieved with RAIs. Indeed, in pivotal phase 3 trials, URLi was superior to Lispro for PPG control both at 1 and 2 hours after a meal in type 1 and type 2 diabetes with multiple daily injections, and in type 1 diabetes with continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion. This was achieved without increasing the risk of hypoglycaemia. In this review, we focus on the clinical and pharmacological evidence for URLi in the treatment of diabetes and discuss the potential benefits and considerations with URLi compared with RAIs.

The Effect of Two Different Insulin Formulations on Postprandial Hyperglycemia after High and Low Glycemic-Index Meal in Type 1 Diabetes

Despite multiple pharmacological options, including rapid-acting insulin analogs, postprandial hyperglycemia is still highly prevalent in patients with type 1 and type 2 diabetes. We hypothesize that the new rapid-acting insulin formulation, the so-called faster-acting Aspart, may have a different effect in controlling postprandial hyperglycemic burden according to the quality of the meal compared to the traditional Aspart. Twenty-five patients with type 1 diabetes were consecutively recruited at the diabetes care center of the University Hospital affiliate of the Magna Græcia University of Catanzaro. Each patient performed four meal tests one week apart, two with a predefined high glycemic index (HGI) food and two with a low glycemic index (LGI) food using insulin Aspart once and Faster Aspart the other time. The 0–30 min, 0–60 min, and 0–120 min glucose Area Under the Curve (AUC) of postprandial glycemic excursion, calculated from continuous glucose monitoring data, were significantly lower with Faster Aspart administered before the HGI test meal as compared to Aspart. A significant difference in favor of Faster Aspart was also found when comparing the 0–60 min and 0–120 min AUC after the LGI meal. Faster Aspart may provide better postprandial glucose control than Aspart regardless of the glycemic index of the meal.

Effective Overall Glycaemic Control with Fast-Acting Insulin Aspart Across Patients with Different Baseline Characteristics: A Post Hoc Analysis of the Onset 9 Trial

AIMS

To investigate the efficacy and safety of fast-acting insulin aspart (faster aspart) compared with insulin aspart (IAsp) in participants with type 2 diabetes (T2D) across different subgroups.

METHODS

We report on a post hoc analysis of onset 9, a 16-week trial of participants with T2D randomised to faster aspart (n = 546) or IAsp (n = 545). Participants were grouped by baseline HbA1c (< 7.0%, ≥ 7.0%), meal test bolus insulin dose (≤ 10 units [U], > 10 U to ≤ 20 U, > 20 U), body mass index (< 30 kg/m², ≥ 30 to < 35 kg/m², ≥ 35 kg/m²), and age (< 65 years, ≥ 65 years). Outcomes assessed were change from baseline in HbA1c and in 1-h postprandial glucose (PPG) increment, and severe or blood glucose (BG)-confirmed hypoglycaemia.

RESULTS

Faster aspart provided reductions in HbA1c comparable to IAsp across all subgroups, with improved 1-h PPG control compared with IAsp in several subgroups. Faster aspart had comparable or improved rates of severe or BG-confirmed hypoglycaemia versus IAsp, particularly in participants with good glycaemic control (HbA1c < 7.0%), the elderly (≥ 65 years old), and those with insulin resistance (> 20 U meal test bolus insulin dose).

CONCLUSIONS

Faster aspart provides effective overall glycaemic control, with improved early PPG control compared with IAsp across a range of patient characteristics.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT03268005.

One-hundred year evolution of prandial insulin preparations: From animal pancreas extracts to rapid-acting analogs

The first insulin preparation injected in humans in 1922 was short-acting, extracted from animal pancreas, contaminated by impurities. Ever since the insulin extracted from animal pancreas has been continuously purified, until an unlimited synthesis of regular human insulin (RHI) became possible in the '80s using the recombinant-DNA (rDNA) technique. The rDNA technique then led to the designer insulins (analogs) in the early '90s. Rapid-acting insulin analogs were developed to accelerate the slow subcutaneous (sc) absorption of RHI, thus lowering the 2-h post-prandial plasma glucose (PP-PG) and risk for late hypoglycemia as comparing with RHI. The first rapid-acting analog was lispro (in 1996), soon followed by aspart and glulisine. Rapid-acting analogs are more convenient than RHI: they improve early PP-PG, and 24-h PG and A1C as long as basal insulin is also optimized; they lower the risk of late PP hypoglycemia and they allow a shorter time-interval between injection and meal. Today rapid-acting analogs are the gold standard prandial insulins. Recently, even faster analogs have become available (faster aspart, ultra-rapid lispro) or are being studied (Biochaperone lispro), making additional gains in lowering PP-PG. Rapid-acting analogs are recommended in all those with type 1 and type 2 diabetes who need prandial insulin replacement.

Rapid-acting insulin analogues: Theory and best clinical practice in type 1 and type 2 diabetes

Since the discovery of insulin 100 years ago, insulin preparations have improved significantly. Starting from purified animal insulins, evolving to human insulins produced by genetically modified organisms, and ultimately to insulin analogues, all in an attempt to mimic physiological insulin action profiles seen in individuals without diabetes. Achieving strict glucose control without hypoglycaemia and preventing chronic complications of diabetes while preserving quality of life remains a challenging goal, but the advent of newer ultra-rapid-acting insulin analogues may enable intensive insulin therapy without being too disruptive to daily life. Ultra-rapid-acting insulin analogues can be administered shortly before meals and give better coverage of mealtime-induced glucose excursions than conventional insulin preparations. They also increase convenience with timing of bolus dosing. In this review, we focus on the progress that has been made in rapid-acting insulins. We summarize pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic data, clinical trial data supporting the use of these new formulations as part of a basal-bolus regimen and continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion, and provide a clinical perspective to help guide healthcare professionals when and for whom to use ultra-fast-acting insulins.

Glycaemic Control in People with Diabetes Starting Treatment with Fast-Acting Insulin Aspart: a US Database Study

INTRODUCTION

This study investigated glycaemic control in individuals with type 1 (T1D) or type 2 diabetes (T2D) 6 months after initiating fast-acting insulin aspart (faster aspart) in a real-world setting.

METHODS

This was a single-arm, observational study using extracted patient data from the IBM^® Explorys^® database (USA) for individuals with T1D or T2D initiating faster aspart (at least one prescription of faster aspart) in the study period 1 January 2018 to 27 October 2020. Clinical characteristics, including age, body mass index, and baseline HbA1c, were extracted, as well as recorded events of hypoglycaemia. The primary endpoint was the change in HbA1c from baseline to 6 months.

RESULTS

A total of 787 individuals were included; 36.6% of these individuals had T1D and 63.4% had T2D (of whom 46.9% were new users of rapid-acting insulin when initiating faster aspart [T2D new users] and 53.1% were switching from another rapid-acting insulin to faster aspart [T2D switchers]). For individuals with T1D, T2D new users, or T2D switchers, estimated mean change in HbA1c from baseline to 6 months was - 0.20% (95% CI - 0.53, 0.14; p  =  0.252), - 1.00% (95% CI -  1.34, -  0.67; p < 0.0001), and - 0.70% (95% CI - 1.06,  - 0.35; p = 0.0001), respectively. In the baseline HbA1c > 8.5% subgroup, there was a significant estimated decrease in HbA1c from baseline to 6 months in individuals with T1D (-  1.2% [95% CI - 1.80,  -  0.60]; p = 0.0001) or T2D (- 0.6% [95% CI - 0.92, -  0.35]; p <  0.0001). Event rates of hypoglycaemia after 12 months were 0.68, 0.38, and 0.59 events/year for individuals with T1D, T2D new users, and T2D switchers, respectively.

CONCLUSION

US IBM^® Explorys^® data demonstrated a clinically relevant reduction in HbA1c 6 months after initiating faster aspart treatment for individuals with T2D, but not T1D overall, although patients with baseline HbA1c > 8.5% had significant HbA1c reductions regardless of diabetes type.

Ultra-Rapid-Acting Insulins: How Fast Is Really Needed?

OBJECTIVE

To review the new ultra-rapid-acting insulin analogs and describe the benefits and limitations compared with other bolus insulins.

SUMMARY

The options for bolus insulins, which are usually taken at mealtime or for correction of hyperglycemia, are expanding, with recent approvals of faster-acting insulin aspart and insulin lispro-aabc. These new-generation insulins contain additives that enhance absorption and accelerate onset of action. Clinical studies demonstrate that, although these insulins are faster acting, their efficacy for A1C lowering and safety in terms of hypoglycemia risk are similar to those of other available bolus insulin options such as rapid-acting insulin analogs. However, their use resulted in significant reductions in 1- and 2-hour postprandial glucose levels.

CONCLUSION

Novel ultra-rapid-acting insulins provide additional bolus insulin options, and their quick onset of action provides additional dosing flexibility for people with diabetes. Given their comparable efficacy and safety compared to other quick-acting insulins, health care providers should engage in shared decision-making with patients and their caregivers regarding possible use of ultra-rapid-acting insulin, taking into account their preferences, individualized considerations, and insurance formulary coverage. These new insulin formulations may be a suitable option for people with diabetes who are not able to achieve postprandial glycemic targets with other bolus insulins.

Ultra-rapid-acting insulins for adults with diabetes: A systematic review and meta-analysis

We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials to assess the efficacy and safety of the novel, ultra-rapid-acting insulins aspart and lispro in adults with type 1 or type 2 diabetes. Our primary outcome was change in HbA1c from baseline. We additionally assessed eight efficacy and six safety endpoints. We calculated weighted mean differences (WMD) for continuous outcomes and odds ratios (ORs) for dichotomous outcomes, alongside 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We additionally assessed statistical heterogeneity among studies with the I² statistic, considering values greater than 60% as indicative of substantial heterogeneity. Nine studies comprising 5931 patients were included in the systematic review; eight active-controlled studies could be synthesized in terms of a meta-analysis. Treatment with ultra-rapid-acting insulins had a similar effect on change in HbA1c compared with rapid-acting insulins (WMD -0.02%, 95% CI -0.08 to 0.05, I²  = 61% for patients with type 1 diabetes and -0.02%, 95% CI -0.09 to 0.04, I²  = 19% for patients with type 2 diabetes). Similarly, no difference was evident in terms of change in fasting plasma glucose, self-measured plasma glucose, body weight, basal or bolus insulin dose, incidence of serious adverse events and hypoglycaemia. Compared with rapid-acting insulins, ultra-rapid-acting insulins reduced 1- and 2-hour postprandial glucose (PPG) increment based on a liquid meal test, both in patients with type 1 and type 2 diabetes (WMD -0.94 mmol/L, 95% CI -1.17 to -0.72, I²  = 0% and -0.56 mmol/L, 95% CI -0.79 to -0.32, I²  = 0%, respectively, for change in 1-hour PPG increment). In conclusion, ultra-rapid-acting insulins were as efficacious and safe as rapid-acting insulins, showing a favourable effect solely on PPG control.

A Century of Progress in Diabetes Care with Insulin: A History of Innovations and Foundation for the Future

The year 2021 marks the 100th anniversary of the discovery of insulin, which has greatly changed the lives of people with diabetes and become a cornerstone of advances in medical science. A rapid bench-to-bedside application of the lifesaving pancreatic extract and its immediate commercialization was the result of a promising idea, positive drive, perseverance, and collaboration of Banting and colleagues. As one of the very few proteins isolated in a pure form at that time, insulin also played a key role in the development of important methodologies and in the beginning of various fields of modern science. Since its discovery, insulin has evolved continuously to optimize the care of people with diabetes. Since the 1980s, recombinant DNA technology has been employed to engineer insulin analogs by modifying their amino acid sequence, which has resulted in the production of insulins with various profiles that are currently used. However, unmet needs in insulin treatment still exist, and several forms of future insulins are under development. In this review, we discuss the past, present, and future of insulin, including a history of ceaseless innovations and collective intelligence. We believe that this story will be a solid foundation and an unerring guide for the future.

Expert Group Recommendations on the Effective Use of Bolus Insulin in the Management of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus

Evidence suggests a major contribution of postprandial glucose (PPG) excursions to the increased risk of micro- and macro-vascular complications in individuals with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Administration of bolus insulin remains a very effective therapeutic option for PPG control. The aim of this expert group recommendation document was to provide practical and easy-to-execute guidelines for physicians on the appropriate use of bolus insulin in the management of T2DM. A panel of key opinion leaders from India reviewed and discussed the available clinical evidence and guideline recommendations on the following topics: (1) optimum control of PPG; (2) choice of bolus insulin; and (3) special situations and practical considerations. The expert panel critically analyzed the current literature and clinical practice guidelines and factored their rich clinical experience to develop a set of nine expert group recommendations for the effective use of bolus insulin. These recommendations will not only result in a more evidence-based application of bolus insulin in the clinical setting but also trigger further research and provide a valuable base for the development of future guidelines on the use of bolus insulin in the management of individuals with T2DM.

Fast-Acting Insulin Aspart: A Review of its Pharmacokinetic and Pharmacodynamic Properties and the Clinical Consequences

Fast-acting insulin aspart (faster aspart) is insulin aspart (IAsp) with two added excipients, l-arginine and niacinamide, to ensure formulation stability with accelerated initial absorption after subcutaneous administration compared with previously developed rapid-acting insulins. The pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic properties of faster aspart have been characterised in clinical pharmacology trials with comparable overall methodology. In subjects with type 1 (T1D) or type 2 (T2D) diabetes, the serum IAsp concentration–time and glucose-lowering effect profiles are left-shifted for faster aspart compared with IAsp. In addition, faster aspart provides earlier onset, doubling of initial exposure, and an up to 2.5-fold increase in initial glucose-lowering effect within 30 min of subcutaneous injection, as well as earlier offset of exposure and effect. Similar results have been shown using continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII). The improved pharmacological properties of faster aspart versus IAsp are consistent across populations, i.e. in the elderly, children, adolescents and the Japanese. Thus, the faster aspart pharmacological characteristics more closely resemble the mealtime insulin secretion in healthy individuals, giving faster aspart the potential to further improve postprandial glucose control in subjects with diabetes. Indeed, change from baseline in 1-h postprandial glucose increment is in favour of faster aspart versus IAsp when used as basal-bolus or CSII treatment in phase III trials in subjects with T1D or T2D. This review summarises the currently published results from clinical pharmacology trials with faster aspart and discusses the potential clinical benefits of faster aspart compared with previous rapid-acting insulin products.

Efficacy and safety of fast-acting insulin aspart compared with insulin aspart in combination with insulin degludec in Japanese adults with type 1 diabetes: a subgroup analysis of the randomized onset 8 trial

This study aimed to confirm the efficacy and safety of mealtime and post-meal fast-acting insulin aspart versus insulin aspart, both with basal insulin degludec, in Japanese patients with type 1 diabetes. This was a subgroup analysis of onset 8, a randomized multicenter, treat-to-target trial of mealtime fast-acting insulin aspart (subgroup n = 73), mealtime insulin aspart (n = 83), or open-label post-meal fast-acting insulin aspart (n = 89), all for 26 weeks. Change from baseline in HbA_1c was considered the primary endpoint. After 26 weeks, the estimated treatment difference (ETD, 95% CI) for change from baseline in HbA_1c between mealtime fast-acting insulin aspart or post-meal fast-acting insulin aspart vs. insulin aspart was 0.01% (-0.16;0.19) and 0.10% (-0.07;0.27), respectively. Following a standardized meal test, ETD for change from baseline in postprandial glucose (PPG) increment at 1 hour was -16.91 mg/dL (-32.15;-1.68) for mealtime fast-acting insulin aspart and 40.16 mg/dL (25.46;54.87) for post-meal fast-acting insulin aspart, both versus insulin aspart. Mean self-measured blood glucose 1-hour PPG increments also showed a trend towards improved PPG control with mealtime fast-acting insulin aspart versus insulin aspart. Rates of overall hypoglycemia (35.56, 37.72 and 38.75 per patient-year of exposure with mealtime fast-acting insulin aspart, post-meal fast-acting insulin aspart and insulin aspart, respectively) and meal-related hypoglycemia were similar between treatment arms. Consistent with findings of onset 8, this analysis confirmed mealtime and post-meal fast-acting insulin aspart provided effective HbA_1c and PPG control versus insulin aspart, with similar safety profiles, in Japanese adults with type 1 diabetes.

Impact of Fast-Acting Insulin Aspart on Glycemic Control in Patients with Type 1 Diabetes Using Intermittent-Scanning Continuous Glucose Monitoring Within a Real-World Setting: The GoBolus Study

Background: The GoBolus study investigated the real-world effectiveness of faster aspart in patients with type 1 diabetes (T1D) using intermittent-scanning continuous glucose monitoring (iscCGM) systems. Methods: This 24-week, multicenter, single-arm, noninterventional study investigated adults with T1D (HbA_1c, 7.5%-9.5%) receiving multiple daily injections (MDI) of insulin and using iscCGM within local healthcare settings for ≥6 months before switching to faster aspart at study start (week 0; baseline). Primary endpoint was HbA_1c change from baseline to week 24. Exploratory endpoint was change in iscCGM metrics from baseline to week 24. Results: Overall, 243 patients were included (55.6% male), with mean age/diabetes duration, 49.9/18.8 years; mean HbA_1c, 8.1%. By week 24, HbA_1c had decreased by 0.19% (-2.1 mmol/mol, P < 0.0001) with no mean change in insulin doses or basal/bolus insulin ratios. For patients with sufficient available iscCGM data (n = 92): "time in range" (TIR; 3.9-10.0 mmol/L) increased from 46.9% to 50.1% (P = 0.01), corresponding to an increase of 46.1 min/day; time in hyperglycemia decreased from 49.1% to 46.1% (>10.0 mmol/L, P = 0.026) and 20.4% to 17.9% (>13.9 mmol/L, P = 0.013), corresponding to 43.5 (P = 0.024) and 35.6 (P = 0.015) fewer minutes per day on average spent in these ranges, respectively; no change for time in hypoglycemia (<3.9 and <3.0 mmol/L). Mean interstitial and postprandial glucose improved from 10.4 to 10.1 mmol/L (P = 0.035) and 11.9 to 11.0 mmol/L (P = 0.002), respectively. Conclusion: Real-world switching to faster aspart in adults with T1D on MDI improved HbA_1c, increased TIR, and decreased time in hyperglycemia without affecting time in hypoglycemia. The GoBolus study: NCT03450863.

Glycaemic efficacy and safety of mealtime faster-acting insulin aspart administered by injection as compared to insulin aspart in people with diabetes mellitus: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

AIMS

To summarize all relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and provide precise effect estimates of glycaemic efficacy/safety of faster-acting insulin aspart administered by injection as compared to insulin aspart in people with diabetes mellitus.

METHODS

PubMed/Cochrane Library were systematically searched till October 10, 2020, to identify RCTs with duration ≥16 weeks, evaluating efficacy/safety of mealtime injections of faster aspart compared to insulin aspart in people with type 1 diabetes mellitus and type 2 diabetes mellitus. Studies using faster aspart as continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion were excluded. Continuous and dichotomous outcome variables (expressed as estimated treatment difference and rate ratio in RCTs, respectively) were pooled using generic inverse variance method with fixed/random-effects model. For each outcome variable, subgroup analysis between type 1 diabetes mellitus and type 2 diabetes mellitus was performed.

RESULTS

We included five RCTs; three of type 1 diabetes mellitus (n = 1963) and two of type 2 diabetes mellitus (n = 1780). All had low risk of bias. Faster aspart was associated with small but significant improvement in HbA_1c than insulin aspart (MD: -0.06%, 95% CI: -0.10, -0.02, p = 0.005, I²  = 19%). HbA_1c reduction was statistically significant only in type 1 diabetes mellitus on subgroup analysis (MD: -0.08%, 95% CI: -0.14, -0.02, p = 0.005, I²  = 47%). Besides, faster aspart was associated with reduced postprandial plasma glucose (PPG) increment at 1 h/2 h after meal test and increased 1,5-anhydroglucitol compared to insulin aspart. Early postprandial hypoglycaemic episodes were higher with faster aspart; however, overall and nocturnal hypoglycaemic episodes were not different from insulin aspart.

CONCLUSIONS

Faster aspart is associated with reduced HbA_1c , PPG increment and comparable overall hypoglycaemic episodes with regard to insulin aspart.

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

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

Randomized Double-Blind Clinical Trial Comparing Ultra Rapid Lispro With Lispro in a Basal-Bolus Regimen in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes: PRONTO-T2D

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of ultra rapid lispro (URLi) versus lispro in patients with type 2 diabetes on a basal-bolus insulin regimen.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

This was a phase 3, treat-to-target, double-blind 26-week study. After an 8-week lead-in to optimize basal insulin glargine or degludec in combination with prandial lispro treatment, patients were randomized to blinded URLi (n = 336) or lispro (n = 337) injected 0-2 min prior to meals. Patients could continue metformin and/or a sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor. The primary end point was change in HbA1c from baseline to 26 weeks (noninferiority margin 0.4%), with multiplicity-adjusted objectives for postprandial glucose (PPG) excursions during a standardized meal test.

RESULTS

HbA1c improved for both URLi and lispro, and noninferiority was confirmed: estimated treatment difference (ETD) 0.06% (95% CI -0.05; 0.16). Mean change in HbA1c was -0.38% for URLi and -0.43% for lispro, with an end-of-treatment HbA1c of 6.92% and 6.86%, respectively. URLi was superior to lispro in controlling 1- and 2-h PPG excursions: 1-h ETD, -0.66 mmol/L (95% CI -1.01, -0.30); 2-h ETD, -0.96 mmol/L (-1.41, -0.52). Significantly lower PPG excursions were evident from 0.5 to 4.0 h postmeal with URLi treatment. There were no significant treatment differences in rates of severe or documented hypoglycemia (<3.0 mmol/L). Incidence of overall treatment-emergent adverse events was similar between treatments.

CONCLUSIONS

URLi compared with lispro in a basal-bolus regimen was confirmed to be noninferior for HbA1c and superior to lispro for PPG control in patients with type 2 diabetes.

Recent Advances in Insulin Therapy

Insulin therapy has advanced remarkably over the past few decades. Ultra-rapid-acting and ultra-long-acting insulin analogs are now commercially available. Many additional insulin formulations are in development. This review outlines recent advances in insulin therapy and novel therapies in development.

The association between anti-insulin aspart antibodies and the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic characteristics of fast-acting insulin aspart in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes

BACKGROUND

Fast-acting insulin aspart (faster aspart) is a novel formulation of insulin aspart (IAsp) ensuring ultrafast absorption and effect.

AIM

To compare the pharmacokinetics between faster aspart and IAsp, based on free or total IAsp measurement, and investigate the association between anti-IAsp antibodies and faster aspart and IAsp pharmacological properties in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes (T1D).

METHODS

In a randomized, two-period crossover trial, 12 children, 16 adolescents, and 15 adults (6-11, 12-17, and 18-64 years) received 0.2 U/kg double-blindsingle-dose subcutaneous faster aspart or IAsp followed by a standardized liquid meal test.

RESULTS

Across age groups, the pharmacokinetic profile was left-shifted including greater early exposure for faster aspart vs IAsp irrespective of free or total IAsp assay. Onset of appearance occurred 2.4 to 5.0 minutes (free) or 1.8 to 3.0 minutes (total) earlier for faster aspart vs IAsp (P < .05). Treatment ratios (faster aspart/IAsp) for 0 to 30 minutes IAsp exposure were 1.60 to 2.11 and 1.62 to 1.96, respectively (children, free: P = .062; otherwise P < .05). The ratio of free/total IAsp for overall exposure (AUC_IAsp,0-t ) was negatively associated with anti-IAsp antibody level across age. Pooling with a previous similar trial showed no clear association between anti-IAsp antibodies and meal test 1- or 2-hour postprandial glucose increment independent of age and insulin treatment (R² ≤ .070; P ≥ .17).

CONCLUSIONS

In children and adolescents with T1D, faster aspart provides ultrafast pharmacokinetics irrespective of free or total IAsp assay. Elevated anti-IAsp antibodies are associated with higher total IAsp concentration, but do not impact faster aspart and IAsp glucose-lowering effect.

A Randomized Trial Evaluating the Efficacy and Safety of Fast-Acting Insulin Aspart Compared With Insulin Aspart, Both in Combination With Insulin Degludec With or Without Metformin, in Adults With Type 2 Diabetes (ONSET 9)

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of fast-acting insulin aspart (faster aspart) compared with insulin aspart (IAsp), both with insulin degludec with or without metformin, in adults with type 2 diabetes not optimally controlled with a basal-bolus regimen.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

This multicenter, double-blind, treat-to-target trial randomized participants to faster aspart (n = 546) or IAsp (n = 545). All available information, regardless of treatment discontinuation or use of ancillary treatment, was used for evaluation of effect.

RESULTS

Noninferiority for the change from baseline in HbA_1c 16 weeks after randomization (primary end point) was confirmed for faster aspart versus IAsp (estimated treatment difference [ETD] -0.04% [95% CI -0.11; 0.03]; -0.39 mmol/mol [-1.15; 0.37]; P < 0.001). Faster aspart was superior to IAsp for change from baseline in 1-h postprandial glucose (PPG) increment using a meal test (ETD -0.40 mmol/L [-0.66; -0.14]; -7.23 mg/dL [-11.92; -2.55]; P = 0.001 for superiority). Change from baseline in self-measured 1-h PPG increment for the mean over all meals favored faster aspart (ETD -0.25 mmol/L [-0.42; -0.09]); -4.58 mg/dL [-7.59; -1.57]; P = 0.003). The overall rate of treatment-emergent severe or blood glucose (BG)-confirmed hypoglycemia was statistically significantly lower for faster aspart versus IAsp (estimated treatment ratio 0.81 [95% CI 0.68; 0.97]).

CONCLUSIONS

In combination with insulin degludec, faster aspart provided effective overall glycemic control, superior PPG control, and a lower rate of severe or BG-confirmed hypoglycemia versus IAsp in adults with type 2 diabetes not optimally controlled with a basal-bolus regimen.

Faster Insulin Aspart: A New Bolus Option for Diabetes Mellitus

Since the approval of bolus insulin, it has been used frequently in clinical practice for the management of type 1 and 2 diabetes mellitus for postprandial control. Another new product is faster insulin aspart (Fiasp, Novo Nordisk), a fast-acting insulin with 100 units/mL. Several studies have been conducted evaluating the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of faster insulin aspart, compared with insulin aspart. This new bolus insulin provides greater glucose-lowering effect at 20 min, following subcutaneous administration. Faster insulin aspart had a greater reduction in hemoglobin A1c concentrations from baseline in patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus when compared with insulin aspart, whereas the two bolus insulins were similar in this outcome in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Depending on the trial, the safety profile may differ between these two insulins with severe or confirmed hypoglycemia. Based on the clinical evidence for efficacy and safety, faster insulin aspart can be considered a viable option for those patients with type 1 and 2 diabetes mellitus who desire to inject immediately prior to a meal or within 20 min following a meal. However, additional studies should be completed to determine the role of faster insulin aspart in pregnant and pediatric patients, along with patients prescribed insulin pumps. This article evaluates and summarizes the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of faster insulin aspart for patients with type 1 or 2 diabetes mellitus, and summarizes its application to clinical practice.

Biosimilars and Novel Insulins

BACKGROUND

Insulin therapy is the mainstay of treatment for type 1 diabetes and may be necessary in type 2 diabetes. Current insulin analogues present a more physiological profile, are effective, and with less risk of hypoglycemia, but they are expensive. Biosimilar insulins should offer the advantages of insulin analogues at reduced costs. In addition, current rapid-acting insulin analogues are not fast enough to control excessive postprandial glucose excursions in many patients.

AREAS OF UNCERTAINTY

Biosimilar insulins demonstrated that are safe and effective, but interchangeability and automatic substitution remain an issue. Ultrafast-acting insulins should reduce postprandial hyperglycemia and improve flexibility in insulin dosing.

DATA SOURCES

This systematic review was conducted following widely recommended methods. We searched for each topic in Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and SCISEARCH for relevant citations for the appropriate period.

THERAPEUTIC ADVANCES

LY2963016 and MK-1293 are biosimilar insulins of insulin glargine, and SAR342434 is a biosimilar of insulin lispro. The abbreviated developed program demonstrated comparable efficacy and safety and supports their use for treatment of people with diabetes but no interchangeability. Faster-acting insulin aspart is a new formulation of insulin aspart with accelerated subcutaneous absorption. Faster aspart demonstrated noninferiority in reducing HbA1c as compared to insulin aspart with superiority in controlling postprandial hyperglycemia without increasing hypoglycemia, and flexible insulin dosing.

CONCLUSIONS

Biosimilar insulins have comparable PK-PD profiles and equivalent efficacy and safety to original insulins at a lower price, making them available for more people with diabetes. Faster aspart is the first ultrafast-acting insulin. New upcoming clinical trials and more clinical experience with faster aspart will show the real potential of this new insulin.

The continuing quest for better subcutaneously administered prandial insulins: a review of recent developments and potential clinical implications

The class of rapid-acting insulin analogues were introduced more than 20 years ago to control postprandial plasma glucose (PPG) excursions better than unmodified regular human insulin. Insulins, lispro, aspart and glulisine all achieved an earlier onset of action, greater peak effect and shorter duration of action resulting in lower PPG levels and a reduced risk of late postprandial hypoglycaemia. However, the subcutaneous absorption rate of these analogues still fails to match the physiological profile of insulin in the systemic circulation following a meal. Recent reformulations of aspart and lispro have generated a second generation of more rapid-acting insulin analogue candidates, including fast-acting aspart (faster aspart), ultra-rapid lispro and BioChaperone Lispro. These modifications have the potential to mimic physiological prandial insulin secretion better with an even earlier onset of action with improved PPG control, shorter duration of effect and reduced risk of hypoglycaemia. Recent phase 3 trials in type 1 and type 2 diabetes show that faster aspart and ultra-rapid lispro compared with conventional aspart and lispro, achieved fewer PPG excursions with a small increase in post-meal hypoglycaemia but similar or marginally superior glycated haemoglobin levels, and suggest the need for parallel optimization of basal insulin replacement. Phase 1 trials for BioChaperone Lispro are equally encouraging with phase 3 trials yet to be initiated. Comparative analysis of the clinical and pharmacological evidence for these new prandial insulin candidates in the treatment of type 1 and type 2 diabetes is the main focus of this review.

A survey of physician experience and treatment satisfaction using fast-acting insulin aspart in people with type 1 or type 2 diabetes

AIMS

This survey aimed to explore real-world physician experiences and treatment satisfaction with fast-acting insulin aspart (faster aspart) in clinical practice across Europe and Canada.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

An online web-based survey was used for physicians treating people with type 1 or type 2 diabetes. General practitioners and specialists, with experience using faster aspart, were interviewed.

RESULTS

A total of 191 physicians participated in the survey. Most of their patients (68% of those with T1D and 63% of those with T2D) were previously treated with another mealtime insulin before switching to faster aspart. At the time of initiating faster aspart, nearly half of patients had an HbA_1c level between 7.5% (59 mmol/mol) and 8.5% (69 mmol/mol). The main prescription drivers for faster aspart, versus other mealtime insulins, were faster onset of action, improved postprandial glucose (PPG) control, and dosing flexibility. Most physicians were more satisfied with faster aspart than other mealtime insulins regarding at-meal (66%) and post-meal (71%) dosing flexibility, improved PPG levels (66%), and onset of action (61%). Main reasons for not prescribing faster aspart included a good response to current treatment (76%) or patient reluctance to switch (57%). Overall, 12% of patients discontinued faster aspart, for reasons including concerns of hypoglycemia (17%), poor adherence (17%), and level of patient co-pay (17%). More than half of physicians had fewer concerns regarding postprandial hyperglycemia, and were more confident in their patients reaching their HbA_1c target with faster aspart than with other mealtime insulins.

LIMITATIONS

The findings of this survey are based heavily on physicians' experiences, and could therefore be subject to recall bias.

CONCLUSIONS

Reported physician and patient experiences of using faster aspart have been positive, and better PPG control and increased dosing flexibility are expected to improve glycemic management.

Update on postprandial hyperglycaemia: the pathophysiology, prevalence, consequences and implications of treating diabetes

To achieve appropriate glycaemic control, postprandial and baseline hyperglycaemia should be reduced. Various epidemiological studies have suggested an association between fluctuations in postprandial blood glucose and cardiovascular risk. However, studies of interventions performed to date have not shown that selective control of postprandial hyperglycaemia is associated with cardiovascular benefits. Accordingly, an appropriate combination of drugs that control both baseline and postprandial hyperglycaemia (individually based on each patient's characteristics) is the best strategy for achieving good glycaemic control. This review seeks to impart to clinicians the concept of postprandial hyperglycaemia, analysing its causes, how to measure it, its prevalence, its consequences and, ultimately, the available therapeutic strategies for the preferential control of the postprandial hyperglycaemia along with baseline hyperglycaemia.

Short-term fully closed-loop insulin delivery using faster insulin aspart compared with standard insulin aspart in type 2 diabetes

We evaluated the efficacy and safety of short-term fully closed-loop insulin delivery using faster versus standard insulin aspart in type 2 diabetes. Fifteen adults with insulin-treated type 2 diabetes underwent 22 hours of closed-loop insulin delivery with either faster or standard insulin aspart in a double-blind randomized crossover design. Basal-bolus regimen was replaced by model predictive control algorithm-directed insulin delivery based on sensor glucose levels. The primary outcome was time with plasma glucose in target range (5.6-10.0 mmol/L) and did not differ between treatments (mean difference [95% CI] 3.3% [-8.2; 1.7], P = 0.17). Mean glucose and glucose variability were comparable, as was time spent below and above target range. Hypoglycaemia (<3.5 mmol/L) occurred once with faster insulin aspart and twice with standard insulin aspart. Mean total insulin dose was higher with faster insulin aspart (mean difference [95% CI] 3.7 U [0.7; 6.8], P = 0.021). No episodes of severe hypoglycaemia or other serious adverse events occurred. In conclusion, short-term fully closed-loop in type 2 diabetes may require higher dose of faster insulin aspart compared with standard insulin aspart to achieve comparable glucose control.

Fast-Acting Insulin Aspart: The Rationale for a New Mealtime Insulin

Attenuating postprandial hyperglycaemia is a critical factor in the achievement of optimal glucose control. Prandial insulin analogues have been developed to replicate the physiology of normal endogenous insulin secretion and action, with the aim of limiting postprandial glucose excursions. There is still, however, a significant unmet need, with many people failing to achieve desired glycaemic control targets despite the current armamentarium of prandial insulin analogues. Such insulins have a delayed onset and a longer duration of action than endogenous insulin production. There has been considerable focus on attempts to accelerate the time-action profile of prandial exogenous insulin in order to produce a more physiological profile. One such approach is to modify the insulin formulation. Fast-acting insulin aspart is a modified formulation of insulin aspart containing niacinamide and L-arginine. It has an earlier onset of action than aspart. In an extensive trial programme, this faster aspart demonstrated similar HbA1c reductions to those achieved with aspart but superior postprandial glucose reductions, with no increase in hypoglycaemia. Furthermore, administration of faster aspart up to 20 min after the start of a meal permitted similar glucose control to aspart given preprandially. These data, taken in totality, illustrate the potential role of faster insulin aspart in clinical practice.

Fast-acting insulin aspart in people with type 2 diabetes: Earlier onset and greater initial exposure and glucose-lowering effect compared with insulin aspart

AIMS

To investigate the pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic properties of fast-acting insulin aspart (faster aspart) versus insulin aspart (IAsp) in people with type 2 diabetes (T2D).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In a randomized, double-blind, crossover design, 61 people with T2D usually treated with insulin ± oral antidiabetic drug(s) received single-dose faster aspart and IAsp (0.3 U/kg) on separate visits. Blood samples for pharmacokinetic assessment were collected frequently until 12 hours post-dose. Glucose-lowering effect was determined in a euglycaemic clamp lasting up to 12 hours post-dose (target 5.0 mmol/L).

RESULTS

The serum IAsp pharmacokinetic profile and glucose-lowering effect profile were shifted to the left for faster aspart versus IAsp. Least squares mean (± SE) onset of appearance was 3.3 ± 0.3 minutes for faster aspart, which was 1.2 minutes earlier than for IAsp (95% confidence interval [CI] -1.8;-0.5; P = .001). Onset of action for faster aspart was 8.9 minutes earlier (95% CI -12.1;-5.7; P < .001) than for IAsp. During the first 30 minutes after dosing, 89% larger IAsp exposure (ratio faster aspart/IAsp 1.89 [95% CI 1.56;2.28]; P < .001) and 147% greater glucose-lowering effect (2.47 [95% CI 1.58;6.22]; P < .001) were observed for faster aspart compared with IAsp. Offset of exposure (time to 50% of maximum IAsp concentration in the late part of the pharmacokinetic profile) occurred earlier for faster aspart (difference faster aspart - IAsp -36.4 minutes [95% CI -55.3;-17.6]; P < .001). The treatment difference of faster aspart - IAsp in offset of glucose-lowering effect (time to 50% of maximum glucose infusion rate in the late part of the glucose infusion rate profile) was -14.4 minutes (95% CI -34.4;5.5; P = .152).

CONCLUSIONS

In people with T2D, faster aspart was associated with earlier onset and greater initial exposure and glucose-lowering effect compared with IAsp, as previously shown in people with type 1 diabetes.

How often patients on insulin therapy measure postprandial glycemia and modify insulin doses accordingly? From an on-line survey in insulin-treated diabetes patients in Spain

INTRODUCTION

Controlling postprandial glycemia (PPG) is important to achieve optimal glycemic control, but few studies have evaluated how often is measured and evaluated.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate how often patients on insulin therapy measure PPG and modify insulin doses accordantly. As secondary objectives, we evaluated the factors conditioning elevated PPG and associated issues.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Cross-sectional observational study based on a web-based survey from an unselected sample of adult insulin-treated patients. A p-value of < 0.05 was significant.

RESULTS

1251 patients (68% women, 38.9 ± 13 years [mean ± SD], body mass index (BMI) 24.2 ± 4.2 kg/m², diabetes duration 17.4 ± 12.8 years, insulin dose 38 ± 18 IU) participated, 1104 with autoinmmune disease (AD) and 147 with non-autoinmmune diabetes (NAD). 59% of patients had HbA1c ≤ 7%, 92.7% of patients with AD and 55.8% with NAD were attended by specialists (p < 0.001). People with AD did more often blood glucose monitoring (BGM) (p < 0.0001) and used continuous glucose monitoring systems (CGMS) (p < 0.0001). 90.1% with AD and 68.0% with NAD received instructions on measuring PPG (p < 0.001), and more with AD received specific training to change the treatment (87% vs. 61.2%, p < 0.0001) and were more proactive. However, more with NAD discussed their postprandial glucose levels with their healthcare team during clinical visits (92.5% vs. 74.1%, p < 0.0001). Regarding bolus administration, 88.6% with AD and 68.7% with NAD injected the insulin bolus before meals (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with AD determine PPG more frequently. Diabetes type, follow-up setting, number of injections and CGMS use were the most important predictive factors for PPG measurement. Diabetes education programs should address how to best monitor PPG and appropriate corrective actions.

Mealtime fast-acting insulin aspart versus insulin aspart for controlling postprandial hyperglycaemia in people with insulin-resistant Type 2 diabetes

AIM

This post hoc analysis explored whether mealtime fast-acting insulin aspart treatment provided an advantage in postprandial plasma glucose (PPG) control vs. insulin aspart in people with Type 2 diabetes receiving high doses of bolus insulin.

METHODS

A post hoc, post-randomization, subgroup analysis of a 26-week, randomized, double-blind, treat-to-target trial (onset 2) that compared mealtime fast-acting insulin aspart vs. mealtime insulin aspart, both in a basal-bolus regimen, in people with Type 2 diabetes uncontrolled on basal insulin therapy and metformin. At the end of trial, the impact of fast-acting insulin aspart and insulin aspart on PPG control was assessed with a standard liquid meal test and participants were grouped into three post-randomization subgroups: meal test bolus insulin dose ≤ 10 units per dose (n = 171), > 10-20 units per dose (n = 289) and > 20 units per dose (n = 146).

RESULTS

A statistically significant treatment difference in favour of fast-acting insulin aspart vs. insulin aspart was observed for the change in PPG increment at all post-meal time points (from 1 to 4 h) for those in the > 20 units bolus insulin subgroup. There was no difference in the magnitude of change from baseline in HbA_1c level between fast-acting insulin aspart and insulin aspart in any of the bolus insulin dose subgroups (data herein).

CONCLUSION

Fast-acting insulin aspart may hold promise as a more effective treatment compared with insulin aspart for controlling PPG in people with insulin-resistant Type 2 diabetes.