Adherence to Insulin Therapy

The Association of Glycemic Control Medication Regimens and Preoperative Fructosamine Among Total Joint Artrhoplasty Patients

BACKGROUND

Although glycated hemoglobin A1C (HbA1c) has classically been used for glycemic control screening before surgery, fructosamine, a short-term glucose variability indicator, has been reported to be a more accurate predictor of postoperative periprosthetic joint infection among patients with diabetes mellitus (DM). Given the variability of diabetic medication management, this study aims to identify the associated effect of glycemic control medication regimen (GCMR) on the incidence rate and associated odds of abnormal preoperative fructosamine levels among diabetic primary total knee arthroplasty or total hip arthroplasty patients.

METHODS

Between 2017 and 2018, consecutive series of total hip arthroplasty and total knee arthroplasty patients were identified, and the final cohort included only diabetic patients. All patients reported preoperative HbA1c and fructosamine levels. GCMR categories included insulin, metformin, and other. Independent risk of GCMR and abnormal fructosamine levels (>293 µmol/L) were identified using multivariable logistic regression, while controlling for preoperative baseline factors including HbA1C.

RESULTS

Among 420 patients, 15.7% (66/420) were diabetic, of whom 22.7% (15/66) reported an abnormal fructosamine level. Among patients requiring GCMR, 24.0% (18/75), 56.0% (42/75), and 77.7% (58/75) reported using insulin, other, and metformin, respectively. Multivariable logistic regressions demonstrated that insulin-dependent patients with DM reported a 1.71 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.096 to 30.213, P = 0.716) increased odds of abnormal fructosamine levels compared with nonactive GCMR patients, whereas patients managed with metformin and other glycemic control medications reported a protective 0.48 (95% CI, 0.418 to 5.407, P = 0.549) and 0.32 (95% CI, 0.216 to 4.508, P = 0.393) decreased odds of abnormal fructosamine levels, respectively.

CONCLUSION

In this study, insulin and other GCMR medications exhibited a trend for increased and decreased odds of having abnormal preoperative fructosamine levels while controlling for baseline HbA1c level compared with patients with DM without active GCMR. This association may be explained by multifactorial short-term glucose variability in insulin users, indicating the continued need and optimization of short-term glycemic variations instead of HbA1c.

Association Between Treatment Adherence and Continuous Glucose Monitoring Outcomes in People With Diabetes Using Smart Insulin Pens in a Real-World Setting

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the association of insulin injection adherence, smart insulin pen engagement, and glycemic control using real-world data from 16 countries from adults self-administering basal insulin degludec and bolus insulin with a smart insulin pen (NovoPen 6 or NovoPen Echo Plus) alongside continuous glucose monitoring (CGM).

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

Data were aggregated over 14-day periods. Treatment adherence was defined according to the number of missed basal and missed bolus insulin doses and smart pen engagement according to the number of days with data uploads.

RESULTS

Data from 3,945 adults, including 25,157 14-day periods with ≥70% CGM coverage, were analyzed. On average, 0.2 basal and 6.0 bolus insulin doses were missed over 14 days. The estimated probability of missing at least one basal insulin dose over a 14-day period was 17.6% (95% CI 16.5, 18.7). Missing one basal or bolus insulin dose per 14 days was associated with a significant decrease in percentage of time with glucose levels in range (TIR) (3.9-10.0 mmol/L), of -2.8% (95% CI -3.7, -1.8) and -1.7% (-1.8, -1.6), respectively; therefore, missing two basal or four bolus doses would decrease TIR by >5%. Smart pen engagement was associated positively with glycemic outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

This combined analysis of real-world smart pen and CGM data showed that missing two basal or four bolus insulin doses over a 14-day period would be associated with a clinically relevant decrease in TIR. Smart insulin pens provide valuable insights into treatment injection behaviors.

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

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

Efficacy and safety of once-weekly insulin icodec compared to once-daily insulin g U-100 in patients with type II diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND//OBJECTIVE

Diabetes affects millions of people globally, despite treatment options, adherence and other factors pose obstacles. Once-weekly Insulin Icodec, a novel basal Insulin analog with a week-long half-life, offers potential benefits, enhancing convenience, adherence, and quality of life for improved glycemic control. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of once-weekly Insulin Icodec compared to once-daily Insulin Glargine U-100 in individuals with type II diabetes (T2D).

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted using PubMed, and Cochrane Library databases before September 2023 to identify relevant Randomized control trials (RCTs) with no language restrictions following PRISMA guidelines. The Cochrane risk-of-bias tool was used for quality assessment. All statistical analyses were conducted using RevMan (version 5.4; Copenhagen: The Nordic Cochrane Centre, The Cochrane Collaboration, 2014).

RESULT

Four RCTs published from 2020 to 2023 with a cumulative sample size of 1035 were included. The pooled mean difference (MD) revealed a 4.68% longer TIR (%) with Insulin Icodec compared to Insulin Glargine U-100 [{95% CI (0.69, 8.68), p = 0.02}], the estimated mean changes in HbA1c (%) and FPG (mg%) were found to be insignificant between the two groups [MD = - 0.12 {95% CI (- 0.26, 0.01), p = 0.07}] and [MD = - 2.59 {95% CI (- 6.95, 1.78), p = 0.25}], respectively. The overall OR for hypoglycemia was also nonsignificant between the two regimens 1.04 [{95% CI (0.71, 1.52), p = 0.84}]. Other safety parameters were similar between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Switching from daily Insulin Glargine U-100 to weekly Insulin Icodec showed longer TIR (%) as well as similar blood glycemic control and safety profile. Hence, it may be a good alternate option for management of longstanding T2D.

Insulin therapy among diabetic patients in rural communities of Sub-Saharan Africa: a perspective review

In this perspective review, we describe a brief background on the status quo of diabetes mellitus-related therapies and glycemic control among patients in rural communities in sub-Saharan Africa. The article discusses insulin therapy as well as the difficulties in obtaining insulin and oral hypoglycemic medications for diabetic patients living in sub-Saharan Africa. We wrap up our discussion with suggestions on solutions and opportunities for future research to tackle this health challenge in these impoverished communities. We conducted a literature search from PubMed and Google Scholar up until August 2023. Key words were used to generate search terms used to retrieve the required information. All types of literature with pertinent information on the current topic were included in the study. Diabetes mellitus is on the rise in sub-Saharan Africa. Several studies have reported poor glycemic control, low screening rates for diabetes mellitus, cigarette smoking, high alcohol consumption, prescription of antidiabetic therapy, and associated costs as contributors to the uptake of antidiabetic treatment. Although there is paucity of data on the extent of insulin therapy uptake and its possible modifiable contributors among the diabetic patients in the region, the anticipated increase in the number of people with diabetes on the continent makes it critical for global leaders to address the research gaps in insulin therapy among rural communities of sub-Saharan Africa, thus reducing the burden of diabetes in these populations.

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

Purpose

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

Patients and Methods

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

Results

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

Conclusion

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

Associations of bolus insulin injection frequency and smart pen engagement with glycaemic control in people living with type 1 diabetes

AIM

To evaluate whether both bolus insulin injection frequency and smart pen engagement were associated with changes in glycaemic control, using real-world data from adults with type 1 diabetes (T1D).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Adults using a smart pen (NovoPen 6) to administer bolus insulin (fast-acting insulin aspart or insulin aspart) alongside continuous glucose monitoring were eligible for inclusion. Smart pen engagement was characterized by number of days with pen data uploads over the previous 14 days. Glycaemic control was evaluated by analysing glucose metrics.

RESULTS

Overall, data from 1194 individuals were analysed. The number of daily bolus injections was significantly associated with time in range (TIR; 3.9-10.0 mmol/L [70-180 mg/dL]; P < 0.0001). Individuals administering, on average, three daily bolus insulin injections had an estimated 11% chance of achieving >70% TIR. The probability of achieving >70% TIR increased with the mean number of daily bolus injections. However, the percentage of TIR was lower on days when individuals administered higher-than-average numbers of injections. The observed mean number of daily bolus injections administered across the study population was lower than the optimal number required to reach glycaemic targets (4.8 injections vs. 6-8 injections). Smart pen engagement was significantly associated with improved TIR.

CONCLUSIONS

Glycaemic control was associated with daily bolus insulin injection frequency and smart pen engagement. A treatment regimen combining an optimal bolus injection strategy, and effective smart pen engagement, may improve glycaemic control among adults with T1D.

Smart Pen Exposes Missed Basal Insulin Injections and Reveals the Impact on Glycemic Control in Adults With Type 1 Diabetes

BACKGROUND

Adherence to basal insulin injections and the effects of missed basal insulin injections in adults with type 1 diabetes (T1D) were investigated using data from continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) and smart insulin pen devices in a real-world study.

METHODS

This was a post hoc analysis of a prospective, real-world study conducted in Sweden. Adults with T1D who were using CGM received a smart insulin pen device (NovoPen 6) for insulin injections. Missed basal insulin doses (≥40 hours between doses) were evaluated over 14-day periods, and the probability of missing basal insulin doses was estimated. Associations between missed basal insulin doses and glycemic outcomes were also explored.

RESULTS

Thirty-two patients with 4410 acceptable CGM days (315 14-day periods) were included. The number of missed basal insulin doses ranged from 0 to 4 over 315 14-day periods. The estimated probability of missing at least one basal insulin dose over any given 14-day period was 22% (95% confidence interval: 10%-40%). Missed basal insulin doses were significantly associated with higher mean glycemic levels, higher glucose management indicator, and lower time in range (70-180 mg/dL [3.9-10.0 mmol/L]). Similar results were observed when adjusted for missed bolus insulin doses; age and sex had no statistically significant effect on any glycemic parameter.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first study, based on accurate real-world injection data, to demonstrate the challenge of adherence to basal insulin injections in patients with T1D, and document that just one missed basal injection per week can result in clinically significant changes in glycemic control.

Efficacy and safety of once-weekly basal insulin versus once-daily basal insulin in patients with type 2 diabetes: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Once-weekly insulin is expected to improve treatment compliance and durability and lead to better glycemic control. Several clinical trials on once-weekly insulin have recently been published. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the efficacy and safety of once-weekly insulin versus once-daily insulin in type 2 diabetes (T2D).

METHODS

The following databases were searched for studies: PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane library (From January 1, 1946 to May 9, 2023). All randomized trials comparing weekly versus daily insulin in T2D were eligible for inclusion. Data analysis was performed using STATA 17.0 software (Stata Corporation, College Station, TX). The main outcomes and indexes included reduction in Hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), fasting plasma glucose and bodyweight, proportion of patients achieving HbA1c < 7%, time-in-range 70 to 180 mg/dL and adverse events.

RESULTS

This systematic review and meta-analysis included 7 randomized controlled studies involving 2391 patients (1347 receiving 1-week insulin and 1044 receiving 1-day insulin). Once-weekly insulin was not inferior to once-daily insulin in HbA1c change [estimated treatment difference (ETD) = -0.05; 95% confidence intervals (CI): -0.14 to 0.04), HbA1c  < 7% (odds ratio = 1.14; 95% CI: 0.87-1.50), fasting plasma glucose (ETD = 0.09; 95% CI: -0.19 to 0.36) and body weight loss (ETD = 0.27; 95% CI: -0.36 to 0.91). In terms of time-in-range 70 to 180 mg/dL, weekly insulin was superior to daily insulin (MTD = 3.84; 95% CI: 1.55-6.08). Icodec was associated with higher incidence of all adverse events (odds ratio = 1.20; 95% CI: 1.03-1.48; P = .024), but did not result in high risk of serious and severe adverse events. Moreover, icodec and Basal Insulin Fc did not result in higher incidence of hypoglycemia compared with insulin daily.

CONCLUSION

Our meta-analysis found that insulin weekly was well tolerated and effective for glycemic control. Once-weekly insulin was not inferior to once-daily insulin in both efficacy and safety in T2D.

Perception of self-management and glycaemic control in people with type 2 diabetes receiving insulin injection therapy: A qualitative study

AIM

The aim of this study was to explore the experience of self-management and glycaemic control in Chinese people with type 2 diabetes receiving insulin injection therapy.

METHODS

A qualitative descriptive design was adopted with individual, semi-structured interviews. Participants were selected by purposive sampling. All face-to-face interviews were conducted between December 2020 and January 2021. The interviews were audio recorded and transcribed verbatim. Content analysis was used to analyse the interview data.

RESULTS

A total of 27 participants were recruited and individually interviewed. Three themes were generated: integrating insulin injection therapy into daily self-management; experiencing uncertainty when coping with suboptimal glycaemic control; and self-management programmes for optimal diabetes control.

CONCLUSION

All of our findings increase the understanding of self-management and glycaemic control in people with T2D receiving insulin injection therapy. Healthcare professionals should recognise the unmet needs of this cohort to promote their diabetes management. Appropriate and effective self-management programmes should be developed and implemented to alleviate the negative impacts of insulin injection therapy on diabetes management with consideration of cultural and personal context.

Impact of Second-Line Combination Treatment for Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus on Disease Control: A Population-Based Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Type 2 diabetes mellitus is a chronic disease affecting millions of people worldwide. Achieving and maintaining glycemic control is essential to prevent or delay complications and different strategies are available as second-line treatment options for patients with type 2 diabetes who do not achieve glycemic control with metformin monotherapy.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this work is to describe the impact of initiating a combination treatment to reduce glycated hemoglobin in patients with type 2 diabetes with insufficient glycemic control.

METHODS

We included patients with a type 2 diabetes diagnosis between 2015 and 2020 at the Information System for Research in Primary Care (SIDIAP) database in Catalonia, Spain. The primary outcome was the time to glycated hemoglobin control (≤ 7%) during the first 720 days, expressed as the restricted mean survival time. Adjusted differences of the restricted mean survival time were compared to analyze the performance of each treatment versus the combination with a sulfonylurea. Adherence was calculated as the medication possession ratio using an algorithm to model treatment exposure.

RESULTS

A total of 28,425 patients were analyzed. The most frequent combinations were those with sulfonylureas and dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors. All treatments reduced glycated hemoglobin and the restricted mean survival time for the sulfonylurea treatment was 455 (451-459) days although combinations with glucagon-like peptide-1 and insulin reached glycemic control earlier, - 126 days (- 152 to - 100, p < 0.001) and - 69 days (- 88 to - 50, p < 0.001), respectively. Adherence was high in all groups apart from the insulin combination and had a significant effect in reducing glycated hemoglobin except in sodium-glucose cotransporter type 2 inhibitors and insulin. Glucagon-like peptide-1 and sodium-glucose cotransporter type 2 inhibitors showed significant reductions in weight.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients achieved the glycated hemoglobin goal with second-line treatments. Glucagon-like peptide-1 and insulin combinations achieved the goal earlier than sulfonylurea combinations. Adherence significantly reduced the time to glycated hemoglobin control except for the combination with sodium-glucose cotransporter type 2 inhibitors.

Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus and Efficacy Outcomes from Immune Checkpoint Blockade in Patients with Cancer

PURPOSE

No evidence exists as to whether type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) impairs clinical outcome from immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) in patients with solid tumors.

EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN

In a large cohort of ICI recipients treated at 21 institutions from June 2014 to June 2020, we studied whether patients on glucose-lowering medications (GLM) for T2DM had shorter overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). We used targeted transcriptomics in a subset of patients to explore differences in the tumor microenvironment (TME) of patients with or without diabetes.

RESULTS

A total of 1,395 patients were included. Primary tumors included non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC; 54.7%), melanoma (24.7%), renal cell (15.0%), and other carcinomas (5.6%). After multivariable analysis, patients on GLM (n = 226, 16.2%) displayed an increased risk of death [HR, 1.29; 95% confidence interval (CI),1.07-1.56] and disease progression/death (HR, 1.21; 95% CI, 1.03-1.43) independent of number of GLM received. We matched 92 metformin-exposed patients with 363 controls and 78 patients on other oral GLM or insulin with 299 control patients. Exposure to metformin, but not other GLM, was associated with an increased risk of death (HR, 1.53; 95% CI, 1.16-2.03) and disease progression/death (HR, 1.34; 95% CI, 1.04-1.72). Patients with T2DM with higher pretreatment glycemia had higher neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (P = 0.04), while exploratory tumoral transcriptomic profiling in a subset of patients (n = 22) revealed differential regulation of innate and adaptive immune pathways in patients with T2DM.

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, patients on GLM experienced worse outcomes from immunotherapy, independent of baseline features. Prospective studies are warranted to clarify the relative impact of metformin over a preexisting diagnosis of T2DM in influencing poorer outcomes in this population.

Toward the Design of Sensing-Based Medication Adherence Aids That Support Individualized Activities of Daily Living: Survey and Interviews With Patients and Providers

BACKGROUND

Nearly half of Americans taking prescription medications do not take them properly. The resulting implications have a broad impact. Nonadhering patients develop worsened medical conditions and increased comorbidity of disease or die.

OBJECTIVE

Clinical studies have shown that the most effective strategies for addressing adherence are those that are individualized to the context that each patient and situation require. However, existing aids for adherence are relatively ridged and poorly support adaptation to individual behaviors and lifestyles. The aim of our study was to better understand this design tension.

METHODS

A series of 3 qualitative studies was conducted: a web-based survey of 200 Americans that investigated existing adherence strategies and behaviors and perception of how hypothetical in-home tracking technologies would assist adherence; in-person semistructured interviews with 20 medication takers from Pittsburgh, PA, that investigated personal adherence behaviors, which included demonstration of medication locations and routines as well as an assessment of hypothetical technologies; and semistructured interviews with 6 pharmacists and 3 family physicians to gain a provider perspective on patient adherence strategies, which included feedback on hypothetical technologies in the context of their patient populations. Inductive thematic coding of all interview data was performed. Studies were conducted consecutively, with the results informing the subsequent studies.

RESULTS

Synthesized, the studies identified key medication adherence behaviors amenable to technological interventions, distilled important home-sensing literacy considerations, and detailed critical privacy considerations. Specifically, 4 key insights were obtained: medication routines are heavily influenced and adapted by and through the physical location and placement of medications relative to activities of daily living, routines are chosen to be inconspicuous to maintain privacy, the value of provider-involved routines is motivated by a desire to build trust in shared decision-making, and the introduction of new technologies can create further burden on patients and providers.

CONCLUSIONS

There is considerable potential to improve individual medication adherence by creating behavior-focused interventions that leverage emerging artificial intelligence (AI), machine learning (ML), and in-home Internet of Things (IoT) sensing technologies. However, success will be dependent on the technology's ability to learn effectively and accurately from individual behaviors, needs, and routines and tailor interventions accordingly. Patient routines and attitudes toward adherence will likely affect the use of proactive (eg, AI-assistant routine modification) versus reactive (eg, notification of associated behaviors with missed dosages) intervention strategies. Successful technological interventions must support the detection and tracking of patient routines that can adjust to variations in patient location, schedule, independence, and habituation.

Factors Affecting Performance of Insulin Pen Injector Technology: A Narrative Review

BACKGROUND

Insulin treatment is an essential hormone replacement therapy for the survival of people with type 1 diabetes and is often used for treatment in type 2 diabetes, particularly as the disease progresses. Advances in insulin therapy have been made since its discovery, including production of human insulin and development of insulin analogs with improved efficacy and safety profiles. The different types of available insulin formulations allow health care professionals to personalize treatment to an individual's needs. Generally, insulin requires parenteral administration via subcutaneous injection owing to very low oral bioavailability.

METHODS

This article reviews the human, technological, economical, and regulatory factors affecting the performance of insulin pens and the relationship between them. Opportunities and challenges that insulin pen injections may encounter in the future are also considered.

RESULTS

Insulin delivery devices, together with other factors, influence dose accuracy, convenience, and quality of life, contributing to easier medication administration with high efficacy and safety. For patients, ease of use, fast and accurate drug delivery, and painless injection are the most valuable features of an insulin injection device. For manufacturers, technological feasibility and economic viability also need to be considered when developing injection devices.

CONCLUSION

Insulin pen injectors are generally preferred over vial and syringe, although access may be limited in some health care systems. Insulin pen injectors can adapt to different insulin regimens and formulations and have the potential to acquire dosing data in real time.

STYLCONNECT Study: An Assessment of Automatic Data Collection Devices by People Living with Diabetes and Using an Insulin Pen

INTRODUCTION

The use of devices to connect insulin pens could facilitate management and improve glycaemic control in people with type 1 (PwT1D) and type 2 diabetes (PwT2D). However, their acceptance seems little studied. We conducted an online survey with the main objective of assessing the level of interest among insulin-treated people with diabetes (PwD) in a device connected to a disposable pen and secondary objectives of assessing the perceived benefits and important features expected of a connected device and identifying factors associated with interest scores.

METHODS

An ad-hoc questionnaire, validated by PwD, was used. Responses from 1798 PwD (975 PwT1D and 823 PwT2D) were analysed.

RESULTS

The mean interest rating was 7.4/10 (PwT1D: 7.2 vs PwT2D: 7.7; p < 0.001). PwD perceived that the device would make it easier to record their diabetes-related information (7.7/10) and keep all insulin and diabetes data in a single location (7.7/10). It was particularly important for PwD that this type of device could integrate data from glucose-measuring devices (7.8/10) and could set an alarm when all insulin in the body had been metabolised (7.7/10).

CONCLUSION

Our study highlighted PwD's strong interest in automating the collection of their insulin therapy data, with significantly more interest among PwT2D than PwT1D, and the importance of interoperability between glucose measurement devices and interchangeability between the different brands of insulin. More generally, for the first time and on a large scale, our study provided a greater understanding of the expectations of PwD regarding these devices.

Efficacy of a Smart Insulin Pen Cap for the Management of Patients with Uncontrolled Type 2 Diabetes: A Randomized Cross-Over Trial

BACKGROUND

We studied a smart insulin pen cap that can be plugged to several brand of insulin pens, to track insulin administration via smart-phone Bluetooth technology, with alarm/reminder system aiming.

METHODS

This pilot randomized, cross-over design study assessed the use of a smart insulin pen cap in improving adherence, glycemic control and patient satisfaction in insulin-treated patients with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes. Eighty patients on basal insulin ± oral agents with hemoglobin A1C (HbA1c) between 7.0% and 12.0% were randomized to a 12-week active phase receiving alarms/reminders and a 12-week control/masked phase without feedback. We assessed differences between groups on treatment adherence, insulin omission, and mistiming of insulin injections, HbA1c, treatment satisfaction (using Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire Status).

RESULTS

Compared to the control/masked phase, the active phase resulted in lower mean daily blood glucose (147.0 ± 34 vs 157.6 ± 42 mg/dL, P < .01); and greater reduction in HbA1c from baseline (-0.98% vs -0.72%, P = .006); however, no significant differences in treatment adherence, insulin omission or insulin mistiming were observed. High patient satisfaction scores were reported in both active and control phases, with DTSQc of 15.5 ± 3.7 and 14.9 ± 3.6, respectively. Statistical models showed no residual effect after cross-over between active and control phases.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this pilot study indicates that this smart insulin pen cap was effective in improving glycemic control with overall good satisfaction in insulin treated patients with type 2 diabetes. Future studies are needed to confirm its potential for improving care in insulin treated patients with diabetes.

The Diabetes teleMonitoring of patients in insulin Therapy (DiaMonT) trial: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

The effect of telemedicine solutions in diabetes remains inconclusive. However, telemedicine studies have shown a positive trend in regards to glycemic control. The telemedicine interventions that facilitate adjustment of medication seems to improve glycemic control more effectively. Hence, it is recommended that future telemedicine studies for patients with diabetes include patient-specific suggestions for changes in medicine. Hence, the aim of the trial is to explore the effect of telemonitoring in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) on insulin therapy.

METHODS

The trial is an open-label randomized controlled trial with a trial period of 3 months conducted in two sites in Denmark. Patients with T2D on insulin therapy will be randomized (1:1) to a telemonitoring group (intervention) or a usual care group (control). The telemonitoring group will use a continuous glucose monitor (CGM), an insulin pen, an activity tracker, and smartphone applications throughout the trial. Hospital staff will monitor the telemonitoring group and contact the subjects by telephone repeatedly throughout the trial period. The usual care group will use a blinded CGM the first and last 20 days of the trial and will use a blinded insulin pen for the entire period. The primary endpoint will be changed from baseline in CGM time in range (3.9-10.0 mmol/L) 3 months after randomization. Secondary endpoints include change from baseline in glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c), total daily dose, time above range, and time below range 3 months after randomization. Exploratory endpoints include health-related quality of life, diabetes-related quality of life, etc. DISCUSSION: The DiaMonT trial will test a telemonitoring setup including various devices. Such a setup may be criticized, because it is impossible to determine which element(s) add to the potential effect. However, it is not possible and counterproductive to test the elements individually, since it is the full telemedicine setup that is being evaluated. The DiaMonT trial is the first Danish trial to explore the effect of telemonitoring on patients on insulin therapy. Thus, the DiaMonT trial has the potential to form the basis for the implementation of telemedicine for patients with T2D in Denmark.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04981808. Registered on 8 June 2021.

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

AIM

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

MATERIALS AND METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Preclinical pharmacology of RA15127343: In vitro and in vivo activity of a novel ultralong-acting basal insulin

AIM

To report the in vitro and in vivo preclinical pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic (PD) properties of RA15127343, a novel ultralong-acting insulin analogue targeting once-weekly administration, in female Göttingen minipigs.

METHODS

In vitro binding and activation of human insulin receptor isoforms (IR-A/IR-B), glucose uptake in rat myocytes, as well as mitogenic activity of RA15127343 were evaluated. In vivo, the PK and PD activities of RA15127343 were assessed in female, normoglycaemic Göttingen minipigs. The half-life (t_1/2 ) and time to maximum plasma concentration (T_max ) of subcutaneously (SC) administered RA15127343 (10/30/45/60 nmol/kg) were estimated. In vivo blood glucose and endogenous plasma C-peptide concentrations after single SC administration (10/30/45/60 nmol/kg) or repeated dosing (15 nmol/kg) were analysed.

RESULTS

In comparison to human insulin, RA15127343 showed lower in vitro binding affinity (19.9/6.31 μM vs. 1.10/1.14 nM) and activation (2.054 μM/669.6 nM vs. 26.04/18.24 nM) of IR-A/IR-B, lower potency to activate glucose uptake (855.2 vs. 3.37 nM) and lower mitogenic activity (17.92 μM vs. 10.78 nM; proliferation in MCF7 cells). In vivo, the mean t_1/2 and T_max of RA15127343 after SC administration ranged from 48 to 59 and 30 to 39 hours, respectively. Blood glucose and plasma C-peptide concentrations were significantly lower with RA15127343 (single/repeated doses) versus vehicle.

CONCLUSIONS

RA15127343 showed an ultra-long t_1/2 with a slow onset of action. The preclinical pharmacological outcomes suggest RA15127343 could be a potential ultralong-acting insulin analogue with low risk of hypoglycaemia in humans.

Insulin Pump Therapy Efficacy and Key Factors Influencing Adherence in Pediatric Population-A Narrative Review

Objective: we aimed to highlight the state of the art in terms of pediatric population adherence to insulin pumps. This study intends to underline the significance of identifying and minimizing, to the greatest extent feasible, the factors that adversely affect the juvenile population's adherence to insulin pump therapy. Materials and methods: articles from PubMed, Embase, and Science Direct databases were evaluated using the following search terms: adherence, pump insulin therapy, children, pediatric population, and type 1 diabetes, in combination with several synonyms such as compliance, treatment adherence, pump adherence, patient dropouts, and treatment refusal. Results: A better glycemic control is connected to a better adherence to diabetes management. We identify, enumerate, and discuss a number of variables which make it difficult to follow an insulin pump therapy regimen. Several key factors might improve adherence to insulin pump therapy: efficient communication between care provider and patients (including home-based video-visits), continuous diabetes education, family support and parental involvement, as well as informational, practical assistance, and emotional support from the society. Conclusions: every cause and obstacle that prevents young patients from adhering to insulin pumps optimally is an opportunity for intervention to improve glycemic control and, as a result, their quality of life.

Adherence to insulin therapy and associated factors among type 1 and type 2 diabetic patients on follow up in Madda Walabu University Goba Referral Hospital, South East Ethiopia

Background

Non-adherence to insulin therapy is a major global public health issue that has a causal relationship with increased diabetic complications that leads to further increase in the health care cost. However, adherence to insulin therapy and associated factors among diabetic mellitus (DM) patients are still not studied adequately in Ethiopia.

Objective

To assess the adherence to insulin therapy and associated factors among type 1 and type 2 diabetic patients on follow-up at Madda Walabu University—Goba Referral Hospital, South East Ethiopia.

Method

An institution-based, cross-sectional study was employed among 311 both type 1 and type 2 diabetic patients, Madda Walabu University—Goba Referral Hospital from March 4 to April 30, 2020. Study participants were recruited with simple random sampling method. Adherence to insulin therapy was measured by 8-item Morisky medication adherence scale. Therefore from these 8-items, those who score 6 or more are considered as adherent to insulin therapy. The data were collected through interviewer administered questionnaires by trained graduating class nurse students. The data were entered to Epidata version 3.1, and analyzed with SPSS version 25. Bivariate and multivariable logistic regression analyses were used to identify factors associated with adherence to insulin therapy. Statistical significance were declared at p <0.05.

Result

A total of 311 patients participate in the study with response rate of 100%. Among these only 38.9% of them were adherent to insulin therapy with a CI of [33.5, 44.3]. Having glucometer (AOR = 3.88; 95% CI [1.46, 10.35]), regular hospital follow-up (AOR = 3.13; 95% CI [1.12, 8.70]), being knowledgeable (AOR = 3.36; 95% CI [1.53, 7.37]), and favorable attitudes (AOR = 4.55; 95%CI [1.68, 12.34]) were the factor associated with adherence to insulin therapy.

Conclusion

This study concluded that adherence to insulin therapy was low in the study area. Having glucometer, regular hospital follow-up, being knowledgeable, and favorable attitudes were the factor associated with adherence to insulin therapy. Attention should be paid to help diabetic patients on acquiring knowledge regarding the need of consistent adherence to insulin therapy and its complications.

Socio-cognitive determinants affecting insulin adherence/non-adherence in late adolescents and young adults with type 1 diabetes: a systematic review protocol

Objective

This systematic review aims to investigate the key socio-cognitive determinants associated with adherence/non-adherence to insulin treatment in late adolescents and young adults in the age range of 17–24 years with T1D.

Methods

A pre-specified search strategy will be used to search for studies in the electronic databases and citation indexes: PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and PsycINFO. Two researchers will screen the title and the abstract independently, then will read and critically appraise the full text of each included study. A third independent reviewer will resolve disagreements in data extraction until consensus. Data will be extracted using the Population, Exposure, Outcomes, Study characteristics framework. Study selection will follow the updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews (PRISMA 2020) and will take place from 15 October 2021 to 1 January 2022. The methodological quality and risk of bias of the observational studies will be assessed by the JBI Critical Appraisal Checklist for Cohort and JBI Critical Appraisal Checklist for Analytical Cross Sectional Studies.

Results

A qualitative narrative synthesis will present the characteristics and the quality of studies and the outcomes of concern.

Conclusion

Based on the contemporary literature, this review will synthesize the evidence on the socio-cognitive determinants associated with adherence/non-adherence to insulin treatment in late adolescents and young adults in the age range of 17–24 years with T1D. The findings will help design patient-centered interventions to promote adherence to insulin in this age group, guide patients’ consultations and diabetes self-management education (DSME) programs.

Protocol registration: PROSPERO ID: CRD42021233074.

Impact of patient satisfaction with insulin pens on glycemic control

Aim: Adherence to the insulin regimen is poor. The use of an insulin pen contributes positively to glycemic control by increasing patient satisfaction and adherence. The aim of this study is to analyze the influence of patients' opinions of insulin pen use on glycemic control in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Material and Method: 126 patients with T2DM who use insulin and inject it with insulin pens were included in the study. Patients' evaluations about the pens (ergonomics, ease of reading the dosage scale, dose selection, needle change, and ease of use of the insulin pen in general) were assessed. Glycemic parameters, demographic characteristics, and treatment protocol were recorded. Results: Patients who perceived the use of the insulin pen as ergonomically 'excellent’ had a significantly lower HbA1c (8.0±1.4%) (p=0.04). HbA1c was significantly lower in patients who perceived needle tip replacement as ‘very easy’ (8.0±1.6%) (p=0.04). No statistically significant relationship was found between the ease of reading the dosage scale and the HbA1c value (p=0.53). The HbA1c value decreased significantly in patients who rated the dosage selection as 'very easy' (8.1±1.7%) (p=0.02). The HbA1c value increased significantly in patients who rated the pen as ‘difficult’ to use (12.2±1.6%) (p=0.01). Conclusion: In our study, we found that patients' opinions of insulin pen use may influence glycemic control parameters. HbA1c was better in patients who found the insulin pen as easy to use and good in ergonomics. In T2DM, patient assessment of insulin pen injection is related to glycemic control. New studies are needed to say whether this situation is related to the appropriate dose of insulin injection or adherence to therapy.

Can Smart Pens Help Improve Diabetes Management?

Smart pen technology has evolved over the past decade with new features such as Bluetooth connectivity, bolus dose calculators, and integration with mobile apps and continuous glucose monitors. While similar in appearance to a traditional insulin pen, smart pens have the ability to record and store data of insulin injections. These devices have the potential to transform diabetes management for clinicians, and patients with type 1 and type 2 diabetes on insulin therapy by improving adherence, glycemic control, and addressing barriers to diabetes management. Smart pens can also highlight the relationship between insulin, food, and physical activity, and provide insight into optimizing insulin regimens. Education of clinicians and patients, and more clinical studies showing the benefits of smart pens and cost-effectiveness, are needed.

Real-world Evidence of Efficacy and Safety of SGLT2 Inhibitors as Adjunctive Therapy in Adults With Type 1 Diabetes: A European Two-Center Experience

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate real-world efficacy and safety of sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor (SGLT2i) use in combination with insulin in people with type 1 diabetes.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort European two-center study. Data on demographics, HbA1c, weight, insulin use, renal function, and adverse events were collected for 199 adults with type 1 diabetes who initiated a SGLT2i adjunct to insulin. Subgroup analyses were performed to identify who benefited most and who was more at risk for adverse events.

RESULTS

Overall, significant reductions in mean HbA1c (-0.5%), weight (-2.9 kg), and daily insulin (-8.5%) were achieved after 12 months. The greatest reduction in HbA1c was obtained in individuals with baseline HbA1c >8% (-0.7% [64 mmol/mol]). The most weight loss was observed in subjects with BMI >27 kg/m2 (-3.5 kg). Individuals with baseline estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) <90 mL/min/1.73 m2 showed an increase in eGFR (4.5 mL/min/1.73 m2), whereas those with urinary albumin-to-creatinine ratio (UACR) >15 mg/g showed a decrease in UACR (-16.6 mg/g). Fifty-seven individuals (28.6%) reported adverse events: 45 with genital infections (22.6%), 5 ketosis episodes (2.5%), and 7 diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) (3.5%). No severe hypoglycemia events were reported.

CONCLUSIONS

Our real-world data on SGLT2i showed promising results in reductions in HbA1c, weight, and insulin requirements in type 1 diabetes. Benefits were more pronounced in individuals with higher baseline HbA1c and BMI. DKA remained a major concern, despite educational measures. Further real-life evidence is still required for evaluation of SGLT2i longer-term effects and their impact on reno-cardiovascular outcomes.

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

AIMS/INTRODUCTION

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

MATERIALS AND METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Advanced Hydrogels for the Controlled Delivery of Insulin

Insulin is a peptide hormone that is key to regulating physiological glucose levels. Its molecular size and susceptibility to conformational change under physiological pH make it challenging to orally administer insulin in diabetes. The most effective route for insulin delivery remains daily injection. Unfortunately, this results in poor patient compliance and increasing the risk of micro- and macro-vascular complications and thus rising morbidity and mortality rates in diabetics. The use of 3D hydrogels has been used with much interest for various biomedical applications. Hydrogels can mimic the extracellular matrix (ECM) and retain large quantities of water with tunable properties, which renders them suitable for administering a wide range of sensitive therapeutics. Several studies have demonstrated the fixation of insulin within the structural mesh of hydrogels as a bio-scaffold for the controlled delivery of insulin. This review provides a concise incursion into recent developments for the safe and effective controlled delivery of insulin using advanced hydrogel platforms with a special focus on sustained release injectable formulations. Various hydrogel platforms in terms of their methods of synthesis, properties, and unique features such as stimuli responsiveness for the treatment of Type 1 diabetes mellitus are critically appraised. Key criteria for classifying hydrogels are also outlined together with future trends in the field.

Impact of pharmacist insulin injection re-education on glycemic control among type II diabetic patients in primary health clinics

Background

Insulin injection technique re-education and diabetes knowledge empowerment has led to improved glycemic control.

Objectives

To evaluate the impact of pharmacist's monthly re-education on insulin injection technique (IT), lipohypertrophy, patients' perception on insulin therapy and its effect on glycaemic control.

Methods

This randomized controlled, multi-centered study was conducted among type 2 diabetics from 15 government health clinics. 160 diabetics with baseline HbA1_C ≥ 8% and unsatisfactory IT technique were randomized into control or intervention group. Control group received standard pharmacist counselling during initiation and at 4th month. Intervention group received monthly counselling and IT re-education for 4 months. Assessment of diabetes, IT knowledge, adherence and perception towards diabetes were conducted using validated study tools Insulin Treatment Appraisal Scale (ITAS) and Medication Compliance Questionnaire (MCQ)).

Results

139 patients completed the study; control group (69), intervention group (70). In control group, all outcomes shown improvement except for patient's perception. Mean HbA1_C decreased 0.79% ± 0.24 (p = 0.001). In intervention group, all outcomes improved significantly. HbA1c reduces significantly by 1.19% ± 0.10 (p < 0.001). Monthly re-education improved patient's perception towards insulin therapy (ITAS score reduced 1.44 ± 2.36; p = 0.021). Between groups, interventional arm shown significantly better improvement in all outcomes. Improvement was shown in IT technique (+2.02 score; p < 0.001), medication adherence (+1.48 score; p < 0.001) and ITAS (-1.99 score; p = 0.037). Mean HbA1_C reduced an additional of 0.63% (p = 0.008) compared to control arm.

Conclusion

Re-education is more effective in increasing adherence, reducing lipohypertrophy, improving injection technique and patient's perception on insulin therapy, thereby providing better glycaemic control.

A Randomized, Open-Label Comparison of Once-Weekly Insulin Icodec Titration Strategies Versus Once-Daily Insulin Glargine U100

OBJECTIVE

Insulin icodec is a novel once-weekly basal insulin analog. This trial investigated the efficacy and safety of icodec using different once-weekly titration algorithms.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

This was a phase 2, randomized, open-label, 16-week, treat-to-target study. Insulin-naive adults (n = 205) with type 2 diabetes and HbA_1c 7-10% while treated with oral glucose-lowering medications initiated once-weekly icodec titrations A (prebreakfast self-measured blood glucose target 80-130 mg/dL; adjustment ±21 units/week; n = 51), B (80-130 mg/dL; ±28 units/week; n = 51), or C (70-108 mg/dL; ±28 units/week; n = 52), or once-daily insulin glargine 100 units/mL (IGlar U100) (80-130 mg/dL; ±4 units/day; n = 51), all titrated weekly. Percentage of time in range (TIR) (70-180 mg/dL) during weeks 15 and 16 was measured using continuous glucose monitoring.

RESULTS

TIR improved from baseline (means: A, 57.0%; B, 55.2%; C, 51.0%; IGlar U100, 55.3%) to weeks 15 and 16 (estimated mean: A, 76.6%; B, 83.0%; C, 80.9%; IGlar U100, 75.9%). TIR was greater for titration B than for IGlar U100 (estimated treatment difference 7.08%-points; 95% CI 2.12 to 12.04; P = 0.005). No unexpected safety signals were observed. Level 2 hypoglycemia (<54 mg/dL) was low in all groups (0.05, 0.15, 0.38, 0.00 events per patient-year of exposure for icodec titrations A, B, and C and IGlar U100, respectively), with no episodes of severe hypoglycemia.

CONCLUSIONS

Once-weekly icodec was efficacious and well tolerated across all three titration algorithms investigated. The results for icodec titration A (80-130 mg/dL; ±21 units/week) displayed the best balance between glycemic control and risk of hypoglycemia.

Titratable fixed-ratio combination of basal insulin plus a glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist: A novel, simplified alternative to premix insulin for type 2 diabetes

Despite novel therapeutic options, many people with type 2 diabetes (T2D) do not achieve their HbA1c targets. Given the progressive nature of T2D, many individuals not controlled with oral therapy will require advancement to injectable therapy using either a glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1 RA), recently recommended as a first option, or traditionally a basal insulin. However, premix insulins remain frequently used, either as initial injectable therapy or as intensification from basal insulin. Premix insulin injections can potentially provide significant glycaemic improvements to basal insulin but at the expense of increased hypoglycaemia and weight gain and the need for multiple daily doses, which may affect treatment adherence. Real-world evidence suggests that glycaemic control often remains suboptimal with premix insulins. Fixed-ratio combinations (FRCs) of basal insulin and GLP-1 RAs provide a novel alternative to premix insulin for therapy intensification. While no direct comparisons between premix insulins and FRCs are available, results from meta-analyses suggest that FRCs may offer better HbA1c reductions, a lower risk of hypoglycaemia and less weight gain compared with premix insulin in a simplified treatment regimen. A head-to-head trial of T2D treatment intensification with premix insulin and a FRC of basal insulin plus a GLP-1 RA is currently in progress, which should help to clarify the outcomes for each treatment option. This review discusses the unmet needs of people with T2D treated with premix insulin and provides evidence supporting FRCs of basal insulin and GLP-1 RAs as an alternative treatment option.

One in Seven Insulin-Treated Patients in Developing Countries Reported Poor Persistence with Insulin Therapy: Real World Evidence from the Cross-Sectional International Diabetes Management Practices Study (IDMPS)

INTRODUCTION

Although poor adherence to insulin is widely recognised, periodic discontinuation of insulin may cause more severe hyperglycaemia than poor adherence. We assessed persistence with insulin therapy in patients with type 1 (T1D) or type 2 diabetes (T2D) in developing countries and the reasons for insulin discontinuation.

METHODS

The International Diabetes Management Practices Study collected real-world data from developing countries in seven waves between 2005 and 2017. In Wave 7 (2016-2017), we asked adult patients with T1D and insulin-treated T2D to report whether they had ever discontinued insulin, the estimated duration of discontinuation and underlying reasons.

RESULTS

Among 8303 patients recruited from 24 countries by 620 physicians, 4596 were insulin-treated (T1D: 2000; T2D: 2596). In patients with T1D, 14.0% (95% CI: 12.5-15.6) reported having self-discontinued insulin for a median duration of 1.0 month (IQR: 0.5, 3.5). The respective figures in patients with T2D were 13.7% (12.4-15.1) and 2.0 months (IQR: 1.0, 6.0). The main reasons for discontinuation were impact on social life (T1D: 41.0%; T2D: 30.5%), cost of medications and test strips (T1D: 34.4%; T2D: 24.5%), fear of hypoglycaemia (T1D: 26.7%; T2D: 28.0%) and lack of support (T1D: 26.4%; T2D: 25.9%). Other factors included age < 40 years, non-university education and short disease duration (T1D: ≤ 1 year; T2D: > 1-≤ 5 years). Patients with T1D who did not perform self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) or self-adjust their insulin dosage, and patients with T1D or T2D without glucose meters were less likely to persist with insulin. Nearly 50% of patients who reported poor persistence had HbA1c > 75 mmol/mol (> 9%) and > 50% of physicians recommended diabetes education programmes to improve treatment persistence.

CONCLUSION

In developing countries, poor persistence with insulin is common among insulin-treated patients, supporting calls for urgent actions to ensure easy access to insulin, tools for SMBG and education.

Insulin Usage and Practices in Children and Adolescents with Type 1 Diabetes

CONTEXT

Data on insulin usage and practices in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes (T1D) is sparse in India.

AIMS

To analyze the various insulin types and regimens used by children and adolescents with T1D, the techniques and the devices used for insulin administration, and the storage and disposal methods of delivery devices.

SETTINGS AND DESIGN

Observational cross-sectional study.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Study subjects were children and adolescents with T1D ≥6 months and informed consent was obtained. A detailed demographic history was collected, and a predesigned, pretested questionnaire was used.

RESULTS

The number of subjects were 90 (M: F; 32:58), age ranging from 3 to 18 years and duration of T1D was 6 months to 16 years. Mean age was 13 ± 4.6 yrs, HbA1c was 9.11 ± 2.2% and duration was 5 years. Conventional insulins were more commonly used than analogs. Basal-bolus (BB) regimen was used in 49% of the subjects. Mean HbA1c for analogs was 7.6% and conventional was 9.3% (p = 0.001). HbA1c <8% was significantly more in those aged 3-8 yrs, mean duration ≤4.1 yrs, those using pens and BB regimen. Fifty-six percent were using own refrigerators for storage and the most common barriers for insulin usage were fear of hypoglycemia (37%), inaccessibility (20%), and apprehension of shots (18%). Site rotation patterns were followed by 84% and 94% of the subjects reported disposing syringes and sharps as general waste.

CONCLUSIONS

Conventional insulins and vial-syringes remain the most commonly used insulin delivery systems. Glycemic control was better in younger age, lesser duration, BB regimen, analog usage, and pen devices.

Machine Learning-Based Adherence Detection of Type 2 Diabetes Patients on Once-Daily Basal Insulin Injections

BACKGROUND

Lack of treatment adherence can lead to life-threatening health complications for people with type 2 diabetes (T2D). Recent improvements and availability in continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) technology have enabled various possibilities to monitor diabetes treatment. Detection of missed once-daily basal insulin injections can be used to provide feedback to patients, thus improving their diabetes management. In this study, we explore how machine learning (ML) based on CGM data can be used for detecting adherence to once-daily basal insulin injections.

METHODS

In-silico CGM data were generated to simulate a cohort of T2D patients on once-daily insulin injection (Tresiba®). Deep learning methods within ML based on automatic feature extraction including convolutional neural networks were explored and compared with simple feature-engineered ML classification models for adherence detection. It was further investigated whether fused expert-dependent and automatically learned features could improve performance, resulting in a comparison of six different detection models. Adherence was detected throughout each day with an increasing amount of CGM data available.

RESULTS

The adherence detection accuracy improved as more CGM data became available on the day of classification. The three classification models based on expert-engineered features obtained mean accuracies of 78.6%, 78.2%, and 78.3%. The classification model based purely on learned features obtained a mean accuracy of 79.7%. The two classification models fusing expert-engineered and learned features obtained mean accuracies of 79.7% and 79.8%. All the mentioned results were obtained 16 hours after time of injection.

CONCLUSION

The results suggest that adherence detection based on CGM data is feasible. Even though our study based on in-silico data indicates only slightly improved performance of more complex models, the question remains whether advanced models would outperform the simple in a real-world setting. Thus, future studies on adherence monitoring using real CGM data are relevant.

Controlled blood sugar improves the eye's accommodative ability in type-1 diabetes

PURPOSE

To evaluate the impact of blood sugar level on ocular measures, including refractive error (RE), amplitude of accommodation (AoA), and lag of accommodation (LoA), in pre-presbyopes with type-1 diabetes.

METHOD

The fasting blood sugar (FBS) and ocular measures of type-1 diabetes patients (age: 14-39 years; n = 30) on insulin treatment was recorded while they fasted on two separate visits, at baseline and 3 months later. The AoA and LoA was measured with the appropriate spectacle correction worn. The Welch's t-test was used for comparison of the baseline measures between the normal FBS ≤ 7 (n = 10) and higher FBS > 7 (n = 20) patients, and the paired t-test used to investigate for differences between the baseline and follow-up data in patients with changes in FBS.

RESULTS

On average, the spectacle correction for the normal FBS group was marginally more myopic (RE: -0.30 ± 0.67 D vs. +0.18 ± 1.00 D, p = 0.032), and they showed greater AoA (5.38 ± 1.08 D vs. 3.68 ± 1.43 D, p < 0.001) and lower LoA (1.00 ± 0.30 D vs. 1.30 ± 0.38 D, p = 0.004) compared with the higher FBS group at baseline. On the follow-up visit attended by 25 patients, the FBS of 15 patients was reduced by an average of 7.0 mmol/L, 8 patients had an average increase of 5.2 mmol/L, while 2 patients recorded no changes relative to the baseline. The patients whose FBS was reduced showed improvement in the mean AoA from 3.78 ± 1.58 D to 4.88 ± 1.61 D (p < 0.001) and a reduction in the mean LoA from 1.37 ± 0.40D to 0.87 ± 0.19D (p < 0.001), whereas those with deteriorated control of the FBS showed an opposite trend.

CONCLUSIONS

Controlling hyperglycemia improves ocular accommodation in type-1 diabetes.

An artificial intelligence decision support system for the management of type 1 diabetes

Type 1 diabetes (T1D) is characterized by pancreatic beta cell dysfunction and insulin depletion. Over 40% of people with T1D manage their glucose through multiple injections of long-acting basal and short-acting bolus insulin, so-called multiple daily injections (MDI)^1,2. Errors in dosing can lead to life-threatening hypoglycaemia events (<70 mg dl^-1) and hyperglycaemia (>180 mg dl^-1), increasing the risk of retinopathy, neuropathy, and nephropathy. Machine learning (artificial intelligence) approaches are being harnessed to incorporate decision support into many medical specialties. Here, we report an algorithm that provides weekly insulin dosage recommendations to adults with T1D using MDI therapy. We employ a unique virtual platform³ to generate over 50,000 glucose observations to train a k-nearest neighbours⁴ decision support system (KNN-DSS) to identify causes of hyperglycaemia or hypoglycaemia and determine necessary insulin adjustments from a set of 12 potential recommendations. The KNN-DSS algorithm achieves an overall agreement with board-certified endocrinologists of 67.9% when validated on real-world human data, and delivers safe recommendations, per endocrinologist review. A comparison of inter-physician-recommended adjustments to insulin pump therapy indicates full agreement of 41.2% among endocrinologists, which is consistent with previous measures of inter-physician agreement (41-45%)⁵. In silico^3,6 benchmarking using a platform accepted by the United States Food and Drug Administration for evaluation of artificial pancreas technologies indicates substantial improvement in glycaemic outcomes after 12 weeks of KNN-DSS use. Our data indicate that the KNN-DSS allows for early identification of dangerous insulin regimens and may be used to improve glycaemic outcomes and prevent life-threatening complications in people with T1D.

Cross-sectional survey in patients with type 1 and type 2 diabetes to understand mealtime insulin unmet needs in Japan: The MINUTES-J study

AIMS

This study was conducted to evaluate existing burden and unmet needs related to mealtime insulin (MTI) injection timing among adult Japanese patients with type 1 (T1D) and type 2 (T2D) diabetes. It also aimed to evaluate if a novel MTI could reduce this burden.

METHODS

This study comprised of a qualitative pilot study facilitating development of an online survey; followed by an online quantitative survey involving T1D, young T2D (yT2D) and elderly T2D (eT2D) patients to assess burden of current MTI timings in Japan.

RESULTS

Overall, 38% patients (amongst T1D, yT2D and eT2D groups) reported injecting MTI just before start or during meal in the past month. Experiencing lower glucose level/hypoglycemic condition before the meal and forgetting were the main reasons for injecting during/after meal in T1D and T2D patients respectively. Patients reported moderate-to-severe burden in multiple aspects of their lives, associated with current MTI timing. Most patients perceived that this burden would remain the same if a faster acting MTI was available.

CONCLUSIONS

Substantial burden reported by Japanese patients regarding the current MTI timings suggests the need for new MTI products that could achieve optimal post-prandial glucose control at different timings to meet patients' needs in Japan.

Favorable Glycemic Control with Once-Daily Insulin Degludec/Insulin Aspart after Changing from Basal Insulin in Adults with Type 2 Diabetes

BACKGROUND

Conflicting results have been reported on the efficacy of insulin degludec/insulin aspart (IDegAsp) compared to basal insulin in type 2 diabetes. We investigated the effects of changing basal insulin to IDegAsp on glycemic control and sought to identify factors related to those effects.

METHODS

In this retrospective study of patients from three referral hospitals, patients with type 2 diabetes using basal insulin with hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) levels less than 11.0% were enrolled. Basal insulin was replaced with IDegAsp, and data were analyzed from 3 months before to 3 months after the replacement.

RESULTS

Eighty patients were recruited (52.5% male; mean age, 67.0±9.8 years; mean duration of diabetes, 18.9±8.5 years; mean HbA1c, 8.7%±1.0%). HbA1c levels increased during 3 months of basal insulin use, but significantly decreased after changing to IDegAsp (8.28%±1.10%, P=0.0001). The reduction was significant at 6 months in 35 patients whose longer-term data were available. Patients with a measured fasting plasma glucose (m-FPG) lower than their predicted FPG (p-FPG) by regression from HbA1c showed a significant HbA1c reduction caused by the change to IDegAsp, even without a significantly increased insulin dose. However, patients whose m-FPG was higher than their p-FPG did not experience a significant HbA1c reduction, despite a significantly increased insulin dose. Furthermore, the HbA1c reduction caused by IDegAsp was significant in patients with low fasting C-peptide levels and high insulin doses.

CONCLUSION

We observed a significant glucose-lowering effect by replacing basal insulin with IDegAsp, especially in patients with a lower m-FPG than p-FPG.

Effect of V-Go Versus Multiple Daily Injections on Glycemic Control, Insulin Use, and Diabetes Medication Costs Among Individuals with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus

BACKGROUND

Coping with discomfort and the uncertainties of daily adjustments are prominent challenges confronting individuals with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) who require multiple daily injections (MDI) of insulin. For this growing population, wearable, disposable devices capable of delivering consistent and sustained doses of basal-bolus therapy may help to alleviate concerns and improve outcomes. However, studies on the comparative effectiveness of new, innovative delivery systems versus MDI on insulin requirements, glycemic control, and health care costs are sparse.

OBJECTIVE

To examine glycemic control, insulin use, and diabetes medication costs for users of the V-Go Wearable Insulin Delivery device compared with MDI insulin therapy among individuals with T2DM in a commercially insured population in the United States.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study queried administrative claims data from the HealthCore Integrated Research Database from July 1, 2011, through July 31, 2017. Cohorts included individuals with T2DM aged 21-80 years either newly initiating V-Go or using MDI for basal/bolus insulin. The date of earliest claim for V-Go prescription fill or for bolus insulin was defined as the index date, depending on the cohort. Previous insulin therapy was required in both cohorts. Baseline hemoglobin A1c (A1c) values were identified during the 6 months before and 15 days after the index date; results closest to 12 months after the index date were selected as follow-up. Insulin use and diabetes medication cost data were examined during the 6 months baseline and the second half of the 1-year follow-up. V-Go and MDI users were 1:1 matched on baseline insulin exposure, A1c level, and other characteristics of interest. Univariate and multivariate tests were used to compare follow-up outcomes.

RESULTS

Matched cohorts included 118 well-balanced pairs (mean age: 56 years; mean baseline A1c: 9.2%). During follow-up, both cohorts experienced improvements in glycemic control relative to baseline (% with A1c ≤ 9%, baseline/follow-up: V-Go 49/69, P < 0.001; MDI 50/60, P = 0.046). With similar baseline insulin prescription fills and diabetes medication costs, V-Go users required fewer insulin prescription fills (mean change: -0.8 vs. +1.8 fills, P < 0.001; -17% vs. +38%); had a smaller increase in diabetes medication costs (mean change in 2016 USD: $341 vs. $1,628, P = 0.012; +10% vs. +47%); and a decrease in insulin total daily dose (mean change in insulin units per day: -29.2 vs. +5.8, P < 0.001; -21% vs. +4%), compared with MDI users, during the last 6 months of follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

This study was the first to evaluate clinical and economic outcomes associated with the use of V-Go for up to a 1-year follow-up period. Relative to MDI users, V-Go users had similar glycemic control but lower insulin use and lower diabetes medication costs during follow-up. V-Go therapy may provide an opportunity to improve quality measures more cost-effectively in people with T2DM who require basal-bolus therapy.

DISCLOSURES

This study was funded by Valeritas. Nguyen is an employee of Valeritas. Zhou, Grabner, Barron, and Quimbo are employees of HealthCore, which received funding for this study from Valeritas. Raval was an employee of HealthCore at the time the study was conducted. Partial findings from this study were presented at the International Society of Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research 23rd Annual International Meeting; May 19-23, 2018; Baltimore, MD; and the 54th European Association for the Study of Diabetes Annual Meeting; October 1-5, 2018; Berlin, Germany.

Medication management support in diabetes: a systematic assessment of diabetes self-management apps

BACKGROUND

Smartphone apps are becoming increasingly popular for supporting diabetes self-management. A key aspect of diabetes self-management is appropriate medication-taking. This study aims to systematically assess and characterise the medication management features in diabetes self-management apps and their congruence with best-practice evidence-based criteria.

METHODS

The Google Play and Apple app stores were searched in June 2018 using diabetes-related terms in the English language. Apps with both medication and blood glucose management features were downloaded and evaluated against assessment criteria derived from international medication management and diabetes guidelines.

RESULTS

Our search yielded 3369 Android and 1799 iOS potentially relevant apps; of which, 143 apps (81 Android, 62 iOS) met inclusion criteria and were downloaded and assessed. Over half 58.0% (83/143) of the apps had a medication reminder feature; 16.8% (24/143) had a feature to review medication adherence; 39.9% (57/143) allowed entry of medication-taking instructions; 5.6% (8/143) provided information about medication; and 4.2% (6/143) displayed motivational messages to encourage medication-taking. Only two apps prompted users on the use of complementary medicine. Issues such as limited medication logging capacity, faulty reminder features, unclear medication adherence assessment, and visually distracting excessive advertising were observed during app assessments.

CONCLUSIONS

A large proportion of diabetes self-management apps lacked features for enhancing medication adherence and safety. More emphasis should be given to the design of medication management features in diabetes apps to improve their alignment to evidence-based best practice.

Effect of V-Go Versus Multiple Daily Injections on Glycemic Control, Insulin Use, and Diabetes Medication Costs Among Individuals with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus

BACKGROUND

Coping with discomfort and the uncertainties of daily adjustments are prominent challenges confronting individuals with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) who require multiple daily injections (MDI) of insulin. For this growing population, wearable, disposable devices capable of delivering consistent and sustained doses of basal-bolus therapy may help to alleviate concerns and improve outcomes. However, studies on the comparative effectiveness of new, innovative delivery systems versus MDI on insulin requirements, glycemic control, and health care costs are sparse.

OBJECTIVE

To examine glycemic control, insulin use, and diabetes medication costs for users of the V-Go Wearable Insulin Delivery device compared with MDI insulin therapy among individuals with T2DM in a commercially insured population in the United States.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study queried administrative claims data from the HealthCore Integrated Research Database from July 1, 2011, through July 31, 2017. Cohorts included individuals with T2DM aged 21-80 years either newly initiating V-Go or using MDI for basal/bolus insulin. The date of earliest claim for V-Go prescription fill or for bolus insulin was defined as the index date, depending on the cohort. Previous insulin therapy was required in both cohorts. Baseline hemoglobin A1c (A1c) values were identified during the 6 months before and 15 days after the index date; results closest to 12 months after the index date were selected as follow-up. Insulin use and diabetes medication cost data were examined during the 6 months baseline and the second half of the 1-year follow-up. V-Go and MDI users were 1:1 matched on baseline insulin exposure, A1c level, and other characteristics of interest. Univariate and multivariate tests were used to compare follow-up outcomes.

RESULTS

Matched cohorts included 118 well-balanced pairs (mean age: 56 years; mean baseline A1c: 9.2%). During follow-up, both cohorts experienced improvements in glycemic control relative to baseline (% with A1c ≤ 9%, baseline/follow-up: V-Go 49/69, P < 0.001; MDI 50/60, P = 0.046). With similar baseline insulin prescription fills and diabetes medication costs, V-Go users required fewer insulin prescription fills (mean change: -0.8 vs. +1.8 fills, P < 0.001; -17% vs. +38%); had a smaller increase in diabetes medication costs (mean change in 2016 USD: $341 vs. $1,628, P = 0.012; +10% vs. +47%); and a decrease in insulin total daily dose (mean change in insulin units per day: -29.2 vs. +5.8, P < 0.001; -21% vs. +4%), compared with MDI users, during the last 6 months of follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

This study was the first to evaluate clinical and economic outcomes associated with the use of V-Go for up to a 1-year follow-up period. Relative to MDI users, V-Go users had similar glycemic control but lower insulin use and lower diabetes medication costs during follow-up. V-Go therapy may provide an opportunity to improve quality measures more cost-effectively in people with T2DM who require basal-bolus therapy.

DISCLOSURES

This study was funded by Valeritas. Nguyen is an employee of Valeritas. Zhou, Grabner, Barron, and Quimbo are employees of HealthCore, which received funding for this study from Valeritas. Raval was an employee of HealthCore at the time the study was conducted. Partial findings from this study were presented at the International Society of Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research 23rd Annual International Meeting; May 19-23, 2018; Baltimore, MD; and the 54th European Association for the Study of Diabetes Annual Meeting; October 1-5, 2018; Berlin, Germany.

Glucose-Responsive Composite Microneedle Patch for Hypoglycemia-Triggered Delivery of Native Glucagon

Insulin-dependent patients with diabetes mellitus require multiple daily injections of exogenous insulin to combat hyperglycemia. However, administration of excess insulin can lead to hypoglycemia, a life-threatening condition characterized by abnormally low blood glucose levels (BGLs). To prevent hypoglycemia associated with intensive insulin therapy, a "smart" composite microneedle (cMN) patch is developed, which releases native glucagon at low glucose levels. The cMN patch is composed of a photo-crosslinked methacrylated hyaluronic acid (MeHA) microneedle array with embedded multifunctional microgels. The microgels incorporate zwitterionic moieties that stabilize loaded glucagon and phenylboronic acid moieties that provide glucose-dependent volume change to facilitate glucagon release. Hypoglycemia-triggered release of structurally unchanged glucagon from the cMN patch is demonstrated in vitro and in a rat model of type 1 diabetes (T1D). Transdermal application of the patch prevented insulin-induced hypoglycemia in the diabetic rats. This work is the first demonstration of a glucose-responsive glucagon-delivery MN patch for the prevention of hypoglycemia, which has a tremendous potential to reduce the dangers of intensive insulin therapy and improve the quality of life of patients with diabetes and their caregivers.

Effectiveness of Targeted Insulin-Adherence Interventions for Glycemic Control Using Predictive Analytics Among Patients With Type 2 Diabetes: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Patient adherence to antidiabetic medications, especially insulin, remains poor, leading to adverse outcomes and increased costs. Most adherence interventions have only been modestly effective, partly because they are not targeted to patients who could benefit most.

Objective

To evaluate whether delivering more intensive insulin-adherence interventions only to individuals with type 2 diabetes predicted to benefit most was more effective than delivering a lower-intensity intervention to a larger group of unselected individuals.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This 3-arm pragmatic randomized clinical trial used data from Horizon, the largest health insurer in New Jersey, on 6000 participants 18 years or older with type 2 diabetes who were receiving basal insulin. Patients were excluded if they were insured by Medicaid or Medicare or had fewer than 3 months of continuous enrollment. The study was conducted from July 7, 2016, through October 5, 2017. Analyses were conducted from February 5 to September 24, 2018.

Interventions

Eligible patients were randomized to 3 arms in a 1:1:1 ratio. Randomization was stratified based on baseline availability of 1 or more glycated hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) test values. All arms were designed to cost the same, and each cohort received a tailored pharmacist telephone consultation varying based on (1) proportion receiving the intervention and (2) intensity, including follow-up frequency and cointerventions. Arm 1 offered a low-intensity intervention to all patients. Arm 2 offered a moderate-intensity intervention to 60% of patients based on their predicted risk of insulin nonadherence. Arm 3 offered a high-intensity intervention to 40% of patients based on glycemic control and predicted risk of insulin nonadherence.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome was insulin persistence. Secondary outcomes were changes in HbA1c level and health care utilization. Outcomes were evaluated in arms 2 and 3 vs arm 1 using claims data, intention-to-treat principles, and multiple imputation for missing values in the 12-month follow-up.

Results

Among 6000 participants, mean (SD) age was 55.9 (11.0) years and 3344 (59.8%) were male. Compared with arm 1, insulin nonpersistence did not differ in arm 2 (relative risk, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.75-1.03) or arm 3 (relative risk, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.77-1.06). Glycemic control was similar in arm 2 and arm 1 (absolute HbA1c level difference, -0.15%; 95% CI, -0.34% to 0.05%) but was better in arm 3 (absolute HbA1c level difference, -0.25%; 95% CI, -0.43% to -0.06%). Total spending and office visits did not differ, but arm 2 (moderate intensity intervention) had more hospitalizations (odds ratio, 1.22; 95% CI, 1.06-1.41) and emergency department visits (odds ratio, 1.38; 95% CI, 1.24-1.53) than did arm 1 (low intensity intervention).

Conclusions and Relevance

Compared with an untargeted low-intensity intervention, delivering a highly targeted high-intensity intervention did not improve insulin persistence but modestly improved mean glycemic control. A partially targeted moderate-intensity intervention did not change insulin persistence or HbA1c level but was associated with a small increase in hospitalizations.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02846779.

A review of sotagliflozin for use in type 1 diabetes

Type 1 diabetes is a challenging disease that is largely managed with the use of insulin. The risk of hypoglycemia, side effects of weight gain, and high glucose variability associated with insulin use have prompted researchers to explore additional therapies to treat this condition. Sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors are a class of medications that lower glucose in type 2 diabetes patients independent of insulin action, and have been studied for use in the type 1 diabetes population. Sotagliflozin is an SGLT2 inhibitor that demonstrates a unique binding affinity for the SGLT1 receptor. A total of three phase III clinical trials (inTandem1, inTandem2, and inTandem3) were conducted to evaluate the safety and efficacy of sotagliflozin in type 1 diabetes. A modest hemoglobin A1C reduction of 0.3-0.4% was observed, with secondary benefits of reduced glucose variability, reduced insulin dosage, and positive weight loss effects. Overall there was a reduction in the risk of severe hypoglycemia with sotagliflozin, but a higher rate of ketone formation and risk of diabetic ketoacidosis was observed, along with increased mycotic infections and volume depletion effects.

Concentrations of Intact Insulin Concurs With FDA and EMA Standards When Measured by HPLC in Different Parts of the Distribution Cold Chain

BACKGROUND

The article by Carter and Heinemann raised serious concerns about the concentrations of insulin in vials being sold in US pharmacies. To study the claims made in the manuscript, we reviewed Novo Nordisk data on insulin concentration.

METHODS

Insulin concentrations within vials from three different sources along the distribution chain were evaluated utilizing currently accepted US Pharmacopeia methodology: (1) insulin content and stability based on production batches covering 7 years of insulin production, (2) insulin content in samples returned to Novo Nordisk over the last three years in the United States, and (3) data from eight years of independent EMA testing.

RESULTS

The data demonstrated that without exception (1) insulin quality based on stability data was maintained, even in scenarios that stressed the normal recommendations for temperature storage conditions, (2) insulin content from the last three years of samples returned to Novo Nordisk from patients in the United States (233 vials) was within USP requirements recognized by FDA, and (3) ten years of independent EMA sampling of products obtained at wholesalers and pharmacies across the EU confirmed compliance (n = 43).

CONCLUSIONS

The study by Carter and Heinemann utilized an LC-MS technique, which has not been validated for the quantification of insulin in pharmaceutical preparations. It appears likely that their findings are the result of the method utilized and not due to decreased insulin content in samples. However, recognizing the importance of maintaining Insulin content from production to the patient, Novo Nordisk supports continued evaluation of insulin distributed to pharmacies and patients utilizing validated techniques compliant with international pharmacopeias.

Factors Associated with Insulin Nonadherence in Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus Patients in Mexico

<b><i>Background:</i></b> Lack of adherence to insulin therapy is common among patients with type 1 diabetes. Factors associated with insulin omission in adult persons with type 1 diabetes in Latin America have not been studied in detail. <b><i>Objectives:</i></b> To investigate factors associated with insulin nonadherence including the presence of psychological disorders (disordered eating behaviors and depression) in adult patients with type 1 diabetes. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> Cross-sectional study including 104 consecutive adults (≥18 years old) attending a tertiary care center in Mexico City. Adherence to insulin therapy was measured with a specific item in a questionnaire. Sociodemographic data and factors related to insulin omission, including validated questionnaires to evaluate disordered eating behavior and depression, were collected and compared between the nonadherent and adherent groups with parametric or nonparametric statistical tests, as appropriate. <b><i>Results:</i></b> We classified 51 (49.1%) patients as nonadherent and 53 (50.9%) as adherent. Adherent subjects reported that they planned their activities around insulin application more often than the nonadherent subjects did (43.4 vs. 23.5%, <i>p</i> = 0.032). In a logistic regression model, fear of hypoglycemia (OR = 11.39) and economic reasons (OR = 6.02) were independently associated with insulin adherence. Presence of disordered eating behavior was identified in 14.4% of subjects, the majority belonging to the nonadherent group. <b><i>Conclusions:</i></b> Only 50% of the patients with type 1 diabetes were adherent. The principal factors associated with nonadherence were economic reasons and fear of hypoglycemia.

Clinical and economic considerations based on persistency with a novel insulin delivery device versus conventional insulin delivery in patients with type 2 diabetes: A retrospective analysis

OBJECTIVE

Insulin is one of the most efficacious treatments for hyperglycemia; however, adherence to insulin therapy is poor, impacting its efficacy. Thus, the objectives of this study were to determine if persistent use of a new insulin delivery option, V-Go, improved clinical outcomes and secondly compare clinical and economic outcomes between persistent use of V-Go and conventional insulin delivery (CID).

METHODS

A retrospective review of an outpatient clinic's records was performed. Patients initiating V-Go with documented persistent use of V-Go or resumed persistent use of CID after short-term V-Go use were included (≥5 months of persistency). Baseline data and a total of two post-V-Go or CID initiation visits were examined for clinical and economic outcomes. Cost-effectiveness of each therapy was calculated by dividing the mean cost difference (baseline to office visit 2) by the mean change in A1c (baseline to office visit 2).

RESULTS

V-Go persistent patients had a significant decrease in A1c (-1.42; p < 0.001). Between baseline and office visit two, they required less insulin units/day and units/kg and had significantly lower A1c, insulin units/day, insulin units/kg, and 30-day insulin costs than CID patients. V-Go persistent patients had a lower incremental cost by $695.61 per 1% change in A1c compared to CID persistent patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Utilization of a new insulin delivery option resulted in improved clinical outcomes compared to CID and was more cost-effective. Clinicians and health plans should consider the use of new insulin delivery options for the management of patients with diabetes on insulin therapy to promote persistence.

Cost-related medication non-adherence among U.S. adults with diabetes

AIMS

To examine factors that affect cost-related medication non-adherence (CRN), defined as taking medication less than as prescribed because of cost, among adults with diabetes and to determine their relative contribution in explaining CRN.

METHODS

Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System data for 2013-2014 were used to identify individuals with diabetes and their CRN. We modeled CRN as a function of financial factors, regimen complexity, and other contextual factors including diabetes care, lifestyle, and health factors. Dominance analysis was performed to rank these factors by relative importance.

RESULTS

CRN among U.S. adults with diabetes was 16.5%. Respondents with annual income <$50,000 and without health insurance were more likely to report CRN, compared to those with income ≥$50,000 and those with insurance, respectively. Insulin users had 1.24 times higher risk of CRN compared to those not on insulin. Contextual factors that significantly affected CRN included diabetes care factors, lifestyle factors, and comorbid depression, arthritis, and COPD/asthma. Dominance analysis showed health insurance was the most important factor for respondents <65 and depression was the most important factor for respondents ≥65.

CONCLUSIONS

In addition to traditional risk factors of CRN, compliance with annual recommendations for diabetes and healthy lifestyle were associated with lower CRN. Policies and social supports that address these contextual factors may help improve CRN.