Continuous subcutaneous infusion of insulin lispro in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes mellitus

A comparison of the rapid-acting insulin analogue glulisine with lispro and aspart for the pump treatment of patients with type 1 diabetes

AIMS

(1) To describe the population of patients with type 1 diabetes (T1DM) using the rapid-acting insulin analogue glulisine versus lispro and aspart during continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII); (2) to describe insulin relative effectiveness based on hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), fasting blood glucose (FBG) and dose; (3) to determine rates of hyperglycemia, hypoglycemia, and diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA).

METHODS

The analysis used March 2021 data from the Diabetes-Patienten-Verlaufsdokumentation registry, which contains data of 618,903 patients with diabetes. Patients were propensity-matched by age, sex, and diabetes duration.

RESULTS

Overall, 42,736 patients of any age were eligible for analysis based on insulin pump usage with either glulisine (N = 707) or lispro/aspart (N = 42,029) between 2004 and 2020. Patients receiving glulisine were older (median 20.0 vs. 16.2 years), equally often male (47.2% vs. 47.8%) and had a longer diabetes duration (median 9.4 vs. 7.4 years). After propensity score matching, 707 pairs remained (total N = 1414). Patient characteristics between groups were similar. Achieved HbA1c values were also comparable: 8.04%, 64 mmol/mol versus 7.96%, 63 mmol/mol for glulisine and lispro/aspart [LS mean difference 0.08 (95%CI - 0.08, 0.25)]. FBG was 9.37 mmol/L (168.9 mg/dL) and 9.58 mmol/L (172.6 mg/dL) in the glulisine and lispro/aspart groups [LS mean diff. - 0.21; (95%CI - 1.13, 0.72)]. Total daily insulin doses and prandial to total insulin ratios were also similar. Glulisine group patients had higher rates of lipodystrophy (0.85% vs. 0.71%) (LS mean diff. 0.18 [95% CI - 1.01, 1.38]) and non-severe DKA (3.11% vs. 0.57%; p = 0.002). Fewer patients in the glulisine group had severe hypoglycemic events (7.66 vs. 9.09; p = 0.333) and severe ketoacidosis events (0.57% vs. 1.56%; p = 0.082) but more had hypoglycemic coma events (p = 0.773), although the differences were not statistically significant.

CONCLUSIONS

Insulin glulisine had comparable glucose control to lispro/aspart. The use of glulisine was less frequent in the present analysis compared to the previous trials.

Understanding of type 1 diabetes mellitus: what we know and where we go

The incidence of type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) in children and adolescents is increasing worldwide. Combined effects of genetic and environmental factors cause T1DM, which make it difficult to predict whether an individual will inherit the disease. Due to the level of self-care necessary in T1DM maintenance, it is crucial for pediatric settings to support achieving optimal glucose control, especially when adolescents are beginning to take more responsibility for their own health. Innovative insulin delivery systems, such as continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII), and noninvasive glucose monitoring systems, such as continuous glucose monitoring (CGM), allow patients with T1DM to achieve a normal and flexible lifestyle. However, there are still challenges in achieving optimal glucose control despite advanced technology in T1DM administration. In this article, disease prediction and current management of T1DM are reviewed with special emphasis on biomarkers of pancreatic β-cell stress, CSII, glucose monitoring, and several other adjunctive therapies.

20 Years of insulin lispro in pediatric type 1 diabetes: a review of available evidence

BACKGROUND

Insulin lispro, the first rapid-acting insulin analog, was developed 20 years ago and has been studied in multiple situations and various populations.

OBJECTIVE

To review the literature on the use of insulin lispro in children, adolescents, and young adults.

PATIENTS

Children, adolescents, and young adults with type-1-diabetes.

METHODS

One hundred and twenty-two relevant publications, identified by a systematic (MEDLINE) and manual literature search, were reviewed.

RESULTS

Multiple daily injection (MDI) treatment with insulin lispro or other rapid-acting insulins, mainly using neutral protamine Hagedorn (NPH) insulin as the basal component, was associated with reduced postprandial glucose excursions, similar or improved HbA1c levels, and similar or reduced risks of severe hypoglycemia when compared with regular human insulin across all age-groups. Continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII)-treatment with insulin lispro also showed similar or improved glycemic control vs. MDI- or other CSII-regimens across all age-groups, without increasing the rate of severe hypoglycemia. The other two more recently developed rapid-acting insulins (aspart, glulisine) demonstrated non-inferiority to lispro on HbA1c. Long-term observational studies and real-life experience indicate that the increasing use of optimized MDI- and CSII-regimens with insulin lispro was associated with improvements in overall glycemic control.

CONCLUSIONS

For almost 20 years, rapid-acting insulins, in particular insulin lispro as the first-in-class, have contributed to broadening the treatment options for the unique needs of pediatric patients with type-1-diabetes across all age-groups, and have enabled more physiological insulin administration. Now widely used, they have allowed pediatric patients to safely reach better glycemic control, with more flexibility in their daily lives.

Continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion in diabetes: patient populations, safety, efficacy, and pharmacoeconomics

The level of glycaemic control necessary to achieve optimal short-term and long-term outcomes in subjects with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) typically requires intensified insulin therapy using multiple daily injections or continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion. For continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion, the insulins of choice are the rapid-acting insulin analogues, insulin aspart, insulin lispro and insulin glulisine. The advantages of continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion over multiple daily injections in adult and paediatric populations with T1DM include superior glycaemic control, lower insulin requirements and better health-related quality of life/patient satisfaction. An association between continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion and reduced hypoglycaemic risk is more consistent in children/adolescents than in adults. The use of continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion is widely recommended in both adult and paediatric T1DM populations but is limited in pregnant patients and those with type 2 diabetes mellitus. All available rapid-acting insulin analogues are approved for use in adult, paediatric and pregnant populations. However, minimum patient age varies (insulin lispro: no minimum; insulin aspart: ≥2 years; insulin glulisine: ≥6 years) and experience in pregnancy ranges from extensive (insulin aspart, insulin lispro) to limited (insulin glulisine). Although more expensive than multiple daily injections, continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion is cost-effective in selected patient groups. This comprehensive review focuses on the European situation and summarises evidence for the efficacy and safety of continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion, particularly when used with rapid-acting insulin analogues, in adult, paediatric and pregnant populations. The review also discusses relevant European guidelines; reviews issues that surround use of this technology; summarises the effects of continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion on patients' health-related quality of life; reviews relevant pharmacoeconomic data; and discusses recent advances in pump technology, including the development of closed-loop 'artificial pancreas' systems. © 2015 The Authors. Diabetes/Metabolism Research and Reviews Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Diabetic ketoacidosis and hyperglycemic hyperosmolar state

Diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) and the hyperglycemic hyperosmolar state (HHS) are potentially fatal hyperglycemic crises that occur as acute complications of uncontrolled diabetes mellitus. The authors provide a review of the current epidemiology, precipitating factors, pathogenesis, clinical presentation, evaluation, and treatment of DKA and HHS. The discovery of insulin in 1921 changed the life expectancy of patients with diabetes mellitus dramatically. Today, almost a century later, DKA and HHS remain significant causes of morbidity and mortality across different countries, ages, races, and socioeconomic groups and a significant economic burden for society.