Comparative Benefits and Harms of Basal Insulin Analogues for Type 2 Diabetes: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis

Open questions on basal insulin therapy in T2D: a Delphi consensus

AIMS

The revolution in the therapeutic approach to type 2 diabetes (T2D) requires a rethinking of the positioning of basal insulin (BI) therapy. Given the considerable number of open questions, a group of experts was convened with the aim of providing, through a Delphi consensus method, practical guidance for doctors.

METHODS

A group of 6 experts developed a series of 29 statements on: the role of metabolic control in light of the most recent guidelines; BI intensification strategies: (1) add-on versus switch; (2) inertia in starting and titrating; (3) free versus fixed ratio combination; basal-bolus intensification and de-intensification strategies; second generation analogues of BI (2BI). A panel of 31 diabetologists, by accessing a dedicated website, assigned each statement a relevance score on a 9-point scale. The RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method was adopted to assess the existence of disagreement among participants.

RESULTS

Panelists showed agreement for all 29 statements, of which 26 were considered relevant, one was considered not relevant and two were of uncertain relevance. Panelists agreed that the availability of new classes of drugs often allows the postponement of BI and the simplification of therapy. It remains essential to promptly initiate and titrate BI when required. BI should always, unless contraindicated, be started in addition to, and not as a replacement, for ongoing treatments with cardiorenal benefits. 2BIs should be preferred for their pharmacological profile, greater ease of self-titration and flexibility of administration.

CONCLUSION

In a continuously evolving scenario, BI therapy still represents an important option in the management of T2D patients.

Efficacy and safety of basal insulins in people with type 2 diabetes mellitus: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials

Aim

The comparative effectiveness of basal insulins has been examined in several studies. However, current treatment algorithms provide a list of options with no clear differentiation between different basal insulins as the optimal choice for initiation.

Methods

A comprehensive search of MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, ISI, and Scopus, and a reference list of retrieved studies and reviews were performed up to November 2023. We identified phase III randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the efficacy and safety of basal insulin regimens. The primary outcomes evaluated were HbA1c reduction, weight change, and hypoglycemic events. The revised Cochrane ROB-2 tool was used to assess the methodological quality of the included studies. A random-effects frequentist network meta-analysis was used to estimate the pooled weighted mean difference (WMD) and odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence intervals considering the critical assumptions in the networks. The certainty of the evidence and confidence in the rankings was assessed using the GRADE minimally contextualized approach.

Results

Of 20,817 retrieved studies, 44 RCTs (23,699 participants) were eligible for inclusion in our network meta-analysis. We found no significant difference among various basal insulins (including Neutral Protamine Hagedorn (NPH), ILPS, insulin glargine, detemir, and degludec) in reducing HbA1c. Insulin glargine, 300 U/mL (IGlar-300) was significantly associated with less weight gain (mean difference ranged from 2.9 kg to 4.1 kg) compared to other basal insulins, namely thrice-weekly insulin degludec (IDeg-3TW), insulin degludec, 100 U/mL (IDeg-100), insulin degludec, 200 U/mL (IDeg-200), NPH, and insulin detemir (IDet), but with low to very low certainty regarding most comparisons. IDeg-100, IDeg-200, IDet, and IGlar-300 were associated with significantly lower odds of overall, nocturnal, and severe hypoglycemic events than NPH and insulin lispro protamine (ILPS) (moderate to high certainty evidence). NPH was associated with the highest odds of overall and nocturnal hypoglycemia compared to others. Network meta-analysis models were robust, and findings were consistent in sensitivity analyses.

Conclusion

The efficacy of various basal insulin regimens is comparable. However, they have different safety profiles. IGlar-300 may be the best choice when weight gain is a concern. In contrast, IDeg-100, IDeg-200, IDet, and IGlar-300 may be preferred when hypoglycemia is the primary concern.

Burden and Coping Strategies of Hypoglycemia in People with Diabetes

Hypoglycemia is a limiting adverse effect of glucose-lowering medications and particularly insulin replacement therapy. This review provides insights into the burden of hypoglycemia in the management of diabetes and outlines strategies available to reduce the risk of hypoglycemia and improve patients' well-being. People with type 1 diabetes are primarily affected by hypoglycemic episodes which are associated with direct physical harms like injuries and cardiac events as well as indirect psychosocial consequences including constant anxiety, absenteeism, increased healthcare costs and overall poorer quality of life. These complications are more prominent amongst individuals with hypoglycemia unawareness or overnight hypoglycemia and could even extend to caregivers such as parents of children with diabetes. Patients experiencing frequent or severe hypoglycemic events might also develop a pathological fear of hypoglycemia and adopt aberrant behaviors intending to maintain higher blood glucose levels. Modern pharmaceutical options with a safer profile in terms of hypoglycemia are available including novel basal insulins with lower rates of nocturnal hypoglycemia along with ultra-rapid-acting insulin analogs with a shorter duration of action that might avert late post-meal hypoglycemia. Continuous glucose monitoring and sensor-augmented insulin pump therapy with low glucose suspend technology can also prevent hypoglycemia, although concerns about cost and patient satisfaction remain. Advancements in insulin therapy and technological modalities should be coupled with ongoing education and support for patients to become co-managers of their disease and reduce the risk of hypoglycemia.

Management of type 2 diabetes in the new era

PURPOSE

Management of type 2 diabetes is advancing beyond glycemic control and is increasingly based on cardiovascular risk stratification. This review summarizes recent advances in the field and identifies existing knowledge gaps and areas of ongoing research.

METHODS

A bibliographic search was carried out in PubMed for recently published cardiorenal outcome trials, relevant guidelines, and studies on antidiabetic agents in the pipeline.

RESULTS

Findings from cardiovascular outcome trials support the use of glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists or sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT-2) inhibitors for patients with established cardiovascular disease or multiple risk factors, although it as yet remains uncertain whether the benefits are transferable to patients at lower absolute cardiovascular risk. Additionally, robust evidence suggests that SGLT-2 inhibitors improve clinical outcomes for people with concomitant heart failure or chronic kidney disease. Gut hormone multiagonists will likely represent another major addition to the therapeutic armamentarium for morbidly obese individuals with diabetes. Moreover, nonalcoholic fatty liver disease is a common comorbidity and several liver outcome trials are awaited with great interest. Use of insulin as first-line injectable therapy has been displaced by GLP-1 receptor agonists. Once-weekly formulations of basal insulins along with combinations with GLP-1 receptor agonists are also under development and could increase patient convenience. Technologies of glucose sensors are rapidly evolving and have the potential to reduce the burden of frequent blood glucose measurements, mainly for patients treated with intensified insulin regimens.

CONCLUSION

Management of type 2 diabetes requires a holistic approach and recent breakthroughs are expected to improve the quality of care.

Management of hyperglycaemia in type 2 diabetes, 2022. A consensus report by the American Diabetes Association (ADA) and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes (EASD)

The American Diabetes Association and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes convened a panel to update the previous consensus statements on the management of hyperglycaemia in type 2 diabetes in adults, published since 2006 and last updated in 2019. The target audience is the full spectrum of the professional healthcare team providing diabetes care in the USA and Europe. A systematic examination of publications since 2018 informed new recommendations. These include additional focus on social determinants of health, the healthcare system and physical activity behaviours including sleep. There is a greater emphasis on weight management as part of the holistic approach to diabetes management. The results of cardiovascular and kidney outcomes trials involving sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists, including assessment of subgroups, inform broader recommendations for cardiorenal protection in people with diabetes at high risk of cardiorenal disease. After a summary listing of consensus recommendations, practical tips for implementation are provided.

Management of Hyperglycemia in Type 2 Diabetes, 2022. A Consensus Report by the American Diabetes Association (ADA) and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes (EASD)

The American Diabetes Association and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes convened a panel to update the previous consensus statements on the management of hyperglycemia in type 2 diabetes in adults, published since 2006 and last updated in 2019. The target audience is the full spectrum of the professional health care team providing diabetes care in the U.S. and Europe. A systematic examination of publications since 2018 informed new recommendations. These include additional focus on social determinants of health, the health care system, and physical activity behaviors, including sleep. There is a greater emphasis on weight management as part of the holistic approach to diabetes management. The results of cardiovascular and kidney outcomes trials involving sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors and glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists, including assessment of subgroups, inform broader recommendations for cardiorenal protection in people with diabetes at high risk of cardiorenal disease. After a summary listing of consensus recommendations, practical tips for implementation are provided.

Comparative effectiveness and safety of glargine 300 U/mL versus degludec 100 U/mL in insulin-naïve patients with type 2 diabetes. A multicenter retrospective real-world study (RESTORE-2 NAIVE STUDY)

AIMS

This study assessed comparative effectiveness of glargine 300 U/mL (Gla-300) versus degludec 100 U/mL (Deg-100) in insulin-naïve patients with T2D.

METHODS

This is a retrospective, multicenter, non-inferiority study based on electronic medical records. All patients initiating Gla-300 or Deg-100 were 1:1 propensity score-matched (PSM). Linear mixed models were used to assess the changes in continuous endpoints. Incidence rates (IR) of hypoglycemia were compared using Poisson's regression models.

RESULTS

Nineteen centers provided data on 357 patients in each PSM cohort. HbA1c after 6 months (primary endpoint) decreased by - 1.70% (95%CI - 1.90; - 1.50) in Gla-300 group and - 169% (95%CI - 1.89; - 1.49) in Deg-100 group, confirming non-inferiority of Gla-300 versus Deg-100. Fasting blood glucose (BG) decreased by ~60 mg/dl in both groups; body weight remained unchanged. In both groups, the mean starting dose was 12U (0.15U/kg) and it was slightly titrated to 16U (0.20U/kg). IR (episodes per patient-months) of BG ≤70 mg/dl was 0.13 in Gla-300 group and 0.14 in Deg-100 group (p=0.87). IR of BG <54 mg/dL was 0.02 in both groups (p=0.49). No severe hypoglycemia occurred.

CONCLUSION

Initiating Gla-300 or Deg-100 was associated with similar improvements in glycemic control, no weight gain and low hypoglycemia rates, without severe episodes during 6 months of treatment.

Efficacy and Safety of Insulin Glargine 300 U/mL in People with Type 2 Diabetes Uncontrolled on Basal Insulin: The 26-Week Interventional, Single-Arm ARTEMIS-DM Study

INTRODUCTION

The efficacy and safety of switching to insulin glargine 300 U/mL (Gla-300) in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) uncontrolled on basal insulin (BI) has been demonstrated in the North American and Western European populations; however, there is limited data from other geographical regions with different ethnicities. The ARTEMIS-DM study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of Gla-300 in people with T2DM uncontrolled on BI from Asia, Latin America and Middle East Africa.

METHODS

The ARTEMIS-DM was a 26-week, prospective, interventional, single-arm, phase IV study (NCT03760991). Adults with T2DM previously uncontrolled (glycated haemoglobin [HbA1c] 7.5-10%) on BI were switched to Gla-300. The primary endpoint was change in HbA1c from baseline to 26 weeks. Key secondary endpoints were changes in HbA1c (week 12), fasting plasma glucose (FPG), self-monitored plasma glucose (SMPG) and BI dose from baseline to week 26. The safety and tolerability of Gla-300 were also assessed.

RESULTS

A total of 372 (50% male) participants were included, with mean (standard deviation [SD]) age 60.9 (10.0) years, duration of diabetes 13.11 (7.48) years and baseline HbA1c 8.67 (0.77)% (71.22 [8.44] mmol/mol). A total of 222 (59.7%) participants were using insulin glargine 100 U/mL and 107 (28.8%) were using neutral protamine Hagedorn insulin as previous BI. There were clinically significant reductions in mean HbA1c (- 0.82%; primary endpoint), FPG and SMPG levels at week 26. With a pre-defined titration algorithm, mean Gla-300 dose increased from 27.48 U (0.35 U/kg) at baseline to 39.01 U (0.50 U/kg) at week 26. Hypoglycaemia events occurred in 20.4% of the participants; 1 (0.3%) participant had a severe hypoglycaemia event.

CONCLUSION

In people with T2DM uncontrolled on previous BI, switching to Gla-300 with optimal titration guided by an algorithm was associated with improved glycaemic control and low incidence of hypoglycaemia across multiple geographic regions.

CLINICALTRIALS

GOV IDENTIFIER

NCT03760991.

The ongoing evolution of basal insulin therapy over 100 years and its promise for the future

The evolution of basal insulin therapy over the past 100 years since the discovery of insulin is a testimony to the biomedical bench-to-bedside process, wherein incremental advances in the basic sciences are progressively translated over time into a series of enhancements in clinical care, each building upon the success of its predecessors. The emergence of recombinant DNA technology and the resultant biosynthesis of human insulin in the 1980s provided the critical capacity to bioengineer designer insulin analogues with pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties that can better mimic, although not fully replicate, the effects of endogenous insulin secretion. Through these efforts, basal insulin therapy has progressed over this time from first-generation analogues (glargine U-100, detemir) to second-generation analogues (glargine U-300, degludec) to ultra-long-acting formulations that are suitable for administration once weekly (icodec). Each iteration in this progression has represented a step closer towards the goal of replicating the continuous secretion of insulin that normally comprises the basal output of the pancreatic beta-cells between meals, during episodes of fasting and overnight. However, it may be that we may have reached the achievable limit in the context of an "open-loop" approach, such that only with the addition of closed loop control will we be able to achieve physiologic basal insulin replacement. In this review, we will examine the evolution of basal insulin therapy over the past 100 years and its implications for patient care and outcomes in current practice and the future.

Efficacy and safety of different basal and prandial insulin analogues for the treatment of type 2 diabetes: a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

AIM

The aim of the present network meta-analysis is to assess the efficacy and safety across different long and short-acting analogs for the treatment of type 2 diabetes.

METHODS

A PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases search (20th May, 2020) for all trials with a duration ≥24 weeks comparing an analogue with another or human insulin was performed. Indirect comparisons were performed by NMA choosing glargine U100 and human regular insulin, as the reference for long- and short-acting analogues, respectively. Primary endpoints were HbA1c at 24, 52, and 104 weeks. The weighted difference in means (WDM) and Mantel-Haenzel Odds Ratio [MH-OR] with 95% Confidence Intervals (CI) were calculated for categorical and continuous variables, respectively.

RESULTS

Fifty trials (n = 43) and 7 for basal and prandial analogues, respectively, enrolling 25,554 and 3184 patients with type 2 and 1 diabetes, respectively, were included. At NMA, detemir was less effective than glargine U-100 at 52 weeks. A significant reduction of 24-week HbA1c (WMD [IC]: -0.10 [-0.17, -0.03]%); and risk of total (MH-OR [IC]: 0.80 [0.70, 0.91]), and nocturnal hypoglycemia (MH-OR [IC]: 0.57 [0.45, 0.73]) was observed for basal analogues versus NPH insulin. At NMA, glargine U300 and degludec were associated with a significant reduction in the risk of nocturnal hypoglycemia. No significant differences across different short-acting insulin were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

This paper supports the use of long-acting analogues, rather than NPH insulin, as basal insulin for the treatment of type 2 diabetes, without any preferences for any individual long-acting analogue over the others. The evidence on short acting analogues is limited.

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

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

Hundert Jahre – Insulin bleibt aktuell und notwendig

In der Behandlung des Typ-1-Diabetes ist die Therapie mit Insulin auch 100 Jahre nach seiner Entdeckung weiterhin eine lebensnotwendige Therapie. Der pharmakologische Fortschritt hat die Behandlung erheblich erleichtert und nähert sich der physiologischen Insulin-Sekretion zunehmend an. In der Behandlung des Typ-2-Diabetes hingegen ist die Insulin-Therapie bei den meisten Patienten zunächst nicht notwendig. Lebensstil-Interventionen und moderne Nicht-Insulin Antidiabetika können häufig zu einer lang andauernden Kontrolle der Erkrankung führen. Die Heterogenität des Typ-2-Diabetes führt jedoch dazu, dass einige Patienten früh von einer Insulin-Therapie profitieren. Auch beim Typ-2-Diabetes können moderne Insulin Präparate die Insulin-Behandlung deutlich erleichtern, auch in Kombination mit anderen Antidiabetika. Einleitung und Begleitung einer Insulin-Therapie gehören somit weiterhin zu den Kernaufgaben der Diabetologie.

Weight gain associated with insulin detemir vs insulin glargine in clinical practice: A retrospective longitudinal cohort study

PURPOSE

In comparative randomized studies, use of insulin detemir has been consistently demonstrated to be associated with less weight gain than the industry standard, insulin glargine. However, the magnitude of the relative reduction in weight gain with use of insulin determir vs insulin glargine in regulatory studies (reported values ranged from 0.77 kg to 3.6 kg) may not be generalizable to patients in real-world practice conditions. A study was conducted to substantiate detemir's purported weight-sparing advantage over insulin glargine in newly treated patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus under the conditions found in a clinical practice setting.

METHODS

A retrospective longitudinal cohort study design was applied in reviewing electronic medical records to identify insulin-naive, overweight patients with type 2 diabetes who received insulin detemir or insulin glargine therapy continued for up to 1 year. Patient weights at baseline and at each subsequent clinic visit after treatment initiation were identified. The primary outcome was the maximum weight increase from baseline after exposure to insulin detemir or glargine. The difference-in-differences (DiD) mean total body weight change was tested by analysis of covariance (ANCOVA).

RESULTS

One hundred nine patient records (56 of patients who received insulin glargine and 53 of patients who received insulin detemir) met study criteria and underwent full abstraction. The covariate-adjusted estimated mean change in body weight associated with use of insulin detemir vs insulin glargine was -1.5 kg (95% CI, -2.89 to -0.12 kg; P = 0.04).

CONCLUSION

The mean weight gain associated with detemir use was significantly less than the mean weight change observed with glargine use. The magnitude of weight change was consistent with that demonstrated in randomized controlled trials. These results further substantiate detemir's purported comparative weight-sparing properties under conditions found in a real-world practice setting.

Hypoglycemia in Older People With Type 2 Diabetes: Prevention and Treatment Strategies for Outpatient and Long-Term Care Facility Settings

Hypoglycemia in the older population is a significant problem accounting for increased hospitalizations, emergency room visits, health care costs, and decreased quality of life. Older patients are more susceptible to hypoglycemia because of the increased prevalence of comorbidities requiring multiple medications, age-related physiologic changes, and a progressive decline in health. Older patients are less likely to present with symptoms of hypoglycemia and symptoms may frequently appear at a lower threshold of blood glucose than in younger patients. Consequently, preventing and treating hyperglycemia in older patients can be challenging. If mismanaged, the impact of hypoglycemia in these patients can lead to acute and chronic negative outcomes. Insulin and sulfonylureas should be closely monitored, and deprescribing should be routinely considered in older patients at high risk for hypoglycemia.

Obesity in Patients with Type 1 Diabetes: Links, Risks and Management Challenges

Obesity affects large numbers of patients with type 1 diabetes (T1D) across their lifetime, with rates ranging between 2.8% and 37.1%. Patients with T1D and obesity are characterized by the presence of insulin resistance, of high insulin requirements, have a greater cardiometabolic risk and an enhanced risk of developing chronic complications when compared to normal-weight persons with T1D. Dual treatment of obesity and T1D is challenging and no specific guidelines for improving outcomes of both glycemic control and weight management have been established for this population. Nevertheless, although evidence is scarce, a comprehensive approach based on a balanced hypocaloric diet, physical activity and cognitive behavioral therapy by a multidisciplinary team, expert in both obesity and diabetes, remains as the best clinical practice. However, weight loss responses with lifestyle changes alone are limited, so in the "roadmap" of the treatment of obesity in T1D, it will be helpful to include anti-obesity pharmacotherapy despite at present there is a lack of evidence since T1D patients have been excluded from anti-obesity drug clinical trials. In case of severe obesity, bariatric surgery has proven to be of benefit in obtaining a substantial and long-term weight loss and reduction in cardiovascular risk. The near future looks promising with the development of new and more effective anti-obesity treatments and strategies to improve insulin resistance and oxidative stress. Advances in precision medicine may help individualize and optimize the medical management and care of these patients. This review, by gathering current evidence, highlights the need of solid knowledge in all facets of the treatment of patients with obesity and T1D that can only be obtained through high quality well-designed studies.

(Ultra-)long-acting insulin analogues versus NPH insulin (human isophane insulin) for adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus

BACKGROUND

Evidence that antihyperglycaemic therapy is beneficial for people with type 2 diabetes mellitus is conflicting. While the United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS) found tighter glycaemic control to be positive, other studies, such as the Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes (ACCORD) trial, found the effects of an intensive therapy to lower blood glucose to near normal levels to be more harmful than beneficial. Study results also showed different effects for different antihyperglycaemic drugs, regardless of the achieved blood glucose levels. In consequence, firm conclusions on the effect of interventions on patient-relevant outcomes cannot be drawn from the effect of these interventions on blood glucose concentration alone. In theory, the use of newer insulin analogues may result in fewer macrovascular and microvascular events.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effects of long-term treatment with (ultra-)long-acting insulin analogues (insulin glargine U100 and U300, insulin detemir and insulin degludec) with NPH (neutral protamine Hagedorn) insulin (human isophane insulin) in adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

SEARCH METHODS

For this Cochrane Review update, we searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, ICTRP Search Portal and ClinicalTrials.gov. The date of the last search was 5 November 2019, except Embase which was last searched 26 January 2017. We applied no language restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the effects of treatment with (ultra-)long-acting insulin analogues to NPH in adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected trials, assessed risk of bias, extracted data and evaluated the overall certainty of the evidence using GRADE. Trials were pooled using random-effects meta-analyses.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 24 RCTs. Of these, 16 trials compared insulin glargine to NPH insulin and eight trials compared insulin detemir to NPH insulin. In these trials, 3419 people with type 2 diabetes mellitus were randomised to insulin glargine and 1321 people to insulin detemir. The duration of the included trials ranged from 24 weeks to five years. For studies, comparing insulin glargine to NPH insulin, target values ranged from 4.0 mmol/L to 7.8 mmol/L (72 mg/dL to 140 mg/dL) for fasting blood glucose (FBG), from 4.4 mmol/L to 6.6 mmol/L (80 mg/dL to 120 mg/dL) for nocturnal blood glucose and less than 10 mmol/L (180 mg/dL) for postprandial blood glucose, when applicable. Blood glucose and glycosylated haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) target values for studies comparing insulin detemir to NPH insulin ranged from 4.0 mmol/L to 7.0 mmol/L (72 mg/dL to 126 mg/dL) for FBG, less than 6.7 mmol/L (120 mg/dL) to less than 10 mmol/L (180 mg/dL) for postprandial blood glucose, 4.0 mmol/L to 7.0 mmol/L (72 mg/dL to 126 mg/dL) for nocturnal blood glucose and 5.8% to less than 6.4% HbA1c, when applicable. All trials had an unclear or high risk of bias for several risk of bias domains. Overall, insulin glargine and insulin detemir resulted in fewer participants experiencing hypoglycaemia when compared with NPH insulin. Changes in HbA1c were comparable for long-acting insulin analogues and NPH insulin. Insulin glargine compared to NPH insulin had a risk ratio (RR) for severe hypoglycaemia of 0.68 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.46 to 1.01; P = 0.06; absolute risk reduction (ARR) -1.2%, 95% CI -2.0 to 0; 14 trials, 6164 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The RR for serious hypoglycaemia was 0.75 (95% CI 0.52 to 1.09; P = 0.13; ARR -0.7%, 95% CI -1.3 to 0.2; 10 trials, 4685 participants; low-certainty evidence). Treatment with insulin glargine reduced the incidence of confirmed hypoglycaemia and confirmed nocturnal hypoglycaemia. Treatment with insulin detemir compared to NPH insulin found an RR for severe hypoglycaemia of 0.45 (95% CI 0.17 to 1.20; P = 0.11; ARR -0.9%, 95% CI -1.4 to 0.4; 5 trials, 1804 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The Peto odds ratio for serious hypoglycaemia was 0.16, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.61; P = 0.007; ARR -0.9%, 95% CI -1.1 to -0.4; 5 trials, 1777 participants; low-certainty evidence). Treatment with detemir also reduced the incidence of confirmed hypoglycaemia and confirmed nocturnal hypoglycaemia. Information on patient-relevant outcomes such as death from any cause, diabetes-related complications, health-related quality of life and socioeconomic effects was insufficient or lacking in almost all included trials. For those outcomes for which some data were available, there were no meaningful differences between treatment with glargine or detemir and treatment with NPH. There was no clear difference between insulin-analogues and NPH insulin in terms of weight gain. The incidence of adverse events was comparable for people treated with glargine or detemir, and people treated with NPH. We found no trials comparing ultra-long-acting insulin glargine U300 or insulin degludec with NPH insulin.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

While the effects on HbA1c were comparable, treatment with insulin glargine and insulin detemir resulted in fewer participants experiencing hypoglycaemia when compared with NPH insulin. Treatment with insulin detemir also reduced the incidence of serious hypoglycaemia. However, serious hypoglycaemic events were rare and the absolute risk reducing effect was low. Approximately one in 100 people treated with insulin detemir instead of NPH insulin benefited. In the studies, low blood glucose and HbA1c targets, corresponding to near normal or even non-diabetic blood glucose levels, were set. Therefore, results from the studies are only applicable to people in whom such low blood glucose concentrations are targeted. However, current guidelines recommend less-intensive blood glucose lowering for most people with type 2 diabetes in daily practice (e.g. people with cardiovascular diseases, a long history of type 2 diabetes, who are susceptible to hypoglycaemia or older people). Additionally, low-certainty evidence and trial designs that did not conform with current clinical practice meant it remains unclear if the same effects will be observed in daily clinical practice. Most trials did not report patient-relevant outcomes.

A Real-World Observational Study Evaluating the Probability of Glycemic Control with Basal Insulin or Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonist in Japanese Patients with Type 2 Diabetes

INTRODUCTION

The effectiveness of basal insulin (BI) or glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) in providing glycemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) in Japanese routine practice is not well known. This real-world observational study evaluated the probability of achieving glycemic control in Japanese patients with T2D uncontrolled by oral antidiabetic drugs (OADs) who initiated BI or GLP-1 RA therapy.

METHODS

Patients with T2D aged ≥ 18 years initiating BI or GLP-1 RA therapy following treatment with OADs were selected from real-world data (RWD) retrieved from a large electronic medical record database in Japan, using data from 01 January 2010 to 30 June 2019. Patients were required to have glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) ≥ 7% within 90 days prior to the first prescription of BI or GLP-1 RA. The probability of reaching first HbA1c < 7% was assessed over a 24-month period in cohorts of patients who initiated BI (n = 3477) or GLP-1 RA (n = 780) and in subcohorts by number of OADs at baseline (1, 2, or ≥ 3), HbA1c at baseline (≥ 7 to < 8%, ≥ 8 to < 9%, or ≥ 9%), and age (< 65 or ≥ 65 years).

RESULTS

Mean (standard deviation) baseline HbA1c was 9.4% (1.8%) and 8.8% (1.4%) in patients initiating BI or GLP-1 RA therapy, respectively. The cumulative probability of achieving glycemic control was 50.1% with BI and 60.3% with GLP-1 RA therapy, respectively, at 12 months, and 60.8% and 66.6%, respectively, at 24 months. Quarterly (3-month intervals) conditional probabilities of achieving glycemic control decreased over time and were < 10% after 12 months. Patients with more OADs or higher HbA1c at baseline had a lower probability of achieving glycemic control.

CONCLUSION

Among Japanese patients with T2D who initiated BI or GLP-1 RA therapy after treatment with OADs, the probability of reaching first glycemic control diminished over time. Further therapy intensification is warranted in patients who do not achieve glycemic control within 6-12 months with BI or GLP-1 RA, particularly those with high HbA1c or taking multiple OADs.

Insulin Therapy in Type 2 Diabetes

BACKGROUND

Since the discovery of insulin, it was the only drug available for the treatment of diabetes until the development of sulfonylureas and biguanides 50 years later. But even with the availability of oral glucose-lowering drugs, insulin supplementation was often needed to achieve good glucose control in type 2 diabetes. Insulin NPH became the basal insulin therapy of choice and adding NPH to metformin and/or sulfonylureas became the standard of care until basal insulin analogs were developed and new glucose-lowering drugs became available.

AREAS OF UNCERTAINTY

The advantages in cost-benefit of insulin analogs and their combination with new glucose-lowering drugs are still a matter of debate. There is no general agreement on how to avoid inertia by prescribing insulin therapy in type 2 diabetes when really needed, as reflected by the diversity of recommendations in the current clinical practice guidelines.

DATA SOURCES

When necessary for this review, a systematic search of the evidence was done in PubMed and Cochrane databases.

THERAPEUTIC ADVANCES

Adding new oral glucose-lowering drugs to insulin such as DPP-4 inhibitors lead to a modest HbA1c reduction without weight gain and no increase in hypoglycemia. When SGLT-2 inhibitors are added instead, there is a slightly higher HbA1c reduction, but with body weight and blood pressure reduction. The downside is the increase in genital tract infections. GLP-1 receptor agonists have become the best alternative when basal insulin fails, particularly using fixed ratio combinations. Rapid-acting insulins via the inhaled route may also become an alternative for insulin supplementation and/or intensification. "Smart insulins" are under investigation and may become available for clinical use in the near future.

CONCLUSIONS

Aggressive weight loss strategies together with the new glucose-lowering drugs which do not cause hypoglycemia nor weight gain should limit the number of patients with type 2 diabetes needing insulin. Nevertheless, because of therapeutic inertia and the progressive nature of the disease, many need at least a basal insulin supplementation and insulin analogs are the best choice as they become more affordable. Fixed ratio combinations with GLP1 receptor agonists are a good choice for intensification of insulin therapy.

Exploration of temperature and shelf-life dependency of the therapeutically available Insulin Detemir

PURPOSE

Insulin, in typical use, undergoes multiple changes in temperature; from refrigerator, to room temperature, to body temperature. Although long-term storage temperature has been well-studied, the short term changes to insulin are yet to be determined. Insulin detemir (IDet) is a clinically available, slow-acting, synthetic analogue characterised by the conjugation of a C14 fatty acid. The function of this modification is to cause the insulin to form multi-hexameric species, thus retarding the pharmacokinetic rate of action. In this investigation, the temperature dependence properties of this synthetic analogue is probed, as well as expiration.

METHODS

Dynamic light scattering (DLS) and viscometry were employed to assess the effect of temperature upon IDet. Mass spectrometry was also used to probe the impact of shelf-life and the presence of certain excipients.

RESULTS

IDet was compared with eight other insulins, including human recombinant, three fast-acting analogues and two other slow-acting analogues. Of all nine insulins, IDet was the only analogue to show temperature dependent behaviour, between 20 °C and 37 °C, when probed with non-invasive backscatter dynamic light scattering. Upon further investigation, IDet observed significant changes in size related to temperature, direction of temperature (heated/cooled) and expiration with cross-correlation observed amongst all 4 parameters.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings are critical to our understanding of the behaviour of this particular clinically relevant drug, as it will allow the development of future generations of peptide-based therapies with greater clinical efficacy.

Endothelium as a Therapeutic Target in Diabetes Mellitus: From Basic Mechanisms to Clinical Practice

Endothelium plays an essential role in human homeostasis by regulating arterial blood pressure, distributing nutrients and hormones as well as providing a smooth surface that modulates coagulation, fibrinolysis and inflammation. Endothelial dysfunction is present in Diabetes Mellitus (DM) and contributes to the development and progression of macrovascular disease, while it is also associated with most of the microvascular complications such as diabetic retinopathy, nephropathy and neuropathy. Hyperglycemia, insulin resistance, hyperinsulinemia and dyslipidemia are the main factors involved in the pathogenesis of endothelial dysfunction. Regarding antidiabetic medication, metformin, gliclazide, pioglitazone, exenatide and dapagliflozin exert a beneficial effect on Endothelial Function (EF); glimepiride and glibenclamide, dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors and liraglutide have a neutral effect, while studies examining the effect of insulin analogues, empagliflozin and canagliflozin on EF are limited. In terms of lipid-lowering medication, statins improve EF in subjects with DM, while data from short-term trials suggest that fenofibrate improves EF; ezetimibe also improves EF but further studies are required in people with DM. The effect of acetylsalicylic acid on EF is dose-dependent and lower doses improve EF while higher ones do not. Clopidogrel improves EF, but more studies in subjects with DM are required. Furthermore, angiotensin- converting-enzyme inhibitors /angiotensin II receptor blockers improve EF. Phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitors improve EF locally in the corpus cavernosum. Finally, cilostazol exerts favorable effect on EF, nevertheless, more data in people with DM are required.

Glargine-300: An updated literature review on randomized controlled trials and real-world studies

Despite the availability of a variety of insulins, rates of insulinisation and the acceptance of insulin therapy is suboptimal in real-world clinical settings. Patient and physician concerns with hypoglycaemia and weight gain are the two key issues that serve to impede appropriate insulinisation in patients with diabetes. Recently introduced second-generation basal insulin analogues [for e.g., insulin glargine 300 U/mL (Gla-300) and insulin degludec] are designed to have improved pharmacokinetic profiles with an intention to deliver steady insulin levels over a longer period. Several randomised controlled and real-world studies have proven the resultant advantages of second-generations insulin analogues in lowering intra-individual variability in plasma insulin levels, flexibility in dosing, a sustained glucose-lowering effect, and decreasing the risk of hypoglycaemia. Gla-300 is one of the newer second-generation basal insulin analogues to have been approved for both type 1 and 2 diabetes. In this article, we review the currently available clinical and real-world data of Gla-300.

Efficacy and Safety of Treatment with New Basal Insulin Analogues in Type 1 Diabetes: Nation-Wide Survey

INTRODUCTION

To date, only a few studies have addressed the long-term safety of basal insulins. We have therefore investigated the efficacy and safety of all available basal insulins used in the treatment of type 1 diabetes, using data from national databases in Sweden.

METHODS

We assessed patients with type 1 diabetes who were using insulin glargine 100 U/mL (IG100) and who either continued using IG100 or switched to insulin glargine 300 U/mL (IG300) or insulin degludec (ID) for differences in clinical characteristics at baseline (index date) and subsequent changes in glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c), weight and hospitalizations caused by hypoglycaemia, cardiovascular disease or death.

RESULTS

The mean follow-up time was 1.1 years for patients who switched to IG300 and ID and 1.6 years for those remaining on IG100. There were no marked differences in clinical characteristics between the groups, but patients on IG100 were slightly older and had used insulin pumps or continuous glucose monitors more seldom. The mean HbA1c levels were similar, and 4% of the patients had a history of cardiovascular disease. HbA1c decreased in all groups during follow-up, while the body mass index remained virtually unchanged. Rates of severe hypo- or hyperglycaemia were low and similar between the groups. Sixteen patients (0.7%) treated with IG300 and 13 patients (0.8%) treated with ID died during follow-up, while 221 patients (1.95%) on IG100 therapy died. All other severe adverse events were numerically more frequent in those patients receiving IG100, while there were no apparent differences between those receiving IG300 and those on ID.

CONCLUSION

The long-term effects and safety of IG300 and ID appear to be very similar in adult patients with type 1 diabetes. The results of this study suggest that these basal insulin analogues may provide benefits compared with the established reference IG100.

Management of type 2 diabetes: consensus of diabetes organizations

Despite the advances in diabetes management, people with diabetes are not reaching their target glycemic goals. Healthcare professionals often fail to initiate, escalate, or de-intensify therapy when indicated. There are several organizations that provide guidance on the management of diabetes to assist the practitioner in achieving improved glycemic control, and this can cause confusion to the practitioner on which organizations' guidance to follow. Diabetes mellitus is associated with an elevated risk of cardiovascular disease, and there have been studies that suggest some antidiabetic medications increase cardiovascular risk and some reduce cardiovascular risk. Diabetes organizations recommend the individualization of treatment goals and choices of drug therapy that will be safe and effective. Healthcare professionals should be knowledgeable and equipped to decide on the best treatment regimen for each of their patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) and be familiar with how to utilize the different organizations' philosophies in treating their patients.

Association of Potentially Modifiable Diabetes Care Factors With Glycemic Control in Patients With Insulin-Treated Type 2 Diabetes

IMPORTANCE

Numerous factors are associated with the ability of patients with type 2 diabetes to achieve optimal glycemic control. However, many of these factors are not modifiable by quality improvement interventions. In contrast, the structure of how diabetes care is delivered, such as whether patients visit an endocrinologist or how prescriptions are filled, is potentially modifiable, yet its associations with glycemic control have not been rigorously evaluated.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the association of diabetes care delivery with glycemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes using insulin.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This retrospective cohort study used baseline claims and laboratory insurer data within a large pragmatic trial to identify individuals with type 2 diabetes using insulin with data for at least 1 hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) test result from before trial randomization (July 1, 2014, to October 5, 2016) and for key nonmodifiable patient factors as well as diabetes care delivery and behavioral factors measured before the HbA1c test. Analyses were conducted from February 4, 2017, to November 13, 2018.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Multivariable modified Poisson regression was used to evaluate the independent associations of nonmodifiable patient factors and potentially modifiable diabetes care delivery and patient behavioral factors with achieving adequate diabetes control (ie, HbA1c level <8%). The extent of measured variation explained in glycemic control by these factors was also explored using pseudo R2 and C statistics.

RESULTS

Of 1423 patients included, 565 (39.7%) were women, and the mean (SD) age was 56.4 (9.0) years. In total, 690 (48.5%) had HbA1c levels less than 8%. Age (relative risk [RR] per 1-unit increase, 1.01; 95% CI, 1.00-1.02), persistent use of basal insulin (RR, 1.20; 95% CI, 1.00-1.43), more frequent filling of glucose self-testing supplies (RR, 1.01; 95% CI, 1.01-1.02), visiting an endocrinologist (RR, 1.41; 95% CI, 1.19-1.67), and receipt of insulin prescriptions by mail order (RR, 1.23; 95% CI, 1.03-1.48) were all independently associated with adequate control. Measured potentially modifiable diabetes care factors explained more variation in adequate glycemic control than measured nonmodifiable patient factors (C statistic, 0.661 vs 0.598; pseudo R2 = 0.11 vs 0.04).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

These findings suggest that for patients with type 2 diabetes using insulin, the way in which care is delivered may be more strongly associated with achieving adequate control of HbA1c levels than patient factors that cannot be altered are. Given the potential for intervention, these care delivery factors could be the focus of efforts to improve diabetes outcomes.

Comparison of Mortality and Major Cardiovascular Events Among Adults With Type 2 Diabetes Using Human vs Analogue Insulins

Importance

The comparative cardiovascular safety of analogue and human insulins in adults with type 2 diabetes who initiate insulin therapy in usual care settings has not been carefully evaluated using machine learning and other rigorous analytic methods.

Objective

To examine the association of analogue vs human insulin use with mortality and major cardiovascular events.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This retrospective cohort study included 127 600 adults aged 21 to 89 years with type 2 diabetes at 4 health care delivery systems who initiated insulin therapy from January 1, 2000, through December 31, 2013. Machine learning and rigorous inference methods with time-varying exposures were used to evaluate associations of continuous exposure to analogue vs human insulins with mortality and major cardiovascular events. Data were analyzed from September 1, 2017, through June 30, 2018.

Exposures

On the index date (first insulin dispensing), participants were classified as using analogue insulin with or without human insulin or human insulin only.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Overall mortality, mortality due to cardiovascular disease (CVD), myocardial infarction (MI), stroke or cerebrovascular accident (CVA), and hospitalization for congestive heart failure (CHF) were evaluated. Marginal structural modeling (MSM) with inverse probability weighting was used to compare event-free survival in separate per-protocol analyses. Adjusted and unadjusted hazard ratios and cumulative risk differences were based on logistic MSM parameterizations for counterfactual hazards. Propensity scores were estimated using a data-adaptive approach (machine learning) based on 3 nested covariate adjustment sets. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to address potential residual confounding from unmeasured differences in risk factors across delivery systems.

Results

The 127 600 participants (mean [SD] age, 59.4 [12.6] years; 68 588 men [53.8%]; mean [SD] body mass index, 32.3 [7.1]) had a median follow-up of 4 quarters (interquartile range, 3-9 quarters) and experienced 5464 deaths overall (4.3%), 1729 MIs (1.4%), 1301 CVAs (1.0%), and 3082 CHF hospitalizations (2.4%). There were no differences in adjusted hazard ratios for continuous analogue vs human insulin exposure during 10 quarters for overall mortality (1.15; 95% CI, 0.97-1.34), CVD mortality (1.26; 95% CI, 0.86-1.66), MI (1.11; 95% CI, 0.77-1.45), CVA (1.30; 95% CI, 0.81-1.78), or CHF hospitalization (0.93; 95% CI, 0.75-1.11).

Conclusions and Relevance

Insulin-naive adults with type 2 diabetes who initiate and continue treatment with human vs analogue insulins had similar observed rates of major cardiovascular events, CVD mortality, and overall mortality.

Achieving Glycaemic Control with Concentrated Insulin in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes

The recent introduction of the second-generation long-acting analogue insulins degludec and insulin glargine U300 have increased the choice of basal insulin therapy for patients with type 2 diabetes. The pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties of these insulins result in a flatter profile that lasts over 24 h and provides an increased window of administration of 6 h once daily. Large-scale multicentre randomised clinical trial programmes (BEGIN for degludec U100 and U200 and EDITION for glargine U300) evaluating these insulin therapies against glargine U100 have demonstrated that they are either non-inferior or superior for glycaemic efficacy and safety, but less likely to result in severe or nocturnal hypoglycaemia than glargine U100. The disposable pen devices for these insulins have been designed with patient satisfaction and convenience in mind. No concerns have arisen with adverse events with insulin analogues or cardiovascular safety from the ORIGIN and DEVOTE trials. As they demonstrate equivalent glycaemic efficacy to other basal insulins, they should be considered more in selected patient groups including those with recurrent or increased risk of hypoglycaemia, especially severe or nocturnal episodes, in the elderly or those living alone, and in patients with multiple co-morbidities such as cardiovascular or renal disease.

Body composition changes in diabetes and aging

Aging is associated with changes in body composition, including both fat gain and muscle loss beginning in middle age, and is associated with increased risk of type 2 diabetes. Moreover, changes in fat distribution take place in adults as they age and may contribute to the increased risk of type 2 diabetes. Recent literature has shown differences in the age-related changes in body composition by diabetes status suggesting that some of these changes might not only be a risk factor of the development of diabetes but could also be a consequence of the disease. In this article, we review the current evidence on body composition changes that take place in adults after the diagnosis of type 2 diabetes and compare them to those observed in adults without diabetes as they age. We also review the effect of various lifestyle, pharmacological, and surgical treatments that lower blood glucose on body composition in adults with type 2 diabetes.

Management of diabetes mellitus and patients' attitude towards the disease: Data from a nationwide study in Greece

AIM

To examine management of diabetes mellitus (DM) and patients' attitude towards DM in a random sample of the adult Greek population.

METHODS

s: We selected a random sample of adults with self-reported DM (n = 1002) from a population-based nationwide study using the effective random sampling technique. Collection of data was performed through phone interviews.

RESULTS

Prevalence of type 1 DM was 3.5% and of type 2 DM 96.5%. Prevalence of type 1 DM declined while of type 2 DM increased with age. No gender or residency differences were found between type 1 and type 2 DM. A total of 72.0% of subjects with type 2 DM were treated with oral antidiabetic drugs (OAD), 11.5% were treated with insulin and 7.1% were treated with both OAD and insulin. Internists specialized in DM were mainly doctors who started insulin treatment. Almost half of insulin naive subjects were skeptical towards insulin initiation and their main concern was the needle punch.

CONCLUSIONS

In a random nationwide sample of the adult population in Greece the majority of subjects with self-reported DM had type 2 DM. Most patients with type 2 were treated with OAD. Almost half of insulin naive subjects were skeptical towards insulin initiation.

Therapeutic medications against diabetes: What we have and what we expect

Diabetes has become one of the largest global health and economic burdens, with its increased prevalence and high complication ratio. Stable and satisfactory blood glucose control are vital to reduce diabetes-related complications. Therefore, continuous attempts have been made in antidiabetic drugs, treatment routes, and traditional Chinese medicine to achieve better disease control. New antidiabetic drugs and appropriate combinations of these drugs have increased diabetes control significantly. Besides, novel treatment routes including oral antidiabetic peptide delivery, nanocarrier delivery system, implantable drug delivery system are also pivotal for diabetes control, with its greater efficiency, increased bioavailability, decreased toxicity and reduced dosing frequency. Among these new routes, nanotechnology, artificial pancreas and islet cell implantation have shown great potential in diabetes therapy. Traditional Chinese medicine also offer new options for diabetes treatment. Our paper aim to overview these therapeutic methods for diabetes therapy. Proper combinations of these existing anti-diabetic medications and searching for novel routes are both necessary for better diabetes control.