Inter- and intra-rater-reliability of a clinical framework for spine-related neck-arm pain

OBJECTIVE

A mechanism-based clinical framework for spine-related pain differentiates (i) somatic referred pain, ii) heightened nerve mechanosensitivity, iii) radicular pain, iv) radiculopathy and mixed-pain. This study aimed to determine the reliability of proposed framework.

METHOD

Fifty-one people with unilateral spine-related neck-arm pain were assessed and categorized by examiner-1. The classifications were compared to those made by two other examiners, based on written documentation of examiner-1. Cohens kappa was calculated between examiner-pairs; Fleiss Kappa among all examiners to assess agreement in classifying subgroups and entire framework.

RESULT

Inter-rater-reliability showed moderate to almost perfect reliability (somatic: no variation, mechanosensitivity: 0.96 (95% CI 0.87-1.0) to 1.0 (95% CI: 1.0-1.0), radicular pain: 0.46 (95% CI: 0.19-0.69) to 0.62 (95% CI: 0.42-0.81), radiculopathy: 0.65 (95% CI: 0.43-0.84) to 0.80 (95% CI: 0.63-0.96) mixed-pain: 0.54 (95% CI: 0.21-0.81) to 0.75 (95% CI: 0.48-0.94). There was almost perfect to moderate reliability among all examiners (somatic: no variation, mechanosensitivity: 0.97 (95% CI: 0.82-1.0), radicular pain: 0.56 (95% CI: 0.40-0.71), radiculopathy: 0.74 (95% CI: 0.58-0.90), mixed-pain: 0.63 (95% CI: 0.47-0.79), entire framework: 0.64 (95% CI: 0.57-0.71)). Intra-rater-reliability showed substantial to almost perfect reliability (somatic: no variation, mechanosensitivity: 0.96 (95% CI: 0.87-1.0), radicular pain: 0.76 (95% CI: 0.57-0.92), radiculopathy: 0.84 (95% CI: 0.67-0.96), mixed-pain: 0.83 (95% CI: 0.60-1.0), entire framework: 0.80 (95% CI: 0.61-0.92).

CONCLUSION

Moderate to almost perfect reliability in subgrouping people with spine-related neck-arm pain and substantial reliability for entire framework support this classification's reliability.

Phase I studies of the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of the dual glucagon receptor/glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist BI 456906

AIM

To report two phase I studies of the novel subcutaneous glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor/glucagon receptor (GLP-1R/GCGR) dual agonist BI 456906 versus placebo in healthy volunteers and people with overweight/obesity.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A phase Ia study (NCT03175211) investigated single rising doses (SRDs) of BI 456906 in 24 males with a body mass index (BMI) of 20-<30 kg/m² . A phase Ib study (NCT03591718) investigated multiple rising doses (MRDs) of BI 456906 (escalated over 6 [Part A] or 16 [Part B] weeks) in 125 adults with a BMI of 27-40 kg/m² .

RESULTS

In the SRD study (N = 24), mean body weight decreased with increasing BI 456906 dose. In the MRD study, the maximum decreases in placebo-corrected mean body weight were at week 6 (-5.79%, dosage schedule [DS] 1; Part A) and week 16 (-13.8%, DS7; Part B). BI 456906 reduced plasma amino acids and glucagon, indicating target engagement at GCGRs and GLP-1Rs. Drug-related adverse events (AEs) increased with BI 456906 dose. The most frequent drug-related AE with SRDs was decreased appetite (n = 9, 50.0%), and two subjects (8.3%) did not complete the trial because of AEs (nausea and vomiting). During MRD Part A (N = 80), 10 subjects (12.5%) discontinued BI 456906, most commonly because of a cardiac or vascular AE (n = 6, 7.5%); during Part B (N = 45), eight subjects (17.8%) discontinued BI 456906, mainly because of AEs (n = 6, 13.3%), most commonly gastrointestinal disorders.

CONCLUSIONS

BI 456906 produced a placebo-corrected body weight loss of 13.8% (week 16), highlighting its potential to promote clinically meaningful body weight loss in people with overweight/obesity.

Acute effects of linagliptin on intact and total glucagon-like peptide-1 and gastric inhibitory polypeptide levels in insulin-dependent type 2 diabetes patients with and without moderate renal impairment

AIMS

To investigate the effect of renal impairment on incretin metabolism in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) before and after treatment with the dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitor linagliptin.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Long-standing T2DM patients with normal (estimated glomerular filtration rate [eGFR] >90 mL/min/1.73m² ) and impaired (eGFR <60 mL/min/1.73m² ) renal function on stable treatment with insulin were included. Before and after 8 days of treatment with 5 mg linagliptin once daily, patients underwent a 75-g oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) and total and intact glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) and gastric inhibitory polypeptide (GIP), glucose, insulin, C-peptide and glucagon concentrations were measured. The primary outcome was the difference between the study groups in change of intact GLP-1 concentrations.

RESULTS

Of 115 patients screened, 29 were analysed (15 [51.7%] with and 14 [48.3%] without renal impairment). Renal function differed significantly between the groups (101 ± 11 vs. 47 ± 13 mL/min/1.73m² ; P < 0.0001), while glycaemic control was similar (glycated haemoglobin 68 ±  5 vs. 66 ± 5 mmol/mol; P = 0.45). Baseline GLP-1 and GIP levels were comparable. Glucose concentrations during the OGTT were significantly lowered by linagliptin treatment in patients with renal impairment (P = 0.017), but not in those with normal renal function (P = 0.17). Treatment with linagliptin resulted in a significant increase in intact GLP-1 and GIP levels in patients with normal (P = 0.048 and P = 0.0001, respectively) and impaired (P = 0.040 and P = 0.0011, respectively) renal function during the OGTT. However, the primary outcome (difference between the groups in change of intact GLP-1 concentrations) was not significant (P = 0.22). Overall, linagliptin was well tolerated.

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment with linagliptin increases intact incretin levels in patients with T2DM. Impaired renal function does not compromise the effects of linagliptin on active or total incretin levels as well as on glucagon secretion. Thus, treatment with linagliptin is suitable for patients with T2DM, independently of renal function.

Effect of upper gastrointestinal disease on the pharmacokinetics of oral semaglutide in subjects with type 2 diabetes

AIM

To investigate whether upper gastrointestinal (GI) disease has any effect on the exposure of oral semaglutide, an important consideration given that its absorption occurs primarily in the stomach.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In an open-label, parallel-group trial (NCT02877355), subjects aged 18-80 years with type 2 diabetes with mild-to-moderate upper GI disease (N = 36; chronic gastritis [n = 5], gastroesophageal reflux disease [n = 8], and both [n = 23]) or without upper GI disease (N = 19) received oral semaglutide 3 mg once daily for 5 days, followed by 7 mg for 5 days. The primary and key supportive endpoints were the area under the semaglutide plasma concentration-time curve (AUC) from 0 to 24 hours after last trial product administration on day 10 (AUC_0-24h,day10 ) and the maximum semaglutide plasma concentration (C_max,day10 ), respectively.

RESULTS

Semaglutide exposure was not statistically significantly different between subjects with and without upper GI disease. Estimated group ratios (subjects with/without upper GI disease) were 1.18 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.80, 1.75) for AUC_0-24h,day10 and 1.16 (95% CI, 0.77, 1.76) for C_max . Time to C_max and semaglutide half-life were similar in subjects with and without upper GI disease. Oral semaglutide was well tolerated; all adverse events were mild-to-moderate, with no withdrawals because of adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

There was no significant difference in exposure to oral semaglutide in subjects with or without upper GI disease, hence no dose adjustment is required.

Ultra-rapid lispro shows faster pharmacokinetics and reduces postprandial glucose excursions versus Humalog® in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus in a randomized, controlled crossover meal test early phase study

AIMS

To compare the pharmacokinetics (PK), glucodynamics (GD) and tolerability following single and multiple daily subcutaneous doses of ultra rapid lispro (URLi) and Humalog® in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2D).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was a two-part, randomized, double-blind Phase 1b study. Part A used a six-period crossover design to assess PK and GD response to a solid mixed meal tolerance test (MMTT) following a single dose of URLi or Humalog administered 15 minutes before, immediately before, or 15 minutes after the start of the meal. Part B evaluated URLi or Humalog during 2 weeks of multiple daily dosing with a parallel design. The PK and GD were assessed following MMTTs at the beginning and end of the 2 weeks when insulins were administered immediately before the start of the meal.

RESULTS

URLi increased the insulin exposure within the first 30 minutes postdose by 2.2-fold and reduced the time to the early half-maximal drug concentration by 22.6% compared with Humalog. Overall, URLi resulted in better postprandial glucose lowering when dosed before, immediately before, or after a meal. In comparing the same meal-to-dose timing between the insulins, the postprandial glucose excursion over 5 hours was significantly reduced by 29%-105% for all three dose timings (-15, 0 and +15 minutes) with URLi. The PK and GD were sustained after daily subcutaneous dosing for 2 weeks in patients with T2D. URLi had more hypoglycaemic events during the MMTTs; few events occurred for both treatments during the 2 weeks of outpatient dosing.

CONCLUSIONS

URLi demonstrated accelerated insulin lispro absorption and greater postprandial glucose reduction at different meal-to-dose timings compared with Humalog and was well tolerated in patients with T2D.

Macronutrient intake, appetite, food preferences and exocrine pancreas function after treatment with short- and long-acting glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists in type 2 diabetes

AIM

To clarify the distinct effects of a long-acting (liraglutide) and a short-acting (lixisenatide) glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1 RA) on macronutrient intake, gastrointestinal side effects and pancreas function.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Fifty participants were randomized to either lixisenatide or liraglutide for a treatment period of 10 weeks. Appetite, satiety, macronutrient intake, gastrointestinal symptoms and variables related to pancreatic function and gastric emptying were assessed at baseline and after treatment.

RESULTS

Both GLP-1 RAs reduced macronutrient intake similarly. Weight loss and appetite reduction were not related to the delay in gastric emptying or gastrointestinal side effects (P > .05). Lipase increased significantly with liraglutide treatment (by 18.3 ± 4.1 U/L; P = .0001), but not with lixisenatide (-1.8 ± 2.4 U/L; P = .46). Faecal elastase and serum ß-carotin levels (indicators for exocrine pancreas function) improved in both groups (P < .05). Changes in lipase activities did not correlate with gastrointestinal symptoms (P > .05 for each variable).

CONCLUSIONS

Both GLP-1 RAs comparably affected body weight, energy and macronutrient intake. Both treatments were associated with indicators of improved exocrine pancreas function. Reductions in appetite and body weight as a result of treatment with short- or long-acting GLP-1 RAs are not driven by changes in gastric emptying or gastrointestinal side effects.

A single-dose euglycaemic clamp study in two cohorts to compare the exposure of SAR341402 (insulin aspart) Mix 70/30 with US- and European-approved versions of insulin aspart Mix 70/30 and SAR341402 rapid-acting solution in subjects with type 1 diabetes

AIM

To compare the pharmacokinetic exposure of SAR341402 Mix 70/30 (SAR_Asp -Mix) with US- and European (EU)-approved versions of insulin aspart Mix 70/30 (NovoLog Mix 70/30 [NN-Mix-US]/NovoMix 30 [NN-Mix-EU]) and SAR341402 insulin aspart solution (SAR-Asp) in subjects with type 1 diabetes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was a randomized, double-blind, crossover trial in two cohorts. Fifty-two subjects received a single subcutaneous 0.3 U/kg dose of each treatment and underwent a euglycaemic clamp procedure lasting for a maximum of 24 hours after dosing. In cohort 1, subjects (N = 36) were exposed once each to SAR_Asp -Mix, NN-Mix-US and NN-Mix-EU. In cohort 2, subjects (N = 16) were exposed once each to SAR_Asp -Mix and SAR-Asp.

RESULTS

Of the 52 subjects randomized, 48 completed all treatment periods. In cohort 1, the extent of exposure (total and maximum concentration) was similar among the three treatments, with the 90% confidence intervals for pairwise treatment ratios meeting the predefined acceptance range (0.80 to 1.25). In cohort 2, statistically significant differences (P < .001) in early (0-4 hours) and intermediate (4-12 hours) exposure to SAR_Asp -Mix compared with SAR-Asp were observed, all exceeding a 20% difference. Pharmacodynamic results were in support of the pharmacokinetic findings for both cohorts. All treatments were well tolerated and there were no relevant differences in safety variables among treatments.

CONCLUSIONS

SAR_Asp -Mix showed similar pharmacokinetic exposure to commercially available insulin aspart Mix 70/30 formulations, and a distinct exposure profile compared with SAR-Asp.

Ultra rapid lispro lowers postprandial glucose and more closely matches normal physiological glucose response compared to other rapid insulin analogues: A phase 1 randomized, crossover study

AIMS

To compare the pharmacokinetic (PK) and glucodynamic (GD) characteristics of ultra rapid lispro (URLi; Eli Lilly and Company, Indianapolis, Indiana), Fiasp® (Novo Nordisk, Bagsvaerd, Denmark), Humalog® (Eli Lilly and Company) and NovoRapid® (Novo Nordisk), in patients with type 1 diabetes (T1D).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was a randomized, double-blind, four-period, crossover study, conducted in 68 patients with T1D. Patients received the same individualized subcutaneous dose of each study drug immediately prior to a liquid test meal. For comparison, 12 healthy subjects received the same test meal.

RESULTS

URLi had a significantly faster insulin absorption compared to the other insulins tested. Early half-maximal drug concentration was reached 13 minutes after administration of URLi, which was 6 minutes faster than Fiasp, 13 minutes faster than Humalog, and 14 minutes faster than NovoRapid (all P <0.0001). Early insulin exposure was significantly greater and late insulin exposure was reduced after URLi compared to the other insulins. URLi achieved the greatest numerical reduction in postprandial glucose (PPG) at 2 hours post-meal (7 mg/dL vs Fiasp) and was significantly different from Humalog (21 mg/dL) and Novo Rapid (29 mg/dL). Additionally, glucose excursions over the first 3 hours post-meal with URLi were comparable to those in healthy subjects.

CONCLUSIONS

URLi demonstrated the fastest insulin absorption and the greatest numeric PPG-lowering effect compared to the other insulins tested. URLi more closely matched the early physiological glucose control observed in healthy subjects.

Effects of Lixisenatide Versus Liraglutide (Short- and Long-Acting GLP-1 Receptor Agonists) on Esophageal and Gastric Function in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes

OBJECTIVE

Short-acting glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) decelerate gastric emptying more than long-acting GLP-1 RAs. Delayed gastric emptying is a risk factor for gastroesophageal reflux disease. We aimed to measure esophageal reflux and function as well as gastric emptying and acid secretion during treatment with short-acting (lixisenatide) and long-acting (liraglutide) GLP-1 RAs.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

A total of 57 subjects with type 2 diabetes were randomized to a 10-week treatment with lixisenatide or liraglutide. Changes from baseline in the number of reflux episodes during 24-h pH registration in the lower esophagus, lower esophagus sphincter pressure, gastric emptying (¹³C-sodium octanoate acid breath test), and gastric acid secretion (¹³C-calcium carbonate breath test) were analyzed.

RESULTS

Gastric emptying half-time was delayed by 52 min (Δ 95% CI 16, 88) with lixisenatide (P = 0.0065) and by 25 min (3, 46) with liraglutide (P = 0.025). There was no difference in the number of reflux episodes (mean ± SEM 33.7 ± 4.1 vs. 40.1 ± 5.3 for lixisenatide and liraglutide, respectively, P = 0.17) or the extent of gastroesophageal reflux (DeMeester score) (35.1 ± 6.7 vs. 39.7 ± 7.5, P = 0.61), with similar results for the individual GLP-1 RAs. No significant changes from baseline in other parameters of esophageal motility and lower esophageal sphincter function were observed. Gastric acidity decreased significantly by -20.7% (-40.6, -0.8) (P = 0.042) with the GLP-1 RAs.

CONCLUSIONS

Lixisenatide exerted a more pronounced influence on gastric emptying after breakfast than liraglutide. Neither lixisenatide nor liraglutide had significant effects on esophageal reflux or motility. Gastric acid secretion appears to be slightly reduced by GLP-1 RAs.

Effects of sequential treatment with lixisenatide, insulin glargine, or their combination on meal-related glycaemic excursions, insulin and glucagon secretion, and gastric emptying in patients with type 2 diabetes

AIM

To examine the glucose-lowering mechanisms of the glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist lixisenatide after two subsequent meals and in combination with basal insulin.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Twenty-eight metformin-treated patients with type 2 diabetes were randomly assigned to treatment sequences with either lixisenatide or insulin glargine alone for 4 weeks, and a combination of both treatments for 4 weeks. Metabolic examinations were performed before and after each treatment period following breakfast and a late lunch 8 hours later.

RESULTS

Lixisenatide mainly reduced postprandial glycaemia, while insulin glargine mainly reduced fasting glucose after breakfast (P < 0.05). This was partially preserved after a late lunch (P < 0.05). After breakfast, lixisenatide reduced insulin secretion and glucagon levels significantly. These effects were lost after a late lunch. Insulin glargine did not significantly reduce glucagon or insulin secretion. Gastric emptying was slowed by lixisenatide, but not by insulin glargine after breakfast. After the late lunch, lixisenatide slightly accelerated gastric emptying.

CONCLUSIONS

Lixisenatide decelerates gastric emptying after breakfast, thereby reducing glycaemic excursions, insulin secretion and glucagon levels. The glycaemic reduction persists until after a late lunch, despite accelerated gastric emptying. The combination with insulin glargine enhances the glucose-lowering effect because of complementary modes of action.

Single-Dose Euglycemic Clamp Study Demonstrating Pharmacokinetic and Pharmacodynamic Similarity Between SAR341402 Insulin Aspart and US- and EU-Approved Versions of Insulin Aspart in Subjects with Type 1 Diabetes

Background: The objective of this study was to demonstrate the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic similarity among SAR341402 insulin aspart biosimilar/follow-on product, United States-sourced insulin aspart (NovoLog^®), and European Union-sourced insulin aspart (NovoRapid^®). Materials and Methods: This was a single-center, randomized, double-blind, 3-treatment, 3-period, single-dose, crossover euglycemic study (NCT03202875) in 30 adult male subjects with type 1 diabetes (T1D). Subjects received 0.3 U/kg of each treatment under fasted conditions and underwent a 12-h euglycemic clamp technique to assess pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic activity for up to 12 h. Primary endpoints were area under the plasma insulin concentration-time curve from time zero to the last quantifiable concentration (INS-AUC_last), and extrapolated to infinity (INS-AUC_inf), maximum plasma insulin concentration (INS-C_max), and the area under the body weight-standardized glucose infusion rate (GIR)-time curve from 0 to 12 hours (GIR-AUC_0-12h) among the three treatments. GIR_max was the main secondary endpoint. Results: Of the 30 subjects randomized, 29 completed all 3 treatment periods. Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic profiles were similar in all groups. The extent of exposure (INS-C_max, INS-AUC_last, and INS-AUC_inf) and glucodynamic activity (GIR-AUC_0-12h, GIR_max) was similar among the three treatments. The corresponding 90% confidence intervals for pairwise treatment ratios were completely contained within the limits of 80%-125%. SAR341402 was well tolerated. Conclusions: The present study demonstrated similar pharmacokinetic exposure profiles and glucodynamic potency among SAR341402, NovoLog, and NovoRapid in subjects with T1D, supporting further clinical evaluation of SAR341402 as a biosimilar/follow-on product.

Acceptability of Implantable Continuous Glucose Monitoring Sensor

BACKGROUND

Real-time continuous glucose monitoring is associated with significant benefits for diabetes management. Implantable sensors could overcome some challenges reportedly associated with device visibility, psychosocial functioning and sensor durability.

METHODS

A psychosocial assessment was conducted to determine acceptability and impact of an implantable continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) sensor as part of the PRECISE trial. Questionnaires were administered to participants comprising the Diabetes Distress Scale, the CGM impact scale, and bespoke device satisfaction.

RESULTS

Fifty-one participants across the United Kingdom (n = 10) and Germany (n = 41) completed the questionnaires. Of these, 90% had T1D, 50% followed an insulin pump therapy regimen, and 45% of the participants were previous CGM users. CGM Impact Scale results show 86% (n = 44) of participants reported feeling better (14% neutral) about their diabetes control with 90% CGM naïve participants and 81% previous CGM users reporting increased confidence about their diabetes management. Furthermore, 73% (n = 37) felt more safe (27% neutral) while sleeping and 78% (n = 39) more confident (22% neutral) about avoiding serious hypoglycemia. Responses correspond with an average improvement in HbA1c from 7.51 to 7.05 ( P < .0001) over the 90 days use of the CGM. Overall, the system was rated highly on ease of use, convenience and comfort. 84% would choose to be inserted again with 93% of CGM naïve participants (86% previous CGM users) reporting minimized burden of diabetes.

CONCLUSIONS

Implantable CGM devices are acceptable to users and are evaluated favorably. The considerable majority of participants (93% of first time users and 77% previous CGM users) would like to continue using the system to help manage their diabetes more effectively.

Sequential Treatment Escalation with Dapagliflozin and Saxagliptin Improves Beta Cell Function in Type 2 Diabetic Patients on Previous Metformin Treatment: An Exploratory Mechanistic Study

We investigated the effect of sequential treatment escalation with dapagliflozin and saxagliptin on beta cell function in patients with T2DM insufficiently controlled on metformin monotherapy during a hyperglycaemic clamp investigation. Twenty-six patients (19 males, age 63.5±7.0 years; duration of diabetes 8.8±4.7 years; HbA1c 63.9±15.8 mmol/mol; mean±SD) were enrolled in the study. During a first treatment period (TP1) all patients received 10 mg dapagliflozin for one month, followed by the addition of 5 mg saxagliptin or placebo for another month (TP2). At baseline and at the end of each treatment period, fasting glucose and insulin levels were analysed, and a hyperglycaemic clamp with the measurement of plasma C-peptide, insulin, proinsulin, and glucagon was performed. Treatment with dapagliflozin reduced fasting glucose levels and insulin resistance (TP1). Within the hyperglycaemic clamp, C-peptide and insulin concentrations increased after the addition of dapagliflozin in TP1 (0.48±0.45 nmol*h/l; 6.24±17.9 mU*h/l) and further improved after the addition of saxagliptin in TP2 (0.38±0.34 nmol*h/l; 6.59±10.15 mU*h/l). Acute insulin response did not change after the addition of dapagliflozin (TP1), but significantly improved after the addition of saxagliptin in TP2 (0.89±0.76 mU*h/l). Both drugs improved the C-peptide/proinsulin ratio. After the addition of saxagliptin, the glucagon/insulin ratio significantly declined (TP2). Treatment escalation with dapagliflozin and saxagliptin exhibit additive effects on beta cell capacity, and improves alpha and beta cell integrity.

Impact of Injection Speed, Volume, and Site on Pain Sensation

BACKGROUND

Painful subcutaneous insulin injections may decrease treatment compliance. Improving injection comfort therefore represents a particular area of technological research in which steady progress has been made since the introduction of the insulin pen in 1985. Injection pain can be influenced by many variables, but relatively little is known about their impact. This study investigated the impact of injection volume (range 0-2250 µL), speed (range 0-800 µL/sec), and site (abdomen vs thigh) on pain sensation.

METHOD

In random order, patients (n = 80) with type 1 or type 2 diabetes received 24 saline injections subcutaneously through a 27G ultra-thin-wall needle. Injections were performed in the abdomen (n = 19) and thigh (n = 5) with predefined speed-volume combinations. For each injected speed-volume combination, patients scored their pain sensation on a 100 mm visual analog scale (VAS).

RESULTS

The mean pain scores for speed-volume combinations were all in the lower part (<20 mm) of the VAS, indicating zero to mild pain. Pain sensation was statistically higher ( P < .05) with the 2250 µL volume compared to other injection volumes (range 4.3-5.1 mm) and with thigh compared to abdomen injections (2.1 mm). Pain sensation did not change with increasing injection speed. Patient acceptance of the injection pain was high for all injections (range 93.7-98.7%).

CONCLUSIONS

In summary, large volume and thigh injections are rated more painful, but the clinical impact of these findings is likely marginal considering the low absolute pain levels and high patient acceptance rates. Injection speed does not influence pain sensation.

Impact of insulin glargine and lixisenatide on β-cell function in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: A randomized open-label study

It is known that β-cell function can be enhanced by direct stimulation of insulin secretion or by induction of β-cell rest, but whether both strategies can complement each other has not yet been examined. A total of 28 people with type 2 diabetes (glycated haemoglobin 7.8% ± 0.5%) were treated with either lixisenatide or titrated insulin glargine, followed by their combined administration, each over 4 weeks. First- and second-phase insulin secretion during an intravenous glucose challenge were calculated. First- and second-phase insulin secretion were not increased with glargine alone, but increased after addition of lixisenatide ( P  < .001). Lixisenatide alone increased first- and second-phase insulin secretion ( P  < .01). Addition of insulin glargine tended to further increase first-phase insulin secretion (P = .054), as well as insulin and C-peptide concentrations ( P  < .05). Second-phase insulin secretion was not affected by the addition of glargine. The sequence of initiating lixisenatide or glargine had no effect on the final measures of glycaemia or insulin secretion. Thus, lixisenatide and, to a lesser extent, insulin glargine, increase glucose-stimulated insulin secretion in an additive manner.

Understanding how pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic differences of basal analog insulins influence clinical practice

This article reviews pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic (PD) concepts relating to the pharmacology of basal insulin analogs. Understanding the pharmacology of currently available long-acting basal insulins and the techniques used to assess PK and PD parameters (e.g. the euglycemic clamp method) is important when considering the efficacy and safety of these agents, and can help in understanding the rationale for specific dosing strategies when tailoring therapy for a specific patient. Basal insulins such as insulin glargine 100 units (U)/mL and insulin detemir show improved PK/PD characteristics compared with the intermediate-acting NPH insulin, with a longer duration of action, a more consistent glucose-lowering effect and less prominent concentration peaks. However, more recently developed basal insulins (insulin glargine 300 U/mL, and insulin degludec 100 U/mL and 200 U/mL) have PK/PD profiles closer to the physiologic profile of endogenous basal insulin owing to a more evenly distributed, predictable and prolonged time-action profile that exceeds 24 hours and improved within-patient variability in glucose-lowering effect. The clinical implications and relevance of these PK/PD profiles is explored, including the potential effect of PK/PD parameters on glycemic control and hypoglycemia, and the timing of dosing. The improved PK/PD properties of newer longer-acting basal insulins may translate into clinical benefits for patients with type 1 and type 2 diabetes, such as more consistent insulin levels in the blood over 24 hours, lower intra-patient variability, a reduced risk of nocturnal hypoglycemia, and more flexibility in dosing time, all of which are important to consider when choosing a basal insulin regimen.

Consistent findings in glycaemic control, body weight and hypoglycaemia with iGlarLixi (insulin glargine/lixisenatide titratable fixed-ratio combination) vs insulin glargine across baseline HbA1c, BMI and diabetes duration categories in the LixiLan-L trial

AIMS

To assess the impact of baseline characteristics on clinical outcomes in the LixiLan-L trial, a randomized open-label trial designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of iGlarLixi, a novel fixed-ratio combination of insulin glargine 100 U (iGlar) plus lixisenatide, in comparison with iGlar over 30 weeks in a population of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) inadequately controlled on a previous regimen of basal insulin alone or in combination with 1 or 2 oral glucose-lowering drugs.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this exploratory analysis of LixiLan-L (N = 736), efficacy outcomes were assessed within population subgroups derived from the following baseline characteristics: glycated haemoglobin [HbA1c; <8%, ≥8% (<64, ≥64 mmol/mol)]; duration of T2DM (<10, ≥10 years); body mass index (<30, ≥30 kg/m² ). Furthermore, the incidence of symptomatic hypoglycaemia with plasma glucose ≤3.9 mmol/L (≤70 mg/dL) was also analysed according to the same subgroups.

RESULTS

Compared with the iGlar treatment group, patients treated with iGlarLixi showed consistently greater reductions in HbA1c during the treatment period, with higher percentages of patients achieving the HbA1c target level of <7% (<53 mmol/mol) in all of the subpopulations tested (P < .0001 for all), having consistent mitigation of body weight gain and with no major differences in the incidence of hypoglycaemia.

CONCLUSIONS

iGlarLixi consistently improved glycaemic control compared with iGlar in all baseline characteristic subgroups of patients with T2DM inadequately controlled with insulin, including difficult-to-treat subgroups of patients with long duration of diabetes, obesity and high HbA1c. Clinical trial number: NCT02058160 (clinicaltrials.gov).

Effects of semaglutide on beta cell function and glycaemic control in participants with type 2 diabetes: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS

Semaglutide is a glucagon-like peptide-1 analogue in development for the treatment of type 2 diabetes. Its effects on first- and second-phase insulin secretion and other measures of beta cell function and glycaemic control were assessed.

METHODS

In this single-centre, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group trial, conducted at the Profil Institut für Stoffwechselforschung, Germany, 75 adult (aged 18-64 years) participants with type 2 diabetes (eligibility: HbA1c of 6.5-9.0% (47.5-74.9 mmol/mol); BMI 20.0-35.0 kg/m2; and treatment with diet and exercise and/or metformin monotherapy with a dose unchanged in the 30 days prior to screening) were randomised (1:1) to once-weekly s.c. semaglutide 1.0 mg (0.25, 0.5, 1.0 mg escalated) or placebo for 12 weeks. Co-primary endpoints were changes from baseline to end of treatment in the first (AUC0-10 min) and second (AUC10-120 min) insulin secretion phases, as measured by the IVGTT. An arginine stimulation test (AST) and a 24 h meal stimulation test were also conducted. A graded glucose infusion test (GGIT) assessed insulin secretion rate (ISR) in treated participants and a group of untreated healthy participants. Safety endpoints were also assessed.

RESULTS

In total, 37 participants received semaglutide and 38 received placebo. Following IVGTT, for insulin, both AUC0-10min and AUC10-120min were significantly increased with semaglutide (estimated treatment ratio [95% CI] 3.02 [2.53, 3.60] and 2.10 [1.86, 2.37], respectively; p < 0.0001). The 24 h meal test showed reduced fasting, postprandial and overall (AUC0-24h) glucose and glucagon responses with semaglutide (p < 0.0001). The AST showed that maximal insulin capacity increased following semaglutide treatment. During GGIT, semaglutide significantly increased ISR to levels similar to those in healthy participants. Semaglutide was well tolerated.

CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION

Twelve weeks of once-weekly treatment with semaglutide significantly improved beta cell function and glycaemic control in participants with type 2 diabetes.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02212067 FUNDING: The study was funded by Novo Nordisk A/S.

Similar pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of rapid-acting insulin lispro products SAR342434 and US- and EU-approved Humalog in subjects with type 1 diabetes

AIM

To compare the pharmacokinetics (PK) and pharmacodynamics (PD) of 3 rapid-acting insulin lispro products: SAR342434 solution, United States (US)-approved Humalog and European Union (EU)-approved Humalog.

METHODS

In a single-centre, randomized, double-blind, 3-treatment, 3-period, 6-sequence, crossover, euglycaemic clamp study (NCT02273258), adult male subjects with type 1 diabetes were randomized to receive 0.3 U/kg of SAR342434 solution, US-approved and EU-approved Humalog under fasted conditions. PK and PD (glucose infusion rate [GIR]) were assessed up to 12 hours.

RESULTS

Of the 30 subjects randomized, 28 completed all 3 treatment periods. Mean concentration and GIR vs time profiles were similar for all 3 products. Exposure (INS-C_max , INS-AUC_last and INS-AUC) and activity (GIR_max and GIR-AUC_0-12h ) of SAR342434, US-approved and EU-approved Humalog were similar in all comparisons (point estimates of treatment ratios, 0.95-1.03 for PK parameters and 1.00-1.07 for PD parameters), with 90% confidence intervals for the ratios of geometric least squares means within the pre-specified bioequivalence limit (0.80-1.25) and no significant differences in time-related parameters. Within-subject variability of exposure and activity was low across the 3 clamps, indicating high day-to-day reproducibility in clamp performance, irrespective of the individual product. Adverse events were similar for all 3 products. No safety concerns were noted in vital signs or in laboratory and electrocardiogram data.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this study demonstrate similarity in insulin lispro exposure profiles and PD activity of SAR342434 solution to both US- and EU-approved Humalog, and between both US- and EU-approved Humalog, supporting the use of SAR342434 solution for injection as a follow-on product.

Effects on α- and β-cell function of sequentially adding empagliflozin and linagliptin to therapy in people with type 2 diabetes previously receiving metformin: An exploratory mechanistic study

AIMS

To investigate the effect of sequential treatment escalation with empagliflozin and linagliptin on laboratory markers of α- and β-cell function in people with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) insufficiently controlled on metformin monotherapy.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

A total of 44 people with T2DM received 25 mg empagliflozin for a duration of 1 month in an open-label fashion (treatment period 1 [TP1]). Thereafter, they were randomized to a double-blind add-on therapy with linagliptin 5 mg or placebo (treatment period 2 [TP2]) for 1 additional month. α- and β-cell function was assessed using a standardized liquid meal test and an intravenous (i.v.) glucose challenge. Efficacy measures comprised the areas under the curve for glucose, insulin, proinsulin and glucagon after the liquid meal test and the assessment of fast and late-phase insulin release after an i.v. glucose load with a subsequent hyperglycaemic clamp.

RESULTS

Empagliflozin reduced fasting and postprandial plasma glucose levels, associated with a significant reduction in postprandial insulin levels and an improvement in the conversion rate of proinsulin (TP1). The addition of linagliptin during TP2 further improved postprandial glucose levels, probably as a result of a marked reduction in postprandial glucagon concentrations (TP2). The insulin response to an i.v. glucose load increased during treatment with empagliflozin (TP1), and further improved after the addition of linagliptin (TP2).

CONCLUSION

After metformin failure, sequential treatment escalation with empagliflozin and linagliptin is an attractive treatment option because of the additive effects on postprandial glucose control, probably mediated by complementary effects on α- and β-cell function.

Once-weekly dulaglutide 1.5 mg restores insulin secretion in response to intravenous glucose infusion

AIMS

To evaluate the effects of dulaglutide 1.5 mg on first- and second-phase insulin secretion in response to an intravenous (i.v.) glucose bolus challenge, in subjects with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM; primary objective) and in healthy subjects.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, 2-period crossover study, subjects received a single subcutaneous injection of dulaglutide 1.5 mg or placebo on day 1 of each period. On day 3, subjects underwent a 6-hour insulin infusion, followed by an i.v. glucose bolus and a glucagon challenge during hyperglycaemia. Areas under the concentration-time curve and maximum concentrations for first- (AUC_0-10 and C_max0-10 ) and second-phase secretion (AUC_10-180 and C_max10-180 ) were calculated for insulin and C-peptide. The glucose disappearance constant (K_g ) and homeostasis model assessment of β-cell function (HOMA-β) were assessed.

RESULTS

In 20 subjects with T2DM, dulaglutide increased mean insulin AUC_0-10 by 7.92-fold and C_max0-10 by 5.40-fold vs placebo, and mean AUC_10-180 and C_max10-180 by 2.44- and 3.78- fold, respectively. In 10 healthy subjects, dulaglutide increased the mean insulin AUC_0-10 by 3.09-fold and C_max0-10 by 2.96-fold vs placebo, and mean AUC_10-180 and C_max10-180 by 2.04- and 4.15-fold, respectively. The corresponding C-peptide values also increased. Mean K_g and HOMA-β were higher after dulaglutide compared with placebo.

CONCLUSIONS

In subjects with T2DM, a single dulaglutide 1.5-mg dose restored the first-phase insulin secretion in response to an i.v. glucose bolus, increased the second-phase insulin response and enhanced β-cell function.

Duration of action of two insulin glargine products, LY2963016 insulin glargine and Lantus insulin glargine, in subjects with type 1 diabetes mellitus

AIMS

LY2963016 (LY IGlar) and Lantus (IGlar) are insulin glargine products manufactured by distinct processes, but with identical amino acid sequences. This study compared the duration of action of LY IGlar and IGlar in subjects with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was a randomized, double-blind, single-dose, two-period, crossover study. Twenty subjects underwent 42-hour euglycaemic clamps after a single subcutaneous 0.3-U/kg dose of LY IGlar or IGlar. In this study, the duration of action was defined as the time required for blood glucose levels to rise consistently above a predefined cut-off of 8.3 mmol/L (150 mg/dL) from a state of euglycaemia. Blood samples were collected to measure blood glucose for pharmacodynamic (PD) evaluations.

RESULTS

End of action was reached within 42 hours in 26 of 40 clamps (13 LY IGlar and 13 IGlar). The median duration of action for all subjects was 37.1 and 40.0 hours, and the mean duration of action (calculated using only patients who reached end of action) was 23.8 and 25.5 hours for LY IGlar and IGlar, respectively. The duration of action was demonstrated to be similar between the treatments using time-to-event analysis (log-rank test of equality p = .859). Following administration of LY IGlar and IGlar, the PD parameters of maximum glucose infusion rate (R _max ) and total glucose infusion during the clamp (G _tot ) were comparable.

CONCLUSION

LY IGlar and IGlar had similar duration of action and comparable PD parameters in subjects with T1DM.

Accuracy and Longevity of an Implantable Continuous Glucose Sensor in the PRECISE Study: A 180-Day, Prospective, Multicenter, Pivotal Trial

OBJECTIVE

It is known that continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) systems can lower mean glucose compared with episodic self-monitoring of blood glucose. Implantable CGM systems may provide additional benefits.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

We studied the Eversense (Senseonics Inc.) implantable CGM sensor in 71 participants aged 18 years and older with type 1 and type 2 diabetes in a 180-day multinational, multicenter pivotal trial. Participants used the CGM system at home and in the clinic. CGM accuracy was assessed during eight in-clinic visits with the mean absolute relative difference (MARD) for venous reference glucose values >4.2 mmol/L as the primary end point. Secondary end points included Clarke Error Grid Analysis and alarm performance. The primary safety outcome was device-related serious adverse events. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02154126.

RESULTS

The MARD value against reference glucose values >4.2 mmol/L was 11.1% (95% CI 10.5, 11.7). Clarke Error Grid Analysis showed 99.2% of samples in the clinically acceptable error zones A and B. Eighty-one percent of hypoglycemic events were detected by the CGM system within 30 min. No device-related serious adverse events occurred during the study.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results indicate the safety and accuracy of this new type of implantable CGM system and support it as an alternative for transcutaneous CGM.

A Comprehensive Performance Evaluation of Five Blood Glucose Systems in the Hypo-, Eu-, and Hyperglycemic Range

BACKGROUND

The objective was to evaluate the performance (in terms of accuracy, precision, and trueness) of 5 CE-certified and commercially available blood glucose (BG) systems (meters plus test strips) using an innovative clinical-experimental study design with a 3-step glucose clamp approach and frequent capillary BG measurements.

METHODS

Sixteen subjects with type 1 diabetes participated in this open label, single center trial. BG was clamped at 3 levels for 60 minutes each: 60-100-200 mg/dL. Medical staff performed regular finger pricks (up to 10 per BG level) to obtain capillary blood samples for paired BG measurements with the 5 BG systems and a laboratory method as comparison.

RESULTS

Three BG systems displayed significantly lower mean absolute relative deviations (MARD) (ACCU-Chek® Aviva Nano [5.4%], BGStar® [5.1%], iBGStar® [5.3%]) than 2 others (FreeStyle InsuLinx® [7.7%], OneTouch Verio®IQ [10.3%]). The measurement precision of all BG systems was comparable, but relative bias was also lower for the 3 systems with lower MARD (ACCU-Chek [1.3%], BGStar [-0.9%], iBGStar [1.0%]) compared with the 2 others (FreeStyle [-7.2%], OneTouch [8.9%]).

CONCLUSIONS

This 3 range glucose clamp approach enables a systematic performance evaluation of BG systems under controlled and reproducible conditions. The random error of the tested BG systems was comparable, but some showed a lower systematic error than others. These BG systems allow an accurate glucose measurement at low, normal and high BG levels.

Intradermal insulin infusion achieves faster insulin action than subcutaneous infusion for 3-day wear

Rapid uptake previously demonstrated by intradermal (ID) drug administration indicates compound delivery within the dermis may have clinical and pharmacological advantages for certain drug therapies. This study is the first clinical trial to evaluate continuous microneedle-based drug infusion, device wearability, and intradermal microneedle insulin kinetics over a multi-day (72 h) wear period. This was a single center, open-label, two-period crossover study in T1DM patients on continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII). Patients received treatment during interventional visits: one SC and one ID basal/bolus infusion of insulin aspart (NovoRapid® U-100) administered over 3 days in a randomized order. Twenty-eight patients were randomized and exposed to trial product, and 23 completed the study. Bolus insulin infusions were given prior to standardized breakfast and lunch test meals on each of the three treatment days. Blood samples were drawn at predefined time points for measurements of insulin aspart and blood glucose in serum. The primary endpoint insulin Tmax demonstrated that ID bolus infusion was associated with a significantly shorter Tmax with statistically significantly smaller intra-subject variability, compared to SC infusion, and this difference was maintained over three treatment days. Analyses of secondary PK endpoints corresponded with the primary endpoint findings. Postprandial glycemic response was significantly less pronounced after ID bolus: For most endpoints ID vs. SC, differences were statistically significant within the 0–1.5 or 0–2 h time period. Intradermal delivery of insulin is a viable delivery route alternative providing reduced time for insulin absorption with less intra-subject variability and lower glycemic response.

Preserved pharmacokinetic exposure and distinct glycemic effects of insulin degludec and liraglutide in IDegLira, a fixed-ratio combination therapy

Insulin degludec/liraglutide (IDegLira) is a novel fixed-ratio combination of the basal insulin insulin degludec (IDeg) and liraglutide, a glucagon-like peptide-1 analog. The pharmacokinetics (PK) and pharmacodynamics of IDegLira were assessed versus its components. A single-dose, randomized, 4-period crossover clinical pharmacology study in healthy subjects compared the bioavailability of IDegLira with its monocomponents. Dose proportionality, covariate effects on exposure, and exposure-response for change in glycated hemoglobin were analyzed based on data from a randomized treat-to-target phase 3 study in subjects with type 2 diabetes. Overall, the PK properties of IDeg and liraglutide were preserved for IDegLira. Liraglutide exposure was lower when dosed as IDegLira but met the criterion for equivalence. No relevant deviations from dose proportionality for the IDegLira components were observed. Covariate effects on exposure were consistent with previous results. Glycemic response to IDegLira was larger than with IDeg or liraglutide alone, reflecting their distinct glucose-lowering effects throughout the dose/exposure range.

Contrasting Effects of Lixisenatide and Liraglutide on Postprandial Glycemic Control, Gastric Emptying, and Safety Parameters in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes on Optimized Insulin Glargine With or Without Metformin: A Randomized, Open-Label Trial

OBJECTIVE

This mechanistic trial compared the pharmacodynamics and safety of lixisenatide and liraglutide in combination with optimized insulin glargine with/without metformin in type 2 diabetes (T2D).

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

This was a multicenter, randomized, open-label, three-arm trial comparing lixisenatide 20 µg and liraglutide 1.2 and 1.8 mg once daily for 8 weeks in combination with insulin glargine after optimized titration. The primary end point was change from baseline to week 8 in incremental area under the postprandial plasma glucose curve for 4 h after a standardized solid breakfast (AUC PPG0030-0430 h). Changes from baseline in gastric emptying, 24-h plasma glucose profile, HbA1c, fasting plasma glucose (FPG), 24-h ambulatory heart rate and blood pressure, amylase and lipase levels, and adverse events (AEs) were also assessed.

RESULTS

In total, 142 patients were randomized and treated. Lixisenatide 20 µg achieved greater reductions of AUC PPG0030-0430 h compared with liraglutide (marginal mean [95% one-sided CI] treatment difference, -6.0 [-7.8] h ⋅ mmol/L [-108.3 (-140.0) h ⋅ mg/dL] vs. liraglutide 1.2 mg and -4.6 [-6.3] h ⋅ mmol/L [-83.0 (-114.2) h ⋅ mg/dL] vs. liraglutide 1.8 mg; P < 0.001 for both), and gastric emptying was delayed to a greater extent than with liraglutide 1.2 and 1.8 mg (P < 0.001 for treatment comparisons). FPG was unchanged in all treatment arms. At week 8, mean ± SD HbA1c was 6.2 ± 0.4% (44 ± 5 mmol/mol), 6.1 ± 0.3% (44 ± 4 mmol/mol), and 6.1 ± 0.3% (44 ± 4 mmol/mol) for lixisenatide 20 µg and liraglutide 1.2 and 1.8 mg, respectively. At week 8, both liraglutide doses increased marginal mean ± SE 24-h heart rate from baseline by 9 ± 1 bpm vs. 3 ± 1 bpm with lixisenatide (P < 0.001). Occurrence of symptomatic hypoglycemia was higher with lixisenatide; gastrointestinal AEs were more common with liraglutide. Lipase levels were significantly increased from baseline with liraglutide 1.2 and 1.8 mg (marginal mean ± SE increase 21 ± 7 IU/L for both; P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Lixisenatide and liraglutide improved glycemic control in optimized insulin glargine-treated T2D albeit with contrasting mechanisms of action and differing safety profiles.

Low within- and between-day variability in exposure to new insulin glargine 300 U/ml

AIMS

To characterize the variability in exposure and metabolic effect of insulin glargine 300 U/ml (Gla-300) at steady state in people with type 1 diabetes (T1DM).

METHODS

A total of 50 participants with T1DM underwent two 24-h euglycaemic clamps in steady-state conditions after six once-daily administrations of 0.4 U/kg Gla-300 in a double-blind, randomized, two-treatment, two-period, crossover clamp study. Participants were randomized to receive Gla-300 as a standard cartridge formulation in the first treatment period, and as a formulation with enhanced stability through polysorbate-20 addition in the second treatment period, or vice versa. This design allowed the assessment of bioequivalence between formulations and, subsequently, within- and between-day variability.

RESULTS

The cumulative exposure and effect of Gla-300 developed linearly over 24 h, and were evenly distributed across 6- and 12-h intervals. Diurnal fluctuation in exposure (within-day variability) was low; the peak-to-trough ratio of insulin concentration profiles was <2, and both the swing and peak-to-trough fluctuation were <1. Day-to-day reproducibility of exposure was high: the between-day within-subject coefficients of variation for total systemic exposure (area under the serum insulin glargine concentration time curve from time 0 to 24 h after dosing) and maximum insulin concentration were 17.4% [95% confidence interval (CI) 15-21] and 33.4% (95% CI 28-41), respectively. Reproducibility of the metabolic effect was lower than that of exposure.

CONCLUSIONS

Gla-300 provides predictable, evenly distributed 24-h coverage as a result of low fluctuation and high reproducibility in insulin exposure, and appears suitable for effective basal insulin use.

Semaglutide, a once-weekly human GLP-1 analog, does not reduce the bioavailability of the combined oral contraceptive, ethinylestradiol/levonorgestrel

The effect of semaglutide, a once-weekly human glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) analog in development for type 2 diabetes (T2D), on the bioavailability of a combined oral contraceptive was investigated. Postmenopausal women with T2D (n = 43) on diet/exercise ± metformin received ethinylestradiol (0.03 mg)/levonorgestrel (0.15 mg) once daily for 8 days before (semaglutide-free) and during (steady-state 1.0 mg) semaglutide treatment (subcutaneous once weekly; dose escalation: 0.25 mg 4 weeks; 0.5 mg 4 weeks; 1.0 mg 5 weeks). Bioequivalence of oral contraceptives was established if 90%CI for the ratio of pharmacokinetic parameters during semaglutide steady-state and semaglutide-free periods was within prespecified limits (0.80-1.25). The bioequivalence criterion was met for ethinylestradiol area under the curve (AUC0-24 h ) for semaglutide steady-state/semaglutide-free; 1.11 (1.06-1.15). AUC0-24 h was 20% higher for levonorgestrel at semaglutide steady-state vs. semaglutide-free (1.20 [1.15-1.26]). Cmax was within bioequivalence criterion for both contraceptives. Reductions (mean ± SD) in HbA1c (-1.1 ± 0.6%) and weight (-4.3 ± 3.1 kg) were observed. Semaglutide pharmacokinetics were compatible with once-weekly dosing; the semaglutide dose and dose-escalation regimen were well tolerated. Adverse events, mainly gastrointestinal, were mild to moderate in severity. Asymptomatic increases in mean amylase and lipase were observed. Three subjects had elevated alanine aminotransferase levels ≥3x the upper limit of normal during semaglutide/oral contraceptive coadministration, which were reported as adverse events, but resolved during follow-up. Semaglutide did not reduce the bioavailability of ethinylestradiol and levonorgestrel.

Safety, efficacy and weight effect of two 11β-HSD1 inhibitors in metformin-treated patients with type 2 diabetes

AIMS

We assessed safety and efficacy of two selective 11β-HSD1 inhibitors (RO5093151/RO-151 and RO5027383/RO-838) in this randomized, controlled study in metformin-treated patients with type 2 diabetes.

METHODS

Patients either received placebo (N = 21), RO-151 BID 5 mg (N = 24) or 200 mg (N = 20) or RO-838 QD 50 mg (N = 21) or 200 mg (N = 24) for 28 days. Metabolic assessments comprising of nine-point plasma glucose profiles, oral glucose tolerance tests and determination of metabolic biomarkers including insulin, C-peptide, glucagon, HbA1c and lipids were done at baseline and end of treatment.

RESULTS

Despite the short treatment duration, both RO-151 and RO-838 showed trends for improved HbA1c and consistent reductions in body weight (-0.86 to -1.67 kg) exceeding those observed with placebo (-0.28 kg, p = 0.019 for 200 mg RO-151 vs. placebo). Insulin sensitivity parameters (e.g. HOMA-IR and Matsuda-Index) improved non-significantly with 200 mg RO-151. Lipid parameters did not consistently improve with either compound, but RO-838 led to non-significant increases in triglycerides and VLDL-cholesterol versus placebo. Both compounds were well tolerated and showed inhibitory effects on 11β-HSD1 activity based on urinary corticosteroid excretion. As reported for other 11β-HSD1-inhibitors increased concentrations of ACTH and adrenal androgen precursors were found with RO-151, but not with RO-838.

CONCLUSIONS

Slight metabolic improvements were seen, in particular with RO-151 high dose, however, the observed changes often did not reach statistical significance and were not clearly dose dependent. Studies of longer duration are needed to further investigate potential benefits and risks of these compounds.

Lixisenatide resensitizes the insulin-secretory response to intravenous glucose challenge in people with type 2 diabetes--a study in both people with type 2 diabetes and healthy subjects

AIMS

Glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists improve blood glucose control by enhancing glucose-sensitive insulin release, delaying gastric emptying and reducing postprandial glucagon secretion. The studies reported here investigated the insulin response to an intravenous (iv) glucose challenge after injection of lixisenatide (LIXI) 20 µg or placebo.

METHODS

Two single-centre, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, single-dose, crossover studies were performed in healthy subjects (HS) and people with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Participants received subcutaneous LIXI or placebo 2 h before an iv glucose challenge. Study endpoints included first- and second-phase insulin response, insulin concentration (INS), glucagon response and glucose disposal rate (K(glucose)). LIXI exposure was measured over 12 h.

RESULTS

LIXI 20 µg reached maximum concentration after 2 h and resensitized first-phase insulin secretion by 2.8-fold in T2DM to rates comparable with those in HS on placebo, and raised second-phase insulin secretion by 1.6-fold in T2DM. INS rose correspondingly and glucose disposal was accelerated by 1.8-fold in T2DM. First-phase insulin secretion and glucose disposal were also augmented by LIXI in HS, whereas second-phase insulin secretion reduced blood glucose concentrations to below fasting levels and then ceased, accompanied by a rapid, short-lasting rise in glucagon. Otherwise, suppression of glucagon release subsequent to augmentation of insulin release was unaffected in T2DM and in HS.

CONCLUSIONS

LIXI resensitized the insulin response to an iv glucose challenge in people with T2DM, thereby accelerating glucose disposal to nearly physiological intensity, and did not impair counter-regulation to low glucose levels by glucagon.

The once-daily human GLP-1 analogue liraglutide impacts appetite and energy intake in patients with type 2 diabetes after short-term treatment

The aim was to investigate effects of liraglutide on appetite and energy intake in a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, crossover study. Eighteen subjects with type 2 diabetes were assigned to treatment with once-daily subcutaneous liraglutide (increasing by weekly 0.6 mg increments) or placebo for 3 weeks. Appetite ratings were assessed using visual analogue scales during a 5-h meal test. Energy and macronutrient intake during the subsequent ad libitum lunch were also measured. After 3 weeks, mean postprandial and minimum hunger ratings were significantly lower with liraglutide 1.8 mg than placebo (p < 0.01), and the mean overall appetite score was significantly higher (p = 0.05), indicating reduced appetite. Liraglutide was associated with higher maximum fullness ratings (p = 0.001) and lower minimum ratings of prospective food consumption (p = 0.01). Mean estimated energy intake was 18% lower for liraglutide than placebo [estimated ratio 0.82 (95% CI 0.73;0.94); p = 0.004], but no significant differences in macronutrient distribution were noted. Findings suggest that reduced appetite and energy intake may contribute to liraglutide-induced weight loss.

Pharmacodynamic characteristics of lixisenatide once daily versus liraglutide once daily in patients with type 2 diabetes insufficiently controlled on metformin

AIM

Assess the pharmacodynamics of lixisenatide once daily (QD) versus liraglutide QD in type 2 diabetes insufficiently controlled on metformin.

METHODS

In this 28-day, randomized, open-label, parallel-group, multicentre study (NCT01175473), patients (mean HbA1c 7.3%) received subcutaneous lixisenatide QD (10 µg weeks 1-2, then 20 µg; n = 77) or liraglutide QD (0.6 mg week 1, 1.2 mg week 2, then 1.8 mg; n = 71) 30 min before breakfast. Primary endpoint was change in postprandial plasma glucose (PPG) exposure from baseline to day 28 during a breakfast test meal.

RESULTS

Lixisenatide reduced PPG significantly more than liraglutide [mean change in AUC(0:30-4:30h) : -12.6 vs. -4.0 h·mmol/L, respectively; p < 0.0001 (0:30 h = start of meal)]. Change in maximum PPG excursion was -3.9 mmol/l vs. -1.4 mmol/l, respectively (p < 0.0001). More lixisenatide-treated patients achieved 2-h PPG <7.8 mmol/l (69% vs. 29%). Changes in fasting plasma glucose were greater with liraglutide (-0.3 vs. -1.3 mmol/l, p < 0.0001). Lixisenatide provided greater decreases in postprandial glucagon (p < 0.05), insulin (p < 0.0001) and C-peptide (p < 0.0001). Mean HbA1c decreased in both treatment groups (from 7.2% to 6.9% with lixisenatide vs. 7.4% to 6.9% with liraglutide) as did body weight (-1.6 kg vs. -2.4 kg, respectively). Overall incidence of adverse events was lower with lixisenatide (55%) versus liraglutide (65%), with no serious events or hypoglycaemia reported.

CONCLUSIONS

Once daily prebreakfast lixisenatide provided a significantly greater reduction in PPG (AUC) during a morning test meal versus prebreakfast liraglutide. Lixisenatide provided significant decreases in postprandial insulin, C-peptide (vs. an increase with liraglutide) and glucagon, and better gastrointestinal tolerability than liraglutide.

Hyperglycaemia is associated with impaired pulsatile insulin secretion: effect of basal insulin therapy

AIM

Postprandial insulin pulsatility is impaired in patients with type 2 diabetes, but the effects of exogenous insulin therapy on pulsatile insulin secretion are not known. We addressed, whether pulsatile insulin secretion is related to glycaemic control, whether basal insulin supplementation increases postprandial insulin secretion, and if so, is this accomplished by a specific improvement in pulsatile insulin secretion?

METHODS

Fourteen patients with type 2 diabetes underwent a mixed meal test before and after an 8-week treatment period with insulin glargine. Glucose, insulin and C-peptide levels were measured, and insulin pulsatility was determined by deconvolution analysis.

RESULTS

Insulin treatment lowered fasting glycaemia from 179.6 ± 7.5 mg/dl to 117.6 ± 6.5 mg/dl (p < 0.001). Postprandial insulin and C-peptide levels increased significantly after the treatment period (p < 0.0001). The total calculated insulin secretion rate increased with insulin treatment (p = 0.0039), with non-significant increases in both pulsatile and non-pulsatile insulin secretion. Insulin pulse frequency was unchanged by the intervention. There was an inverse relationship between fasting and postprandial glycaemia and insulin pulse mass (r(2) = 0.51 and 0.56, respectively), whereas non-pulsatile insulin secretion was unrelated to either fasting or postprandial glucose concentrations (r(2) = 0.0073 and 0.031).

CONCLUSIONS

Hyperglycaemia in type 2 diabetes is associated with a reduction in postprandial insulin secretion, specifically through a reduction in insulin pulsatility. Reducing chronic hyperglycaemia by basal insulin therapy enhances endogenous β-cell function in the postprandial state. These data support the use of basal insulin regimens in the pharmacotherapy of overtly hyperglycaemic patients with type 2 diabetes.

Effect of the once-daily human GLP-1 analogue liraglutide on appetite, energy intake, energy expenditure and gastric emptying in type 2 diabetes

AIMS

Liraglutide reduces bodyweight in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). This study aimed to investigate the mechanisms underlying this effect.

METHODS

The comparative effects of liraglutide, glimepiride and placebo on energy intake, appetite, nausea, gastric emptying, antral distension, bodyweight, gastrointestinal hormones, fasting plasma glucose and resting energy expenditure (REE), were assessed in subjects with T2DM randomised to treatment A (liraglutide-placebo), B (placebo-glimepiride) or C (glimepiride-liraglutide). Assessments were performed at the end of each 4-week treatment period.

RESULTS

Energy intake was less (NS) with liraglutide vs placebo and glimepiride, and 24-h REE was higher (NS) with liraglutide vs placebo and glimepiride. Fasting hunger was less (p=0.01) with liraglutide vs placebo and glimepiride, and meal duration was shorter with liraglutide (p=0.002) vs placebo. Paracetamol AUC(0-60 min) and C(max) were less (p<0.01) and fasting peptide YY was lower (p ≤ 0.001) after liraglutide vs placebo and glimepiride. Bodyweight reductions of 1.3 and 2.0 kg were observed with liraglutide vs placebo and glimepiride (p<0.001). There were no differences on antral distension, nausea, or other gastro-intestinal hormones.

CONCLUSION

Liraglutide caused decreased gastric emptying and increased reduction in bodyweight. The mechanisms of the liraglutide-induced weight-loss may involve a combined effect on energy intake and energy expenditure.

Pharmacokinetics and postprandial glycemic excursions following insulin lispro delivered by intradermal microneedle or subcutaneous infusion

BACKGROUND

Intradermal (ID) delivery has been shown to accelerate insulin pharmacokinetics (PK). We compared the PK and pharmacodynamic (PD) effects of insulin lispro administered before two daily standardized solid mixed meals (breakfast and lunch), using microneedle-based ID or traditional subcutaneous (SC) delivery.

METHOD

The study included 22 subjects with type 1 diabetes in an eight-arm full crossover block design. One arm established each subject's optimal meal dose. In six additional arms, the optimal, higher, and lower doses (+30%, -30%) were each given ID and SC delivery, in random order. The final arm assessed earlier timing for the ID optimal dose (-12 versus -2 min). The PK/PD data were collected for 6 h following meals. Intravenous basal regular insulin was given throughout, and premeal blood glucose (BG) adjusted to 115 mg/dl.

RESULTS

The primary end point, postprandial time in range (70-180 mg/dl), showed no route-based differences with a high level of overall BG control for both SC and ID delivery. Secondary insulin PK end points showed more rapid ID availability versus SC across doses and meals (∆Tmax -16 min, ∆T50rising -7 min, ∆T50falling -30 min, all p < .05). Both intrasubject and intersubject variability for ID Tmax were significantly lower. Intradermal delivery showed modest, statistically significant secondary PD differences across doses and meals, generally within 90-120 min postprandially (∆12 mg/dl BG at 90 min, ∆7 mg/dl BGmax, ∆7 mg/dl mean BG 0-2 h, all p < .05).

CONCLUSIONS

This study indicates that ID insulin delivery is superior to SC delivery in speed of systemic availability and PK consistency and may improve postprandial glucose control.

Remogliflozin etabonate, a selective inhibitor of the sodium-dependent transporter 2 reduces serum glucose in type 2 diabetes mellitus patients

AIMS

Remogliflozin etabonate (RE) is the pro-drug of remogliflozin (R), a selective inhibitor of renal sodium-dependent glucose transporter 2 (SGLT2) that improves glucose control via enhanced urinary glucose excretion (UGE). This study evaluated the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of repeated doses of RE in subjects with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM).

METHODS

In a double-blinded, randomized, placebo-controlled trial, subjects who were drug-naïve or had metformin discontinued received RE [100 mg BID (n = 9), 1000 mg QD (n = 9), 1000 mg BID (n = 9)], or placebo (n = 8) for 12 days. Safety parameters were assessed, including urine studies to evaluate renal function. Plasma concentrations of RE and metabolites were measured with the first dose and at steady state. RE effects on glucose levels were assessed with fasting glucose concentrations, frequently sampled 24-h glucose profiles and oral glucose tolerance tests.

RESULTS

No significant laboratory abnormalities or safety events were reported; the most frequent adverse events were headache and flatulence. Plasma exposure to RE and R were proportional to administered dose with negligible accumulation. Mean 24-h UGE increased in RE treatment groups. Compared with the placebo group, 24-h mean (95% CI) changes in plasma glucose were -1.2 (-2.2 to -0.3) (100 mg BID), -0.8 (-1.7 to 0.2) (1000 mg QD) and -1.7 (-2.7 to -0.8) mmol/l (1000 mg BID).

CONCLUSIONS

Administration of RE for 12 days is well-tolerated and results in clinically meaningful improvements in plasma glucose, accompanied by changes in body weight and blood pressure in subjects with T2DM.

The effect of the once-daily human glucagon-like peptide 1 analog liraglutide on the pharmacokinetics of acetaminophen

INTRODUCTION

Acetaminophen is a commonly used analgesic and antipyretic drug, and is frequently used to study gastric emptying. Due to its high permeability and high solubility, acetaminophen can be used as a pharmacologic model for medications with similar characteristics. The objective of this study was to assess the effect of liraglutide on the pharmacokinetics (PK) of acetaminophen in patients with type 2 diabetes.

METHODS

This was a randomized, placebo-controlled, two-period crossover trial in which subjects with type 2 diabetes received placebo or liraglutide. After steady state PK of liraglutide 1.8 mg/ placebo were established, a single dose of acetaminophen 1 g was administered at the time of liraglutide C(max) (maximum concentration). The PK profile of acetaminophen was assessed at 18 time points during the 8-hour post-dosing period. Placebo and liraglutide were considered equivalent with respect to area under the curve (AUC)(0-∞) and AUC(0-480) min of acetaminophen if the 90% CI for the ratio was fully contained within the limits of 0.80 to 1.25.

RESULTS

All subjects (n=18; mean [SD] age 59 [7] years, body mass index [BMI] 29.7 [4.2] kg/m(2), and glycated hemoglobin [HbA(1c)] 7.8% [0.6%]) completed the study. Equivalence was demonstrated between liraglutide 1.8 mg at steady state and placebo, with respect to acetaminophen AUC(0-∞) (estimated ratio 1.04; 90% CI: 0.97, 1.10) and acetaminophen AUC(0-480) min (estimated ratio 0.95; 90% CI: 0.89, 1.01). During liraglutide, a lower C(max) was observed (estimated ratio 0.69; 90% CI: 0.56, 0.85) and the median acetaminophen t(max) occurred 15 minutes later compared with placebo.

CONCLUSION

The overall exposure of acetaminophen following a 1 g dose was comparable for subjects taking liraglutide or placebo, and the clinical impact of the lower C(max) and delay in absorption of acetaminophen was considered to be transient and small, and without clinical relevance. No adjustment for acetaminophen is recommended when used concomitantly with liraglutide.

Microneedle-based intradermal versus subcutaneous administration of regular human insulin or insulin lispro: pharmacokinetics and postprandial glycemic excursions in patients with type 1 diabetes

BACKGROUND

This study assessed pharmacokinetics (PK) and pharmacodynamic postprandial glycemia (PPG) in patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) after a standardized liquid meal following insulin lispro (IL) or regular human insulin (RHI) given by microneedle-based intradermal (ID) versus subcutaneous (SC) delivery.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

In this randomized, open-label, five-way crossover study, 29 T1DM patients received IL and RHI (0.125 U/kg) at 2 min and 17 min premeal, respectively, by both the SC and ID routes and also received RHI by the ID route at 2 min premeal. Blood glucose was stabilized at 120 mg/dL prior to a standardized 82-g carbohydrate liquid meal. ID delivery used a 34-gauge 1.5-mm steel microneedle, and SC delivery used a 31-gauge 8-mm syringe needle.

RESULTS

The 90-min PPG (blood glucose area under the curve for 0-1.5 h) for ID RHI was 14% lower than SC RHI at -17 min (P < 0.0001) and 11% lower than ID RHI at -2 min (P = 0.0006). PPG did not differ between ID RHI and SC IL, both at -2 min (P = 0.8345). ID IL PPG was lower than SC, both at -2 min, but not significantly (P = 0.10). Both ID IL and ID RHI PK data showed significantly faster uptake and time to maximum concentration, higher maximum concentration, and shorter systemic circulating duration versus SC dosing. ID IL and RHI delivery was generally well tolerated.

CONCLUSIONS

PPG with RHI administered ID via microneedle was improved versus SC delivery when dosed 17 min premeal. ID RHI provided similar control of PPG as SC IL immediately premeal. Further studies of ID insulin delivery via steel microneedles are warranted.

Intradermal microneedle delivery of insulin lispro achieves faster insulin absorption and insulin action than subcutaneous injection

BACKGROUND

This study compared insulin lispro (IL) pharmacokinetics (PK) and pharmacodynamics (PD) delivered via microneedle intradermal (ID) injection with subcutaneous (SC) injection under euglycemic glucose clamp conditions.

METHODS

Ten healthy male volunteers were administered 10 international units (IU) of IL at 3 microneedle lengths (1.25, 1.50, or 1.75 mm) in a randomized, crossover fashion on Days 1-3 followed by a repetitive ID 1.5-mm microneedle dose (Day 4) and an SC dose (Day 5).

RESULTS

Microneedle ID delivery resulted in more rapid absorption of IL, with decreased time to maximum insulin concentration (ID vs. SC: 36.0-46.4 vs. 64.3 min, P < 0.05) and higher fractional availability at early postinjection times. ID produced more rapid effects on glucose uptake with shorter times to maximal and early half-maximal glucose infusion rates (GIRs) (ID vs. SC: time to maximum GIR, 106-112 vs. 130 min, P < 0.05; early half-maximal GIR, 29-35 vs. 42 min), increased early GIR area under the curve (AUC), and faster offset of insulin action (shorter time to late half-maximal GIR: 271-287 vs. 309 min). Relative total insulin bioavailability (AUC to 360 min and AUC to infinite measurement) did not significantly differ between administration routes. ID PK/PD parameters showed some variation as a function of needle length. Delivery of ID IL was generally well tolerated, although transient, localized wheal formation and redness were observed at injection sites.

CONCLUSIONS

Microneedle ID insulin lispro delivery enables more rapid onset and offset of metabolic effect than SC therapy and is safe and well tolerated; further study for insulin therapy is warranted.

Piragliatin (RO4389620), a novel glucokinase activator, lowers plasma glucose both in the postabsorptive state and after a glucose challenge in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: a mechanistic study

CONTEXT

Glucokinase plays a key role in glucose homeostasis. Glucokinase activators can lower glucose levels in both animal and human type 2 diabetes, but their mechanism of action has never been explored in humans.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of the study was to investigate the effects of the glucokinase activator piragliatin (RO4389620) on β-cell function and glucose fluxes in both fasting and fed (oral glucose tolerance test) states in patients with type 2 diabetes.

DESIGN

This was a phase Ib randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled crossover trial of two (25 and 100 mg) doses of piragliatin.

SETTING

This study was conducted at a clinical research center.

PATIENTS

Patients included 15 volunteer ambulatory patients with mild type 2 diabetes.

INTERVENTIONS

Interventions included three 10-h (-300' to +300') studies, with an interval of at least 14 d. Administration of a single dose of placebo or piragliatin 25 mg or piragliatin 100 mg at -120'. Oral glucose tolerance test (at 0') with dual (iv and oral routes) tracer dilution technique was conducted.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary measure was plasma glucose concentration. The secondary measure was model assessed β-cell function and tracer-determined glucose fluxes.

RESULTS

Piragliatin caused a dose-dependent reduction of glucose levels in both fasting and fed states (P < 0.01). In the fasting state, piragliatin caused a dose-dependent increase in β-cell function, a fall in endogenous glucose output, and a rise in glucose use (all P < 0.01). In the fed state, the primary effects of piragliatin were on β-cell function (P < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

The glucokinase activator piragliatin has an acute glucose-lowering action in patients with mild type 2 diabetes, mainly mediated through a generalized enhancement of β-cell function and through fasting restricted changes in glucose turnover.

How pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic principles pave the way for optimal basal insulin therapy in type 2 diabetes

This pedagogical review illustrates the differences between pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic (PD) measures, using insulin therapy as the primary example. The main conclusion is that PD parameters are of greater clinical significance for insulin therapy than PK parameters. The glucose-clamp technique, the optimal method for determining insulin PD, is explained so that the reader can understand the important studies in the literature. Key glucose-clamp studies that compare two basal insulin analogues - insulin glargine and insulin detemir - to Neutral Protamine Hagedorn insulin and to each other are then presented. The review further explains how PD parameters have been translated into useful clinical concepts and simple titration algorithms for everyday clinical practice. Finally, the necessity of overcoming patient and/or physician barriers to insulin therapy and providing continuing education and training is emphasised.

Further improvement in postprandial glucose control with addition of exenatide or sitagliptin to combination therapy with insulin glargine and metformin: a proof-of-concept study

OBJECTIVE

To assess the effect of a 4-week adjunctive therapy of exenatide (EXE) (5-10 microg b.i.d.) or sitagliptin (SITA) (100 mg once daily) in response to a standardized breakfast meal challenge in 48 men or women with type 2 diabetes receiving insulin glargine (GLAR) + metformin (MET).

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

This was a single-center, randomized, open-label, active comparator-controlled study with a three-arm parallel group design, consisting of: screening, 4- to 8-week run-in period, 4-week treatment period, and follow-up. In all three groups, the GLAR dose was titrated according to an algorithm (fasting blood glucose <or=100 mg/dl).

RESULTS

The unadjusted 6-h postprandial blood glucose excursion of both GLAR + MET + EXE and GLAR + MET + SITA was statistically significantly smaller than that of GLAR + MET (606 +/- 104 vs. 612 +/- 133 vs. 728 +/- 132 mg/dl/h; P = 0.0036 and 0.0008). A1C significantly decreased in all three groups (P < 0.0001), with the greatest reduction of -1.9 +/- 0.7 under GLAR + MET + EXE (GLAR + MET + SITA -1.5 +/- 0.7; GLAR + MET -1.2 +/- 0.5%-points; GLAR + MET + EXE vs. GLAR + MET P = 0.0154). The American Diabetes Association A1C target of <7.0% was reached by 80.0, 87.5, and 62.5% of subjects, respectively. GLAR + MET + EXE had the highest number (47) of adverse events, mostly gastrointestinal (56%) with one dropout. GLAR + MET or GLAR + MET + SITA only had 10 and 12 adverse events, respectively, and no dropouts. Hypoglycemia (blood glucose <50 mg/dl) rates were low and comparable among groups. Weight decreased with GLAR + MET + EXE (-0.9 +/- 1.7 kg; P = 0.0396) and increased slightly with GLAR + MET (0.4 +/- 1.5 kg; NS; GLAR + MET + EXE vs. GLAR + MET P = 0.0377).

CONCLUSIONS

EXE or SITA added to GLAR + MET further substantially reduced postprandial blood glucose excursions. Longer-term studies in a larger population are warranted to confirm these findings.

Oral insulin: a comparison with subcutaneous regular human insulin in patients with type 2 diabetes

OBJECTIVE

To determine the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties of an oral insulin (OI) formulation compared with subcutaneously injected regular human insulin (RHI).

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

Ten male patients with type 2 diabetes (means +/- SD; A1C 7.0 +/- 1.1%; BMI 28.3 +/- 2.7 kg/m(2)) received either 300 units of insulin combined with 400 mg of delivery agent orally or 15 units RHI subcutaneously under isoglycemic clamp conditions.

RESULTS

Maximum insulin concentration was greater and onset of action was faster with OI (C(max) 93 +/- 71 vs. 33 +/- 11 microU/ml; AUC(GIR)((0-1h)) 173 +/- 86 vs. 27 +/- 32 mg/kg; P < 0.05). Mean insulin concentration and glucose infusion rate returned to baseline within 3 h after OI administration. Relative bioavailability of OI was 7 +/- 4% (1st 2 h).

CONCLUSIONS

This proof-of-concept study demonstrated that absorption of OI is feasible under fasting conditions. OI has a fast onset and a short duration of action but also shows a rather high between-subject variability in absorption.