Ultra rapid lispro improves postprandial glucose control compared with lispro in patients with type 1 diabetes: Results from the 26-week PRONTO-T1D study

Diabetes Technology Meeting 2020

Diabetes Technology Society hosted its annual Diabetes Technology Meeting on November 12 to November 14, 2020. This meeting brought together speakers to cover various perspectives about the field of diabetes technology. The meeting topics included artificial intelligence, digital health, telemedicine, glucose monitoring, regulatory trends, metrics for expressing glycemia, pharmaceuticals, automated insulin delivery systems, novel insulins, metrics for diabetes monitoring, and discriminatory aspects of diabetes technology. A live demonstration was presented.

Commemorating insulin's centennial: engineering insulin pharmacology towards physiology

The life-saving discovery of insulin in Toronto in 1921 is one of the most impactful achievements in medical history, at the time being hailed as a miracle treatment for diabetes. The insulin molecule itself, however, is poorly amenable as a pharmacological intervention, and the formidable challenge of optimizing insulin therapy has been ongoing for a century. We review early academic insights into insulin structure and its relation to self-association and receptor binding, as well as recombinant biotechnology, which have all been seminal for drug design. Recent developments have focused on combining genetic and chemical engineering with pharmaceutical optimization to generate ultra-rapid and ultra-long-acting, tissue-selective, or orally delivered insulin analogs. We further discuss these developments and propose that future scientific efforts in molecular engineering include realizing the dream of glucose-responsive insulin delivery.

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.

Long-Term Efficacy and Safety of Ultra Rapid Lispro (URLi) in Adults with Type 1 Diabetes: The PRONTO-T1D Extension

INTRODUCTION

The PRONTO-T1D study, which evaluated the efficacy and safety of ultra rapid lispro (URLi) versus lispro in adults with type 1 diabetes (T1D), met the primary endpoint of noninferiority of HbA1c change from baseline compared to lispro at 26 weeks. We present results of an additional 26-week treatment phase evaluating long-term efficacy and safety of URLi.

METHODS

In this phase 3, treat-to-target study, subjects were randomized to double-blind mealtime URLi, lispro, or open-label postmeal URLi with insulin degludec or glargine for 26 weeks. Subjects in the double-blind URLi (n = 451) and lispro (n = 442) groups continued for another 26 weeks to assess long-term efficacy and safety.

RESULTS

HbA1c increased marginally during the long-term maintenance period (week 26-52) in both groups to 7.47% (URLi) and 7.54% (lispro). At week 52, there were no statistically significant treatment differences in change from baseline HbA1c with a least-squares mean treatment difference (95% confidence interval) of - 0.06% (- 0.16, 0.03). Proportions of patients with HbA_1c < 7% at week 52 were similar (URLi, 26.8%; lispro, 24.5%). Self-monitored blood glucose (SMBG) showed that 1-h (9.23 versus 10.14 mmol/L) and 2-h (8.40 versus 9.53 mmol/L) postmeal daily mean glucose was statistically significantly (p < 0.001) lower with URLi than lispro. The rate and incidence of severe, documented, and postprandial hypoglycemia (< 54 mg/dl [3.0 mmol/L]) were similar between treatments, but URLi demonstrated a 31% lower rate in the period more than 4 h after meals, (p = 0.023). Injection site reactions were reported by 3.3% of patients on URLi and 0.9% on lispro. The incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events was similar between treatments.

CONCLUSION

Overall glycemic control and improved postprandial glucose via SMBG were maintained after 52 weeks with URLi versus lispro, suggesting that the efficacy of URLi is preserved during long-term treatment in patients with T1D. No long-term safety issues were identified with URLi.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03214367.

Advances in newer basal and bolus insulins: impact on type 1 diabetes

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Insulin administration is vitally important to maintain a good glycaemic control in people with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM). The purpose of this review is to give a clinically relevant overview of the newer basal and bolus insulin analogues and to highlight their practicalities of use and advantages in specific categories of patients with T1DM.

RECENT FINDINGS

Second-generation rapid-acting insulin analogues (i.e. faster insulin aspart and ultrarapid-acting lispro) have shown to be safe, efficient and superior in controlling postprandial plasma glucose levels without an increase in hypoglycaemia. The newest basal insulin analogues, insulin glargine U300 and degludec, have proven to be efficient in reducing hypoglycaemic events due to a more stable action profile.

SUMMARY

The second-generation rapid-acting and basal insulin analogues approach better the desired physiological insulin pattern of the beta cell. Due to a faster absorption, it is possible to inject the prandial insulin analogues more closely or even after meals without compromising postprandial glucose control. Due to more stable release patterns, basal insulins now have more reliable and longer profiles, covering basal insulin demands in a superior way, leading to a better glycaemic control with less hypoglycaemia (especially nocturnal events) and an improved quality of life.

Impact of glucagon response on early postprandial glucose excursions irrespective of residual β-cell function in type 1 diabetes: A cross-sectional study using a mixed meal tolerance test

Aims/Introduction

Controlling postprandial glucose levels in patients with type 1 diabetes is challenging even under the adequate treatment of insulin injection. Recent studies showed that dysregulated glucagon secretion exacerbates hyperglycemia in type 2 diabetes patients, but little is known in type 1 diabetes patients. We investigated whether the glucagon response to a meal ingestion could influence the postprandial glucose excursion in patients with type 1 diabetes.

Materials and Methods

We enrolled 34 patients with type 1 diabetes and 23 patients with type 2 diabetes as controls. All patients underwent a liquid mixed meal tolerance test. We measured levels of plasma glucose, C‐peptide and glucagon at fasting (0 min), and 30, 60 and 120 min after meal ingestion. All type 1 diabetes patients received their usual basal insulin and two‐thirds of the necessary dose of the premeal bolus insulin.

Results

The levels of plasma glucagon were elevated and peaked 30 min after the mixed meal ingestion in both type 1 diabetes and type 2 diabetes patients. The glucagon increments from fasting to each time point (30, 60 and 120 min) in type 1 diabetes patients were comparable to those in type 2 diabetes patients. Among the type 1 diabetes patients, the glucagon response showed no differences between the subgroups based on diabetes duration (<5 vs ≥5 years) and fasting C‐peptide levels (<0.10 vs ≥0.10 nmol/L). The changes in plasma glucose from fasting to 30 min were positively correlated with those in glucagon, but not C‐peptide, irrespective of diabetes duration and fasting C‐peptide levels in patients with type 1 diabetes.

Conclusions

The dysregulated glucagon likely contributes to postprandial hyperglycemia independent of the residual β‐cell functions during the progression of type 1 diabetes.

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

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

9. Pharmacologic Approaches to Glycemic Treatment: Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes-2021

The American Diabetes Association (ADA) "Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes" includes the ADA's current clinical practice recommendations and is intended to provide the components of diabetes care, general treatment goals and guidelines, and tools to evaluate quality of care. Members of the ADA Professional Practice Committee, a multidisciplinary expert committee (https://doi.org/10.2337/dc21-SPPC), are responsible for updating the Standards of Care annually, or more frequently as warranted. For a detailed description of ADA standards, statements, and reports, as well as the evidence-grading system for ADA's clinical practice recommendations, please refer to the Standards of Care Introduction (https://doi.org/10.2337/dc21-SINT). Readers who wish to comment on the Standards of Care are invited to do so at professional.diabetes.org/SOC.

Ultra-Rapid Lispro Improves Postprandial Glucose Control and Time in Range in Type 1 Diabetes Compared to Lispro: PRONTO-T1D Continuous Glucose Monitoring Substudy

Background: This study evaluated glucose control by continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) during treatment with ultra-rapid lispro (URLi) or lispro used in combination with insulin glargine or degludec in adults with type 1 diabetes in a substudy of the PRONTO-T1D study. Methods: Ambulatory glucose profiles were evaluated in 269 patients from PRONTO-T1D assigned to double-blind URLi (n = 97) or lispro (n = 99) given 0-2 min before the start of the meal (mealtime), or open-label URLi (n = 73) given 20 min after the meal (postmeal URLi). Blinded CGM was used for up to 14 days before baseline and the 26-week primary endpoint. The primary objective was to compare mealtime URLi and lispro with respect to incremental area under the serum glucose concentration versus time curve from 0 to 2 h (iAUC_0-2h) after breakfast. Results: Mealtime URLi was superior in reducing the iAUC_0-2h when compared to lispro for breakfast (least squares mean [LSM] difference -28.1 mg·h/L, P = 0.048) and for all meals combined. iAUC_0-3h and iAUC_0-4h were also reduced. Postmeal URLi resulted in similar postprandial glucose (PPG) control to mealtime lispro, but less optimal PPG control compared to mealtime URLi. Mealtime URLi increased daytime time in range (71-180 mg/dL [3.9-10.0 mmo/L]) (LSM difference = +43.6 min, P = 0.020) and decreased nighttime time in hypoglycemia (LSM difference ≤70 mg/dL [3.9 mmol/L] = -11.5 min, P = 0.009) compared to mealtime lispro. Conclusions: Results of this CGM substudy support the improved PPG control seen with mealtime URLi in the PRONTO-T1D study and show that mealtime URLi resulted in improved daytime time in target range.

Ultra rapid lispro improves postprandial glucose control compared with lispro in patients with type 1 diabetes: Results from the 26-week PRONTO-T1D study

AIMS

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of ultra rapid lispro (URLi) versus lispro in adults with type 1 diabetes in a 26-week, treat-to-target, phase 3 trial.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

After an 8-week lead-in to optimize basal insulin glargine or degludec, patients were randomized to double-blind mealtime URLi (n = 451) or lispro (n = 442), or open-label post-meal URLi (n = 329). The primary endpoint was change from baseline glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) to 26 weeks (non-inferiority margin 0.4%), with multiplicity-adjusted objectives for postprandial glucose (PPG) excursions after a meal test.

RESULTS

Both mealtime and post-meal URLi demonstrated non-inferiority to lispro for HbA1c: estimated treatment difference (ETD) for mealtime URLi -0.08% [95% confidence interval (CI) -0.16, 0.00] and for post-meal URLi +0.13% (95% CI 0.04, 0.22), with a significantly higher endpoint HbA1c for post-meal URLi versus lispro (P = 0.003). Mealtime URLi was superior to lispro in reducing 1- and 2-hour PPG excursions during the meal test: ETD -1.55 mmol/L (95% CI -1.96, -1.14) at 1 hour and - 1.73 mmol/L (95% CI -2.28, -1.18) at 2 hours (both P < 0.001). The rate and incidence of severe, documented and postprandial hypoglycaemia (<3.0 mmol/L) was similar between treatments, but mealtime URLi demonstrated a 37% lower rate in the period >4 hours after meals (P = 0.013). Injection site reactions were reported by 2.9% of patients on mealtime URLi, 2.4% on post-meal URLi, and 0.2% on lispro. Overall, the incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events was similar between treatments.

CONCLUSIONS

The results showed that URLi provided good glycaemic control, with non-inferiority to lispro confirmed for both mealtime and post-meal URLi, while superior PPG control was demonstrated with mealtime dosing.

Pharmacokinetic and Glucodynamic Responses of Ultra Rapid Lispro vs Lispro Across a Clinically Relevant Range of Subcutaneous Doses in Healthy Subjects

PURPOSE

Ultra rapid lispro (URLi) is a novel insulin lispro formulation developed to more closely match physiological insulin secretion and improve postprandial glucose control. This study compared the pharmacokinetic and glucodynamic parameters of URLi and Lispro (Humalog®) at 3 dose levels in healthy subjects.

METHODS

This randomized, 6-period, subject- and investigator-blind, crossover study included 42 healthy subjects. At each period, subjects received a single subcutaneous dose of 7, 15, or 30 U of URLi or Lispro followed by a 10-h automated euglycemic clamp. Insulin lispro and blood glucose concentrations were measured.

FINDINGS

Across all 3 doses, insulin lispro appeared in the serum 2-5 min faster, and exposure was 6- to 8-fold greater in the first 15 min, with URLi versus Lispro. Exposure beyond 3 h postdose was 45%-52% lower, and duration of exposure was 67-86 min shorter with URLi versus Lispro for all dose levels. Onset of insulin action was 7-9 min faster and insulin action was ~3-fold greater in the first 30 min with URLi versus Lispro across the dose levels. Insulin action beyond 4 h was reduced by 32%-45%, and duration of action was reduced by 47-67 min, with URLi versus Lispro for all 3 dose levels. Overall exposure and total glucose infused were similar between URLi and Lispro at each dose level. Dose proportionality was observed for maximum and overall exposure after URLi. Less than dose-proportional increases in maximum and total glucose infused were observed and were similar for both URLi and Lispro.

IMPLICATIONS

URLi exhibited ultra-rapid pharmacokinetic and glucodynamic parameters across all 3 dose levels studied and exhibited dose-proportional increases in exposure in healthy subjects. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03286751.

Ultra-Rapid Lispro Efficacy and Safety Compared to Humalog® in Japanese Patients with Type 1 Diabetes: PRONTO-T1D Subpopulation Analysis

INTRODUCTION

We evaluated the efficacy and safety of ultra-rapid lispro (URLi) in comparison to lispro in a subgroup analysis of Japanese adults with type 1 diabetes mellitus from the phase 3 PRONTO-T1D trial.

METHODS

After an 8-week lead-in to optimize basal insulin treatment, patients were randomized to 52-week double-blind mealtime URLi or lispro, or 26-week open-label postmeal URLi. The primary endpoint was change in hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) from baseline (week 0) to week 26 between mealtime URLi and lispro. The multiplicity adjusted objectives were 1- and 2-h postprandial glucose (PPG) excursions after a meal test between mealtime URLi and lispro, and change in HbA1c from baseline to week 26 between postmeal URLi and mealtime lispro.

RESULTS

This manuscript presents pre-specified exploratory analyses of 26-week data from Japanese patients randomized to double-blind URLi (n = 62) or lispro (n = 59), or open-label URLi (n = 46). Mean baseline HbA1c levels were 7.52% for mealtime URLi, 7.44% for lispro, and 7.51% for postmeal URLi at randomization. At week 26, the least squares mean (LSM) difference compared to lispro was 0.04% (95% confidence interval [CI] - 0.14 to 0.22) for mealtime URLi, and 0.16% (95% CI - 0.04 to 0.35) for postmeal URLi. In comparison to lispro, mealtime URLi resulted in statistically significantly lower 1- and 2-h PPG excursions during the mixed-meal tolerance test. LSM differences were - 40.5 mg/dL, 95% CI - 59.5 to 21.4 (- 2.25 mmol/L, 95% CI - 3.3 to - 1.2) for 1-h PPG excursions and - 51.7 mg/dL, 95% CI - 81.7 to - 21.8 (- 2.87 mmol/L, 95% CI - 4.5 to - 1.2) for 2-h PPG excursions at week 26. There were no significant treatment differences in rates of severe/overall hypoglycemia, or incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

Mealtime and postmeal URLi provide effective and comparable glycemic control in Japanese patients. Mealtime URLi demonstrated more effective PPG control compared to lispro.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03214367.