New insulin glargine 300 Units · mL-1 provides a more even activity profile and prolonged glycemic control at steady state compared with insulin glargine 100 Units · mL-1

Once-weekly basal insulin icodec: Looking ONWARDS from pharmacology to clinical trials

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Insulin icodec is currently the most advanced candidate insulin suitable for once-weekly administration. We aim to conduct a systematic review of the literature to find out the efficacy and safety of insulin icodec in patients with diabetes mellitus.

METHODS

We systematically searched the electronic database of PubMed, and Google Scholar from inception until August 20, 2022, using MeSH keywords. Ongoing trials of insulin icodec were additionally searched from the ClinicalTrials.Gov. We retrieved all the available granular details of phase 1 to phase 3 studies of insulin icodec in both type 1 and type 2 diabetes.

RESULTS

Phase 1 study showed insulin icodec having a half-life of 196 h (>1 week) while a steady state is achieved after 3 to 4 weekly injections. Phase 2 studies compared once-weekly icodec to insulin glargine (U-100) and found a similar glucose control with no significantly greater hypoglycemia risks. Top-line results from the five phase 3 studies reported better glucose control with once-weekly icodec compared to both once-daily insulin glargine (ONWARDS 1) and once-daily degludec (in both ONWARDS 2 and 4) with similar rates of hypoglycemia in type 2 diabetes, although there was a higher hypoglycemic event with insulin icodec in type 1 diabetes (ONWARDS 6) compared to once-daily degludec despite a similar glycemic control.

CONCLUSION

A brighter prospect of once-weekly insulin icodec is on the card in particular in type 2 diabetes in terms of reducing injection pricks by >85% vs. once-daily basal insulin analogs, although few unknowns still exist.

Insulin: evolution of insulin formulations and their application in clinical practice over 100 years

The first preparation of insulin extracted from a pancreas and made suitable for use in humans after purification was achieved 100 years ago in Toronto, an epoch-making achievement, which has ultimately provided a life-giving treatment for millions of people worldwide. The earliest animal-derived formulations were short-acting and contained many impurities that caused adverse reactions, thereby limiting their therapeutic potential. However, since then, insulin production and purification improved with enhanced technologies, along with a full understanding of the insulin molecule structure. The availability of radio-immunoassays contributed to the unravelling of the physiology of glucose homeostasis, ultimately leading to the adoption of rational models of insulin replacement. The introduction of recombinant DNA technologies has since resulted in the era of both rapid- and long-acting human insulin analogues administered via the subcutaneous route which better mimic the physiology of insulin secretion, leading to the modern basal-bolus regimen. These advances, in combination with improved education and technologies for glucose monitoring, enable people with diabetes to better meet individual glycaemic goals with a lower risk of hypoglycaemia. While the prevalence of diabetes continues to rise globally, it is important to recognise the scientific endeavour that has led to insulin remaining the cornerstone of diabetes management, on the centenary of its first successful use in humans.

Controlling glycemic variability in people living with type 1 diabetes receiving insulin glargine 300 U/mL (Gla-300)

Short-term glycemic variability is associated with the risk of hypoglycemia and hyperglycemia in people living with type 1 diabetes and can potentially affect clinical outcomes. Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) is of increasing importance to evaluate glycemic variability in greater detail. Specific metrics for assessing glycemic variability were proposed, such as the SD of mean glucose level and associated coefficient of variation, and time in target glucose range to guide study designs, therapy and allow people with diabetes more transparency in interpreting their own CGM data. Randomized controlled trials (RCT) and real-world evidence provide complementary information about the efficacy/effectiveness and safety of interventions. Insulin glargine 300 U/mL (Gla-300) has a longer lasting and less variable action than insulin glargine U100 (Gla-100) with a lower risk of hypoglycemia. While insulin degludec U100 (iDeg-100) was associated with lower glucose values but more time below range in one randomized study compared with Gla-300, Gla-300 was associated with a higher per cent time in range, but also above the therapeutic range. However, a real-world study did not find differences during the day between Gla-300 and iDeg-100. The upcoming InRange RCT is the first head-to-head comparison of Gla-300 with iDeg-100 using CGM in an international population using CGM metrics as the primary endpoint. The non-interventional COMET-T real-world study will determine the real-world effectiveness of Gla-300 using CGM metrics and cover a broad spectrum of clinical practice decisions irrespective of the prior basal insulin.

Comparison of the Impact of Insulin Degludec U100 and Insulin Glargine U300 on Glycemic Variability and Oxidative Stress in Insulin-Naive Patients With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: Pilot Study for a Randomized Trial

Background

There is an ongoing discussion about possible differences between insulin degludec (IDeg-100) and glargine U300 (IGlar-300). There is little data and head-to-head comparison of IDeg-100 and IGlar-300 regarding their simultaneous impact on glycemic variability and oxidative stress in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM).

Objective

In our randomized, open-label, crossover study, we compared the impact of IDeg-100 and IGlar-300 on glycemic variability and oxidative stress in insulin-naive patients with T2DM.

Methods

We recruited a total of 25 adult patients with T2DM (7 females) whose diabetes was uncontrolled (HbA1c ≥7.5%) on two or more oral glucose-lowering drugs; a total of 22 completed the study. Mean age was 57.3 (SD 6.99) years and duration of diabetes was 9.94 (SD 5.01) years. After the washout period, they were randomized alternately to first receive either IDeg-100 or IGlar-300 along with metformin. Each insulin was administered for 12 weeks and then switched. At the beginning and end of each phase, biochemical and oxidative stress parameters were analyzed. On 3 consecutive days prior to each control point, patients performed a 7-point self-monitoring of blood glucose profile. Oxidative stress was assessed by measuring thiol groups and hydroperoxides (determination of reactive oxygen metabolites test) in serum.

Results

IGlar-300 reduced mean glucose by 0.02-0.13 mmol/L, and IDeg-100 reduced glucose by 0.10-0.16 mmol/L, with no significant difference. The reduction of the coefficient of glucose variation also did not show a statistically significant difference. IGlar-300 increased thiols by 0.08 µmol/L and IDeg-100 increased thiols by 0.15 µmol/L, with no significant difference (P=.07) between them. IGlar-300 reduced hydroperoxides by 0.040 CARR U and IDeg-100 increased hydroperoxides by 0.034 CARR U, but the difference was not significant (P=.12).

Conclusions

The results of our study do not show a significant difference regarding glycemic variability between patients receiving either insulin IDeg-100 or IGlar-300, although IGlar-300 showed greater dispersion of data. No significant difference in oxidative stress was observed. In a larger study, doses of insulins should be higher to achieve significant impact on glycemic parameters and consequently on glycemic variability and oxidative stress.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04692415; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04692415

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

INTRODUCTION

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

CLINICALTRIALS

GOV IDENTIFIER

NCT03760991.

[Switching insulin degludec to insulin glulisine improved nocturnal hypoglycemia and ventricular arrythmia in an elderly type 1 diabetes patient with chronic heart failure: A case report]

The patient was 82-year-old man with type 1 diabetes mellitus. He had been using insulin degludec (IDeg) and insulin glulisine (IGlu) for treatment. He was admitted to our hospital due to diabetic ketoacidosis. As he started eating after recovery, we restarted intensive insulin therapy for glycemic control. Although he had eaten almost whole meals, his fasting blood glucose was extremely low, and the existence of nocturnal hypoglycemia was apparent. We reduced the dose and changed the injection time (evening→morning) of IDeg. We also stopped the evening IGlu injection; however, his nocturnal hypoglycemia did not improve. We decided to switch IDeg to insulin glargine U300 and to attach an intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitor (isCGM). His nocturnal hypoglycemia improved three days later. Since he had chronic heart failure and premature ventricular contractions, we used a Holter electrocardiogram to investigate the difference in arrythmia during hypoglycemia and non-hypoglycemia. As a result, the number of premature ventricular contractions was apparently high during hypoglycemia. In the present case, which involved an elderly patient with type 1 diabetes mellitus, chronic heart failure and nocturnal hypoglycemia, switching IDeg to insulin glargine U300 improved nocturnal hypoglycemia. IDeg differs from insulin glargine U300 in that it has a fatty acid side chain, which leads IDeg to combine with serum albumin. We thought that the increased level of free fatty acid due to hypoglycemia was competing against albumin combined IDeg, which increased free IDeg, and as a result, encouraged hypoglycemia.

Real-world persistence, adherence, health care resource utilization, and costs in people with type 2 diabetes switching from a first-generation basal insulin to a second-generation (insulin glargine 300 U/mL) vs an alternative first-generation basal insulin

BACKGROUND: People with type 2 diabetes (T2D) who change their basal insulin (BI) may have variable persistence with therapy. Compared with first-generation (long-acting) BI analogs (insulin glargine 100U/mL [Gla-100]; insulin detemir [IDet]), second-generation (longer-acting) BI analogs (insulin glargine 300U/mL [Gla-300]; insulin degludec) have similar glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) attainment and lowered hypoglycemia risk, which could impact treatment persistence. OBJECTIVE: To compare persistence, adherence, health care resource utilization (HRU), and costs for individuals switching from neutral protamine Hagedorn insulin or a first-generation BI analog with either the second-generation BI, Gla-300, or an alternative first-generation BI analog (Gla-100 or IDet). METHODS: We used Optum Clinformatics claims data from adults (aged ≥ 18 years) with T2D who had received BI (neutral protamine Hagedorn, Gla-100, IDet) in the 6-month baseline period, and switched to either Gla-300 or an alternative first-generation BI (Gla-100 or IDet; treatment switch = index date) between April 1, 2015, and August 31, 2019. Participants were followed for 12 months, until plan disenrollment, or until death, whichever occurred first. Cohorts were propensity score matched (PSM) on baseline characteristics. The primary outcome was the proportion who were persistent with therapy at 12 months. Secondary outcomes were adherence (proportion of days covered); change in HbA1c; and all-cause, diabetes-related, and hypoglycemia-related HRU and costs. RESULTS: PSM generated 3,077 participants/group (mean age: 68 years, 52% female). Cohorts were well balanced except for hospitalization, which was adjusted in models as a covariate. During the 12-month follow-up period, participants who received Gla-300 vs first-generation BI had greater persistence with (45.5% vs 42.1%; adjusted P = 0.0001), and adherence to (42.8% vs 38.2%; adjusted P = 0.0006), BI therapy and a statistically larger reduction in HbA1c at 12 months (-0.65% vs -0.45%; adjusted P = 0.0040). The proportion of participants achieving HbA1c less than 8% (47.2% vs 40.9%; P < 0.0001), but not less than 7% (21.2% vs 20.8%), was significantly higher for Gla-300 vs first-generation BI. All-cause (45.3 vs 65.9 per 100 patient-years [P100PY]) and diabetes-related (21.5 vs 29.1 P100PY), but not hypoglycemia-related, hospitalizations (1.0 vs 1.5 P100PY) were significantly (P < 0.0001) lower for Gla-300 vs first-generation BI. Similarly, all-cause (111.9 vs 148.8 P100PY), diabetes-related (54.8 vs 74.2 P100PY), and hypoglycemia-related (2.9 vs 5.7 P100PY) emergency department (ED) visits were significantly lower for Gla-300 (all P < 0.0001). Costs for all-cause hospitalizations and hypoglycemia-related ED visits were significantly lower for Gla-300 vs first-generation BI. Although pharmacy costs were significantly higher for Gla-300 vs first-generation BI, all-cause total health care costs were not significantly different: $41,255 vs $45,316 per person per year, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In this claims-based analysis of people with T2D receiving BI, switching to Gla-300 was associated with significantly better persistence, adherence, and HbA1c reduction compared with switching to an alternative first-generation BI analog. All-cause HRU was significantly lower; despite significantly higher pharmacy costs, total health care costs were similar. DISCLOSURES: This study was funded by Sanofi US. Medical writing support was provided by Helen Jones, PhD, CMPP, of Evidence Scientific Solutions and funded by Sanofi US. Dr Wright is on the speakers' bureau and sits on the advisory boards for Abbot Diabetes, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, and Sanofi; sits on the advisory board for Medtronic; and is a consultant for Abbot Diabetes, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Eli Lilly. Dr Malone is on advisory boards for Novartis and Avalere and consults for Pear Therapeutics, Sarepta, and Strategic Therapeutics. Dr Trujillo sits on advisory boards for Novo Nordisk and Sanofi. Drs Gill, Zhou, and Preblick and Mr Li are employees and stockholders of Sanofi. Mr Huse is an employee of Evidera and a contractor for Sanofi. Dr Reid is a speaker and consultant for Novo Nordisk and Sanofi-Aventis and is a consultant for AstraZeneca and Intarcia.

Effect of the Concomitant Use of Subcutaneous Basal Insulin and Intravenous Insulin Infusion in the Treatment of Severe Hyperglycemic Patients

BACKGRUOUND

No consensus exists regarding the early use of subcutaneous (SC) basal insulin facilitating the transition from continuous intravenous insulin infusion (CIII) to multiple SC insulin injections in patients with severe hyperglycemia other than diabetic ketoacidosis. This study evaluated the effect of early co-administration of SC basal insulin with CIII on glucose control in patients with severe hyperglycemia.

METHODS

Patients who received CIII for the management of severe hyperglycemia were divided into two groups: the early basal insulin group (n=86) if they received the first SC basal insulin 0.25 U/kg body weight within 24 hours of CIII initiation and ≥4 hours before discontinuation, and the delayed basal insulin group (n=79) if they were not classified as the early basal insulin group. Rebound hyperglycemia was defined as blood glucose level of >250 mg/dL in 24 hours following CIII discontinuation. Propensity score matching (PSM) methods were additionally employed for adjusting the confounding factors (n=108).

RESULTS

The rebound hyperglycemia incidence was significantly lower in the early basal insulin group than in the delayed basal insulin group (54.7% vs. 86.1%), despite using PSM methods (51.9%, 85.2%). The length of hospital stay was shorter in the early basal insulin group than in the delayed basal insulin group (8.5 days vs. 9.6 days, P=0.027). The hypoglycemia incidence did not differ between the groups.

CONCLUSION

Early co-administration of basal insulin with CIII prevents rebound hyperglycemia and shorten hospital stay without increasing the hypoglycemic events in patients with severe hyperglycemia.

Evaluation of Patient Reported Satisfaction and Clinical Efficacy of Insulin Glargine 300 U/mL Versus 100 U/mL in Patients With Type 1 Diabetes Using Flash Glucose Monitoring System

Background and Aims:

To analyze patient-reported satisfaction and clinical effectiveness of concentrated insulin glargine 300 U/mL (Gla-300) among patients with type 1 diabetes (T1D) using a flash glucose monitoring (FGM) system.

Methods:

This comparative study was conducted among 86 patients with T1D (aged 14-40 years), who were treated with Glargine 100 U/mL (Gla-100) and switched to Gla-300 at day 1 (baseline). The following data were collected from each patient: demographic information, clinical parameters, and glycemic control markers. All patients completed the Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire (Arabic version), first at baseline and then after 12 weeks. A comparison was done for all the data recorded at baseline (on Gla-100) and after 12 weeks (on Gla-300) and subjected to analysis.

Results:

Compared to patients treated with Gla-100, significant improvements were observed in the Gla-300 group, in terms of the ambulatory glucose profile (AGP) markers, such as percentage of time spent within the target range of the glucose levels (70-180 mg/dL) (P = .037), percentage which fell below the target (<70 mg/dL) (P = .027), and percentage of time spent (<54 mg/dL) (P = .043). Compared to Gla-100, patients treated with Gla-300 experienced significant improvements in the current treatment satisfactions (P = .047), convenient finding treatment recently (P = .034), and flexible finding treatment recently (P = .041), recommend the current treatment (P = .042) and satisfied to continue the current treatment (P = .035).

Conclusion:

Compared to the patients on Gla-100, patients treated with Gla-300 exhibited significant improvements in the AGP markers and degree of treatment satisfaction.

Clinical Use of Insulin Glargine 300 U/mL in Adults with Type 2 Diabetes: Hypothetical Case Studies

Type 2 diabetes (T2D) is a progressive disease, with many individuals eventually requiring basal insulin therapy to maintain glycaemic control. However, there exists considerable therapeutic inertia to the prompt initiation and optimal titration of basal insulin therapy due to barriers that include fear of injections, hypoglycaemia, weight gain, and burdensome regimens. Hypoglycaemia is thought to be a major barrier to optimal glycaemic control and is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Newer second-generation basal insulin analogues provide comparable glycaemic control with lower risk of hypoglycaemia compared with first-generation basal insulin analogues. The present review article discusses clinical evidence for one such second-generation basal insulin analogue, insulin glargine 300 U/mL (Gla-300), in the context of hypothetical case studies that are representative of individuals who may attend routine clinical practice. These case studies discuss individualised treatment needs for people with T2D who are insulin-naïve or pre-treated. Clinical characteristics such as older age, frequent nocturnal hypoglycaemia, and renal impairment, which are known risk factors for hypoglycaemia, are also considered.

New Horizons: Next-Generation Insulin Analogues: Structural Principles and Clinical Goals

Design of "first-generation" insulin analogues over the past 3 decades has provided pharmaceutical formulations with tailored pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic (PD) properties. Application of a molecular tool kit-integrating protein sequence, chemical modification, and formulation-has thus led to improved prandial and basal formulations for the treatment of diabetes mellitus. Although PK/PD changes were modest in relation to prior formulations of human and animal insulins, significant clinical advantages in efficacy (mean glycemia) and safety (rates of hypoglycemia) were obtained. Continuing innovation is providing further improvements to achieve ultrarapid and ultrabasal analogue formulations in an effort to reduce glycemic variability and optimize time in range. Beyond such PK/PD metrics, next-generation insulin analogues seek to exploit therapeutic mechanisms: glucose-responsive ("smart") analogues, pathway-specific ("biased") analogues, and organ-targeted analogues. Smart insulin analogues and delivery systems promise to mitigate hypoglycemic risk, a critical barrier to glycemic control, whereas biased and organ-targeted insulin analogues may better recapitulate physiologic hormonal regulation. In each therapeutic class considerations of cost and stability will affect use and global distribution. This review highlights structural principles underlying next-generation design efforts, their respective biological rationale, and potential clinical applications.

Insulins for the long term management of diabetes mellitus in dogs: a review

The year 2021 marked the centenary of the isolation of a therapeutic form of insulin and its successful use in dogs. This was a landmark moment that subsequently and rapidly led to the commercial manufacture of insulin for use in humans. The impact of insulin was almost miraculous as those destined to die from their diabetes mellitus returned to life. Over the past 100 years, insulin formulations have been modified to attempt to provide a predictable and prolonged duration of action while avoiding the development of hypoglycaemia. This has led to an ever-growing variety of insulin types in human medicine, many of which have subsequently been used in dogs. The purpose of this review article is to provide an overview of available insulin types and their application to the chronic management of canine diabetes mellitus.

Significance of Glycemic Variability in Diabetes Mellitus

The goal of diabetes treatment is to maintain good glycemic control, prevent the development and progression of diabetic complications, and ensure the same quality of life and life expectancy as healthy people. Hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) is used as an index of glycemic control, but strict glycemic control using HbA1c as an index may lead to severe hypoglycemia and cardiovascular death. Glycemic variability (GV), such as excessive hyperglycemia and hypoglycemia, is associated with diabetic vascular complications and has been recognized as an important index of glycemic control. Here, we reviewed the definition and evaluated the clinical usefulness of GV, and its relationship with diabetic complications and therapeutic strategies to reduce GV.

Insulin Degludec Versus Insulin Glargine on Glycemic Variability in Diabetic Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Currently, glycemic variability has more deleterious effects than sustained hyperglycemia and is closely associated with acute and chronic complications of diabetes. Reducing glycemic excursion is becoming another vital goal of glycemic control in clinical practice. This study aimed to determine whether insulin degludec (IDeg) or insulin glargine (IGla) was more beneficial for reducing glycemic fluctuations.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This research was constructed according to the PRISMA guidelines. We searched eight databases and ClinicalTrials.gov from their inception to 30 November 2021. All randomized controlled trials comparing the efficacy of glucose variability between IDeg and IGla in diabetic patients were included.

RESULTS

Fourteen trials with 8,683 participants were included. In patients with T1DM, IDeg was associated with a lower mean (MD: -16.25, 95% CI -29.02 to -3.07, P = 0.01) and standard deviation (P = 0.03) compared to IGla in fasting blood glucose (FBG); in people with T2DM, IDeg was related to a lower mean of FBG versus insulin glargine 100 U/ml (IGla100) (P <0.001) and had a more extended time in the range (TIR) than IGla100 (SMD: 0.15, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.27, P = 0.02) but not longer than insulin glargine 300 U/ml (IGla300). Moreover, IDeg had a lower coefficient of variation of FBG than IGla (P = 0.0254). For other indicators of glycemic variability, namely, standard deviation of blood glucose for 24 h, the mean of 24-h blood glucose, mean amplitude of glycemic excursion, the coefficient of variation for 24 h, the mean of daily differences, area under the glucose curve, and M-value, no significant differences were identified between IDeg and IGla, regardless of T1DM or T2DM.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the current studies, there was comparable efficacy between IDeg and IGla from multiple aspects of glycemic variability, regardless of T1DM or T2DM. However, IDeg may be superior to IGla in reducing FBG variability in T1DM and T2DM. Nonetheless, due to the limitations of the original studies, it is still unclear whether IDeg is superior to both IGla100 and IGla300. In T2DM, IDeg had more extended TIR than IGla100 but not longer than IGla300. Additionally, more well-designed randomized controlled trials comparing IDeg with IGla300 for different indicators of glycemic variability are still warranted.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO, CRD42021283203.

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

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

Insulin Centennial: Milestones influencing the development of insulin preparations since 1922

During 1921 to 1922, a team effort by Banting, Macleod, Collip and Best isolated and purified insulin and demonstrated its life-giving properties, giving rise to the birth of insulin therapy. In the early years (1922-1950), priorities revolved around the manufacture of insulin to meet demand, improving purity to avoid allergic reactions, establishing insulin standards and increasing its duration of action to avoid multiple daily injections. Shortly after the emergence of insulin, Joslin and Allen advocated the need to achieve and maintain good glycaemic control to realize its full potential. Although this view was opposed by some during a dark period in the history of insulin, it was subsequently endorsed some 60 years later endorsed by the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial and United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study. Major scientific advances by the Nobel Laureates Sanger, Hodgkin, Yalow and Gilbert and also by Steiner have revolutionized the understanding of diabetes and facilitated major advances in insulin therapy. The more recent advent of recombinant technology over the last 40 years has provided the potential for unlimited source of insulin, and the ability to generate various insulin 'analogues', in an attempt to better replicate normal insulin secretory patterns. The emerging biosimilars now provide the opportunity to improve availability at a lower cost.

Insulin Glargine 300 U/mL Therapy in Children and Adolescents with Type 1 Diabetes

The pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties of the second-generation basal insulin glargine 300 Units/mL (Gla-300) may be of benefit in the treatment of type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM). Gla-300 provides a stable and sustained time-action profile, which is associated with glycaemic control and flexible dosing schedule. This review summarises the available evidence on the safety and efficacy of Gla-300 in children and adolescents with T1DM. Gla-300 is as effective as the first-generation basal insulin glargine 100 Units/mL (Gla-100), a standard of care for patients with diabetes in reducing HbA1c, and shows a lower risk of severe hypoglycaemia and hyperglycaemia in children and adolescents with T1DM. However, Gla-300 and Gla-100 are not bioequivalent and are not directly interchangeable. Real-world studies on patients aged 6-17 years are limited. To date, only one small study assessed the effectiveness and safety of Gla-300 versus Gla-100 in newly diagnosed T1DM paediatric patients, confirming the treatment safety and effectiveness of Gla-300 in clinical practice. Gla-300 is a longer-acting basal insulin alternative in the management of children (aged ≥ 6 years) and adolescents with T1DM.

Basal weekly insulins: the way of the future!

Basal insulin treatment is indispensable for patients with type 1 diabetes and often required by many with type 2 diabetes. Incremental advances lengthening the duration of action of insulin analogs and reducing pharmacodynamic variability have resulted in truly once-daily, long-acting basal insulin analogs. In the quest for better basal insulins to facilitate improvements in glycemic control and long-term outcomes, the driving need is to remove barriers delaying timely initiation of basal insulin, to maximize treatment adherence and persistence and reduce treatment burden without increasing risk of hypoglycemia. We review the range of investigational once-weekly insulins and their molecular strategies and profiles. Currently, the two most advanced clinical development programs are: (1) basal insulin icodec, an insulin analog acylated with a C20 fatty diacid (icosanedioic acid) side chain (Novo Nordisk) and (2) basal insulin Fc, a fusion protein that combines a single-chain insulin variant with a human immunoglobulin G fragment crystallizable domain (Eli Lilly). Available phase 2 data for these two once-weekly agents show comparable glycemic control to existing once-daily insulin analogs, with no greater risk of hypoglycemia. While phase 3 data are awaited to confirm efficacy and safety, we provide future clinical perspectives on practical considerations for the potential use of once-weekly insulins.

One hundred years of insulin therapy

At the time of its first clinical application 100 years ago, insulin was presented as the cure for people with diabetes mellitus. That transpired to be an overstatement, yet insulin has proven to be the lifesaver for people with type 1 diabetes mellitus and an essential therapy for many with type 2 diabetes mellitus or other forms of diabetes mellitus. Since its discovery, insulin (a molecule of only 51 amino acids) has been the subject of pharmaceutical research and development that has paved the way for other protein-based therapies. From purified animal-extracted insulin and human insulin produced by genetically modified organisms to a spectrum of insulin analogues, pharmaceutical laboratories have strived to tailor the preparations to the needs of patients. Nonetheless, overall glycaemic control often remains poor as exogenous insulin is still not able to mimic the physiological insulin profile. Circumventing subcutaneous administration and the design of analogues with profiles that mimic that of physiological insulin are ongoing areas of research. Novel concepts, such as once-weekly insulins or glucose-dependent and oral insulins, are on the horizon but their real-world effectiveness still needs to be proven. Until a true cure for type 1 diabetes mellitus is found and the therapeutic arsenal for other forms of diabetes mellitus is expanded, insulin will remain central in the treatment of many people living with diabetes mellitus.

Modeling Between-Subject Variability in Subcutaneous Absorption of a Long-Acting Insulin Glargine 100 U/mL by a Nonlinear Mixed Effects Approach

Subcutaneous insulin absorption is well-known to vary significantly both between and within subjects (BSV and WSV, respectively). This variability considerably obstacles the establishing of a reproducible and effective insulin therapy. Some models exist to describe the subcutaneous kinetics of both fast and long-acting insulin analogues; however, none of them account for the BSV. The aim of this study is to develop a nonlinear mixed effects model able to describe the BSV observed in the subcutaneous absorption of a long-acting insulin glargine 100 U/mL. Four stochastic models of the BSV were added to a previously validated model of subcutaneous absorption of insulin glargine 100 U/mL. These were assessed on a database of 47 subjects with type 1 diabetes. The best model was selected based on residual analysis, precision of the estimates and parsimony criteria. The selected model provided good fit of individual data, precise population parameter estimates and allowed quantifying the BSV of the insulin glargine 100 U/mL pharmacokinetics. Future model development will include the description of the WSV of long- acting insulin absorption.

The Evolution of Insulin Administration in Type 1 Diabetes

Insulin has been utilized in the treatment of type 1 diabetes (T1D) for 100 years. While there is still no cure for T1D, insulin administration has undergone a remarkable evolution which has contributed to improvements in quality of life and life expectancy in individuals with T1D. The advent of faster-acting and longer-acting insulins allowed for the implementation of insulin regimens more closely resembling normal insulin physiology. These improvements afforded better glycemic control, which is crucial for limiting microvascular complications and improving T1D outcomes. Suspension of insulin delivery in response to actual and forecasted hypoglycemia has improved quality of life and mitigated hypoglycemia without compromising glycemic control. Advances in continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) and insulin pumps, efforts to model glucose and insulin kinetics, and the application of control theory to T1D have made the automation of insulin delivery a reality. This review will summarize the past, present, and future of insulin administration in T1D.

Effect of insulin degludec versus insulin glargine U100 on time in range: SWITCH PRO, a crossover study of basal insulin-treated adults with type 2 diabetes and risk factors for hypoglycaemia

AIMS

To compare time in range (TIR) with use of insulin degludec U100 (degludec) versus insulin glargine U100 (glargine U100) in people with type 2 diabetes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We conducted a randomized, crossover, multicentre trial comparing degludec and glargine U100 in basal insulin-treated adults with type 2 diabetes and ≥1 hypoglycaemia risk factor. There were two treatment periods, each with 16-week titration and 2-week maintenance phases (with evaluation of glucose using blinded professional continuous glucose monitoring). The once-weekly titration (target: 3.9-5.0 mmol/L) was based on pre-breakfast self-measured blood glucose. The primary endpoint was percentage of TIR (3.9─10.0 mmol/L). Secondary endpoints included overall and nocturnal percentage of time in tight glycaemic range (3.9-7.8 mmol/L), and mean glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) and glucose levels.

RESULTS

At baseline, participants (n = 498) had a mean (SD) age of 62.8 (9.8) years, a diabetes duration of 15.1 (7.7) years and an HbA1c level of 59.6 (11.0) mmol/mol (7.6 [1.0]%). Noninferiority and superiority were confirmed for degludec versus glargine U100 for the primary endpoint, with a mean TIR of 72.1% for degludec versus 70.7% for glargine U100 (estimated treatment difference [ETD] 1.43% [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.12, 2.74; P = 0.03] or 20.6 min/d). Overall time in tight glycaemic range favoured degludec versus glargine U100 (ETD 1.5% [95% CI: 0.15, 2.89] or 21.9 min/d). Degludec also reduced nocturnal time below range (TBR; <3.9 mmol/L) compared with glargine U100 (ETD -0.88% [95% CI: -1.34, -0.42] or 12.7 min/night; post hoc) and significantly fewer nocturnal hypoglycaemic episodes of <3.0 mmol/L were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Degludec, compared with glargine U100, provided more TIR and time in tight glycaemic range, and reduced nocturnal TBR in insulin-treated people with type 2 diabetes.

Effectiveness and Safety of Insulin Glargine 300 U/ml in Comparison with Insulin Degludec 100 U/ml Evaluated with Continuous Glucose Monitoring in Adults with Type 1 Diabetes and Suboptimal Glycemic Control in Routine Clinical Practice: The OneCARE Study

INTRODUCTION

Data regarding efficacy of second-generation basal insulins (BI) using continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) come from clinical trials. We evaluated the effectiveness of insulin glargine 300 U/ml (Gla-300) compared to insulin degludec 100 U/ml (IDeg-100) in terms of percentage of time in range (TIR); 70-180 mg/dl was obtained from CGM in sub-optimally controlled patients with type 1 diabetes (T1D) in routine clinical practice.

METHODS

This observational, multicenter, cross-sectional study included patients with T1D (> 3 years diabetes duration, HbA_1c ≥ 7.5%) who had switched from first-generation BI to Gla-300/IDeg-100 within the past 24 months according to physician discretion. Clinical and laboratory data were obtained from clinical records and during study visit, and CGM data were collected prior to the visit.

RESULTS

One hundred ninety-nine people with T1D were included [42.6 ± 13.4 (mean ± SD) years, 18.4 ± 10.4 years diabetes duration]; 104 received Gla-300, 95 IDeg-100. TIR 70-180 throughout whole day was similar in both groups, 52.4 ± 14.0 vs. 49.3 ± 13.9% Gla-300/IDeg-100, respectively. At night, TIR 70-180 and TIR 70-140 were significantly higher in the Gla-300 group compared to the IDeg-100 (52.4 vs. 46.2 and 31.8 vs. 26.9%, respectively, p = 0.0209 and p = 0.0182), and time above range (180) was significantly lower in the Gla-300 group (40.1% vs. 47.2%, p = 0.0199). Additional CGM glucometric data were comparable in both groups. Patient treatment satisfaction score assessed through the Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire (DTSQ) was high and similar for both insulins.

CONCLUSION

This real-world study shows the effectiveness and safety of Gla-300 are more similar to than different from IDeg-100, with a slightly better nocturnal glucose profile, in sub-optimally controlled T1D patients switching from a first-generation BI.

Post Hoc Analysis Evaluating the Impact of Antihyperglycemic Background Therapies on Attainment of A1C Targets Without Hypoglycemia in the ACHIEVE Control Pragmatic, Real-Life Study

BACKGROUND

ACHIEVE Control, a prospective, open-label, randomized, pragmatic, real-life study in insulin-naive people with type 2 diabetes (A1C 8.0-11.0%), demonstrated superiority of insulin glargine 300 units/mL (Gla-300) versus first-generation standard-of-care basal insulin (SOC-BI; glargine 100 units/mL or insulin detemir) in achieving individualized A1C targets without documented symptomatic (glucose ≤3.9 mmol/L [≤70 mg/dL] or <3.0 mmol/L [<54 mg/dL]) or severe hypoglycemia (American Diabetes Association level 3) at 6 months. Noninsulin antihyperglycemic background therapies are commonly used; however, sulfonylureas may increase hypoglycemia risk. This post hoc analysis assessed outcomes according to background therapy.

METHODS

Subgroup analyses were performed per concomitant use/nonuse of sulfonylureas, glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists, dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitors, or sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors. End points (6 and 12 months) included A1C target attainment without documented symptomatic or severe hypoglycemia, A1C target attainment, and absence of documented symptomatic or severe hypoglycemia.

RESULTS

Odds ratios (ORs) at 12 months mostly favored Gla-300 versus SOC-BI across subgroups except in analysis of SGLT2 inhibitors, in which ORs were similar. Among sulfonylurea users, ORs at 12 months strongly favored Gla-300 versus SOC-BI for all end points, particularly A1C target achievement without documented symptomatic hypoglycemia (glucose ≤3.9 mmol/L [≤70 mg/dL]; OR 1.25, 95% CI 1.02-1.53) or severe hypoglycemia and achievement of no documented symptomatic hypoglycemia (glucose <3.0 mmol/L [<54 mg/dL]; OR 1.25, 95% CI 1.02-1.52) or severe hypoglycemia.

CONCLUSION

The results suggest that, in insulin-naive people with type 2 diabetes, Gla-300 is effective with a risk of hypoglycemia that is lower than or similar to that of SOC-BI regardless of background medication. Individuals receiving concomitant sulfonylureas were more likely to remain without symptomatic or severe hypoglycemia with Gla-300.

Insulin glargine 300 units/mL for the treatment of individuals with type 2 diabetes in the real world: A review of the DELIVER programme

Evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) has shown that second-generation basal insulin (BI) analogues, insulin glargine 300 U/mL (Gla-300) and insulin degludec (IDeg), provide similar glycaemic control, with a lower risk of hypoglycaemia compared with the first-generation BI analogue insulin glargine 100 U/mL (Gla-100) in people with type 2 diabetes (T2D). However, the highly selected participants and frequent follow-up of RCTs may not be truly representative of real-life clinical practice. It is important to assess the safety and effectiveness of these second-generation BI analogues in real-life clinical practice settings. The DELIVER programme utilized electronic healthcare records from the United States to compare clinical outcomes in people with T2D who received either Gla-300 or other BI analogues in real-world clinical practice. This review provides a concise overview of the results of the DELIVER studies. Overall, Gla-300 provided similar antihyperglycaemic effectiveness and a lower risk of hypoglycaemia versus the first-generation BI analogues Gla-100 and insulin detemir in people with T2D who had switched BIs. In those who were insulin-naïve, initiation with Gla-300 versus Gla-100 was associated with significantly better antihyperglycaemic effectiveness and similar or lower hypoglycaemic risk. Both glycaemic control and hypoglycaemia risk were also shown to be similar with Gla-300 and IDeg, in people who had switched BIs and in those who were insulin-naïve. In addition, the DELIVER 2 study reported that people with T2D who switched to Gla-300 had reduced healthcare resource utilization, with an overall saving of US$1439 per person per year compared with those who switched to another BI analogue. Overall, the real-world DELIVER programme showed that the glycaemic control with a low risk of hypoglycaemia observed with Gla-300 in RCTs was also seen in standard clinical practice.

Efficacy and safety among second-generation and other basal insulins in adult patients with type 1 diabetes: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

We aimed to assess the comparative efficacy and safety of second-generation basal insulins (glargine U300 and degludec U100) vs. neutral protamine Hagedorn (NPH) and first-generation basal insulins (glargine U100 and detemir) in type 1 diabetes (T1D) adults.PubMed, the Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Google Scholar (until January 2021) were systematically searched. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with ≥ 12 weeks of follow-up comparing efficacy (HbA_1c) or safety (hypoglycemia and weight gain) between second-generation basal insulins vs. other basal insulins in T1D adults were included. Bayesian network meta-analyses were used to estimate risk ratio, hazard ratio, and mean difference. Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) was used to appraise evidence certainty.Eighteen RCTs (≥ 24 weeks of follow-up) involving 7283 randomized participants were included for main analysis. Moderate to high certainty evidence suggested that second-generation basal insulins showed equivalent HbA_1c reduction compared with NPH and first-generation basal insulins. Compared with second-generation basal insulins, low to high certainty evidence suggested that NPH was associated with a higher risk of patients experiencing severe hypoglycemia; NPH and first-generation basal insulins were associated with a higher rate of nocturnal confirmed hypoglycemic events. For the weight gain, glargine U300 was comparable to detemir (low certainty), but degludec U100 was greater than detemir (moderate certainty).In conclusion, second-generation basal insulins maintained equivalent efficacy of glycemic control (moderate to high certainty), with differences in safety (low to high certainty) compared with NPH and first-generation basal insulins during ≥ 24 weeks of follow-up in T1D adults.

Clinical Benefit of Insulin Glargine 300 U/mL Among Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Previously Uncontrolled on Basal or Premixed Insulin in Serbia: A Prospective, Observational, Single-Arm, Multicenter, Real-World Study

INTRODUCTION

Insulin glargine 300 U/mL (Gla-300) is a novel glargine formulation which shows slower and more prolonged absorption following subcutaneous administration in comparison to insulin glargine 100 U/mL. In this prospective, observational, single-arm, multicenter, real-world study conducted in Serbia, we evaluated the effectiveness and safety of Gla-300 in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) previously inadequately controlled with different basal or premix insulin therapy regimes.

METHODS

A total of 350 patients with T2DM were enrolled by 27 physicians, from date of the first patient in (12 December 2017) to the date of last patient completed/last patient out (30 October 2018), from both medical centers and general hospitals. Patients' observation and data collection were performed at visit 1 (V1), i.e., the inclusion visit (3-6 months after Gla-300 introduction), including collection of retrospective data from the patients' medical charts at the time of Gla-300 introduction, and at visit 2 (V2) (3-6 months after V1). The primary objective was to assess the change in glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) level from day of the Gla-300 initiation to the end of the observational period, while the secondary objectives included other effectiveness, as well as safety and other clinically relevant data.

RESULTS

The mean age of the 350 patients was 63.4 ± 8.4 years and 56.3% were female. The mean duration of diabetes was 13.4 ± 7.4 years, while the mean duration of insulin therapy prior to Gla-300 initiation was 5.3 ± 3.9 years. There was a significant reduction in HbA1c level at each visit compared to the previous visit (8.63 ± 1.52% at baseline prior to Gla-300 initiation, 7.87 ± 1.13% at V1, 7.45 ± 1.05% at V2; p < 0.01 vs. previous visit) accompanied by significant reduction of all hypoglycemic events (p < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

Initiation of Gla-300 therapy significantly improved glycemic control and reduced the risk of hypoglycemia in patients with T2DM inadequately controlled with different basal or premix insulin therapy regimes.

FUNDING

Sanofi Serbia.

Real-World Use of Insulin Glargine U100 and U300 in Insulin-Naïve Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: DosInGlar Study

INTRODUCTION

In the EDITION clinical trial programme, patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) receiving insulin glargine (IGlar) U300 required 10-15% more insulin than those receiving IGlar U100. This study sought to determine whether this difference was apparent in real-world practice.

METHODS

In this observational, retrospective cohort study, electronic medical records in the Big-Pac® database (Real Life Data) relating to adult insulin-naïve patients with T2DM who initiated IGlar U100 or U300 treatment in Spain in 2016-2017 and remained on treatment for 18 months were selected. IGlar U100- and U300-treated patients were matched 1:1 (propensity score matching). The primary analysis compared changes from baseline in mean daily IGlar dose (U and U/kg) at 6 (± 2), 12 (± 2) and 18 (± 2) months between cohorts (paired t tests). Changes in glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) and weight were analysed descriptively.

RESULTS

The IGlar U100 and U300 cohorts included 556 matched pairs (46.9% female) with the following mean (standard deviation) values at baseline, respectively: age 63.6 (12.8) versus 63.7 (11.9) years; years since diagnosis 9.5 (1.4) versus 9.5 (1.3); HbA1c 8.8 (1.3) versus 8.7 (1.5) %; weight 84.6 (16.9) versus 84.7 (17.1) kg. Mean IGlar dose at baseline was 0.19 U/kg/day (both cohorts). Patients receiving IGlar U300 showed a greater increase from baseline in IGlar dose at 6, 12 and 18 months [mean dose (U/kg/day) 5.1%, 10.3% and 12.8% greater, respectively, in IGlar U300-treated patients]. Mean HbA1c was 8.1% in both cohorts at 18 months. Mean (SD) weight at 18 months with IGlar U100 and IGlar300 was 86.8 (17.0) kg and 85.0 (17.1) kg, respectively.

CONCLUSION

In real-world practice, insulin dose was significantly higher in IGlar U300-treated than U100-treated patients at 6, 12 and 18 months, with similar reductions in HbA1c. At equal IGlar price/unit in Spain, the increased dose requirements of IGlar U300 would result in higher costs.

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.

Comparison of insulin glargine 300 U/mL versus glargine 100 U/mL on glycemic control and hypoglycemic events in East Asian patients with type 2 diabetes: A Patient-level meta-analysis of phase 3 studies

AIMS

To evaluate efficacy and safety of Gla-300 with Gla-100 in a patient-level meta-analysis among large East Asian patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM).

METHODS

A patient level meta-analysis of three EDITION studies with similar design and endpoints were conducted over 6-months treatment period. The analysis included 547 patients treated with Gla-300 and 348 patients treated with Gla-100.

RESULTS

Over 6-month treatment period, mean change in HbA1c was similar for Gla-300 [Least square (LS) mean, (SE): -1.13 (0.05) % and Gla-100: -1.14 (0.05) %], showing non-inferiority of Gla-300 to Gla-100 (LS mean difference: 0.02%, 95% CI: -0.08 to 0.11). Gla-300 was associated with reduced risk of hypoglycemic event (confirmed ≤ 3.9 mmol/L or severe) vs Gla-100 at any time of day or at night (00:00-05:59 h). The event rates of hypoglycemia were consistently lower with Gla-300 than Gla-100. Severe hypoglycemia was rare in both treatment groups. Weight gain was minimal in both treatment groups.

CONCLUSION

Gla-300 provides comparable glycemic control to Gla-100 in East Asian patients with broad clinical spectrum of T2DM, with consistently less hypoglycemia at any time of the day and night.

Current treatment options and challenges in patients with Type 1 diabetes: Pharmacological, technical advances and future perspectives

Type 1 diabetes mellitus imposes a significant burden of complications and mortality, despite important advances in treatment: subjects affected by this disease have also a worse quality of life-related to disease management. To overcome these challenges, different new approaches have been proposed, such as new insulin formulations or innovative devices. The introduction of insulin pumps allows a more physiological insulin administration with a reduction of HbA1c level and hypoglycemic risk. New continuous glucose monitoring systems with better accuracy have allowed, not only better glucose control, but also the improvement of the quality of life. Integration of these devices with control algorithms brought to the creation of the first artificial pancreas, able to independently gain metabolic control without the risk of hypo- and hyperglycemic crisis. This approach has revolutionized the management of diabetes both in terms of quality of life and glucose control. However, complete independence from exogenous insulin will be obtained only by biological approaches that foresee the replacement of functional beta cells obtained from stem cells: this will be a major challenge but the biggest hope for the subjects with type 1 diabetes. In this review, we will outline the current scenario of innovative diabetes management both from a technological and biological point of view, and we will also forecast some cutting-edge approaches to reduce the challenges that hamper the definitive cure of diabetes.

All-Cause and Cardiovascular Mortality Among Insulin-Naïve People With Type 2 Diabetes Treated With Insulin Detemir or Glargine: A Cohort Study in the UK

INTRODUCTION

Uncontrolled type 2 diabetes (T2D) is associated with an increased risk of micro- and macrovascular complications and mortality. The impact of basal insulins on the risks of mortality and cardiovascular mortality in people with T2D has not been thoroughly investigated in real-world settings. The aim of the present real-word study was to investigate differences in mortality among insulin-naïve people with T2D who initiated insulin detemir (detemir) and insulin glargine (glargine).

METHODS

We assessed all-cause and cardiovascular mortality in people with T2D, aged ≥ 40 years and insulin-naïve at treatment initiation. People were identified from the United Kingdom Clinical Practice Research Datalink GOLD national database (2004-2019). Database information included prescribed medications, demographic and clinical variables and mortality. Cause of death was obtained from the Office for National Statistics (ONS). For mortality, 24 clinically relevant confounders were considered and adjusted for using Cox regression analyses.

RESULTS

The total cohort included 12,847 people with T2D, including 3031 who commenced detemir and 9816 who commenced glargine. Median age was 66.8 years and median diabetes duration was 7.6 years. From the total cohort, 3231 deaths occurred during follow-up and 6897 people were eligible for linkage to the ONS for cardiovascular mortality data (528 cardiovascular deaths). The adjusted hazard ratio (HR) (95% confidence interval [CI]) was 0.86 (0.79; 0.95) for all-cause mortality and 0.83 (0.67; 1.03) for cardiovascular mortality, in favour of detemir versus glargine. These associations were more pronounced among people with obesity (body mass index ≥ 30 kg/m²), with HRs (95% CI) of 0.79 (0.69; 0.91) and 0.69 (0.50; 0.96) for all-cause and cardiovascular mortality, respectively.

CONCLUSION

In this real-world observational study, there was an association between all-cause mortality and basal insulin choice in insulin-naïve people with T2D; the mortality risk was lower with detemir versus glargine after adjustment for potential confounders.

Clinical research of insulin glargine U300 in type 1 diabetes mellitus patients with frequent hypoglycaemia: real-world experience

Introduction

We aimed to see whether insulin glargine U300 can provide better blood glucose control while reducing hypoglycaemia in a more homogeneous population compared to previous studies.

Material and methods

The retrospective study included type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) patients with frequent hypoglycaemia. For evaluation of fasting blood glucose, haemoglobin glycated (HbA_1c) and weight at 6 months and 12 months (final), observation windows of 120–240 days (4–8 months) and 240–480 days (9–16 months) after insulin glargine U300 initiation, respectively, were permitted. Mean follow-up time was 12 months. Hypoglycaemia was defined as blood glucose level < 70 mg/dl, either symptomatic or asymptomatic, measured in hospital or at home.

Results

Forty-four patients were included in the study, and 35 patients completed the study – 20 (57.1%) females and 15 (42.9%) males, with a mean age of 24.1 ±6.6 years. Mean body mass index was 24.4 ±7.4 kg/m². A significant decrease was not found between baseline and HbA_1c values at 6 months (p = 0.199), but a significant decrease was found in the final period (between 9–16 months) (p = 0.025). Hypoglycaemic events occurred in all patients (100%) before using insulin glargine U300, while the incidence of hypoglycaemic events gradually decreased to 74.3%, 68.6%, and 68.6% between months 1–3, 3–6, and 6–9, respectively. Of the 26 patients who declared their level of satisfaction, 23 (88.5%) were satisfied, 2 (7.7%) indicated that there was no significant difference, and 1 (3.8%) patient was unsatisfied.

Conclusions

Over 9–16 months of follow-up, insulin glargine U300 led to a significant reduction not only of HbA_1c levels but also of the frequency of hypoglycaemia, and also yielded high satisfaction rates.

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.

Glycaemic Control with Insulin Glargine 300 U/mL in Individuals with Type 2 Diabetes and Chronic Kidney Disease: A REALI European Pooled Data Analysis

INTRODUCTION

Management of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) in patients with chronic kidney disease is complex. Using the REALI European pooled database, we determined the impact of baseline renal function on the effectiveness and safety of insulin glargine 300 U/mL (Gla-300) initiated in adults with inadequately controlled T2DM.

METHODS

Data from 1712 patients with available estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) at baseline were pooled from six 24-week prospective studies. Patients who received once-daily subcutaneous injections of Gla-300 were classified into four renal function subgroups, according to baseline eGFR: ≥ 90 (N = 599), 60-89 (N = 786), 45-59 (N = 219), and 15-44 mL/min/1.73 m² (N = 108).

RESULTS

Compared to those with baseline eGFR ≥ 60 mL/min/1.73 m², patients with lower eGFR values tended to be older, had a longer T2DM duration, and were more likely to present diabetic complications. After 24 weeks of Gla-300 therapy, the least-squares mean (95% confidence interval) decrease in haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) from baseline (- 1.14% [- 1.28 to - 1.00], - 1.21% [- 1.34 to - 1.08], - 1.19% [- 1.36 to - 1.01], and - 0.99% [- 1.22 to - 0.76]) and the proportion of patients achieving HbA1c < 7.5% (53.3%, 51.3%, 49.5%, and 51.5%) were comparable in the ≥ 90, 60-89, 45-59, and 15-44 mL/min/1.73 m² subgroups, respectively. Although the incidence of hypoglycaemia was overall low, more patients in the eGFR 15-44 mL/min/1.73 m² subgroup experienced hypoglycaemia at night or at any time of the day compared with higher eGFR subgroups. There were no notable differences between the renal function subgroups in the changes in Gla-300 daily dose and body weight from baseline to week 24.

CONCLUSION

Although an eGFR of 15-44 mL/min/1.73 m² was associated with a slightly increased risk of hypoglycaemia among patients with inadequately controlled T2DM, Gla-300 provided glycaemic improvement with an overall favourable safety profile regardless of baseline eGFR.

Real-World Effectiveness and Safety of Insulin Glargine 300 U/mL in Patients with T2D Uncontrolled on NPH or Premixed Insulins as Part of Routine Clinical Practice in Bulgaria: ToUPGRADE Study

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this study is to demonstrate the real-life effectiveness and safety of insulin glargine 300 U/mL (Gla-300) in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) previously uncontrolled on NPH ± prandial insulin or premixed insulins in routine clinical practice in Bulgaria.

METHODS

This was a 24-week prospective, observational study performed in 40 inpatient and outpatient sites across the country.

RESULTS

A total of 286 patients were included in the study. The mean age (± SD) was 61.2 ± 10.0 years with duration of diabetes of 11.64 ± 7.5 years and body mass index (BMI) of 32.1 ± 5.7 kg/m². HbA1c before Gla-300 initiation was 9.8 ± 1.0%, and fasting plasma glucose (FPG) was 13.1 ± 3.4 mmol/L. HbA1c and FPG change from baseline to week 24 was - 1.86% (p < 0.001) and - 4.8 mmol/L (p < 0.001), respectively. The proportion of patients reaching their individualized HbA1c at week 24 was 39.1% (95% CI 33.3-45.1%), while the proportion of patients reaching their individualized HbA1c target without confirmed and/or severe hypoglycaemia was 34.8% (95% CI 29.2-40.7%). At study end, 19.0% (95% CI 14.6-24.1%) achieved HbA1c < 7%. Body weight decreased from 88.3 to 87.0 kg from baseline to week 24 with mean change of - 1.3 kg (p < 0.001). The incidence and event rates of anytime confirmed (≤ 3.9 mmol/L) and/or severe hypoglycaemia were low: 7.7% and 0.42 events per patient-year, respectively. The overall Insulin Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire (ITSQ) score increased from 53.2 to 78.2 from baseline to week 24 and the difference of 25.1 ± 21.5 points was significant (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

In real-life settings, Gla-300 significantly improved glycaemic control and insulin treatment satisfaction in people with T2D who were inadequately controlled with NPH ± prandial insulin or premixed insulin analogues. Improvement of glycaemic control was associated with a very low risk of hypoglycaemia and with significant weight loss irrespective of the previous insulin regimen.

Changes in fasting patterns during Ramadan, and associated clinical outcomes in adults with type 2 diabetes: A narrative review of epidemiological studies over the last 20 years

Although religious guidance exempts some Muslims with type 2 diabetes from fasting during Ramadan, many choose to fast. The associated risks for fasting adults with diabetes includes hypoglycemia, hyperglycemia, ketoacidosis, dehydration, and thrombosis. Thus, it is important that healthcare professionals support individuals who choose to fast to minimize risks. We reviewed three epidemiologic studies to understand how fasting patterns during Ramadan and associated clinical outcomes in adults with type 2 diabetes have evolved over two decades (2000-2020). Over a period of time people with diabetes choosing to fast during Ramadan are displaying increasingly complex profiles in terms of their diabetes, with increased disease duration, greater body mass index, and elevated pre-Ramadan mean glycated hemoglobin levels. Despite this, in the most recent study, >85% of adults with type 2 diabetes still chose to fast. Increased risk of hypoglycemia remains a major concern despite some improvements over time, which could be attributable to enhanced education programs, and changes in treatment type and/or dose prior to and/or during Ramadan. Our review highlights the evolution in fasting patterns over two decades and serves as an update for healthcare professionals to provide appropriate guidance to ensure that Ramadan fasting is safe and rewarding.

Risk of hypoglycemia in Japanese people with type 2 diabetes mellitus who initiated or switched to insulin glargine 300 U/mL: A subgroup analysis of 12-month post-marketing surveillance study (X-STAR study)

AIMS

This study investigated the hypoglycemia risk in people with type 2 diabetes (T2D) who initiated or switched to insulin glargine 300 U/mL (Gla-300) by stratifying them by age and renal function.

METHODS

We examined data from 4621 people with T2D (1227 insulin-naïve and 3394 insulin-experienced) of the X-STAR study, a prospective, observational, 12-month study conducted from December 2015 to August 2018 in Japan. Participants were stratified by age (<65, 65 to <75, and ≥75 years) and estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) (≥90, 60 to <90, 30 to <60, and <30 mL/min/1.73 m²). Hypoglycemia was defined according to the Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare manual of Japan.

RESULTS

No apparent increase in the proportion of people who experienced hypoglycemia was found in all subgroups. The proportions were 2.9-3.5% and 2.7-5.2% of insulin-naïve and insulin-experienced people, respectively, for age subgroups, and 2.4-4.7% and 4.6-4.8%, respectively, for eGFR subgroups. The result was similar for HbA1c levels below and at or above 7.0% in all age subgroups.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study found no apparent increase in the hypoglycemia risk in people with older age and renal impairment who were administered Gla-300. These results would provide reassuring information on Gla-300 use.

Comparative Effectiveness of Switching From First-Generation Basal Insulin to Glargine 300 U/ml or Degludec 100 U/ml in Type 1 Diabetes: The RESTORE-1 Study

INTRODUCTION

Following pivotal trials, real-world evidence is important to assess the impact of new drugs in everyday clinical practice. The RESTORE-1 study aimed to compare effectiveness and safety of the second-generation basal insulins (2BI), i.e., insulin glargine 300 U/ml (Gla-300) vs. degludec 100 U/ml (IDeg-100), in type 1 diabetes (T1D).

METHODS

Retrospective, non-inferiority, multicenter study, based on electronic medical records. All patients switching to Gla-300 or IDeg-100 from first-generation basal insulins (1BI) were 1:1 propensity score matched (PSM). Changes during 6 months in HbA1c (primary endpoint), fasting plasma glucose (FPG), body weight, and insulin doses were assessed using linear mixed models for repeated measures. Incidence rates (IR) of hypoglycemic events were assessed.

RESULTS

Overall, 19 centers provided data on 585 patients in each PSM cohort. For both groups, statistically significant reductions in HbA1c from baseline to 6 months were documented: - 0.20%; (95% CI - 0.32; - 0.08) in the Gla-300 group and - 0.14%; (95% CI - 0.24; - 0.04) in the IDeg-100 group. The non-inferiority of Gla-300 vs. IDeg-100 was confirmed (non-inferiority margin of 0.30%; upper 95% CI at 6 months, 0.09%). No statistically significant between-group differences emerged in FPG and body weight. Dose changes of basal and short-acting insulin were small in both groups, but higher in the Gla-300 group than in the Deg-100 group (p < 0.006). Incidence rates (IR) of hypoglycemia (blood glucose ≤ 70 mg/dl and < 54 mg/dl) during the 6-month follow-up by treatment were slightly lower in the Gla-300 group than in the Deg-100 group [IR ratios 0.82 (95% CI 0.55; 1.22) and 0.83; (95% CI 0.38; 1.83), respectively]. Hypoglycemic events (blood glucose < 54 mg/dl) decreased at 6 months in both groups (p = 0.01 for Gla-300 and p < 0.001 for IDeg-100). There were no severe hypoglycemic events for Gla-300 and seven events for IDeg-100 (p = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

Switching from 1BI to 2BI in adults with T1D was associated with similar improvements in glycemic control and overall significant decrease in hypoglycemia, with no severe events with Gla-300. Effectiveness of both insulins was limited by under-titration.

Effectiveness and safety of insulin glargine Gla-300 in insulin-naïve type 2 diabetes subjects in a real-life setting-the GOAL_RO trial

Background

Basal insulin is the first choice for insulin initiation in type 2 diabetes (T2DM), with the second generation of basal insulin analogues having a lower risk of hypoglycemia compared to the first generation of basal insulins. The aim of our study was to assess on a large cohort of insulin-naïve T2DM subjects the effectiveness and safety of insulin glargine 300 U/mL (Gla-300) in a real-life setting.

Methods

This was a multicenter, prospective, non-interventional, 24 weeks, 3 visits (baseline, 3 and 6 months) trial performed in adult T2DM subjects not achieving glycemic target (HbA1c >7%) with prior oral or GLP-1 RA therapy. The study included 1,095 subjects (55.2% M/44.8% F) in 124 study sites. Mean (±SD) age was 61.1±8.5 years while mean duration of diabetes was 8.8±5.2 years. Mean BMI was 31.7±5.4 kg/m² with 91.2% being overweight or obese. Baseline diabetes treatment included metformin (88.4% of subjects), sulphonylureas (75.4%), DPP-4i (16.7%) and GLP-1 RAs (8%). Comparison between quantitative variables was made with the paired sample t test.

Results

Mean HbA1c at baseline was 9.8%±1.7% with a mean fasting plasma glucose (FBG) of 231.5±67.4 mg/dL. Mean HbA1c decreased to 7.7%±1.2% at 6 months with a mean change from baseline of -2.1% (P<0.001). Overall, 30.7% of subjects reached the HbA1c target of 7%. Final mean dose of Gla-300 was 0.4 IU/kg/day. Mean weight gain was 0.4 kg over 6 months. Adverse events (AEs) were reported by 11.1% of subjects with 2.3% reporting serious adverse events (SAEs). Overall, 4.4% of subjects reporting at least one event of symptomatic or confirmed hypoglycemia. Only 7 episodes of nocturnal and one of severe hypoglycemia were reported.

Conclusions

In conclusion, a significant 2.1% decrease of HbA1c was recorded after 6 months of treatment with Gla-300 with no unexpected safety signals, low risk of hypoglycemia and modest weight gain.

Pharmacokinetic and Pharmacodynamic Head-to-Head Comparison of Clinical, Equivalent Doses of Insulin Glargine 300 units · mL-1 and Insulin Degludec 100 units · mL-1 in Type 1 Diabetes

OBJECTIVE

To prove equivalence of individual, clinically titrated basal insulin doses of glargine 300 units ⋅ mL^-1 (Gla-300) and degludec 100 units ⋅ mL^-1 (Deg-100) under steady state conditions in a single-blind, randomized, crossover study, on the glucose pharmacodynamics (PD) in people with type 1 diabetes (T1D).

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

Subjects with T1D (N = 22, 11 men, age 44.3 ± 12.4 years, disease duration 25.5 ± 11.7 years, A1C 7.07 ± 0.63% [53.7 ± 6.9 mmol ⋅ mL^-1], BMI 22.5 ± 2.7 kg · m^-2), naïve to Gla-300 and Deg-100, underwent 24-h euglycemic clamps with individual clinical doses of Gla-300 (0.34 ± 0.08 units ⋅ kg^-1) and Deg-100 (0.26 ± 0.06 units ⋅ kg^-1), dosing at 2000 h, after 3 months of optimal titration of basal (and bolus) insulin.

RESULTS

At the end of 3 months, Gla-300 and Deg-100 reduced slightly and, similarly, A1C versus baseline. Clamp average plasma glucose (0-24 h) was euglycemic with both insulins. The area under curve of glucose infused (AUC-GIR_{[0-24 h]}) was equivalent for the two insulins (ratio 1.04, 90% CI 0.91-1.18). Suppression of endogenous glucose production, free fatty acids, glycerol, and β-hydroxybutyrate was 9%, 14%, 14%, and 18% greater, respectively, with Gla-300 compared with Deg-100 during the first 12 h, while glucagon suppression was no different. Relative within-day PD variability was 23% lower with Gla-300 versus Deg-100 (ratio 0.77, 90% CI 0.63-0.92).

CONCLUSIONS

In T1D, individualized, clinically titrated doses of Gla-300 and Deg-100 at steady state result in similar glycemic control and PD equivalence during euglycemic clamps. Clinical doses of Gla-300 compared with Deg-100 are higher and associated with quite similar even 24-h distribution of PD and antilipolytic effects.

Equipotency of insulin glargine 300 and 100 U/mL with intravenous dosing but differential bioavailability with subcutaneous dosing in dogs

AIMS

Insulin glargine 300 U/mL (Gla-300) contains the same units versus glargine 100 U/mL (Gla-100) in three-fold lower volume, and higher subcutaneous (SC) doses are required in people with diabetes. To investigate blood glucose (BG) lowering potency, Gla-300 and Gla-100 were compared after intravenous (IV, for 4 h) and SC (for 24 h) injection in healthy Beagle dogs.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The dose of 0.15 U/kg Gla-300 and Gla-100 was injected IV in 12 dogs. BG, C-peptide, glucagon and the active metabolite 21A-Gly-human insulin (M1; liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry method) were measured. Twelve other dogs were studied after SC injection of 0.3 U/kg Gla-300 and Gla-100.

RESULTS

After IV injection, Gla-300 and Gla-100 were equally potent [BG_AUC_{0-4 h} ratio 1.01 (95% confidence interval, 0.94; 1.09)]. After SC injection, BG decreased slower and less with Gla-300. Similar metabolism of Gla-300 and Gla-100 to M1 occurred with IV dosing [M1_AUC_{0-1 h} ratio 0.99 (95% confidence interval, 0.82; 1.22)], but with SC dosing M1_C_max and AUC_0-24h were 44% and 17% lower; mean residency time and bioavailability were 32% longer and 50% lower, with Gla-300.

CONCLUSIONS

IV Gla-300 and Gla-100 have the equivalent of BG-lowering potency and M1 metabolism. SC Gla-300 has lower M1 bioavailability with a reduced BG-lowering effect and need for greater doses versus Gla-100.

[Insulin therapy is a personalized approach to glycemic management in diabetes]

Type 2 diabetes is characterized by chronic hyperglycemia and varying degrees of insulin resistance and insulinopenia. Achieving targeted glycemic control in diabetic patients is important to reduce the risk of late complications, and many patients with type 2 diabetes ultimately require insulin therapy to maintain adequate glycemic control. Timely administration of insulin can prevent the progression of diabetes, reduce the development of complications, and have fewer side effects. Basal insulin is the preferred option in most cases when glycemic control is not achieved. However, there is considerable therapeutic inertia in clinical practice, both with respect to initiation of insulin therapy and titration of the basal insulin dose. The longer duration of action, reduced glucose variability and a lower risk of hypoglycemia seen with the latest generation of basal insulin analogs compared to the previous generation simplify titration and may increase patient compliance.

Recent Advances in Insulin Therapy

Insulin therapy has advanced remarkably over the past few decades. Ultra-rapid-acting and ultra-long-acting insulin analogs are now commercially available. Many additional insulin formulations are in development. This review outlines recent advances in insulin therapy and novel therapies in development.

Considerations for Insulin-Treated Type 2 Diabetes Patients During Hospitalization: A Narrative Review of What We Need to Know in the Age of Second-Generation Basal Insulin Analogs

With the availability of second-generation basal insulin analogs, insulin degludec (100 and 200 units/ml [degludec]) and insulin glargine 300 units/ml (glargine U300), clinicians now have long-acting, efficacious treatment options with stable pharmacokinetic profiles and associated low risks of hypoglycemia that may be desirable for many patients with type 2 diabetes. In this narrative review, we summarize the current evidence on glycemic control in hospitalized patients and review the pharmacokinetic properties of degludec and glargine U300 in relation to the challenges these may pose during the hospitalization of patients with type 2 diabetes who are receiving outpatient regimens involving these newer insulins. Their increased use in clinical practice requires that hospital healthcare professionals (HCPs) have appropriate protocols to transfer patients from these second-generation insulins to formulary insulin on admission, and ensure the safe discharge of patients and transition back to degludec or glargine U300. However, there is no guidance available on this. Based on the authors' clinical experience, we identify key issues to consider when arranging hospital care of such patients. We also summarize the limited available evidence on the potential utility of these second-generation basal insulin analogs in the non-critical inpatient setting and identify avenues for future research. To address current knowledge gaps, it is important that HCPs are educated about the differences between standard formulary insulins and second-generation insulins, and the importance of clear communication during patient transitions.