A pharmacological approach assessing the role of mast cells in insulin infusion site inflammation

Phenolic Preservatives Are Not the Sole Cause of Eosinophilic Infiltration at Infusion Pump Sites

Background: Skin reactions and discomfort associated with insulin infusion pumps limit user adherence. A recent histopathological study by Kalus et al. (DERMIS study) reported increased eosinophilic infiltration and imputed an inflammatory response to an allergen delivered at the catheter tip. This finding might explain the pruritus reported by pump users. As eosinophils migrate to inflammatory foci, primarily due to IL-5 and CCL11, we aimed to evaluate insulin phenolic preservative (IPP) as a potential allergen in vitro and assess tissue eosinophilic infiltration in vivo. Methods: Histopathological evaluations for eosinophil recruitment were performed over 1 week following IPP infusions in swine tissue. Additional histopathological investigations of eosinophilic infiltration were conducted using three commercial glucose sensors implanted in swine for up to 3 weeks. Results: Eosinophilic infiltration in the dermis and subcutaneous tissue was observed following saline and IPP infusion and at glucose sensor implantation at all time points examined. In vitro studies revealed IPP eosinophil cytotoxicity. However, neither CCL11 nor IL-5 was detected in any of the tested tissue cells after IPP treatment. Conclusion: These findings suggest that IPP is not the only triggering allergen, as IPP did not induce eosinophils in vitro, while glucose sensors also indicated increased eosinophilic infiltration. Therefore, factors other than IPP trigger eosinophil recruitment to insulin infusion pump sets.

Mast Cell Deficiency in Mice Attenuates Insulin Phenolic Preservative-Induced Inflammation

One major obstacle that limits the lifespan of insulin infusion pumps is surmounting the tissue site reaction at the device implantation site. All commercial insulin formulations contain insulin phenolic preservatives (IPPs) designed to ensure insulin protein stability and prolong shelf-life. However, our laboratory demonstrated that these preservatives are cytotoxic and induce inflammation. Mature mast cells (MCs) reside in cutaneous tissue and are one of the first responders to an epidermal breach. Upon activation, MCs release proinflammatory and immunomodulatory prepacked mediators that exacerbate these inflammatory reactions. Thus, we hypothesized that once the epidermis is breached, cutaneous MCs are triggered inciting the inflammatory response to IPP-induced inflammation. This hypothesis was pursued utilizing our modified in vivo mouse air pouch model, including a c-kit dependent (C57BL/6J-kitW-sh/W-sh) and a c-kit independent (Cpa3-Cre; Mcl-1fl/fl) MC-deficient mouse model. Leukocytes were quantified in the mouse air pouch lavage fluid following flow cytometry analysis for IPP infusion under three different states, insulin-containing phenolic preservatives (Humalog®), insulin preservatives alone, and normal saline as a control. The air pouch wall was assessed using histopathological evaluations. Flow cytometry analysis demonstrated a statistically significant difference in inflammatory cell recruitment for both MC-deficient mouse models when compared to the control strain including infused control saline. Significantly less inflammation was observed at the site of infusion for the MC-deficient strains compared to the control strain. Overall, concordant results were obtained in both mouse types, C57Bl6-kitW-sh/W-sh and Cpa3-Cre; Mcl-1fl/fl. These findings in multiple model systems support the conclusion that MCs have important or possible unique roles in IPP-induced inflammation.

Inflammation at Site of Insulin Infusion Diminishes Glycemic Control

The approximation of euglycemia is the most effective means of preventing diabetic complications, which is achieved through effective insulin delivery. Recent reports indicate that insulin phenolic preservatives, which are found in all commercial insulin formulations, are cytotoxic, pro-inflammatory and induce secondary fibrosis. Therefore, we hypothesize that these preservatives induce an inflammatory response at the site of insulin infusion leading to diminished glycemic control and adverse pharmacokinetic outcomes. Insulin degradation by inflammatory cell proteases was quantitated following protease treatment in vitro. A modified murine air pouch model was utilized to evaluate the relative inflammatory responses following infusions of saline, insulin preservatives, and insulin, utilizing the adjuvant irritant thioglycolate. Blood glucose levels were monitored in diabetic mice with and without air pouch irritation. A pharmacokinetic analysis evaluated insulin effectiveness for diabetic mice between these two conditions. Inflammatory cells are significantly present in insulin preservative-induced inflammation, which effects diminished blood glucose control by both insulin uptake and degradation. Insulin containing these preservatives resulted in similar degrees of inflammation as observed with the irritant thioglycolate. These studies imply that the preservative agents found in commercial insulin formulations induce an intense localized inflammatory reaction. This inflammatory reaction may be responsible for the premature failure of insulin infusion devices. Future studies directed at reducing this inflammatory reaction may prove to be an important step in extending the lifespan of insulin infusion devices.