Intensifying Insulin Therapy in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: Dosing Options for Insulin Analogue Premixes

Obstructive Sleep Apnea, Circadian Clock Disruption, and Metabolic Consequences

Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is a chronic disorder characterized by recurrent episodes of apnea and hypopnea during sleep. It is associated with various cardiovascular and metabolic complications, including type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and obesity. Many pathways can be responsible for T2DM development in OSA patients, e.g., those related to HIF-1 and SIRT1 expression. Moreover, epigenetic mechanisms, such as miRNA181a or miRNA199, are postulated to play a pivotal role in this link. It has been proven that OSA increases the occurrence of circadian clock disruption, which is also a risk factor for metabolic disease development. Circadian clock disruption impairs the metabolism of glucose, lipids, and the secretion of bile acids. Therefore, OSA-induced circadian clock disruption may be a potential, complex, underlying pathway involved in developing and exacerbating metabolic diseases among OSA patients. The current paper summarizes the available information pertaining to the relationship between OSA and circadian clock disruption in the context of potential mechanisms leading to metabolic disorders.

Exenatide Twice Daily Plus Glargine Versus Aspart 70/30 Twice Daily in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes With Inadequate Glycemic Control on Premixed Human Insulin and Metformin

OBJECTIVE

Many patients with type 2 diabetes treated with premixed insulin gradually have inadequate glycemic control and switch to a basal-bolus regimen, which raises some concerns for weight gain and increased hypoglycemic risk. Switching to combination use of glp-1 agonist and basal insulin may be an alternative option.

METHODS

After a 12-week premixed human insulin 70/30 dosage optimization period, 200 patients with HbA1c of 7.0% to 10.0% were randomized into 24-week treatment groups with exenatide twice a day plus glargine or with aspart 70/30 twice a day.

RESULTS

After 24 weeks, the patients receiving exenatide plus glargine (n = 90) had improved HbA1c control compared with those receiving aspart 70/30 (n = 90) (least squares mean change: ‒0.59 vs ‒0.13%; difference [95% CI]: ‒0.45 [‒0.74 to ‒0.17]) in the full analysis set population. Weight decreased 3.5 kg with exenatide and decreased 0.4 kg with aspart 70/30 (P < .001). The insulin dose was reduced 10.7 units/day (95% CI, ‒12.2 to ‒9.2 units; P < .001) with exenatide, and increased 9.7 units/day (95% CI, 8.2 to 11.2 units; P < .001) with aspart 70/30. The most common adverse events were gastrointestinal adverse effects in the exenatide group (nausea [21%], vomiting [16%], diarrhea [13%]). The incidence of hypoglycemia was similar in 2 groups (27% for exenatide and 38% for aspart 70/30; P = .1).

CONCLUSION

In premixed human insulin‒treated patients with type 2 diabetes with inadequate glycemic control, switching to exenatide twice a day plus glargine was superior to aspart 70/30 twice a day for glycemic and weight control.

Advancing Therapy in Suboptimally Controlled Basal Insulin-Treated Type 2 Diabetes: Clinical Outcomes With iGlarLixi Versus Premix BIAsp 30 in the SoliMix Randomized Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVE

To directly compare the efficacy and safety of a fixed-ratio combination, of insulin glargine 100 units/mL and the glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist lixisenatide (iGlarLixi), with those of a premix insulin analog, biphasic aspart insulin 30 (30% insulin aspart and 70% insulin aspart protamine) (BIAsp 30) as treatment advancement in type 2 diabetes suboptimally controlled on basal insulin plus oral antihyperglycemic drugs (OADs).

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

In SoliMix, a 26-week, open-label, multicenter study, adults with suboptimally controlled basal insulin-treated type 2 diabetes (HbA1c ≥7.5% and ≤10%) were randomized to once-daily iGlarLixi or twice-daily BIAsp 30. Primary efficacy end points were noninferiority in HbA1c reduction (margin 0.3%) or superiority in body weight change for iGlarLixi versus BIAsp 30.

RESULTS

Both primary efficacy end points were met: after 26 weeks, baseline HbA1c (8.6%) was reduced by 1.3% with iGlarLixi and 1.1% with BIAsp 30, meeting noninferiority (least squares [LS] mean difference -0.2% [97.5% CI -0.4, -0.1]; P < 0.001). iGlarLixi was also superior to BIAsp 30 for body weight change (LS mean difference -1.9 kg [95% CI -2.3, -1.4]) and percentage of participants achieving HbA1c <7% without weight gain and HbA1c <7% without weight gain and without hypoglycemia (all P < 0.001). iGlarLixi was also superior versus BIAsp 30 for HbA1c reduction (P < 0.001). Incidence and rates of American Diabetes Association level 1 and 2 hypoglycemia were lower with iGlarLixi versus BIAsp 30.

CONCLUSIONS

Once-daily iGlarLixi provided better glycemic control with weight benefit and less hypoglycemia than twice-daily premix BIAsp 30. iGlarLixi is a more efficacious, simpler, and well-tolerated alternative to premix BIAsp 30 in suboptimally controlled type 2 diabetes requiring treatment beyond basal insulin plus OAD therapy. VIDEO 1: diacare;dc21-0393v4/F1F1f1Infographic available at https://care.diabetesjournals.org/content/dc21-0393-infographic.

Liuwei Dihuang exhibits antidiabetic effects through inhibiting α-amylase and α-glucosidase

OBJECTIVE

Liuwei Dihuang (LWDH) is a famous traditional herbal medicine formula in China that may regulate the balance of kidney yin yang and has been used to restore functional insufficiency of the kidney for a long time in China.

METHODS

In this study, the water extract of LWDH was tested for its α-Amylase and α-Glucosidase inhibitory activities, and its anti-diabetic property in streptozotocin (STZ)-induced diabetic mice was also analyzed.

RESULTS

LWDH extract inhibited α-Glucosidase and α-Amylase activities in a dose- dependent manner. Treatment of streptozotocin-induced diabetic mice with LWDH extract decreased camp, fasting blood glucose, TC, TG, LDL-c, HbA1C, Urine volume levels and Urine sugar, increased HDL-c level when compared to STZ induced diabetic mice.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrates that extract of LWDH can inhibit α-amylase and α-glucosidase activities and shows anti-diabetic effect in a mice preclinical model.

Effectiveness of insulin glargine in type 2 diabetes mellitus patients failing glycaemic control with premixed insulin: Adriatic countries data meta-analysis

AIMS

Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is a progressive disease, often requiring exogenous insulin therapy and treatment intensification. Despite new therapies, most patients do not reach the recommended HbA1c targets, among them a significant proportion of patients on premixed insulins. The aim was to summarize published data in Adriatic countries on effectiveness of insulin glargine based therapy in type 2 diabetic patients suboptimally controlled on premix insulin.

METHODS

A meta-analysis was carried out in major medical databases up to April 2014, focusing on Adriatic region. We searched observational studies with duration of at least 6 months, evaluating effectiveness and safety of insulin glargine (IGlar), in combination with OAD or bolus insulin in patients with T2 failing premixed insulin therapy. Outcomes included values of HbA1c, fasting blood glucose and two hours post-prandial glucose concentration as well as changes in body mass index after at least 6 months of study duration.

RESULTS

Three prospective, observational, multicentric trials (698 patients in total) were included. The basal bolus regimen with glargine significantly reduced HbA1c (Mean Difference, MD=2.27, CI [1.76, 2.78]), fasting glucose (MD=5.15, CI [4.86, 5.44]) and 2-hours postprandial glucose concentration (MD=6.94, CI [6.53, 7.34]). No significant changes were found in BMI after switching from premixes to IGlar based treatment.

CONCLUSION

Insulin glargine based therapy following premix failure is efficacious and safe option of type 2 diabetes treatment intensification.

Breaking down patient and physician barriers to optimize glycemic control in type 2 diabetes

Approximately half of patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) do not achieve globally recognized blood glucose targets, despite the availability of a wide range of effective glucose-lowering therapies. Failure to maintain good glycemic control increases the risk of diabetes-related complications and long-term health care costs. Patients must be brought under glycemic control to improve treatment outcomes, but existing barriers to optimizing glycemic control must first be overcome, including patient nonadherence to treatment, the failure of physicians to intensify therapy in a timely manner, and inadequacies in the health care system itself. The reasons for such barriers include treatment side effects, complex treatment regimens, needle anxiety, poor patient education, and the absence of an adequate patient care plan; however, newer therapies and devices, combined with comprehensive care plans involving adequate patient education, can help to minimize barriers and improve treatment outcomes.