Therapy with insulin glargine (Lantus) in toddlers, children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes

The efficacy of insulin degludec and insulin glargine over NPH insulin among toddlers and preschoolers with type 1 diabetes using glycemic variability and time in range

Optimizing glycemic control without risking hypoglycemia is crucial in toddlers and preschoolers with type 1 diabetes (T1D) to avoid cognitive impairment later in life. Hence, this study aims to compare glycemic parameters among toddlers and preschoolers with T1D in relation to different basal insulins. Sixty toddlers and preschoolers with T1D with mean age of 3.53 ± 1.17 years (range, 2-6) and mean diabetes duration of 9.37 ± 1.85 months were randomly assigned into three equal groups; group A received insulin degludec, group B received insulin glargine, and group C were on NPH. At baseline, the three groups were matched regarding clinical and laboratory parameters (p > 0.05). They were followed up at 3 and 6 months for insulin daily dose (IDD), hypoglycemia and severe-hypoglycemia frequency, and glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c). At the study endpoint, continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) was assessed in a random sample of 10 patients from each group. The mean time in range (TIR) of the studied cohort was 55.07 ± 24.05%, and their mean coefficient of variation (CV) was 42.82 ± 11.69%. The TIR was significantly higher in the degludec group (69.36 ± 18.54) and the glargine group (55.43 ± 26.51) than the NPH group (32.56 ± 9.11), p < 0.001. Meanwhile, the CV was significantly lower in the degludec group (35.12 ± 6.47) than the gargine (44.1 ± 13.13) and the NPH (53.8 ± 7.54) groups, p < 0.001. The insulin degludec and glargine groups had significantly lower HbA1c (p = 0.002), hypoglycemia (p = 0.006), severe hypoglycemia (p = 0.029), and IDD (p = 0.015) than the NPH group.

CONCLUSION

Insulin degludec and glargine resulted in better HbA1c and TIR with reduced hypoglycemia and IDD than NPH among toddlers and preschoolers with T1D. Moreover, CV was lowest in the insulin degludec group.

WHAT IS KNOWN

• Insulin therapy is the mainstay of T1D management. • Optimal insulin therapy for young children with T1D should provide effective glycemic.

WHAT IS NEW

• Insulin degludec and insulin glargine have better efficacy than NPH insulin among toddlers and preschoolers with T1D in the term of significantly lower coefficient of variation, HbA1c and IDD and significantly higher time in range. • Insulin degludec and insulin glargine have better safety in the term of less hypoglycemia and severe hypoglycemia episodes than NPH insulin among toddlers and preschoolers with T1D.

Continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion versus multiple daily injections in children and young people at diagnosis of type 1 diabetes: the SCIPI RCT

BACKGROUND

The risk of developing long-term complications of type 1 diabetes (T1D) is related to glycaemic control and is reduced by the use of intensive insulin treatment regimens: multiple daily injections (MDI) (≥ 4) and continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII). Despite a lack of evidence that the more expensive treatment with CSII is superior to MDI, both treatments are used widely within the NHS.

OBJECTIVES

(1) To compare glycaemic control during treatment with CSII and MDI and (2) to determine safety and cost-effectiveness of the treatment, and quality of life (QoL) of the patients.

DESIGN

A pragmatic, open-label randomised controlled trial with an internal pilot and 12-month follow-up with 1 : 1 web-based block randomisation stratified by age and centre.

SETTING

Fifteen diabetes clinics in hospitals in England and Wales.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients aged 7 months to 15 years.

INTERVENTIONS

Continuous subsutaneous insulin infusion or MDI initiated within 14 days of diagnosis of T1D.

DATA SOURCES

Data were collected at baseline and at 3, 6, 9 and 12 months using paper forms and were entered centrally. Data from glucometers and CSII were downloaded. The Health Utilities Index Mark 2 was completed at each visit and the Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory (PedsQL, diabetes module) was completed at 6 and 12 months. Costs were estimated from hospital patient administration system data.

OUTCOMES

The primary outcome was glycosylated haemoglobin (HbA_1c) concentration at 12 months. The secondary outcomes were (1) HbA_1c concentrations of < 48 mmol/mol, (2) severe hypoglycaemia, (3) diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA), (4) T1D- or treatment-related adverse events (AEs), (5) change in body mass index and height standard deviation score, (6) insulin requirements, (7) QoL and (8) partial remission rate. The economic outcome was the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained.

RESULTS

A total of 293 participants, with a median age of 9.8 years (minimum 0.7 years, maximum 16 years), were randomised (CSII, n = 149; MDI, n = 144) between May 2011 and January 2015. Primary outcome data were available for 97% of participants (CSII, n = 143; MDI, n = 142). At 12 months, age-adjusted least mean squares HbA_1c concentrations were comparable between groups: CSII, 60.9 mmol/mol [95% confidence interval (CI) 58.5 to 63.3 mmol/mol]; MDI, 58.5 mmol/mol (95% CI 56.1 to 60.9 mmol/mol); and the difference of CSII - MDI, 2.4 mmol/mol (95% CI -0.4 to 5.3 mmol/mol). For HbA_1c concentrations of < 48 mmol/mol (CSII, 22/143 participants; MDI, 29/142 participants), the relative risk was 0.75 (95% CI 0.46 to 1.25), and for partial remission rates (CSII, 21/86 participants; MDI, 21/64), the relative risk was 0.74 (95% CI 0.45 to 1.24). The incidences of severe hypoglycaemia (CSII, 6/144; MDI, 2/149 participants) and DKA (CSII, 2/144 participants; MDI, 0/149 participants) were low. In total, 68 AEs (14 serious) were reported during CSII treatment and 25 AEs (eight serious) were reported during MDI treatment. Growth outcomes did not differ. The reported insulin use was higher with CSII (mean difference 0.1 unit/kg/day, 95% CI 0.0 to 0.2 unit/kg/day; p = 0.01). QoL was slightly higher for those randomised to CSII. From a NHS perspective, CSII was more expensive than MDI mean total cost (£1863, 95% CI £1620 to £2137) with no additional QALY gains (-0.006 QALYs, 95% CI -0.031 to 0.018 QALYs).

LIMITATIONS

Generalisability beyond 12 months is uncertain.

CONCLUSIONS

No clinical benefit of CSII over MDI was identified. CSII is not a cost-effective treatment in patients representative of the study population.

FUTURE WORK

Longer-term follow-up is required to determine if clinical outcomes diverge after 1 year. A qualitative exploration of patient and professional experiences of MDI and CSII should be considered.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN29255275 and EudraCT 2010-023792-25.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 22, No. 42. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information. The cost of insulin pumps and consumables supplied by F. Hoffman-La Roche AG (Basel, Switzerland) for the purpose of the study were subject to a 25% discount on standard NHS costs.

Clinical Effectiveness and Safety of Analog Glargine in Type 1 Diabetes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

INTRODUCTION

The use of insulin analogs for the treatment of type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) is widespread; however, the therapeutic benefits still require further evaluation given their higher costs. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of analog insulin glargine compared to recombinant DNA (rDNA) insulin in patients with T1DM in observational studies, building on previous reviews of randomized controlled trials comparing neutral protamine Hagedorn insulin and insulin glargine.

METHODS

A systematic review with a meta-analysis was performed. The review included cohort studies and registries available on PubMed, LILACS, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), as well as manual and gray literature searches. The meta-analysis was conducted in Review Manager 5.3 software. The primary outcomes were glycated hemoglobin (Hb1Ac), weight gain, and hypoglycemia. Methodological quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale.

RESULTS

Out of 796 publications, 11 studies were finally included. The meta-analysis favored insulin glargine in HbA1c outcomes (adult patients) and hypoglycemic episodes (P < 0.05), but without reaching glycemic control (Hb1Ac to approximately 7%). The methodological quality of the studies was moderate, noting that 45% of studies were funded by pharmaceutical companies.

CONCLUSION

Given the high heterogeneity of the studies, the discrete value presented by the estimated effect on effectiveness and safety, potential conflicts of interest of the studies, and the appreciable higher cost of insulin glargine, there is still no support for recommending first-line therapy with analogs. The role of analogs in the treatment of T1DM could be better determined by further observational studies of good methodological quality to assess their long-term effectiveness and safety, as well as their cost-effectiveness.

The Impact of Technology on Current Diabetes Management

Technological innovations have revolutionized the treatment of type 1 diabetes. Although technological advances can potentially improve diabetes outcomes, maintenance of target glycemic control, at the present time, remains largely dependent on patient and family motivation, competence, and adherence to daily diabetes care requirements. Trials of closed loop or "artificial pancreas" technology show great promise to automate insulin delivery and achieve near normal glucose control and reduced hypoglycemia with minimal patient intervention.

Insulin glargine in pediatric patients with type 1 diabetes in Japan

BACKGROUND

We evaluated the safety and effectiveness of insulin glargine in Japanese pediatric patients with type 1 diabetes in clinical settings based on post-marketing surveillance data.

METHODS

Clinical data were collected from Japanese pediatric patients with type 1 diabetes for 24 weeks after initiation of glargine treatment. Baseline characteristics, hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), fasting plasma glucose (FPG), previous/concomitant medication, height, bodyweight, and adverse events were analyzed.

RESULTS

One-hundred and thirteen patients were enrolled from 20 medical institutions in Japan in 2003 and 2004. Of these patients, 73 were included in the safety analysis, and 70 of these patients were also included in the efficacy analysis. The 73 patients included 28 boys and 45 girls, with a mean age of 11.8 years at entry. Hypoglycemia occurred in three patients (three events) and was severe in two patients (two events); all patients recovered. In the efficacy evaluation, HbA1c at baseline and final assessment was 9.10% and 8.09% (P < 0.001) in all patients; 8.96% and 7.85% (P < 0.001) in patients aged 7-12 years (Group 1); and 9.28% and 8.37% (P = 0.010) in patients aged 13-15 years (Group 2). FPG significantly decreased in all patients and in Group 1. No significant changes were observed in body mass index or degree of obesity during the study.

CONCLUSIONS

Glargine therapy for Japanese pediatric patients with type 1 diabetes resulted in good glycemic control in terms of HbA1c and FPG as well as good safety in clinical settings. Glargine had little effect on the physical build of patients.

Treatment with insulin detemir or NPH insulin in children aged 2-5 yr with type 1 diabetes mellitus

This randomised (1:1), multinational, open-labelled, parallel group trial compared insulin detemir (IDet) with neutral protamine Hagedorn (NPH) insulin, in combination with mealtime insulin aspart, over 1 yr in subjects aged 2-16 yr with type 1 diabetes mellitus. Of 348 randomised subjects, 82 (23.6%) were 2-5 yr (IDet: 42, NPH: 40). This article is a descriptive subgroup analysis of these young children. Baseline characteristics (IDet vs. NPH) were similar: mean age, 4.3 vs. 4.5 yr; diabetes duration, 2.2 vs. 2.1 yr; males, 42.9 vs. 52.5%. Mean haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) was similar between groups at baseline (8.2 vs. 8.1%), and changed little over 1 yr (8.1 vs. 8.3%). Fasting plasma glucose (FPG) was similar at baseline (8.44 vs. 8.56 mmol/L) and decreased during the study (-1.0 vs. -0.45 mmol/L). A lower rate of hypoglycaemia was observed with IDet compared with NPH (24-h; 50.6 vs. 78.3 episodes per patient-year; nocturnal hypoglycaemia, 8.0 vs. 17.4 episodes per patient-year). No severe hypoglycaemic episodes occurred with IDet, while 3 subjects reported 6 episodes with NPH. Change in weight standard deviation score standardised by age and gender was -0.17 with IDet and +0.03 with NPH. A slightly lower proportion of subjects in this age group reported adverse events with IDet than with NPH (69.0 vs. 77.5%). Serious adverse events were few (5 with IDet, 7 with NPH). In conclusion, long-term treatment with IDet in children aged 2-5 yr suggested similar glycaemic control, greater reduction in FPG, lower rates of hypoglycaemia, no inappropriate weight gain, and fewer adverse events compared with NPH.

Therapeutics in pediatric diabetes: insulin and non-insulin approaches. Part of a series on Pediatric Pharmacology, guest edited by Gianvincenzo Zuccotti, Emilio Clementi, and Massimo Molteni

Treatment of pediatric diabetes can be challenging. Strict glucose control can be accompanied by hypoglycemia and weight gain. Recently, there have been many developments in insulin preparations and delivery methods which make insulin levels more close to a physiologic pattern. Newly developed rapid/long acting analogues and delivery devices such as continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII, insulin pump) may reduce hypoglycemia and improve glycemic control. CSII combined with continuous glucose monitoring can achieve even better glycemic control. The closed-loop system is rapidly evolving and an artificial pancreas will be available in the near future. It is now recognized that several hormones other than insulin such as glucagon, amylin, and incretins contribute to glucose homeostasis. The role of co-adjuncts such as metformin, amylin analogues, and incretin based therapy is now emerging. Immunotherapy in a high risk population or patients in the early phase of type 1 diabetes may prevent further destruction of pancreatic β cells.

Lower HbA1c after 1 year, in children with type 1 diabetes treated with insulin glargine vs. NPH insulin from diagnosis: a retrospective study

OBJECTIVE

Insulin glargine offers sustained insulin delivery for 24 h. Change to glargine treatment consistently results in lower fasting glucose and fewer hypoglycemic episodes in children with type 1 diabetes compared to continuation of NPH, although glargine has not been shown to improve HbA1c in randomized trials. Studies comparing glargine and NPH in multiple injection therapy in children treated from diagnosis of type 1 diabetes are lacking.

METHODS

HbA1c and insulin requirement were compared in a retrospective study of children (7-17 yr of age) with type 1 diabetes treated from diagnosis with basal insulin glargine (n = 49) or NPH (n = 49) in a multiple injection therapy (MIT) regimen with a rapid-acting insulin analogue. Patients were followed every third month for 1 yr. HbA1c, insulin dose, and weight data were retrieved.

RESULTS

HbA1c (mean ± SD) was lower at 3-5 months (5.5 ± 0.89 vs. 6.2 ± 0.89%, p < 0.05) and 6-9 months (5.6 ± 1.14 vs. 6.6 ± 0.99%; p < 0.001) in glargine treated. After 12 months, HbA1c was significantly lower in glargine treated (6.3 ± 1.56 vs. 7.1 ± 1.28; p < 0.01). Reported total insulin doses were similar at nadir (0.5 U/kg BW × 24 h), but significantly lower at 12 months in glargine treated (0.64 ± 0.23 vs. 0.86 ± 0.3 U/kg BW × 24 h; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

HbA1c 1 yr from diagnosis was lower in children treated with glargine from start as compared with those on NPH. This observation should be viewed in the light of a significantly lower dose of total daily insulin in the glargine group.

Improving glycaemic control in children and adolescents: which aspects of therapy really matter?

In paediatric diabetes, the concept of intensive therapy in the post-Diabetes Control and Complications Trial period has become subverted by a pharmaco-technological paradigm at the expense of other aspects of care such as goal-setting and psychosocial support. This review examines which patients benefit most from intensive therapy in terms of glycaemic control (HbA1c). It also reviews published controlled trial and observational data relating to the impact of various insulin types and delivery systems on glycaemic control and canvasses the literature dealing with the impact of patient support, philosophy of care, goal setting and treating team dynamic on HbA1c. Taking into account the characteristics of those patients who benefit most from intensive therapy, the quantum of HbA1c change and the persistence of changes that have been reported in selected and non-selected patient groups, it appears that there is a clear hierarchy in aspects of therapy that improve glycaemic control for children and adolescents with Type 1 diabetes. Prime issues appear to be patient support, team cohesion and goal setting. The reported glycaemic benefits achieved by an isolated emphasis upon a pharmaco-technological paradigm are limited in children and adolescents. It appears that only after the prime issues have been first considered will the potential benefits of the insulin types and regimens then be realized.

Comparison of the efficacy and safety of insulin glargine and insulin detemir with NPH insulin in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes mellitus receiving intensive insulin therapy

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of insulin glargine and detemir with NPH insulin in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes mellitus (DM).

METHODS

Thirty four children and adolescents with type 1 DM (mean age 12.7 ± 3.4 years, diabetes duration 5.4 ± 3.0 years) were included in the study. All patients had been receiving intensive insulin therapy with insulin aspart and NPH for at least 6 months before switching from NPH to insulin glargine (Group 1, n=19) or detemir (Group 2, n=15). The medical records obtained within 6 months before and after treatment with insulin glargine and detemir were retrospectively reviewed and the data were compared in each group.

RESULTS

The mean age and duration of DM were similar in two groups (p>0.05). In both groups, switching from NPH to insulin glargine or detemir, resulted in a reduction in HbA(1c) (p0.05, for both). Patients in the detemir treated group had less increment in body mass index (BMI) SDS at the end of 6 months of therapy compared to NPH and glargine treated patients (p>0.05, for both). No side effects were noted throughout the study.

CONCLUSION

Both insulin glargine and detemir improved HbA(1c) at short-term and proved to be safe and well tolerated in children and adolescents with type 1 DM.

Effects of moderate-severe exercise on blood glucose in Type 1 diabetic adolescents treated with insulin pump or glargine insulin

BACKGROUND

Few papers focus on exercise-related blood glucose (BG) in patients on continuous sc insulin infusion (CSII) or multiple daily injections (MDI) with glargine.

AIM

The main objective was to evaluate the degree of glycemic control in Type 1 diabetes mellitus adolescents on CSII doing physical activity with pump switched on or off. These findings were also compared with a small group of patients on MDI with glargine.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

Eight patients on CSII (basal rate continued or turned off in alternating sessions) and 5 on MDI joined 4 sessions of moderate-severe exercise.

RESULTS

Post-exercise BG significantly increased with the pump off and was unchanged/decreased with the pump on and MDI groups vs baseline. The hypoglycemia rate was not different among the 3 groups at any time. Pump on: hypoglycemias more frequent both at bedtime (p=0.031) and at awakening (p<0.001) than before dinner and at awakening than at bed-time (p=0.044). Pump off: hypoglycemias more frequent both at bed-time (p=0.010) and at awakening (p=0.031) than before dinner. MDI: no differences.

CONCLUSIONS

Glargine is safe and reducing the pre-lunch insulin is unnecessary. Subjects on insulin pump should not stop the basal rate. If they stop the pump, some actions are advisable: pre-exercise insulin bolus, pre-sleeping snack rich in carbohydrates, slight reduction of the overnight basal rate. On the other hand, if the basal rate is unmodified, the ingestion of sugary drinks during the exercise, the reduction of the overnight basal rate, a reduction of the pre-dinner insulin bolus and/or a pre-sleeping snack should be considered.

Insulin Glargine: a review 8 years after its introduction

Insulin Glargine was the first long-acting insulin analog produced by recombinant DNA technology, approved for use by the US FDA in April 2000 and by the European Agency for the Evaluation of Medicinal Products in June, 2000. It has become the most widely used insulin in the USA owing to its long duration of action without a pronounced peak. The principal advantage of insulin Glargine over neutral protamine Hagedorn (NPH) insulin is in a lower frequency of hypoglycemic reactions, thus affording improved safety. It is used in both type 1 and type 2 diabetes, usually as a single daily dose. In type 2 patients, it is often the first insulin introduced as a single daily dose. Although insulin Glargine is typically administered as a single nighttime dose, it can be given in the morning or at any other time convenient for the patient. In labile type 1 diabetes, it is often most effective given as two daily injections. In obese, insulin-resistant patients, it may be best to administer insulin Glargine in two separate doses, owing to the high volumes of injected insulin required. Insulin Glargine does not treat postprandial hyperglycemia. It is necessary to supplement with short-acting insulin at mealtimes to control glucose surges after meals. Insulin Glargine is effective in hospitalized and postsurgical patients on account of its lack of pronounced insulin peaks and long duration of action. Although there is considerable use of Glargine in pregnant diabetic women, there is no definitive study to confirm its benefits. Insulin Glargine is thought to coprecipitate supplementary short-acting insulins when co-administered in the same syringe. Therefore, more injections are typically needed in the usual treatment regimen for insulin requiring diabetes. In many cases, constant basal insulin levels may be achieved with multiple overlapping doses of NPH insulin given together with short-acting insulin at mealtimes. Such a therapy may be less costly, but the major advantage of insulin Glargine remains the greater safety of a lower frequency of hypoglycemic reactions.

[Switching of NPH insulin to glargine therapy in a cohort of diabetic patients: observational study]

This study examined the impact of insulin glargine introduction in basal-bolus therapy in type 1 and type 2 diabetic patients with inadequate metabolic control (A1c > 6.9%) using previous NPH insulin regime. In this uncontrolled, retrospective study, 49 patients (28F/21M), average age 24.7 +/- 16.5, mean duration of DM 13.2 +/- 10.1 yrs., 93.1% DM1 patients, received insulin glargine plus mealtime rapid-acting insulin (lispro or aspart) followed by 90-day treatment. We analyzed mean total insulin dose, incidence of hypoglycemic events, convulsive crisis, hyperglycemic complications and A1c levels before and after three months of introduction of glargine therapy. A1c values were determined using the HPLC instrument, with a normal range of 4.3% to 6.9%. After switching to insulin glargine therapy, mean A1c dropped from 10.2 +/- 2.0 to 9.1 +/- 1.8%, with significant impact (p= 0.019). We observed a significant reduction of 0.11 U/kg/day in total insulin dose, dropped from 0.75 U/kg of NPH to 0.64 U/kg of glargine, with significant correlation (p< 0.05). The introduction of glargine therapy was coincident with a decrease of hypoglycemic crisis (p= 0.02), convulsive events due to hypoglycemia (severe hypoglycemic crisis) (p= 0.023) and ketosis (p= 0.001) switching MDI-treated patients with improvement of metabolic control (reduction of A1c levels). This therapy improved quality of life in these patients due to a significant reduction of hypoglycemic (including severe) events, ketosis episodes and total daily insulin dose, with important impact on health public services.

Basal insulin switch from NPH to glargine in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes

BACKGROUND

Insulin glargine is a long-acting insulin analogue increasingly used instead of neutral protamine Hagedorn (NPH) insulin in young subjects with type 1 diabetes.

OBJECTIVE

We evaluated the clinical course of diabetes in children and adolescents who were switched from NPH to insulin glargine.

METHODS

Between August 2003 and November 2004, a total of 76 subjects were switched to glargine in our clinic, treating 340 children with type 1 diabetes. All the subjects had been receiving insulin NPH, and their serum C-peptide levels had been non-detectable for at least 1 yr. Data were collected retrospectively, and 12-18 months after the change, experiences with glargine were inquired using a questionnaire. Seven subjects (9.2%) discontinued glargine before 12 months, and seven refused to participate.

RESULTS

Data for 62 subjects were analyzed. At the switch (0 months), their mean age was 12.7 yr (range 5.1-17.5), mean duration of diabetes was 6.7 yr (range 1.8-14.3), and mean hemoglobin A1c was (HbA1c) 9.2%. Twelve months later (+12 months), the mean HbA1c remained similar (9.2%), the proportion of long-acting insulin was smaller (47.7 vs. 58.1%; p < 0.001), and the daily insulin dose was lower (0.97 vs. 1.05 IU/kg; p < 0.001). The number of injections was lower at +12 months (17.7% with more than five injections vs. 64.5%; p < 0.001). No differences were seen in weight for height or the number of severe hypoglycemias. Most subjects who continued with glargine for > or =12 months considered glargine better than NPH.

CONCLUSIONS

A switch to insulin glargine retains a similar glycemic control and does not change the number of severe hypoglycemias.

Hypoglycemia in type 1 diabetes: a still unresolved problem in the era of insulin analogs and pump therapy

The Diabetes Control and Complications Trial demonstrated that in patients with type 1 diabetes, tight metabolic control achieved with intensive insulin therapy can reduce the risk of long-term microvascular complications. However, strict glycemic control carries an increased risk of severe hypoglycemia. Recurrent episodes of hypoglycemia, especially at young ages, can lead to hypoglycemia unawareness, exert adverse effects on neurocognitive function, and cause significant emotional morbidity in the child and parents. Although the introduction of the new insulin analogs in diabetes therapy and the use of continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion raised hopes for a solution to this problem, these modalities have not been associated with the expected reduction in hypoglycemic episodes. The findings suggest that the prevention of hypoglycemia in patients with type 1 diabetes lies in biologically controlled insulin secretion, as in islet transplantation, or the development of an autonomous closed-loop system that efficiently mimics the action of the pancreatic beta-cells and maintains blood glucose levels within the desired range.

The role of new technologies in treating children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes mellitus

Given the physiological and psychological impact of type 1 diabetes in children and adolescents, these patients present special challenges to pediatric health care providers. The goals of intensive management of diabetes have been clearly established since the publication of the Diabetes Control and Complication Trial (DCCT) in 1993, which demonstrated that tight metabolic control achieved with intensive insulin therapy is superior to conventional treatment in reducing the risk of long-term microvascular complications. Thus, current recommendations mandate that youth with type 1 diabetes should aim to achieve metabolic control as close to normal as possible. However, strict glycemic control is hard to achieve requiring frequent blood glucose measurements and several insulin injections per day, and in addition is associated with an increased risk of severe hypoglycemia. Recurrent episodes of hypoglycemia, especially at young ages, may cause adverse effects on neurocognitive function, may lead to hypoglycemia unawareness, and may be associated with significant emotional morbidity for the child and parents. Since the discovery of insulin in 1921 there has been constant progress in the way patients with type 1 diabetes are treated. The introduction of recombinant insulin and insulin analogs as well as new insulin delivery systems and glucose monitoring devices enhanced the ability of both patients and medical teams to better define the therapeutic goals and to develop more effective therapeutic strategies. Recent advances in devices for insulin administration and glucose monitoring and the introduction of telemedicine are having a profound effect on the lives of youth with type 1 diabetes. This review focuses on the new technologies which have been developed for treating children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes.

Insulin glargine: a basal insulin for the management of diabetes

The prevalence of diabetes mellitus has been increasing steadily in the last 30 years and it is predicted that there will be 300 million people affected by 2025. Insulin deficiency is a feature of both Type 1 and 2 diabetes; insulin treatment, obligatory in Type 1, will also be required in many Type 2 patients. Insulin glargine is the first available synthetic insulin that can truly be described as basal - administered as a once-daily subcutaneous injection it raises the background, or basal, insulin level without a significant peak action and less hypoglycemia than previously used basal insulins. Insulin glargine is the first basal insulin that can be administered as a single injection daily as part of an intensive basal-bolus insulin regimen in Type 1 diabetes. In Type 2 diabetes, insulin glargine, administered once daily with one or two oral hypoglycemic drugs, can enable more than 50% of patients to achieve an A_1c of less than 7%. The titration of the insulin glargine dose to an appropriate level over a period of weeks is essential to its successful use in Type 2 diabetes.

[Insulin glargine in intensively-treated type 1 diabetes mellitus]

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the use of insulin glargine in intensively-treated children and adolescents. To assess the degree of patient and parent satisfaction with this treatment.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We studied 42 patients with type 1 diabetes. There were 27 girls and 15 boys. The mean age at diagnosis was 6.8 years (range 1.2-13.2), the mean age at initiation of glargine therapy was 12.8 years (range 7.0-17.7), and the mean duration of diabetes was 6.1 years (range 2.0-11.9). Glargine indications were poor metabolic control or frequent hypoglycemia with multiple daily injections of NPH insulin, which were substituted by one dose of glargine. Patient and parent satisfaction with diabetes treatment was assessed with the scale published by Boot. ANOVA, Student's t test, Mann-Whitney and Fisher tests were applied.

RESULTS

Variables are reported as mean 6 standard deviation. After 18 months, glargine reduced hemoglobin A1c levels (7.65 % +/- 0.74 vs. 8.03 % +/- 0.69; p = 0.001), with no significant changes in insulin dose (1.03 +/- 0.19 U/kg/day vs. 1.08 +/- 0.21; p = 0.052) or body mass index SDS (standard deviation score) (+0.51 +/- 0.96 vs. 10.61 +/- 1.02; p = 0.11). Glargine also increased patient satisfaction (+44.5 +/- 18.8 points vs. -9.9 +/- 26.8; p < 0.001) and parent satisfaction (+42.0 +/- 17.9 points vs. -20.8 +/- 29.1; p < 0.001) with diabetes treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

1. Glargine insulin improves metabolic control in intensively-treated children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes. 2. Glargine also improves patient and parent satisfaction with diabetes treatment.

Comparison of breakfast and bedtime administration of insulin glargine in children and adolescents with Type 1 diabetes

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of administration time of insulin glargine (IG) on glycemic control in children and adolescents with Type 1 diabetes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 31 children and adolescents (15 F and 16 M) with Type 1 diabetes on intensive therapy (bedtime NPH and premeal insulin aspart) were randomized to receive once-daily IG either at breakfast (breakfast group, n=15) or bedtime (bedtime group, n=16) while continuing insulin aspart premeals for 6 months. Blood glucose levels were measured fasting, preprandially and bedtime. Total daily insulin dose (TDD), body mass index (BMI), glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA(1c)), and frequency of hypoglycemia in the preceding 3 months were assessed at recruitment, third month and sixth month.

RESULTS

The dose of IG, TDD, and fasting blood glucose levels were similar in both groups during the study period. The only significant difference in blood glucose levels between breakfast and bedtime groups was found for dinnertime at 6 months (135+/-26mg/dl versus 161+/-33mg/dl, respectively, p=0.035). In the breakfast group, the mean HbA(1c) level was significantly lower than that of baseline at month 6 (9.4+/-2.5% versus 8.0+/-0.9%, respectively, p=0.022), whereas there was no significant change in the bedtime group (9.2+/-2.1% versus 8.9+/-2.2%, respectively). The frequency of hypoglycemia was lower with IG than NPH (2.7+/-2.8/6 months versus 6.4+/-6.7/6 months, respectively, p=0.008).

CONCLUSIONS

Once-daily IG at breakfast in children and adolescents with Type 1 diabetes on intensive therapy is more efficacious than bedtime administration to improve metabolic control. Also, the number of hypoglycaemic events decreased with both breakfast and bedtime administrations of IG.

An Update on the Long-Acting Insulin Analogue Glargine

For both type 1 and type 2 diabetes, tight glycaemic control is vital to reduce the risk of long-term complications. However, this must be achieved with minimal risk of hypoglycaemia. Glargine is a new long-acting insulin analogue with an action profile designed to overcome this and has now been in clinical use for a number of years. In many countries glargine is widely used. Here we present an update on the clinical information available on glargine with respect to glycaemic control, the risk of hypoglycaemia and quality of life in both type 1 and type 2 diabetes.

Insulin glargine and its place in the treatment of Types 1 and 2 diabetes mellitus

Insulin treatment in Type 1 and Type 2 diabetes has come a long way since its discovery by Banting and Best in 1922. Early insulin therapy was life-saving, but was associated with practical problems and had side effects such as lipoatrophy. Initial modifications of insulin structure produced several classes of insulins with varying pharmacokinetics, but did not sufficiently mimic physiological insulin release. Novel long- and short-acting insulin analogues, the so-called 'designer insulins', developed through genetic engineering in the 1990s, paved the way for more physiological insulin therapy, which was theoretically less problematic in terms of hypoglycaemia and patient satisfaction. Insulin glargine (glargine) was the first DNA-recombinant long-acting insulin analogue. The replacement of asparagine with glycine and the addition of two arginine molecules in the molecular structure results in modified pharmacokinetics. Consequently, glargine has a longer, often 24-h profile, which is described as 'peakless' compared with other insulins such as neutral protamine Hagedorn insulin (NPH) and insulin ultralente. Since its launch, the use of glargine in Type 1 and Type 2 diabetes has been extensively reviewed to determine its place in the current insulin market. A potential advantage of glargine seems to be a lower risk of hypoglycaemia, particularly at night. The UK National Institute of Clinical Excellence has recommended that glargine is a treatment option for people with Type 1 diabetes. In Type 2 diabetes, it has been advised that glargine only be considered for: those who require assistance to administer insulin injections; those whose lifestyle is restricted significantly by recurrent symptomatic hypoglycaemic episodes; or those who would otherwise need twice-daily basal insulin injections in combination with oral glucose-lowering drugs.

Safety and side effects of the insulin analogues

The analogue insulins were developed to more clearly mimic the basal and prandial components of insulin secretion for subjects with diabetes mellitus. Analogues are now widely used and have largely taken over from the conventional human recombinant insulins. It is important that these insulins are not only as effective as their predecessors, but are also safe and well-tolerated. In this manuscript, the authors review the adverse effects reported with analogue insulins and make a comparison with standard insulin treatments.