Insulin therapy in type 2 diabetes mellitus

2023 Clinical Practice Guidelines for Diabetes Mellitus of the Korean Diabetes Association

In May 2023, the Committee of Clinical Practice Guidelines of the Korean Diabetes Association published the revised clinical practice guidelines for Korean adults with diabetes and prediabetes. We incorporated the latest clinical research findings through a comprehensive systematic literature review and applied them in a manner suitable for the Korean population. These guidelines are designed for all healthcare providers nationwide, including physicians, diabetes experts, and certified diabetes educators who manage patients with diabetes or individuals at risk of developing diabetes. Based on recent changes in international guidelines and the results of a Korean epidemiological study, the recommended age for diabetes screening has been lowered. In collaboration with the relevant Korean medical societies, recently revised guidelines for managing hypertension and dyslipidemia in patients with diabetes have been incorporated into this guideline. An abridgment containing practical information on patient education and systematic management in the clinic was published separately.

An Update on the Molecular and Cellular Basis of Pharmacotherapy in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus

Diabetes mellitus (DM) is a chronic illness with an increasing global prevalence. More than 537 million cases of diabetes were reported worldwide in 2021, and the number is steadily increasing. The worldwide number of people suffering from DM is projected to reach 783 million in 2045. In 2021 alone, more than USD 966 billion was spent on the management of DM. Reduced physical activity due to urbanization is believed to be the major cause of the increase in the incidence of the disease, as it is associated with higher rates of obesity. Diabetes poses a risk for chronic complications such as nephropathy, angiopathy, neuropathy and retinopathy. Hence, the successful management of blood glucose is the cornerstone of DM therapy. The effective management of the hyperglycemia associated with type 2 diabetes includes physical exercise, diet and therapeutic interventions (insulin, biguanides, second generation sulfonylureas, glucagon-like peptide 1 agonists, dipeptidyl-peptidase 4 inhibitors, thiazolidinediones, amylin mimetics, meglitinides, α-glucosidase inhibitors, sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors and bile acid sequestrants). The optimal and timely treatment of DM improves the quality of life and reduces the severe burden of the disease for patients. Genetic testing, examining the roles of different genes involved in the pathogenesis of DM, may also help to achieve optimal DM management in the future by reducing the incidence of DM and by enhancing the use of individualized treatment regimens.

Improvement of beta-cell function in conjunction with glycemic control after medical nutrition therapy in newly-diagnosed type 2 diabetes mellitus

BACKGROUND

The current study aimed to reveal the correlation of beta-cell function and insulin sensitivity with glycemic control and weight control before and after medical nutrition therapy (MNT) in patients with newly-diagnosed type 2 diabetes mellitus.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed consecutive 68 patients with newly-diagnosed type 2 diabetes mellitus who started MNT without antihyperglycemic medications and underwent a 75-g oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) before and after the therapy. Beta-cell function was evaluated by the OGTT-derived disposition index, whereas insulin sensitivity was evaluated by Matsuda's insulin sensitivity index.

RESULTS

After 4.0 ± 1.5 months of MNT, mean HbA1c and body mass index significantly decreased from 9.6 ± 1.8% to 7.2 ± 1.0% and from 26.9 ± 4.1 to 25.4 ± 3.7 kg/m² (both P < 0.001), while the median disposition index and Matsuda's index significantly increased from 0.34 (0.20-0.68) to 0.88 (0.53-1.52) (P < 0.001) and from 4.70 (2.95-5.93) to 5.17 (3.48-6.89) (P = 0.003), respectively. The disposition index was significantly correlated with HbA1c levels both before and after MNT (r = -0.61 and -0.68; both P < 0.001). The magnitude of the correlation after MNT was not different from that before MNT (P = 0.42). Matsuda's index was correlated not with HbA1c levels but with body mass index, both before (r = 0.07 [P = 0.57] and r = -0.58 [P < 0.001]) and after MNT (r = -0.01 [P = 0.95] and r = -0.52 [P < 0.001]).

CONCLUSIONS

Beta-cell function was improved in conjunction with glycemic control after MNT in patients with newly-diagnosed type 2 diabetes mellitus. Insulin sensitivity was linked with weight control rather than glycemic control.

2021 Clinical Practice Guidelines for Diabetes Mellitus of the Korean Diabetes Association

The Committee of Clinical Practice Guidelines of the Korean Diabetes Association (KDA) updated the previous clinical practice guidelines for Korean adults with diabetes and prediabetes and published the seventh edition in May 2021. We performed a comprehensive systematic review of recent clinical trials and evidence that could be applicable in real-world practice and suitable for the Korean population. The guideline is provided for all healthcare providers including physicians, diabetes experts, and certified diabetes educators across the country who manage patients with diabetes or the individuals at the risk of developing diabetes mellitus. The recommendations for screening diabetes and glucose-lowering agents have been revised and updated. New sections for continuous glucose monitoring, insulin pump use, and non-alcoholic fatty liver disease in patients with diabetes mellitus have been added. The KDA recommends active vaccination for coronavirus disease 2019 in patients with diabetes during the pandemic. An abridgement that contains practical information for patient education and systematic management in the clinic was published separately.

Multicenter Real-World Assessment of the Effectiveness of V-Go Wearable Insulin Delivery Device in Adult Patients with Type 2 Diabetes (ENABLE Study): A Retrospective Analysis

Purpose

Patch-like wearable insulin delivery devices are gaining acceptance as a treatment modality for insulin delivery in patients with diabetes. These devices aim to simplify and optimize insulin delivery while reducing barriers associated with a basal-bolus insulin regimen. As clinicians aim to learn more about this method of insulin delivery, real-world evidence can provide insight for patient identification and treatment guidance. This study was performed to evaluate the change in glycemic control (A1C) and insulin total daily dose (TDD) after switching to V-Go wearable insulin delivery device in a type 2 diabetes population with suboptimal control using conventional insulin delivery regimens.

Patients and Methods

Electronic health records were queried to identify patients meeting inclusion criteria. Study objectives evaluated change in A1C and insulin TDD compared to baseline. A total of 283 patients were enrolled across 9 diabetes specialty sites.

Results

A1C significantly decreased from baseline at 3 months (−1.01% ± 0.09; P=0.0001) and 7 months (−1.04% ± 0.10; P<0.0001) after switching to V-Go. TDD of insulin significantly decreased at 3 months (−17 ± 3 U/day; P<0.0001) and 7 months (−14 ± 3 U/day; P<0.0001). Stratifying by prescribed baseline insulin regimen (basal-bolus, basal only or premix) or diabetes duration (<5 years to >20 years) demonstrated significant glycemic improvements from baseline with V-Go regardless of baseline regimen or duration of diabetes. After 7 months of V-Go use, the percent of patients considered high risk (A1C >9.0%) was reduced by nearly half (46% to 24%), and 52% of patients overall achieved an A1C <8%.

Conclusion

This study represents the largest real-world study of the effectiveness of V-Go in patients with type 2 diabetes. Significant improvements in glycemic control with a reduction in insulin utilization were achieved across varying baseline insulin regimens and regardless of diabetes duration supporting the clinical benefits of this patch-like wearable insulin delivery device.

Precision Dosing of Rapid-Acting Insulin Matters

Despite several molecular and technological advances in insulin therapy and insulin delivery, global evidence highlights inadequate glycemic control in populations with type 1 diabetes (T1D) and type 2 diabetes (T2D). In this review, we discuss the importance of more precise dosing of insulin as one of the approaches to improve glycemic control while reducing hypoglycemic events. This report is based on the expert opinion of authors and literature search of articles relevant to the past and present insulin delivery devices in diabetes management, especially half-unit insulin pens. We describe the various factors that facilitate better glycemic control, focusing on the impact of appropriate insulin delivery device selection on diabetes management. Precision dosing of insulin is a lesser-studied factor that contributes toward better glycemic control. Insulin pens have consistently outperformed syringes as delivery devices due to their greater accuracy and precision of dosing, ease-of-use, and patient preference. These advantages make them better suited to administer insulin in hypoglycemia-prone insulin-sensitive people with T1D, particularly younger children and geriatric patients. Half-unit insulin pens further extend this benefit by delivering half-unit doses of insulin accurately. They may contribute to better management of diabetes by allowing flexible dosing for mealtimes and physical activities even in erratic diet situations or illnesses by offering corrective doses in small increments. They are ideal delivery devices for insulin-sensitive people with T1D who require greater accuracy and precision in insulin delivery to achieve more stringent glycemic control.

Comparison between sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors and pioglitazone as additions to insulin therapy in type 2 diabetes patients: A systematic review with an indirect comparison meta-analysis

AIMS/INTRODUCTION

We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of pioglitazone (PIO) and sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) as additions to insulin therapy for the management of type 2 diabetes mellitus.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We searched PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and ClinicalTrials.gov through December 2016. Randomized controlled trials published in English that compared SGLT2i plus insulin (SGLT2i/INS) or PIO plus insulin (PIO/INS) with placebo plus insulin (PCB/INS) in type 2 diabetes mellitus patients were included. We compared the efficacy and safety between SGLT2i/INS and PIO/INS indirectly.

RESULTS

A total of 14 randomized controlled trials comparing 7,226 participants were included (8 SGLT2i and 6 PIO studies). SGLT2i/INS achieved similar reductions in hemoglobin A1c (weighted mean difference [WMD] -0.01% [-0.1 mmol/mol], 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.25 to 0.22% [-2.7 to -2.4 mmol/mol]; P = 0.896) and fasting plasma glucose (WMD -0.90 mg/dL, 95% CI: -15.50 to 13.71 mg/dL; P = 0.904), and a similar proportion of participants achieved hemoglobin A1c <7.0% (<53.0 mmol/mol; relative risk 0.98, 95% CI: 0.73 to 1.33; P = 0.917) as compared with the PIO/INS group, with greater weight reduction (WMD -4.54 kg, 95% CI: -5.67 to -3.41 kg; P < 0.001). PIO/INS showed non-significant trends toward a higher risk of hypoglycemia (relative risk 1.15, 95% CI: 0.97 to 1.35; P = 0.102) and higher reduction of total daily insulin doses (WMD -2.45 IU/day, 95% CI: -7.30 to 2.40 IU/day; P = 0.438).

CONCLUSIONS

Both PIO and SGLT2i are feasible adjunctive oral agents to pre-existing insulin therapy in individuals with inadequately controlled type 2 diabetes mellitus.

Management of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease: Lessons learned from type 2 diabetes

Nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) is considered the hepatic manifestation of insulin resistance, which is the hallmark of type 2 diabetes (T2D). NAFLD is a known risk factor for developing T2D and has a very high prevalence in those with existing T2D. The diabetes spectrum includes several conditions from prediabetes to T2D to insulin-dependent diabetes leading to macrovascular and microvascular complications. Similarly, NAFLD has a histologic spectrum that ranges from the relatively benign nonalcoholic fatty liver to the aggressive form of nonalcoholic steatohepatitis with or without liver fibrosis to nonalcoholic steatohepatitis-cirrhosis leading to end-stage liver disease. The management of T2D has witnessed significant changes over the past few decades with multiple new drug classes entering the treatment algorithm. Unfortunately, there are no U.S. Food and Drug Administration-approved medications to treat NAFLD, and guidelines for the management of NAFLD are less established. However, the field of drug development in NAFLD has witnessed a revolution over the past 5 years with the establishment of a regulatory pathway for Food and Drug Administration approval; this has generated substantial interest from pharmaceutical companies. Several diabetes medications have been studied as potential treatments for NAFLD with promising results; moreover, drugs that target specific pathways that play a role in NAFLD development and progression are being developed at a rapid pace. Given the similarities between NAFLD and T2D in terms of pathogenesis, underlying risk factors, and disease spectrum, lessons learned from optimizing treatment for T2D can be extrapolated to the management of NAFLD. The aim of this review is to use the founding principles of the comprehensive type 2 diabetes management algorithm to optimize the management of NAFLD. (Hepatology Communications 2018;2:778-785).

Oral Insulin Delivery in a Physiologic Context: Review

Insulin remains indispensable to the treatment of diabetes, but its availability in injectable form only has hampered its timely and broader use. The development of an oral insulin remains an ultimate goal to both enhance ease of use, and to provide therapeutic advantages rooted in its direct delivery to the portal vein and liver. By mimicking the physiological path taken by pancreatic insulin, oral insulin is expected to have a distinct effect on the hepatic aspect of carbohydrate metabolism, hepatic insulin resistance, and, at the same time, avoid hyperinsulinemia and minimize the risk of hypoglycemia. With oral insulin approaching late stages of development, the goal of this review is to examine oral insulin in a physiological context and report on recent progress in its development.

Comparison between SGLT2 inhibitors and DPP4 inhibitors added to insulin therapy in type 2 diabetes: a systematic review with indirect comparison meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Both sodium glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors and dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP4) inhibitors can be used to treat patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) that is inadequately controlled with insulin therapy, and yet there has been no direct comparison of these two inhibitors.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, LILACS, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and ClinicalTrials.gov through June 2015. Randomized controlled trials published in English that compare SGLT2 inhibitor plus insulin (SGLT2i/INS) with placebo plus insulin or DPP4 inhibitor plus insulin (DPP4i/INS) with placebo plus insulin in patients with T2DM were selected. Data on the study characteristics, efficacy and safety outcomes were extracted. We compared the efficacy and safety between SGLT2i/INS and DPP4i/INS indirectly with covariates adjustment. Risk of potential bias was assessed.

RESULTS

Fourteen eligible randomized controlled trials comprising 6980 patients were included (five SGLT2 inhibitor studies and nine DPP4 inhibitor studies). Covariate-adjusted indirect comparison using meta-regression analyses revealed that SGLT2i/INS achieved greater reduction in HbA_1c [weighted mean difference (WMD) -0.24%, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.43 to -0.05%], fasting plasma glucose (WMD -18.0 mg/dL, 95% CI -28.5 to -7.6 mg/dL) and body weight (WMD -2.38 kg, 95% CI -3.18 to -1.58 kg) from baseline than DPP4i/INS without increasing the risk of hypoglycaemia (relative risks 1.19, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.82).

CONCLUSIONS

Sodium glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors achieved better glycaemic control and greater weight reduction than DPP4 inhibitors without increasing the risk of hypoglycaemia in patients with T2DM that is inadequately controlled with insulin. There has been no direct comparison of SGLT2 inhibitors and DPP4 inhibitors in patients with T2DM inadequately controlled with insulin therapy. In this study, we performed indirect meta-analysis comparing SGLT2 inhibitors and DPP4 inhibitors added to insulin therapy. Without increasing hypoglycaemia, SGLT2 inhibitors showed better glycaemic control and greater weight reduction than DPP4 inhibitors in patients with T2DM inadequately controlled with insulin. The results of the current study could serve as the best available evidence in selecting oral agents to improve glycaemic control in insulin-treated T2DM patients. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

CONSENSUS STATEMENT BY THE AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF CLINICAL ENDOCRINOLOGISTS AND AMERICAN COLLEGE OF ENDOCRINOLOGY ON THE COMPREHENSIVE TYPE 2 DIABETES MANAGEMENT ALGORITHM--2015 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This document represents the official position of the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists and the American College of Endocrinology. Where there were no randomized controlled trials or specific U.S. FDA labeling for issues in clinical practice, the participating clinical experts utilized their judgment and experience. Every effort was made to achieve consensus among the committee members. Position statements are meant to provide guidance, but they are not to be considered prescriptive for any individual patient and cannot replace the judgment of a clinician.

Contrasting Effects of Lixisenatide and Liraglutide on Postprandial Glycemic Control, Gastric Emptying, and Safety Parameters in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes on Optimized Insulin Glargine With or Without Metformin: A Randomized, Open-Label Trial

OBJECTIVE

This mechanistic trial compared the pharmacodynamics and safety of lixisenatide and liraglutide in combination with optimized insulin glargine with/without metformin in type 2 diabetes (T2D).

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

This was a multicenter, randomized, open-label, three-arm trial comparing lixisenatide 20 µg and liraglutide 1.2 and 1.8 mg once daily for 8 weeks in combination with insulin glargine after optimized titration. The primary end point was change from baseline to week 8 in incremental area under the postprandial plasma glucose curve for 4 h after a standardized solid breakfast (AUC PPG0030-0430 h). Changes from baseline in gastric emptying, 24-h plasma glucose profile, HbA1c, fasting plasma glucose (FPG), 24-h ambulatory heart rate and blood pressure, amylase and lipase levels, and adverse events (AEs) were also assessed.

RESULTS

In total, 142 patients were randomized and treated. Lixisenatide 20 µg achieved greater reductions of AUC PPG0030-0430 h compared with liraglutide (marginal mean [95% one-sided CI] treatment difference, -6.0 [-7.8] h ⋅ mmol/L [-108.3 (-140.0) h ⋅ mg/dL] vs. liraglutide 1.2 mg and -4.6 [-6.3] h ⋅ mmol/L [-83.0 (-114.2) h ⋅ mg/dL] vs. liraglutide 1.8 mg; P < 0.001 for both), and gastric emptying was delayed to a greater extent than with liraglutide 1.2 and 1.8 mg (P < 0.001 for treatment comparisons). FPG was unchanged in all treatment arms. At week 8, mean ± SD HbA1c was 6.2 ± 0.4% (44 ± 5 mmol/mol), 6.1 ± 0.3% (44 ± 4 mmol/mol), and 6.1 ± 0.3% (44 ± 4 mmol/mol) for lixisenatide 20 µg and liraglutide 1.2 and 1.8 mg, respectively. At week 8, both liraglutide doses increased marginal mean ± SE 24-h heart rate from baseline by 9 ± 1 bpm vs. 3 ± 1 bpm with lixisenatide (P < 0.001). Occurrence of symptomatic hypoglycemia was higher with lixisenatide; gastrointestinal AEs were more common with liraglutide. Lipase levels were significantly increased from baseline with liraglutide 1.2 and 1.8 mg (marginal mean ± SE increase 21 ± 7 IU/L for both; P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Lixisenatide and liraglutide improved glycemic control in optimized insulin glargine-treated T2D albeit with contrasting mechanisms of action and differing safety profiles.

Insulin tactics in type 2 diabetes

Insulin is the most powerful glycemic control agent available. However, its use as a therapeutic modality requires education of the patient and regimentation of food intake, exercise, and frequent glucose monitoring. Such regimentation is particularly important when using a basal-bolus therapy approach. The introduction of many novel noninsulin drugs in the past decade has resulted in better glycemic control and often a need to reduce previously instituted insulin therapy. Although many of these novel therapies by themselves do not cause hypoglycemia, by reducing the overall glycemic burden through a myriad of mechanisms, they function in an insulin-sparing fashion. The doses of exogenously administered insulin may therefore need to be reduced in the presence of these new drugs to mitigate hypoglycemia. For insulin therapy (or any other drug treatment) to be successful, it is critical that the physician not only establish glycemic goals, but communicate these goals to the patient. The measurement of HbA1c helps in achieving a long-term goal, but on a day-today basis, patients need to be cognizant of their own BG goals and what they need to do if falling outside of target. The patients' understanding of self-management skills and empowerment are therefore foundational to insulin therapy.

Defining the role of GLP-1 receptor agonists for individualized treatment of Type 2 diabetes

With the advent of dipeptidyl peptidase (DPP)-4 inhibitors and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) over the past decade, incretin therapy has become established as an important treatment strategy for Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), with an efficacy and safety profile distinct from that of other anti-hyperglycemic agents. However, our understanding of the optimal clinical use of incretins remains incomplete. This review focuses on the use of GLP-1 RAs in the treatment of T2DM, with reference to the differing dominant mechanisms of action between short- and long-acting GLP-1 RAs and the clinical implications of this difference. The role of GLP-1 and the effects of GLP-1 RAs in various organs other than the pancreas will also be discussed.

Lixisenatide plus basal insulin in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: a meta-analysis

AIMS

The efficacy of the once-daily prandial GLP-1 receptor agonist lixisenatide plus basal insulin in T2DM was assessed by pooling results of phase III trials.

METHODS

A meta-analysis was performed of results from three trials in the GetGoal clinical program concerning lixisenatide or placebo plus basal insulin with/without OADs. The primary endpoint was change in HbA1c from baseline to week 24. Secondary endpoints were change in PPG, FPG, insulin dose, and weight from baseline to week 24. Hypoglycemia rates and several composite endpoints were assessed.

RESULTS

Lixisenatide plus basal insulin was significantly more effective than basal insulin alone at reducing HbA1c at 24 weeks. Composite and secondary endpoints were improved significantly with lixisenatide plus basal insulin, with the exception of FPG, which showed no significant difference between the groups. Lixisenatide plus basal insulin was associated with an increased incidence of hypoglycemia versus basal insulin alone.

CONCLUSIONS

Lixisenatide plus basal insulin resulted in significant improvement in glycemic control versus basal insulin alone, particularly in terms of controlling PPG. Prandial lixisenatide in combination with basal insulin is a suitable option for treatment intensification in patients with T2DM insufficiently controlled with basal insulin, as these agents have complementary effects on PPG and FPG, respectively.