Glucodynamics of long-acting basal insulin peglispro compared with insulin glargine at steady state in patients with type 1 diabetes: substudy of a randomized crossover trial

Pharmacokinetics, Pharmacodynamics, and Modulation of Hepatic Glucose Production With Insulin Glargine U300 and Glargine U100 at Steady State With Individualized Clinical Doses in Type 1 Diabetes

OBJECTIVE

This study characterized the pharmacokinetics (PK), pharmacodynamics (PD), and endogenous (hepatic) glucose production (EGP) of clinical doses of glargine U300 (Gla-300) and glargine U100 (Gla-100) under steady-state (SS) conditions in type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM).

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

T1DM subjects (N = 18, age 40 ± 12 years, T1DM duration 26 ± 12 years, BMI 23.4 ± 2 kg/m², A1C 7.19 ± 0.52% [55 ± 5.7 mmol · mol-1^-1]) were studied after 3 months of Gla-300 or Gla-100 (evening dosing) titrated to fasting euglycemia (random, crossover) with the euglycemic clamp using individualized doses (Gla-300 0.35 ± 0.08, Gla-100 0.28 ± 0.07 units · kg^-1).

RESULTS

Plasma free insulin concentrations (free immunoreactive insulin area under the curve) were equivalent over 24 h with Gla-300 versus Gla-100 (point estimate 1.11 [90% CI 1.03; 1.20]) but were reduced in the first 6 h (0.91 [90% CI 0.86; 0.97]) and higher in the last 12 h postdosing (1.38 [90% CI 1.21; 1.56]). Gla-300 and Gla-100 both maintained 24 h euglycemia (0.99 [90% CI 0.98; 1.0]). The glucose infusion rate was equivalent over 24 h (1.03 [90% CI 0.88; 1.21]) but was lower in first (0.77 [90% CI 0.62; 0.95]) and higher (1.53 [90% CI 1.23; 1.92]) in the second 12 h with Gla-300 versus Gla-100. EGP was less suppressed during 0-6 h but more during 18-24 h with Gla-300. PK and PD within-day variability (fluctuation) was 50% and 17% lower with Gla-300.

CONCLUSIONS

Individualized, clinical doses of Gla-300 and Gla-100 resulted in a similar euglycemic potential under SS conditions. However, Gla-300 exhibited a more stable profile, with lower variability and more physiological modulation of EGP compared with Gla-100.

Dose Unit Establishment for a New Basal Insulin Using Joint Modeling of Insulin Dose and Glycemic Response

BACKGROUND

For new insulin analogs with properties that vary from human insulin, defining activity in units of human insulin based on glycemic lowering efficacy may be challenging. Here we present a new method that can be used to quantify a unit dose of an experimental insulin when the traditional euglycemic clamp method is not adequate.

METHODS

Joint modeling of insulin dose and the glycemic outcome variable hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), where both were response variables, was used to evaluate insulin unit potency for basal insulin peglispro (BIL). The data were from the Phase 3 program for BIL, which included greater than 5500 patients with type 1 or type 2 diabetes who were treated for 26 or 52 weeks with BIL or a comparator insulin. Both basal-bolus and basal insulin only studies were included, and some type 2 diabetes patients were insulin-naïve.

RESULTS

The analysis showed that 1 unit of BIL, composed of 9 nmol of active ingredient, had similar or slightly greater potency compared to 1 unit insulin glargine or NPH insulin for all populations.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite some limitations, the joint modeling of HbA1c and insulin dose provides a reasonable approach to estimate the relative potency of a new basal insulin versus an established basal insulin.

Randomized double-blind clinical trial comparing basal insulin peglispro and insulin glargine, in combination with prandial insulin lispro, in patients with type 2 diabetes: IMAGINE 4

AIMS

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of basal insulin peglispro (BIL) with those of insulin glargine, both in combination with prandial insulin lispro, in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D).

METHODS

In this phase III, multicentre, double-blind, 26-week study, we randomized patients with T2D [glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) ≥7 and <12%, on ≥1 insulin injections daily) to BIL (n = 691) or glargine (n = 678), in combination with lispro.

RESULTS

At week 26, the primary objective of non-inferiority of BIL versus glargine for HbA1c reduction was achieved (least squares mean difference -0.21%; 95% confidence interval -0.31 to -0.11%), with statistical superiority of BIL with multiplicity adjustment (p < 0.001). HbA1c at baseline was 8.4% versus 8.5% for BIL versus glargine and at 26 weeks it was 6.8% versus 7.0%. At 26 weeks, more patients reached HbA1c <7% with BIL than with glargine (63.3% vs 53.3%; p < 0.001), the nocturnal hypoglycaemia rate (≤3.9 mmol/l) was lower with BIL (0.51 vs 0.92 events/30 days; p < 0.001), but the daytime hypoglycaemia rate was higher with BIL (5.47 vs 4.53 events/30 days; p < 0.001). The total hypoglycaemia relative rate was 1.10 (p = 0.053). At 26 weeks, patients in the BIL group had lower fasting serum glucose levels, higher basal insulin dosing, with no statistically significant difference in prandial or total insulin dosing, reduced glucose variability and less weight gain (1.3 kg vs 2.2 kg) compared with the glargine group. The BIL group had higher mean triglyceride and aminotransferase levels.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with T2D, BIL with insulin lispro provided greater improvement in glycaemic control with less nocturnal hypoglycaemia, lower glucose variability and less weight gain compared with glargine. The daytime hypoglycaemia rate and mean triglyceride and aminotransferase levels were higher with BIL.

Randomized, double-blind clinical trial comparing basal insulin peglispro and insulin glargine, in combination with prandial insulin lispro, in patients with type 1 diabetes: IMAGINE 3

AIMS

To compare the efficacy and safety of basal insulin peglispro (BIL), which has a flat pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic profile and a long duration of action, with insulin glargine (GL) in patients with type 1 diabetes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this phase III, 52-week, blinded study, we randomized 1114 adults with type 1 diabetes in a 3 : 2 distribution to receive either BIL (n = 664) or GL (n = 450) at bedtime, with preprandial insulin lispro, using intensive insulin management. The primary objective was to compare glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) in the groups at 52 weeks, with a non-inferiority margin of 0.4%.

RESULTS

At 52 weeks, mean (standard error) HbA1c was 7.38 (0.03)% with BIL and 7.61 (0.04)% with GL {difference -0.22% [95% confidence interval (CI) -0.32, -0.12]; p < 0.001}. At 52 weeks more BIL-treated patients reached HbA1c <7% (35% vs 26%; p < 0.001), the nocturnal hypoglycaemia rate was 47% lower (p < 0.001) and the total hypoglycaemia rate was 11% higher (p = 0.002) than in GL-treated patients, and there was no difference in severe hypoglycaemia rate. Patients receiving BIL lost weight, while those receiving GL gained weight [difference -1.8 kg (95% CI -2.3, -1.3); p < 0.001]. Treatment with BIL compared with GL at 52 weeks was associated with greater increases from baseline in levels of serum triglyceride [difference 0.19 mmol/l (95% CI 0.11, 0.26); p < 0.001] and alanine aminotransferase (ALT) levels [difference 6.5 IU/l (95% CI 4.1, 8.9), p < 0.001], and more frequent injection site reactions.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with type 1 diabetes, treatment with BIL compared with GL for 52 weeks resulted in a lower HbA1c, more patients with HbA1c levels <7%, and reduced nocturnal hypoglycaemia, but more total hypoglycaemia and injection site reactions and higher triglyceride and ALT levels.

A randomized clinical trial of basal insulin peglispro vs NPH in insulin-naïve patients with type 2 diabetes: the IMAGINE 6 trial

AIMS

Basal insulin peglispro (BIL) has a longer duration of action than conventional insulin analogues and a hepato-preferential mechanism of action. This study assessed whether BIL was non-inferior to isophane insulin (NPH) in reducing HbA1c in insulin-naïve patients with type 2 diabetes, when added to pre-study oral anti-hyperglycaemic medications.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was a Phase 3, open-label, treat-to-target (TTT), randomized trial with a 2-week lead-in, 26-week treatment and a 4-week safety follow-up period. Patients were randomized to bedtime (pm) NPH, morning (am) BIL or pm BIL in a 1:1:1 ratio.

RESULTS

Six hundred and forty-one patients [NPH, n = 213; BIL, n = 428 (am, n = 213; pm, n = 215)] received study drug. BIL was non-inferior to NPH for HbA1c change from baseline at Week 26 with a between-treatment difference (95% confidence interval) of -0.37% (-0.50, -0.23%). HbA1c at baseline was 8.5%, and was lower in BIL- vs NPH-treated patients after 26 weeks of treatment (6.8% vs 7.1%; P < .001). More BIL-treated patients achieved HbA1c <7.0% and HbA1c <7.0% without nocturnal hypoglycaemia. Fasting serum glucose levels and nocturnal hypoglycaemia rates were lower in BIL-treated patients; total hypoglycaemia rates were similar. Treatment-emergent adverse events were similar between groups. Fasting triglycerides decreased from baseline in both groups and to a greater extent with NPH, but were not significantly different between groups at Week 26. Mean alanine aminotransferase (ALT) increased with BIL treatment, but there was no evidence of acute severe hepatotoxicity.

CONCLUSIONS

In this TTT study, BIL treatment showed clinically relevant improvements in glycaemic control and a significant reduction in nocturnal hypoglycaemia compared to NPH.

Basal insulin peglispro: Overview of a novel long-acting insulin with reduced peripheral effect resulting in a hepato-preferential action

Basal insulin peglispro (BIL) is a novel basal insulin with a flat, prolonged activity profile. BIL has been demonstrated in a dog model, in healthy men and in patients with type 1 diabetes (T1D) to have significant hepato-preferential action resulting from reduced peripheral activity. In the IMAGINE-Phase 3 clinical trial program, more than 6000 patients were included, of whom ~3900 received BIL. Of the 7 pivotal IMAGINE trials, 3 studies were double-blinded and 3 were in T1D patients. BIL consistently demonstrated a greater HbA1c reduction, less glycaemic variability and a clinically relevant reduction in the rates of nocturnal hypoglycaemia across comparator [glargine and isophane insulin (NPH)] studies. Trials using basal/bolus regimens had higher rates of total hypoglycaemia with BIL due to higher rates of daytime hypoglycaemia. Severe hypoglycaemia rates were similar to comparator among both patients with T1D or type 2 diabetes (T2D). T1D patients lost weight compared with glargine (GL). Patients with T2D tended to gain less weight with BIL than with glargine. Compared to glargine, BIL was associated with higher liver fat, triglycerides and alanine aminotransferase (ALT) levels, including a higher frequency of elevation of ALT ≥3 times the upper limit of normal, but without severe, acute drug-induced liver injury. Injection site reactions, primarily lipohypertrophy, were more frequent with BIL. In conclusion, BIL demonstrated better glycaemic control with reduced glucose variability and nocturnal hypoglycaemia but higher triglycerides, ALT and liver fat relative to conventional comparator insulin. The hepato-preferential action of BIL with reduced peripheral activity may account for these findings.

A randomized clinical trial comparing basal insulin peglispro and insulin glargine, in combination with prandial insulin lispro, in patients with type 1 diabetes: IMAGINE 1

AIMS

The primary objective was to demonstrate that basal insulin peglispro (BIL) was non-inferior compared with insulin glargine (GL) for haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) at 26 weeks with a non-inferiority margin of 0.4%.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

IMAGINE 1 was a Phase 3, open-label, parallel-arm study conducted in nine countries. Adults with type 1 diabetes (n = 455) were randomized (2:1) to bedtime BIL or GL in combination with prandial insulin lispro for 78 weeks, with a primary endpoint of 26 weeks. An electronic diary facilitated data capture and insulin dosing calculations for intensive insulin management.

RESULTS

At 26 weeks, mean HbA1c was 7.06% ± 0.04% and 7.43% ± 0.06% for patients assigned to BIL (N = 295) and GL (N = 160), respectively (difference -0.37% [95% CI: -0.50 to -0.23], P < .001); more patients on BIL achieved HbA1c <7% (44.9% vs 27.5%, P < .001). Compared with GL, patients using BIL lost weight, with lower fasting serum glucose and between-day fasting blood glucose variability, and 36% less nocturnal hypoglycemia, 29% more total hypoglycemia and more severe hypoglycemia. Total and prandial insulin doses were lower with BIL; basal insulin doses were higher. Alanine aminotransferase increased with BIL, with more patients having elevations ≥3 × ULN. BIL treatment was associated with more frequent injection site reactions and an increase from baseline in serum triglycerides.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with type 1 diabetes, treatment with BIL compared to GL for 26 weeks was associated with lower HbA1c, less nocturnal hypoglycemia, lower glucose variability and weight loss. Increases in total and severe hypoglycemia, triglycerides, aminotransferases and injection site reactions were also noted.