Analysis of glycaemic control and weight change in patients initiated with human or analog insulin in an US ambulatory care setting

Therapeutically interchangeable? A study of real-world outcomes associated with switching basal insulin analogues among US patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus using electronic medical records data

AIMS

To evaluate real-world clinical outcomes for switching basal insulin analogues [insulin glargine (GLA) and insulin detemir (DET)] among US patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM).

METHODS

Using the GE Centricity Electronic Medical Records database, this retrospective study examined two cohorts: cohort 1, comprising patients previously on GLA and then either switching to DET (DET-S) or continuing with GLA (GLA-C); and cohort 2, comprising patients previously on DET and then either switching to GLA (GLA-S) or continuing with DET (DET-C). Within each cohort, treatment groups were propensity-score-matched on baseline characteristics. At 1-year follow-up, insulin treatment patterns, glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) levels, hypoglycaemic events, weight and body mass index (BMI) were evaluated.

RESULTS

The analysis included 13 942 patients: cohort 1: n = 10 657 (DET-S, n = 1797 matched to GLA-C, n = 8860) and cohort 2: n = 3285 (GLA-S, n = 858 matched to DET-C, n = 2427). Baseline characteristics were similar between the treatment groups in each cohort. At 1-year follow-up, in cohort 1, patients in the DET-S subgroup were significantly less persistent with treatment, more likely to use a rapid-acting insulin analogue, had higher HbA1c values, lower HbA1c reductions and lower proportions of patients achieving HbA1c <7.0 or <8.0% compared with patients in the GLA-C subgroup, while hypoglycaemia rates and BMI/weight values and change from baseline were similar in the two subgroups. In cohort 2, overall, there were contrasting findings between patients in the GLA-S and those in the DET-C subgroup.

CONCLUSIONS

This study showed contrasting results when patients with T2DM switched between basal insulin analogues, although these preliminary results may be subject to limitations in the analysis. Nevertheless, this study calls into question the therapeutic interchangeability of GLA and DET, and this merits further investigation.

Glycemic control after initiating basal insulin therapy in patients with type 2 diabetes: a primary care database analysis

BACKGROUND

When target glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) levels are not reached, basal insulin therapy should be considered in type 2 diabetes. The objective of this report was to describe the predictors of glycemic control (strict criterion: HbA1c ≤6.5%) during the first year after initiating basal insulin therapy in primary care.

METHODS

The study applied a retrospective approach using a nationwide database in Germany (Disease Analyzer, IMS Health, January 2008 to December 2011, including 1,024 general and internal medicine practices). Potential predictors of glycemic control considered were age, sex, duration of diabetes, type of basal insulin, comedication with short-acting insulin, baseline HbA1c, previous oral antidiabetic drugs, diabetologist care, private health insurance, macrovascular and microvascular comorbidity, and concomitant medication. Multivariable logistic regression models were fitted with glycemic control as the dependent variable.

RESULTS

A total of 4,062 type 2 diabetes patients started basal insulin (mean age 66 years, males 53%, diabetes duration 4.8 years, mean HbA1c 8.8%), of whom 295 (7.2%) achieved an HbA1c ≤6.5% during the one-year follow-up. Factors positively associated with HbA1c ≤6.5% in logistic regression were male sex (odds ratio 1.59, 95% confidence interval 1.23-2.04), insulin glargine (reference neutral protamine Hagedorn; odds ratio 1.43, 95% confidence interval 1.09-1.88), short-acting insulin (odds ratio 1.33, 95% confidence interval 1.01-1.76), and prior treatment with metformin, dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors, and diuretics. Lipid-lowering drugs were associated with a lower odds of reaching the glycemic target.

CONCLUSION

Few type 2 diabetes patients (7%) reached the glycemic target (HbA1c ≤6.5%) after one year of basal insulin therapy. Achievement of the glycemic target was associated with type of basal insulin, additional short-acting insulins, previous antidiabetic medication, and other comedication, eg, diuretics or lipid-lowering drugs.

Insulin analogs--is there a compelling case to use them? No!

The availability of insulin analogs has offered insulin replacement strategies that are proposed to more closely mimic normal human physiology. Specifically, there are a considerable number of reports demonstrating that prandial insulin analogs (lispro, aspart, glulisine) have pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic profiles closer to normal, with resulting faster onset and offset of insulin effect when compared with regular human insulin. In addition, basal insulin analogs (glargine, detemir) have been reported to offer longer duration of action, less variability, more predictability, less hypoglycemia (especially nocturnal), and a favorable effect on weight. However, an argument against use of analog insulins as compared with use of regular or NPH insulin is one that states that the effectiveness and risk of hypoglycemia are the only two valid clinical outcomes that should be used to compare the analog and human insulins. Thus, there remains a debate in some circles that analog insulins are no more effective than human insulins, yet at a much higher financial cost. To provide an in-depth understanding of both sides of the argument, we provide a discussion of this topic as part of this two-part point-counterpoint narrative. In the counterpoint narrative presented here, Dr. Davidson provides his argument and defends his opinion that outside of a few exceptions, analog insulins provide no clinical benefit compared with human insulins but cost much more. In the preceding point narrative, Dr. Grunberger provides a defense of analog insulins and their value in clinical management and suggests that when evaluating the “cost” of therapy, a much more global assessment is needed.

Much ado about nothing? A real-world study of patients with type 2 diabetes switching Basal insulin analogs

Introduction

Type-2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is a progressive disease, and many patients eventually require insulin therapy. This study examined real-world outcomes of switching basal insulin analogs among patients with T2DM.

Methods

Using two large United States administrative claims databases (IMPACT^® and Humana^®), this longitudinal retrospective study examined two cohorts of adult patients with T2DM. Previously on insulin glargine, Cohort 1 either continued insulin glargine (GLA-C) or switched to insulin detemir (DET-S), while Cohort 2 was previously on insulin detemir, and either continued insulin detemir (DET-C) or switched to insulin glargine (GLA-S). One-year follow-up treatment persistence and adherence, glycated hemoglobin (HbA_1c), hypoglycemia events, healthcare utilization and costs were assessed. Selection bias was minimized by propensity score matching between treatment groups within each cohort.

Results

A total of 5,921 patients (mean age 60 years, female 50.0%, HbA_1c 8.6%) were included in the analysis (Cohort 1: IMPACT^®: n = 536 DET-S matched to n = 2,668 GLA-C; Humana^®: n = 256 DET-S matched to n = 1,262 GLA-C; Cohort 2: n = 419 GLA-S matched to n = 780 DET-C), with similar baseline characteristics between treatment groups in each cohort. During 1-year follow-up, in Cohort 1, DET-S patients, when compared with GLA-C patients, had lower treatment persistence/adherence with 33–40% restarting insulin glargine, higher rapid-acting insulin use, worse HbA_1c outcomes, significantly higher diabetes drug costs, and similar hypoglycemia rates, health care utilization and total costs. However, in Cohort 2 overall opposite outcomes were observed and only 19.8% GLA-S patients restarted insulin detemir.

Conclusions

This study showed contrasting clinical and economic outcomes when patients with T2DM switched basal insulin analogs, with worse outcomes observed for patients switching from insulin glargine to insulin detemir and improved outcomes when switching from insulin detemir to insulin glargine. Further investigation into the therapeutic interchangeability of insulin glargine and insulin detemir in the real-world setting is needed.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s12325-014-0120-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Starting bedtime glargine versus NPH insulin in poorly controlled type 2 diabetic patients with various hyperglycemia types (fasting type or postprandial type)

Our aim was to compare the effects of an intermediate acting human insulin (NPH) and a long-acting insulin analog, insulin glargine, in insulin naïve type 2 diabetes patients, stratified by the type of hyperglycemia (fasting or postprandial type). Based on different action profiles, we hypothesized that patients having different hyperglycemia types would react differently when treated with these insulins. This is a post hoc analysis of the Lanmet study data. The Lanmet study was a randomized, 36-week controlled insulin initiation study in type 2 diabetes patients. 109 subjects with baseline HbA1c >8.0% (64 mmol/mol) completed the study. The patients were divided into two groups according to fasting glucose (mmol/l)/HbA1c (%) ratio. Patients with a ratio ≥1.3 were defined as having fasting type and those with a ratio <1.3 as having postprandial type hyperglycemia. The main outcome measures were change in HbA1c and body weight, and final insulin dose. Independently of insulin type, compared to patients with postprandial type hyperglycemia, those with fasting type hyperglycemia had 2.1 kg/m(2) greater initial BMI (p = 0.044), gained 2.0 kg more weight (p = 0.020, adjusted for baseline BMI p = 0.035), and had 36% greater final insulin dose/kg (p = 0.001). With respect to hyperglycemia type, there was no difference between NPH and glargine in their effects on HbA1c. When starting bedtime insulin in type 2 diabetes patients, those with fasting type hyperglycemia are prone to greater weight gain. Hyperglycemia type does not help in identifying patients who would benefit specially from either NPH insulin or insulin glargine.

Treatment of type 1 and type 2 diabetes mellitus with insulin detemir, a long-acting insulin analog

Insulin detemir is a long-acting basal insulin approved for use in patients with type 1 (T1DM) or type 2 diabetes (T2DM). Insulin detemir has demonstrated equivalent glycemic control and hypoglycemic risk when compared to insulin glargine, and insulin detemir has generally but not consistently demonstrated less weight gain than insulin glargine in T2DM. The benefits of basal insulin analogs relative to NPH insulin are well recognized, including less FBG variability, lower risk of hypoglycemia, and less weight gain specifically with insulin detemir. However, NPH insulin continues to be widely prescribed, which may be due in part to economic considerations. While NPH insulin generally costs less per prescription, insulin detemir has been shown to be cost effective compared to NPH insulin as well as insulin glargine. Therefore, insulin detemir is an effective option from both clinical and economic perspectives for patients with T1DM or T2DM who require basal insulin to achieve glycemic control.