A rational clinical approach to suspected insulin allergy: status after five years and 22 cases

Assessment of the safety of the cationic arginine-rich peptides (CARPs) poly-arginine-18 (R18 and R18D) in ex vivo models of mast cell degranulation and red blood cell hemolysis

Our laboratory focuses on the development of novel neuroprotective cationic peptides, such poly-arginine-18 (R18: 18-mer of l-arginine; net charge +18) and its d-enantiomer R18D in stroke and other brain injuries. In the clinical development of R18/R18D, their cationic property raises potential safety concerns on their non-specific effects to induce mast cell degranulation and hemolysis. To address this, we first utilised primary human cultured mast cells (HCMCs) to examine anaphylactoid effects. We also included as controls, the well-characterised neuroprotective TAT-NR2B9c peptide and the widely used heparin reversal peptide, protamine. Degranulation assay based on β-hexosaminidase release demonstrated that R18 and R18D did not induce significant mast cell degranulation in both untreated (naïve) and IgE-sensitised HCMCs in a dose-response study to a maximum peptide concentration of 16 μM. Similarly, TAT-NR2B9c and protamine did not induce significant mast cell degranulation. To examine hemolytic effects, red blood cells (RBCs), were incubated with the peptides at a concentration range of 1–16 μM in the absence or presence of 2% plasma. Measurement of hemoglobin absorbance revealed that only R18 induced a modest, but significant degree of hemolysis at the 16 μM concentration, and only in the absence of plasma. This study addressed the potential safety concern of the application of the cationic neuroprotective peptides, especially, R18D, on anaphylactoid responses and hemolysis. The findings indicate that R18, R18D, TAT-NR2B9c and protamine are unlikely to induce histamine mediated anaphylactoid reactions or RBC hemolysis when administered intravenously to patients.

•

Cationic peptides R18, R18D, TAT-NR2B9c and protamine do not stimulate the degranulation of ex vivo untreated (naïve) and IgE-sensitised primary human cultured mast cells (HCMCs).

•

R18, R18D, TAT-NR2B9c and protamine do not induce significant hemolysis of human red blood cells (RBCs).

•

R18, R18D, TAT-NR2B9c and protamine are unlikely to induce histamine mediated anaphylactoid reactions or hemolysis when administered intravenously to patients.

Insulin allergy: a diagnostic and therapeutic strategy based on a retrospective cohort and a case-control study

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS

Insulin allergy is a rare but significant clinical challenge. We aimed to develop a management workflow by (1) validating clinical criteria to guide diagnosis, based on a retrospective cohort, and (2) assessing the diagnostic performance of confirmatory tests, based on a case-control study.

METHODS

In the retrospective cohort, patients with suspected insulin allergy were classified into three likelihood categories according to the presence of all (likely insulin allergy; 26/52, 50%), some (possible insulin allergy; 9/52, 17%) or none (unlikely insulin allergy; 17/52, 33%) of four clinical criteria: (1) recurrent local or systemic immediate or delayed hypersensitivity reactions; (2) reactions elicited by each injection; (3) reactions centred on the injection sites; and (4) reactions observed by the investigator (i.e. in response to an insulin challenge test). All underwent intradermal reaction (IDR) tests. A subsequent case-control study assessed the diagnostic performance of IDR, skin prick and serum anti-insulin IgE tests in ten clinically diagnosed insulin allergy patients, 24 insulin-treated non-allergic patients and 21 insulin-naive patients.

RESULTS

In the retrospective cohort, an IDR test validated the clinical diagnosis in 24/26 (92%), 3/9 (33%) and 0/14 (0%) likely, possible and unlikely insulin allergy patients, respectively. In the case-control study, an IDR test was 80% sensitive and 100% specific and identified the index insulin(s). The skin prick and IgE tests had a marginal diagnostic value. Patients with IDR-confirmed insulin allergy were treated using a stepwise strategy.

CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION

Subject to validation, clinical likelihood criteria can effectively guide diabetologists towards an insulin allergy diagnosis before undertaking allergology tests. An IDR test shows the best diagnostic performance. A progressive management strategy can subsequently be implemented. Continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion is ultimately required in most patients.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov: NCT01407640.

Are newer insulin analogues better for people with Type 1 diabetes?

Achieving optimal blood glucose control in Type 1 diabetes is a delicate balance between ensuring tight glycaemic control and achieving this without the expense of hypoglycaemia and weight gain, two major factors impacting quality of life. This is a real challenge for people with Type 1 diabetes and underpins many of the struggles they face in self-managing on a day-to-day basis. The main goals of insulin delivery are to try to simulate the physiology of β-cell insulin secretion as closely as possible and to overcome the challenges of peripheral insulin administration by achieving rapidity of onset with mealtime insulins and stability of the glucose-lowering effects of long-acting insulins. Since the early days of human insulin use, there have been many developments in insulin formulations that aim to achieve these goals as much as possible, thus contributing to better glycaemic control whilst minimizing hypoglycaemia. In the present review we discuss the currently available insulin analogues and the challenges of achieving glucose control using current analogues in those on multiple daily injections, and appraise the evidence base for newer-generation insulin analogues, such as insulin degludec, glargine U300, faster-acting insulin aspart and BioChaperone lispro. We also highlight new insulins in development and unmet needs in people with Type 1 diabetes.

Insulin allergy can be successfully managed by a systematic approach

Background

Type I insulin allergy can be a challenging condition, and there is no international consensus on how to establish the diagnosis. Measurement of specific IgE and skin testing have been cornerstones in the diagnostic work-up. However, these tests have limitations, mainly lack of correlation between test results and clinical findings. At the Allergy Centre, Odense University Hospital, patients with suspected insulin allergy have been evaluated since 2003. The aim of this study was to establish a systematic approach to diagnose and treat patients with insulin allergy.

Methods

The study was conducted retrospectively by retrieving data from the Allergy Centre database on patients with suspected insulin allergy evaluated from 2003 to 2017. The examination comprised a comprehensive medical history, specific IgE against insulin and intracutaneous tests (ICT) with different insulins.

Results

A total of 144 patients were examined on suspicion of insulin allergy of which 110 had negative specific IgE in serum. Of the remaining 34 patients, 33 had ICT performed; 2 had negative ICTs, while 31 had one or more positive ICT. All 34 patients had mild symptoms, and 4 could obtain symptom relief with antihistamines or local steroids, 9 could be managed with oral antidiabetics, and 7 were switched to other insulins. The final 14 patients were offered an insulin pump because of reactions to many different insulins, many positive ICTs, unmanageable diabetes, young age and compliance, or convenience.

Conclusion

Insulin allergy can be managed by a systematic approach, and symptom relief is obtainable in most patients.

Subcutaneous Injectable Drugs Hypersensitivity and Desensitization: Insulin and Monoclonal Antibodies

Injectable drugs, including monoclonal antibodies, are becoming crucial components in the management of chronic diseases. The most common side effects are local reactions at the site of administration. With the increased and prolonged use of these medications, we are seeing increased reports of hypersensitivity reactions. The aim of this article is to discuss the signs and symptoms of these reactions as well as management, which may involve desensitization for 3 commonly encountered injectable drugs: tumor necrosis factor-α inhibitors (etanercept and adalimumab), insulin, and omalizumab.

Hypersensitivity reaction associated with subcutaneous glargine insulin therapy in a cat

CASE SUMMARY

A 14-year-old, domestic shorthair cat was treated for transient diabetes mellitus for 3 months with glargine insulin, which was discontinued when the diabetes mellitus resolved. Approximately 36 months later the diabetes mellitus recurred and glargine insulin was restarted. Within 2-3 mins of the first injection the cat collapsed, developed profuse vomiting and diarrhea, as well as facial swelling and diffuse erythema. A hypersensitivity reaction was suspected and the cat was treated with antihistamines, aggressive fluid therapy and gastrointestinal support. The cat made a full recovery and was discharged 3 days later. Six months later the cat re-presented for relapse of its diabetes mellitus and an intradermal skin challenge with 1:20 diluted insulin was performed confirming a hypersensitivity to glargine. The cat continues to be well regulated on porcine zinc insulin without any hypersensitivity reactions noted.

RELEVANCE AND NOVEL INFORMATION

Hypersensitivity reactions to insulin administration are rarely described in human medicine. This is the first reported case of a hypersensitivity reaction secondary to glargine insulin in a cat. Clinicians should be aware of this potential complication, particularly in animals with a previous history of insulin administration and the potential to utilize intradermal testing with insulin.

Cutaneous allergy to insulin: could statins and ACE inhibitors play a role? A case report

Insulin allergy is rare. Both statins and angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors may cause local urticarial skin reactions and have been implicated to precipitate local reactions to insulin. We describe a case of a localised urticarial allergic reaction related to insulin use in a patient co-prescribed an ACE inhibitor and statin.

Development of insulin allergy after bone marrow transplantation

BACKGROUND

Insulin allergy is a not uncommon condition even though human insulin and insulin analogues are widely used. However, the development of insulin allergy after bone marrow transplantation has not been reported.

CASE REPORT

A 44-year-old Japanese woman had aplastic anaemia and secondary haemochromatosis. She was diagnosed with having diabetes at age 32 years and had been treated with human insulin. At age 34 years, bone marrow transplantation was performed. One year later, a rash and urticaria appeared immediately after insulin injections. Intracutaneous tests were positive for both human insulins and analogues, whereas the test for protamine was negative. Furthermore, an IgE-radioallergosorbent test against insulin was positive. Thus, we diagnosed the patient with having an IgE-mediated type I allergy against insulin. Insulin therapy with insulin aspart, which showed the least skin reaction, was continued and the insulin allergy disappeared in 7 years.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first description of insulin allergy after bone marrow transplantation. Our case underscores the effects of bone marrow cells on IgE-mediated type I allergy for insulin.

Successful management of allergy to the insulin excipient metacresol in a child with type 1 diabetes: a case report

Introduction

Insulin allergy to human insulin preparations during the treatment of diabetes is suggested to occur at rates ranging from <1.0% to 2.4%. These reactions vary from mild localized reactions, which resolve with repeated exposure, to life-threatening anaphylaxis and death. The management of persistent insulin allergy in type 1 diabetes mellitus is particularly complicated because ongoing treatment with insulin is essential.

Case presentation

We present the case of a 12-year-old Caucasian girl with localized allergy to the insulin excipient metacresol, and the subsequent desensitization therapy using continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion with simultaneous intravenous insulin infusion.

Conclusions

This is the first documented case of allergy to the metacresol component of insulin in the pediatric type 1 diabetes literature. We describe an approach to diagnosis and management of metacresol allergy in type 1 diabetes.

Generalized allergy due to zinc in insulin treated with zinc-free insulin

Allergy to insulin became a rare complication due to the introduction of recombinant human insulin preparations. Nevertheless, allergic reactions to components of such preparations can occur. We report a case of a 61-year-old man with an atopic background and affected by diabetes mellitus type 2 since 27 years, who experienced generalized allergy to insulin at the moment of switching oral anti-diabetics to insulin. Prick tests revealed an allergy specifically to zinc, and the patient was treated with zinc-free glulisine insulin. After 8 months of such treatment, patient's glucose is stable and he never experienced allergic reactions to insulin injections. Even insulin allergy due specifically to zinc is rare, such complication must be assessed especially in a patient suffering from multiple allergies.

Failure of multiple therapies in the treatment of a type 1 diabetic patient with insulin allergy: a case report

OBJECTIVE

To describe the clinical manifestations of insulin allergy and explain a systematic management approach.

METHODS

We present the clinical, laboratory, and pathologic findings of a type 1 diabetic patient with allergy to subcutaneous insulin and briefly review the related literature.

RESULTS

An 18-year old woman with type 1 diabetes mellitus had an insulin allergy and developed subcutaneous nodules after insulin administration. Human and analogue insulins were used, but painful nodule formation persisted. Treatment with antihistamines, steroids, and omalizumab and insulin desensitization were ineffective. The patient required pancreatic transplant because glycemic control could not be achieved due to the insulin allergy.

CONCLUSIONS

Insulin allergy is not a common condition and can be challenging in patients with type 1 diabetes. Therefore, identifying patients with true insulin allergy and applying a stepwise approach to their treatment is important.

Pan-insulin allergy and severe lipoatrophy complicating Type 2 diabetes

BACKGROUND

  Insulin allergy is a rare complication of insulin use. Localized lipoatrophy is also known to occur following subcutaneous injections of insulin.

CASE REPORT

  A 53-year-old non-obese female patient with Type 2 diabetes displayed local allergic-type symptoms to all available insulin preparations. This was complicated by the development of severe lipoatrophy on her abdominal and thigh injection sites and subsequently resulted in suboptimal glycaemic control.

CONCLUSIONS

  Whilst uncommon, insulin allergy and lipoatrophy can cause major problems in diabetic management. Potential pathophysiological mechanisms and a stepwise approach to management are discussed.

Allergic reactions to human insulin: a review of current knowledge and treatment options

Although the incidence of insulin allergy decreased after the introduction of recombinant human insulin preparations, it is still a major problem which may be life-threatening in some cases. In this article, we attempted to review current knowledge concerning allergic reactions to human insulin and discuss the available treatment options of insulin allergy.

Gallbladder edema in type 1 diabetic patient due to delayed-type insulin allergy

A 29-year-old woman was diagnosed as having type 1 diabetes mellitus and received insulin aspart and NPH insulin (NovolinN). On day 22, she had leg edema and right abdominal pain. The serum hepatobiliary enzyme levels were markedly elevated. Computed tomography revealed gallbladder edema. After an injection of human regular insulin and NPH insulin (HumacartN), the elevated liver enzyme levels were no longer observed. Challenge testing demonstrated that protamine was the cause of her allergy. Furthermore, tests revealed increased VEGF levels. This is an extremely rare case with a delayed-type protamine allergy caused by NovolinN resulting in gallbladder edema.

Pseudo "insulin allergy"

Allergy to human insulin is relatively rare in clinical practice. This report describes a patient referred for suspected “insulin allergy” due to lesions appearing at all sites of insulin injection. Careful evaluation confirmed contamination of the insulin syringes due to faulty techniques used by the patient. The report discusses the various types of insulin allergies and the need for proper diabetic education to avoid such infections.

Immunogenicity of human and bovine insulin in type 1 diabetes mellitus patients

BACKGROUND

The advantages of synthetic insulin (human insulin) over bovine insulin in the treatment of type 1 diabetes mellitus (DM) are much debated in terms of potency and purity. Immunogenicity is one of several factors that determine potency and safety. This study was designed to investigate and study the difference in immunogenicity of human and bovine insulin. We investigated anti-insulin antibody (AIAB) status in 69 type 1 DM patients receiving insulin therapy. Group 1 had 33 patients treated with bovine insulin, and group 2 had 32 patients treated with human insulin. All patients had received their respective insulin therapy for a minimum period of 1 year and had no history of change in insulin type. Forty-three subjects from the normal population were the control group.

METHODS

AIABs were assayed in serum samples of all subjects using a semiquantitative radioimmunoassay kit. The Kruskal-Wallis non-parametric and Mann-Whitney U tests were used to study the difference in immunogenicity of human and bovine insulins.

RESULTS

The Kruskal-Wallis test showed that antibody titers in the three groups significantly differed (P<0.001). The Mann-Whitney U test showed no significant difference in AIAB titer between the treatment groups. AIAB titers in the two treatment groups differed significantly from that of the control group, independently (P<0.001). High titers of AIABs are present in patients receiving bovine and human insulin compared to that of the normal population.

CONCLUSIONS

Bovine and human insulins are antigenic, and there is no significant difference in AIAB titer. Prospective studies are required to determine the long-term clinical significance of these antibodies.

Insulin allergy: clinical manifestations and management strategies

Insulin allergy in patients with diabetes mellitus on insulin treatment is a rare condition. It is suspected upon noticing immediate symptoms following insulin injections. The immediate vital implications for the patient call for prompt diagnosis and management of insulin allergy. We review current knowledge and procedures based on four diabetic patients who presented in our clinic. Insulin allergy was suspected as they showed immediate symptoms after insulin injection (urticaria, rash, angioedema, hypotension, dyspnea). A detailed allergologic work-up was performed and adequate therapy was initiated. In three of the four patients, a specific immunotherapy was started whereas in one patient a switch to oral antidiabetics was possible and consequently initiated. By standard prick testing and measurement of specific IgE antibodies, a type 1 IgE-mediated allergy was confirmed. After initiation of insulin immunotherapy, the symptoms completely resolved in two out three of patients and significantly improved in the third patient. The fourth patient was successfully switched to oral antidiabetics. Insulin allergy is a rare but severe condition that calls for immediate allergological work-up. It can be managed well in close cooperation between the diabetologist and the allergologist. Specific immunotherapy is efficient and should be considered.

Immunological responses to exogenous insulin

Regardless of purity and origin, therapeutic insulins continue to be immunogenic in humans. However, severe immunological complications occur rarely, and less severe events affect a small minority of patients. Insulin autoantibodies (IAAs) may be detectable in insulin-naive individuals who have a high likelihood of developing type 1 diabetes or in patients who have had viral disorders, have been treated with various drugs, or have autoimmune disorders or paraneoplastic syndromes. This suggests that under certain circumstances, immune tolerance to insulin can be overcome. Factors that can lead to more or less susceptibility to humoral responses to exogenous insulin include the recipient's immune response genes, age, the presence of sufficient circulating autologous insulin, and the site of insulin delivery. Little proof exists, however, that the development of insulin antibodies (IAs) to exogenous insulin therapy affects integrated glucose control, insulin dose requirements, and incidence of hypoglycemia, or contributes to beta-cell failure or to long-term complications of diabetes. Studies in which pregnant women with diabetes were monitored for glycemic control argue against a connection between IAs and fetal risk. Although studies have shown increased levels of immune complexes in patients with diabetic microangiopathic complications, these immune complexes often do not contain insulin or IAs, and insulin administration does not contribute to their formation. The majority of studies have shown no relationship between IAs and diabetic angiopathic complications, including nephropathy, retinopathy, and neuropathy. With the advent of novel insulin formulations and delivery systems, such as insulin pumps and inhaled insulin, examination of these issues is increasingly relevant.

Allergy reactions to insulin: effects of continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion and insulin analogues

The purification of animal insulin preparations and the use of human recombinant insulin have markedly reduced the incidence but not completely suppressed the occurrence of insulin allergy manifestations. Advances in technologies concerning the mode of delivery of insulin, i.e. continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII), and the use of insulin analogues, resulting from the alteration in the amino acid sequence of the native insulin molecule, may influence the immunogenicity and antigenicity of native insulin. Instead of increasing allergy reactions, CSII has been reported to represent a successful alternative treatment in diabetic patients presenting local or generalized allergy to insulin or other components (zinc, protamine) of conventional treatment. Most recent reports concern CSII-treated patients using short-acting insulin analogues (essentially insulin lispro), although the precise role of these insulin analogues remains unclear as allergy to them has also been described. Finally, data on antigenicity and immunogenicity of long-acting insulin analogues (glargine, detemir), which may mimic the basal insulin delivery with CSII, remain scarce at present.

Insulin allergy in a patient with Type 2 diabetes successfully treated with continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion

BACKGROUND

Patients with poor control of Type 2 diabetes on maximum oral hypoglycaemic therapy invariably need insulin therapy. Insulin allergy is uncommon, particularly in patients with Type 2 diabetes. Management of the condition can be difficult, and here we report the case of a patient with Type 2 diabetes and insulin allergy successfully managed with a continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII).

CASE REPORT

A 60-year-old man was referred with insulin allergy. He had poorly controlled Type 2 diabetes (glycated haemoglobin 10.4%), on maximum doses of sulphonylurea and metformin, with osmotic symptoms. He was compliant with diet and tablets. His diabetes was complicated by retinopathy, nephropathy, coronary heart disease, obstructive sleep apnoea, obesity, depression and hypertension. He commenced on twice daily mixed insulin and, shortly after, developed pain, itching and erythema at the injection sites. The sites became indurated and tender, and he had constitutional symptoms. The insulin was changed to other preparations, including short- and long-acting analogues, with similar responses. Triple therapy with rosiglitazone was tried, with no improvement in control. Skin-prick testing confirmed allergy to insulin rather than additives. The patient was reluctant to undergo desensitization. He was commenced on an insulin pump in addition to his oral hypoglycaemics, and achieved fair control (glycated haemoglobin 8.3%) on 88 units of lispro per day, with little or no skin or systemic reaction.

CONCLUSION

This is the first case report of insulin allergy in Type 2 diabetes being successfully managed by CSII.

Systemic allergy to human insulin and its rapid and long acting analogs: successful treatment by continuous subcutaneous insulin lispro infusion

Since the introduction of highly purified human recombinant insulin, allergy to insulin has become a very rare clinical situation, encountered in less than 1% of patients. It results in potentially life-threatening immediate or delayed, local and general manifestations. Different treatments of unequal efficiency have been proposed, the use of insulin analogs showing benefits in certain situations. We report the case of a type 2 diabetic patient who presented local reactions and then an anaphylactic shock after the introduction of insulin analog premixes. Intra-dermal reactions performed with porcine, human and insulin analogs preparations (aspart, lispro, glargine) were all positive, as well as the specific anti-insulin IgE measurement. Because we could not achieve normoglycaemia with maximal oral treatment and low caloric diet, we decided to attempt a desensitisation by continuous subcutaneous infusion of insulin lispro, since the lowest skin reaction was obtained with this insulin. We were able to induce a tolerance, by means of very low basal rate, very slowly increased, without any boluses, and maintaining antihistamine therapy. Six months later, the patient remains free of any symptom and has achieved a quite good glycaemic control. We describe for the first time a case of allergy to human insulin and to all available rapid and long acting analogs. We show the interest of a treatment with CSII of analogs in order to induce tolerance.

Insulin allergy and resistance successfully treated by desensitisation with Aspart insulin

A 25-year-old, with type I Diabetes Mellitus with a previous diagnosis of Protamine Allergy but not to human Insulin, started to notice anaphylactic reactions inmmediatly after bolus with Insulin. Skin prick and intradermal test were positive to all insulins. Skin tests to other potential allergens resulted negative. Examination after bolus of Human Insulin revealed urticaria. Daily insulin requirement were around 2-2,4 U/Kg/day. Slow desensitisation with Aspart insulin, the insulin with lowest size of skin test, was performed using subcutaneous insulin pump. Six months after the end of desensitisation his daily insulin requirement decreased to 0.8 U/Kg/day and oral corticosteroids are being reduced with no symptoms.