Humalog (lispro) for type 2 diabetes

Toward Better Understanding of Insulin Therapy by Translation of a PK-PD Model to Visualize Insulin and Glucose Action Profiles

Insulin replacement therapy is a fundamental treatment for glycemic control for managing diabetes. The engineering of insulin analogues has focused on providing formulations with action profiles that mimic as closely as possible the pattern of physiological insulin secretion that normally occurs in healthy individuals without diabetes. Hence, it may be helpful to practitioners to visualize insulin concentration profiles and associated glucose action profiles. Expanding on a previous analysis that established a pharmacokinetic (PK) model to describe typical profiles of insulin concentration over time following subcutaneous administration of various insulin formulations, the goal of the current analysis was to link the PK model to an integrated glucose‐insulin (IGI) systems pharmacology model. After the pharmacokinetic‐pharmacodynamic (PK‐PD) model was qualified by comparing model predictions with clinical observations, it was used to project insulin (PK) and glucose (PD) profiles of common insulin regimens and dosing scenarios. The application of the PK‐PD model to clinical scenarios was further explored by incorporating the impact of several hypothetical factors together, such as changing the timing or frequency of administration in a multiple‐dosing regimen over the course of a day, administration of more than 1 insulin formulation, or insulin dosing adjusted for carbohydrates in meals. Visualizations of insulin and glucose profiles for commonly prescribed regimens could be rapidly generated by implementing the linked subcutaneous insulin PK‐IGI model using the R statistical program (version 3.4.4) and a contemporary web‐based interface, which could enhance clinical education on glycemic control with insulin therapy.

Understanding concentrated insulins: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVE

To compile, analyze, and summarize the literature on concentrated insulins (i.e. concentrations >100 units/mL) from randomized controlled trials and derive guidance on appropriate use of these agents.

METHODS

Searches were conducted in Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Trialtrove (through April 2016) and ClinicalTrials.gov (through April 2017) for phase 1-4 clinical studies using concentrated insulins. Selected studies included multiple-arm, randomized controlled trials evaluating subcutaneously administered concentrated insulins. Trial registration numbers (selected studies) were searched in Medline, Embase and Google Scholar (through April 2017). Late-phase studies were graded using guidance from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality.

RESULTS

Thirty-eight completed trials (7900 participants) and 34 qualifying publications were identified. Four marketed concentrated insulins were evaluated: two long-acting basal (insulin glargine 300 units/mL and insulin degludec 200 units/mL [IDeg200]), one rapid-acting prandial (insulin lispro 200 units/mL [ILis200]), and one prandial/basal (human regular insulin 500 units/mL). Early-phase trials established bioequivalence for IDeg200 and ILis200 with the corresponding 100 units/mL formulations. Efficacy studies showed noninferior glycemic control between comparators for long-acting basal and prandial/basal products with generally low severe hypoglycemia. Six additional concentrated insulins with completed early-phase development were also identified.

CONCLUSION

Concentrated-insulin products demonstrated efficacious and safe outcomes in appropriate patients. Clinical findings (HbA1c and hypoglycemia) and methodology (initiation and titration), patient factors (insulin experience and dosing requirements) and treatment characteristics (bioequivalence, potency and device features) are important considerations. This overview of these and other factors provides essential information and guidance for using concentrated insulins in clinical practice.

Modeling Pharmacokinetic Profiles of Insulin Regimens to Enhance Understanding of Subcutaneous Insulin Regimens

Insulin pharmacokinetics following subcutaneous administration were modeled, simulated, and displayed through an interactive and user‐friendly interface to illustrate the time course of administered insulins frequently prescribed, providing a simple tool for clinicians through a straightforward visualization of insulin regimens. Pharmacokinetic data of insulin formulations with different onset and duration of action from several clinical studies, including insulin glargine, regular insulin, neutral protamine Hagedorn (NPH), insulin lispro, and premixed preparations of NPH with regular insulin (Mix 70/30), and insulin lispro protamine suspension with insulin lispro (Mix 50/50, Mix 75/25), were used to develop a predictive population pharmacokinetic model of insulins with consideration of factors such as insulin formulation, weight‐based dosing, body‐weight effect on volume of distribution, and administration time relative to meals, on the insulin time‐action profile. The model‐predicted insulin profile of each insulin was validated and confirmed to be comparable to observed data via an external validation method. Model‐based simulations of clinically relevant insulin‐dosing scenarios to cater to specific initial patient and prescribing conditions were then implemented with differential equations using the R statistical program (version 3.2.2). The R package Shiny was subsequently applied to build a web browser interface to execute and visualize the model simulation outputs. The application of insulin pharmacokinetic modeling enabled informative visualization of insulin time‐action profiles and provided an efficient and intuitive educational tool to quickly convey and interactively explore many insulin time‐action profiles to ease the understanding of insulin formulations in clinical practice.

Preparation of Selenoinsulin as a Long-Lasting Insulin Analogue

Synthetic insulin analogues with a long lifetime are current drug targets for the therapy of diabetic patients. The replacement of the interchain disulfide with a diselenide bridge, which is more resistant to reduction and internal bond rotation, can enhance the lifetime of insulin in the presence of the insulin-degrading enzyme (IDE) without impairing the hormonal function. The [C7U^A ,C7U^B ] variant of bovine pancreatic insulin (BPIns) was successfully prepared by using two selenocysteine peptides (i.e., the C7U analogues of A- and B-chains, respectively). In a buffer solution at pH 10 they spontaneously assembled under thermodynamic control to the correct insulin fold. The selenoinsulin (Se-Ins) exhibited a bioactivity comparable to that of BPIns. Interestingly, degradation of Se-Ins with IDE was significantly decelerated (τ_1/2 ≈8 h vs. ≈1 h for BPIns). The lifetime enhancement could be due to both the intrinsic stability of the diselenide bond and local conformational changes induced by the substitution.

Trends in the prescription of antidiabetic medications from 2009 to 2012 in a general practice of Southern Italy: a population-based study

OBJECTIVE

To assess the prescribing pattern of antidiabetic drugs (AD) in a general practice of Southern Italy from 2009 to 2012, with focus on behaviour prescribing changes.

METHODS

This retrospective, drug utilization study was conducted using administrative databases of the Local Health Unit of Caserta (Southern Italy) including about 1 million citizens. The standardized prevalence of AD use was calculated within each study year. A sample cohort of 78,789 subjects with at least one prescription of AD was identified during the study period.

RESULTS

There was an overall increase of the proportion of the patients treated with monotherapy, which was significant for insulin monotherapy (from 11.2 to 14.6%, p<0.001). The proportion of patients treated with metformin remained stable (from 68.3% to 67.8%, p=0.076), while those receiving sulfonylurea dropped from 18.4% to 12.5% (p<0.001); GLP-1 analogues and DPP-4 inhibitors showed the greatest increase (from 1.2% to 6.6%, p<0.001). In the whole sample of 25,148 new AD users, metformin was the most commonly prescribed drug in monotherapy (41.9%), while insulin ranked second (13.3%).

CONCLUSION

This study shows a rising trend of AD monotherapy, with sulfonylureas and incretins showing the more negative and positive trend, respectively.

Treatment satisfaction and glycemic control in young Type 1 diabetic patients in transition from pediatric health care: CSII versus MDI

To evaluate whether continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) may have any advantage over multiple daily injections (MDI) on glycemic control and treatment satisfaction in young patients with Type 1 diabetes in transition to an adult diabetes center. The study population consisted of 125 patients on MDI; 38 out of the 43 patients considered eligible for CSII completed the study and the 82 remaining on MDI served as control group. Glycemic control and treatment satisfaction [diabetes treatment satisfaction questionnaire (DTSQ)] were evaluated in all patients at baseline and after 12 weeks. At baseline, the two groups were well matched for demographic characteristics and glycemic control. DTSQ score was lower in CSII group (21.1 ± 8.8 vs. 25.1 ± 7.1, P = 0.011). After 12 weeks, a similar decrease in HbA1C was observed in both groups [difference -0.3 % (95 % CI-0.6 to 0.1, P = 0.847)]. Mean amplitude glucose excursions,blood glucose standard deviation, and overall hypoglycemia were significantly reduced in CSII group. DTSQ overall score increased in CSII and decreased in MDI (difference between groups = 9.9, 95 % CI 8.0-12.0, P<0.001), while perceived hyperglycemia and hypoglycemia decreased in CSII compared with MDI (difference:-2.5 and -2.0, respectively, P<0.001 for both). Among young Type 1 diabetic patients in transition from Pediatrics,CSII showed a similar efficacy in reducing HbA1c compared with MDI, with less hypoglycemia and glycemic excursions, and was better in improving overall treatment satisfaction and the rate of perceived hyperglycemia and hypoglycemia.

The development of new basal insulins: is there any clinical advantage with their use in type 2 diabetes?

INTRODUCTION

The basal insulin products currently on market do not optimally mimic endogenous insulin secretion. These unmet clinical needs have fueled the development of new basal insulin analogues for improving their pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics profile.

AREAS COVERED

We review the recent literature investigating the efficacy and safety of new basal insulin analogues in type 2 diabetes, as in the USA, insulin utilization accounted for 26% of treatment visits for these patients in 2012. Insulin degludec is a desB30 insulin acylated at the LysB29 residue with a glutamate linker and 16-carbon fatty diacyl side chain. Insulin lispro has been PEGylated at lysine B28, via a urethane bond, which increases the hydrodynamic size of the molecule and reduces its absorption and clearance following subcutaneous administration. Glargine U300 represents a new high-strength glargine formulation (300 U/ml): once injected, U300 forms a compact subcutaneous depot with a smaller surface area to produce a more gradual and prolonged release. Both PEG-lispro and glargine U300 are not yet on the market.

EXPERT OPINION

Ultra-long acting and high-strength formulations of new basal analogues have the potential for less glycemic variability, less (nocturnal) hypoglycemia and weight-loss advantage for PEG-lispro. However, these new basal insulin analogues need to be monitored closely for adverse signals.

Real-world outcomes of US employees with type 2 diabetes mellitus treated with insulin glargine or neutral protamine Hagedorn insulin: a comparative retrospective database study

OBJECTIVES

To compare real-world outcomes of initiating insulin glargine (GLA) versus neutral protamine Hagedorn (NPH) insulin among employees with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) who had both employer-sponsored health insurance and short-tem-disability coverages.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

MarketScan Commercial Claims and Encounters/Health and Productivity Management Databases 2003-2009.

PARTICIPANTS

Adult employees with T2DM who were previously treated with oral antidiabetic drugs and/or glucagon-like-peptide 1 receptor agonists and initiated GLA or NPH were included if they were continuously enrolled in healthcare and short-term-disability coverages for 3 months before (baseline) and 1 year after (follow-up) initiation. Treatment selection bias was addressed by 2:1 propensity score matching. Sensitivity analyses were conducted using different matching ratios.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

Outcomes during 1-year follow-up were measured and compared: insulin treatment persistence and adherence; hypoglycaemia rates and daily average consumption of insulin; total and diabetes-specific healthcare resource utilisation and costs and loss in productivity, as measured by short-term disability, and the associated costs.

RESULTS

A total of 534 patients were matched and analysed (GLA: 356; NPH 178) with no significant differences in baseline characteristics. GLA patients were more persistent and adherent (both p<0.05), had lower rates of hospitalisation (23% vs 31.4%; p=0.036) and endocrinologist visits (19.1% vs 26.9%; p=0.038), similar hypoglycaemia rates (both 4.4%; p=1.0), higher diabetes drug costs ($2031 vs $1522; p<0.001), but similar total healthcare costs ($14 550 vs $16 093; p=0.448) and total diabetes-related healthcare costs ($4686 vs $5604; p=0.416). Short-term disability days and costs were numerically lower in the GLA cohort (16.0 vs 24.5 days; p=0.086 and $2824 vs $4363; p=0.081, respectively). Sensitivity analyses yielded similar findings.

CONCLUSIONS

Insulin GLA results in better persistence and adherence, compared with NPH insulin, with no overall cost disadvantages. Better persistence and adherence may lead to long-term health benefits for employees with T2DM.