New insulin glargine 300 Units · mL-1 provides a more even activity profile and prolonged glycemic control at steady state compared with insulin glargine 100 Units · mL-1

Understanding the pharmacokinetics and glucodynamics of once weekly basal insulins to inform dosing principles: an introduction to clinicians

OBJECTIVE

A new generation of basal insulin analogs enabling once-weekly administration is currently under development. Weekly basal insulins have the potential to overcome limitations exhibited by current daily basal insulins. The pharmacokinetic and glucodynamic characteristics differ significantly between weekly and daily basal insulins and will require paradigm shifts in how basal insulins are dosed.

METHODS

An overview of pharmacokinetic and glucodynamic principles of basal insulins is presented. Specifically, the pharmacokinetic and glucodynamic properties of daily basal insulins and how these differ for the new weekly basal insulins are discussed. Finally, models and simulations are used to describe the impact of weekly insulin properties on dosing.

RESULTS

Two approaches have been used to extend the half-lives of these insulins, creating fusion proteins with reduced clearance and reduced receptor-mediated degradation of the insulin. The resulting prolonged exposure-response profiles affect dosing and the impact of dosing errors. Specifically, the impact of loading doses, missed doses, and double doses, and the effect on glycemic variability of a once weekly basal insulin option are demonstrated using pharmacokinetic/glucodynamic models and simulations.

CONCLUSIONS

The transition from daily to weekly basal insulin dosing requires an understanding of the implications of the prolonged exposure-response profiles to effectively and confidently incorporate these weekly basal insulins into clinical practice. By reviewing the application of pharmacokinetic and glucodynamic principles to daily basal insulin analogs, the differences with weekly basal insulins, and the impact of these properties on dosing, this review intends to explain the principles behind weekly basal insulin dosing.

A dose titration protocol for once-daily insulin glargine 300 U/mL for the treatment of diabetes mellitus in dogs

BACKGROUND

In purpose-bred dogs, insulin glargine 300 U/mL (IGla300) has long duration of action, peakless time-action profile, and low potency, making it suitable for use as a basal insulin.

HYPOTHESIS

To evaluate IGla300 in client-owned diabetic dogs monitored using a flash glucose monitoring system (FGMS).

ANIMALS

Ninety-five client-owned diabetic dogs, newly diagnosed or previously treated with other insulin formulations, with or without concurrent diseases.

METHODS

Prospective multi-institutional study. Clinical signs and standardized assessment of FGMS data, using treatment and monitoring guidelines established a priori, guided dose adjustments and categorization into levels of glycemic control.

RESULTS

The initial IGla300 dose was 0.5 U/Kg q24h for newly diagnosed dogs and (median dose [range]) 0.8 U/Kg (0.2-2.5) q24h for all dogs. Glycemic control was classified as good or excellent in 87/95 (92%) dogs. The IGla300 was administered q24h (1.9 U/kg [0.2-5.2]) and q12h (1.9 U/kg/day [0.6-5.0]) in 56/95 (59%) and 39/95 (41%) dogs, respectively. Meal-time bolus injections were added in 5 dogs (0.5 U/kg/injection [0.3-1.0]). Clinical hypoglycemia occurred in 6/95 (6%) dogs. Dogs without concurrent diseases were more likely to receive IGla300 q24h than dogs with concurrent diseases (72% vs 50%, respectively; P = .04).

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPORTANCE

Insulin glargine 300 U/mL can be considered a suitable therapeutic option for once-daily administration in diabetic dogs. Clinicians should be aware of the low potency and wide dose range of IGla300. In some dogs, twice-daily administration with or without meal-time bolus injections may be necessary to achieve glycemic control. Monitoring with FGMS is essential for dose titration of IGla300.

Basal Insulinotherapy in Patients Living with Diabetes in France: The EF-BI Study

INTRODUCTION

Second-generation basal insulins like glargine 300 U/mL (Gla-300) have a longer duration of action and less daily fluctuation and interday variability than first-generation ones, such as glargine 100 U/mL (Gla-100). The EF-BI study, a nationwide observational, retrospective study, was designed to compare persistence, acute care complications, and healthcare costs associated with the initiation of such basal insulins (BI) in a real-life setting in France.

METHODS

This study was conducted using the French healthcare claims database (SNDS). Adult patients living with type 1 or type 2 diabetes mellitus (T1DM or T2DM) initiating Gla-300 or Gla-100 ± other hypoglycemic medications between January 1, 2016 and December 31, 2020, and without any insulin therapy over the previous 6 months were included. Persistence was defined as remaining on the same insulin therapy until discontinuation defined by a 6 month period without insulin reimbursement. Hospitalized acute complications were identified using ICD-10 codes. Total collective costs were established for patients treated continuously with each basal insulin over 1-3 years. All comparisons were adjusted using a propensity score based on initial patient/treatment characteristics.

RESULTS

A total of 235,894 patients with T2DM and 6672 patients with T1DM were included. Patients treated with Gla-300 were 83% (T1DM) and 44% (T2DM) less likely to discontinue their treatment than those treated with Gla-100 after 24 months (p < 0.0001). The annual incidence of acute hospitalized events in patients with T2DM treated with Gla-300 was 12% lower than with Gla-100 (p < 0.0001) but similar in patients with T1DM. Comparison of overall costs showed moderate but statistically significant differences in favor of Gla-300 versus Gla-100 for all patients over the first year, and in T2DM only over a 3-year follow-up.

CONCLUSION

Use of Gla-300 resulted in a better persistence, less acute hospitalized events at least in T2DM, and reduced healthcare expenditure. These real-life results confirmed the potential interest of using Gla-300 rather than Gla-100.

The Basis for Weekly Insulin Therapy: Evolving Evidence With Insulin Icodec and Insulin Efsitora Alfa

Basal insulin continues to be a vital part of therapy for many people with diabetes. First attempts to prolong the duration of insulin formulations were through the development of suspensions that required homogenization prior to injection. These insulins, which required once- or twice-daily injections, introduced wide variations in insulin exposure contributing to unpredictable effects on glycemia. Advances over the last 2 decades have resulted in long-acting, soluble basal insulin analogues with prolonged and less variable pharmacokinetic exposure, improving their efficacy and safety, notably by reducing nocturnal hypoglycemia. However, adherence and persistence with once-daily basal insulin treatment remains low for many reasons including hypoglycemia concerns and treatment burden. A soluble basal insulin with a longer and flatter exposure profile could reduce pharmacodynamic variability, potentially reducing hypoglycemia, have similar efficacy to once-daily basal insulins, simplify dosing regimens, and improve treatment adherence. Insulin icodec (Novo Nordisk) and insulin efsitora alfa (basal insulin Fc [BIF], Eli Lilly and Company) are 2 such insulins designed for once-weekly administration, which have the potential to provide a further advance in basal insulin replacement. Icodec and efsitora phase 2 clinical trials, as well as data from the phase 3 icodec program indicate that once-weekly insulins provide comparable glycemic control to once-daily analogues, with a similar risk of hypoglycemia. This manuscript details the technology used in the development of once-weekly basal insulins. It highlights the clinical rationale and potential benefits of these weekly insulins while also discussing the limitations and challenges these molecules could pose in clinical practice.

Real-World Outcomes of Individualized Targeted Therapy with Insulin Glargine 300 Units/mL in Insulin-Naïve Korean People with Type 2 Diabetes: TOBE Study

INTRODUCTION

The TOujeo BEyond glucose control (TOBE) study evaluated clinical outcomes with insulin glargine 300 units/mL (Gla-300) in insulin-naïve Korean people with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) in a real-world setting.

METHODS

This 24-week, prospective, non-interventional, multicenter, open-label, single-arm, observational study included adults aged ≥ 20 years with T2DM suboptimally controlled with oral hypoglycemic agents and/or glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists who require basal insulin. Eligible participants were assigned to either general target glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c < 7%) or individualized target groups as per physician's discretion considering guidelines and participants' characteristics. The primary endpoint was the proportion of participants achieving the HbA1c target (individualized or general) at 24 weeks.

RESULTS

Among 369 participants, 19.5% (72/369) of participants achieved the HbA1c target at week 24; 37.5% (33/88) in the individualized and 13.9% (39/281) in the general target group. In both target groups, similar reductions in fasting plasma glucose and body weight were observed, with low incidence of hypoglycemia, and T2DM duration was significantly shorter in participants who did versus those who did not achieve the target HbA1c (individualized target group: 9.6 ± 8.0 versus 13.1 ± 8.4 years, P = 0.0454; general target group: 10.2 ± 8.6 versus 12.8 ± 7.4 years, P = 0.0378).

CONCLUSIONS

This study showed that initiation of insulin therapy with Gla-300 in people with T2DM using an individualized approach is more effective in achieving an HbA1c target. Moreover, earlier initiation of insulin therapy in people with suboptimally controlled T2DM may increase the success rate of glycemic control. A graphical abstract is available with this article.

The role of basal insulins in the treatment of people with type 2 diabetes and chronic kidney disease: A narrative review

The majority of cases of chronic kidney disease (CKD) worldwide are driven by the presence of type 2 diabetes (T2D), resulting in an increase in CKD rates over the past few decades. The existence of CKD alongside diabetes is associated with increased burden of cardiovascular disease and increased risk of death. Optimal glycaemic control is essential to prevent progression of CKD, but achieving glycaemic targets in people with CKD and diabetes can be challenging because of increased risk of hypoglycaemia and limitations on glucose-lowering therapeutic options. This review considers the challenges in management of T2D in people with impaired kidney function and assesses evidence for use of basal insulin analogues in people with CKD.

Efficacy and safety of basal insulins in people with type 2 diabetes mellitus: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials

Aim

The comparative effectiveness of basal insulins has been examined in several studies. However, current treatment algorithms provide a list of options with no clear differentiation between different basal insulins as the optimal choice for initiation.

Methods

A comprehensive search of MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, ISI, and Scopus, and a reference list of retrieved studies and reviews were performed up to November 2023. We identified phase III randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the efficacy and safety of basal insulin regimens. The primary outcomes evaluated were HbA1c reduction, weight change, and hypoglycemic events. The revised Cochrane ROB-2 tool was used to assess the methodological quality of the included studies. A random-effects frequentist network meta-analysis was used to estimate the pooled weighted mean difference (WMD) and odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence intervals considering the critical assumptions in the networks. The certainty of the evidence and confidence in the rankings was assessed using the GRADE minimally contextualized approach.

Results

Of 20,817 retrieved studies, 44 RCTs (23,699 participants) were eligible for inclusion in our network meta-analysis. We found no significant difference among various basal insulins (including Neutral Protamine Hagedorn (NPH), ILPS, insulin glargine, detemir, and degludec) in reducing HbA1c. Insulin glargine, 300 U/mL (IGlar-300) was significantly associated with less weight gain (mean difference ranged from 2.9 kg to 4.1 kg) compared to other basal insulins, namely thrice-weekly insulin degludec (IDeg-3TW), insulin degludec, 100 U/mL (IDeg-100), insulin degludec, 200 U/mL (IDeg-200), NPH, and insulin detemir (IDet), but with low to very low certainty regarding most comparisons. IDeg-100, IDeg-200, IDet, and IGlar-300 were associated with significantly lower odds of overall, nocturnal, and severe hypoglycemic events than NPH and insulin lispro protamine (ILPS) (moderate to high certainty evidence). NPH was associated with the highest odds of overall and nocturnal hypoglycemia compared to others. Network meta-analysis models were robust, and findings were consistent in sensitivity analyses.

Conclusion

The efficacy of various basal insulin regimens is comparable. However, they have different safety profiles. IGlar-300 may be the best choice when weight gain is a concern. In contrast, IDeg-100, IDeg-200, IDet, and IGlar-300 may be preferred when hypoglycemia is the primary concern.

Evaluation of Glucose Metrics in Adults with Type 1 Diabetes Switching to Insulin Glargine 300 U/mL: A Retrospective, Propensity-Score Matched Study

Objectives: To study real-world effect of switching to Insulin Glargine 300 U/mL (Gla-300) on glucose metrics in people with type 1 diabetes. Methods: This retrospective secondary-use study compared 151 adults who switched to Gla-300 from first-generation long-acting insulins (Switchers) to 281 propensity-score matched controls (Non-switchers) who continued first-generation long-acting insulins. Primary endpoint was difference in time in range (TIR) evolution. A fictive "switching" date was assigned to Non-switchers to facilitate between-group comparisons. Results: In the period before switching, TIR decreased numerically for people in whom Gla-300 was eventually initiated (-0.05%/month [-0.16 to 0.07]), while it increased for matched controls (0.08%/month [0.02 to 0.015]; between-group difference P = 0.047). After Gla-300-initiation, Switchers had similar TIR increase compared to Non-switchers (P = 0.531). Switchers used higher basal dose than before switch (Δ0.012 U/[kg·d] [0.006 to 0.018]; P < 0.0001). Conclusion: In real-life, Gla-300 was typically initiated in people where TIR was decreasing, which was reversed after switch using slightly higher basal insulin dose. ClinicalTrials: ClinicalTrials.gov number NCT05109520.

Current usage of long-acting insulin analogs in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus

INTRODUCTION

Insulin treatment is fundamental to diabetes management. Basal insulin therapy reduces intraday glycemic fluctuations upon reaching a steady state. Besides better blood glucose regulation and achieving target HbA1c values in patients, it also offers protection from diabetes complications. In this review, we aimed to compare basal-acting insulins in light of the literature.

AREAS COVERED

We reviewed current evidence related to diabetes treatment with basal insulins. This includes discussions on clinical trials and meta-analyses concerning first and second-generation ultra-long-acting basal insulins. Treatment indications for long-acting basal insulins, which have shown benefits and are considered superior or comparable to others in the literature, are derived from current clinical studies and meta-analyses, which form the basis of the recommendations in this review.

EXPERT OPINION

First and second-generation basal insulins do not show much superiority over each other in terms of blood glucose regulation and reaching the target HbA1c. However, second-generation basal insulins cause fewer hypoglycemic events. We recommend using the appropriate basal insulin in patient-based, individualized treatments. Basal insulin Icodec may become more widely used over time, owing to its association with less hypoglycemia and a reduction in the number of injections.

You may delay, but time will not. Beta cells lost are never found again: a case for timely initiation of basal insulin in type 2 diabetes

Since its first use just over a century ago, insulin treatment has evolved dramatically, such that the molecules are physiologic in nature, and treatment can now closely resemble the natural hormone response over 24 hours. Newer, longer-acting basal insulin analogs have provided insulin therapies with improved characteristics and, therefore, ease of use, and can readily be incorporated as part of routine treatment for type 2 diabetes (T2D), but evidence suggests that insulin remains underused in people with T2D. We review the barriers to initiation of basal insulin and the education needed to address these barriers, and we provide practical pointers, supported by evidence, for primary care physicians and advanced practice providers to facilitate timely initiation of basal insulin in the people with T2D who will benefit from such treatment.

Real-World Study on Effectiveness of Insulin Glargine U300 After Oral Antidiabetic Drug Failure in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes in the Gulf Region

INTRODUCTION

The effectiveness and safety of long-acting insulin glargine U300 (Gla-300), in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) requiring insulin, has not been reported in the Gulf region.

METHODS

Insulin-naïve patients with T2DM, uncontrolled on OADs, and prescribed Gla-300 were followed up in a 12-month prospective observational study. Gla-300 was titrated to glycemic targets. The primary endpoint (achieving glycemic targets) was evaluated at month 6 of treatment. The need for treatment intensification, safety, and patient-reported outcomes (PRO) were also reported.

RESULTS

The study included 412 patients (61.7% men; age 52.2 ± 11.1 years and T2DM duration 10.7 ± 6.8 years). Almost 50% were on more than 3 OADs, mostly biguanides, sulfonylureas, and dipeptidyl-peptidase-4 inhibitors. Baseline HbA1c level was 9.2% ± 1.1% and targets were set at 6.9% ± 0.4%. Baseline fasting plasma glucose was 11.5 ± 3.8 mmol/l. Fifty-seven patients (13.8%) achieved glycemic targets at month 6, hindered by baseline HbA1c ≥ 10%, frequent co-morbidities, older age, suburban/rural residence, and full-time employment. Levels of HbA1c dropped progressively by 0.96% ± 0.07% (month 3), 1.29% ± 0.08% (month 6), and 1.76% ± 0.06% (month 12). Gla-300 dose was 17.0 ± 9.0 IU/day at baseline, 24.6 ± 9.6 IU/day at month 3, 28.5 ± 9.9 IU/day at month 6, and 30.7 ± 10.7 IU/day at month 12. Three patients experienced non-severe hypoglycemia and a slight decrease in body weight and PROs improved.

CONCLUSIONS

In the Gulf, Gla-300 in patients with T2DM uncontrolled on OADs improved glycemic control, with low rates of hypoglycemia and improved PROs. Gla-300 dose up-titration from baseline to month 6 did not, however, result in a vast proportion of patients achieving their pre-determined HbA1c targets.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03703869.

New advances in type 1 diabetes

Type 1 diabetes is an autoimmune condition resulting in insulin deficiency and eventual loss of pancreatic β cell function requiring lifelong insulin therapy. Since the discovery of insulin more than 100 years ago, vast advances in treatments have improved care for many people with type 1 diabetes. Ongoing research on the genetics and immunology of type 1 diabetes and on interventions to modify disease course and preserve β cell function have expanded our broad understanding of this condition. Biomarkers of type 1 diabetes are detectable months to years before development of overt disease, and three stages of diabetes are now recognized. The advent of continuous glucose monitoring and the newer automated insulin delivery systems have changed the landscape of type 1 diabetes management and are associated with improved glycated hemoglobin and decreased hypoglycemia. Adjunctive therapies such as sodium glucose cotransporter-1 inhibitors and glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists may find use in management in the future. Despite these rapid advances in the field, people living in under-resourced parts of the world struggle to obtain necessities such as insulin, syringes, and blood glucose monitoring essential for managing this condition. This review covers recent developments in diagnosis and treatment and future directions in the broad field of type 1 diabetes.

Efficacy and safety of insulin glargine 300 units/mL vs insulin degludec in patients with type 1 and type 2 diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Ultra-long-acting insulin analogs [insulin degludec (IDeg) and insulin glargine 300 units/mL (IGla-300)] offer a longer duration of action with less risk of hypoglycemia compared to other long-acting insulins. However, data about the comparative efficacy and safety are inconsistent.

Methods

We searched CENTRAL, PubMed, Embase, ICTRP Search Portal, and ClinicalTrials.gov on 7 October 2022. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the safety and efficacy of IDeg (100 or 200 units/mL) and IGla-300 in patients with type 1 or type 2 diabetes were included. Three review authors independently selected trials, assessed the risk of bias, extracted data, and evaluated the overall certainty of the evidence using GRADE. The primary outcomes were the change in glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) and any hypoglycemia; the secondary outcomes were the change in fasting plasma glucose (FPG) and severe and nocturnal hypoglycemia.

Results

Four open-label RCTs were included (2727 participants), 3 parallel and 1 cross-over. Overall, the risk of bias assessment yielded some concern or high risk. There was a comparable change in HbA1c from baseline to the end of treatment, a mean difference of 0.07% (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.06 - 0.19; p = 0.29; 3 trials; 2652 patients; very low-certainty evidence), and a comparable rate of any hypoglycemia, rate ratio 1.02 (95% CI 0.8 - 1.3; p = 0.87; 3 trials; 2881 patients; very low-certainty evidence). IDeg resulted in more reduction in FPG compared to IGla-300, mean difference of 10.27 mg/dL (95% CI 7.25 - 13.29; p < 0.001; 3 trials; 2668 patients; low-certainty evidence). Similar rates of nocturnal and severe hypoglycemia were observed, rate ratio of 1.13 (95% CI 0.72 - 1.78; p = 0.54; 3 trials; 2668 patients; very low-certainty evidence) and 1.4 (95% CI 0.41 - 4.73; p = 0.59; 2 trials; 1952 patients; very low-certainty evidence), respectively.

Conclusion

There is no evidence of a difference between IDeg and IGla-300 in the mean change in HbA1c and the risk of anytime, nocturnal, and severe hypoglycemia. IDeg appeared to cause a higher reduction in FPG compared to IGla-300. However, this finding should be interpreted with caution due to the small number of trials included and their high risk of bias.

Systematic review registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42022364891, identifier CRD42022364891.

9. Pharmacologic Approaches to Glycemic Treatment: Standards of Care in Diabetes-2024

The American Diabetes Association (ADA) "Standards of Care in Diabetes" includes the ADA's current clinical practice recommendations and is intended to provide the components of diabetes care, general treatment goals and guidelines, and tools to evaluate quality of care. Members of the ADA Professional Practice Committee, an interprofessional expert committee, are responsible for updating the Standards of Care annually, or more frequently as warranted. For a detailed description of ADA standards, statements, and reports, as well as the evidence-grading system for ADA's clinical practice recommendations and a full list of Professional Practice Committee members, please refer to Introduction and Methodology. Readers who wish to comment on the Standards of Care are invited to do so at professional.diabetes.org/SOC.

Injectable systems for long-lasting insulin therapy

Insulin therapy is the mainstay to treat diabetes characterizedd by hyperglycemia. However, its short half-life of only 4-6 min limits its effectiveness in treating chronic diabetes. Advances in recombinant DNA technology and protein engineering have led to several insulin analogue products that have up to 42 h of glycemic control. However, these insulin analogues still require once- or twice-daily injections for optimal glycemic control and have poor patient compliance and adherence issues. To achieve insulin release for more than one day, different injectable delivery systems including microspheres, in situ forming depots, nanoparticles and composite systems have been developed. Several of these delivery systems have advanced to clinical trials for once-weekly insulin injection. This review comprehensively summarizes the developments of injectable insulin analogs and delivery systems covering the whole field of injectable long-lasting insulin technologies from prototype design, preclinical studies, clinical trials to marketed products for the treatment of diabetes.

Clinical impact after implementing an insulin protocol involving a switch to insulin glargine 300 U/ml as basal insulin for inpatient glycaemic control: A retrospective single-centre study

AIMS

To evaluate the benefit and safety of a switch in the basal insulin protocol to glargine 300 U/ml (Gla-300) on inpatients' overall dysglycemic events. Efficacy and safety data on insulin Gla-300 in the inpatient setting are limited.

METHODS

Retrospective observational study conducted on 7455 patients admitted to acute care (n = 5414) or geriatric and social healthcare (n = 2041) units of the Regional Hospital of Amposta (Spain) between January 2017 and December 2020 who received basal insulin during hospitalization. Hypo- and hyperglycaemic events were indirectly assessed through hospital pharmacy usage of intravenous glucose and vials of rapid-acting intravenous insulin for 27 months after the switch, and the impact on overall dysglycemic events was analysed.

RESULTS

After protocol implementation, patients were mostly treated with Gla-300 (83.06 % in acute care; and 83.44 % in geriatric and social healthcare), and presented a significant decrease in the use of intravenous insulin (-60.80 %, P = 0.005) and glucose (-62.13 %, P < 0.001), which translated into a significantly reduced overall dysglycemic events (-62.25 %, P < 0.001), with a good safety and tolerability profile.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall inpatient dysglycemic events were improved upon the introduction of the new insulin protocol, which calls for the use of Gla-300 as one of the choices of basal insulin for inpatient care.

A phase-I randomized euglycemic clamp study to demonstrate the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic equivalence of an insulin degludec biosimilar (B01411) with the reference product in healthy Chinese volunteers

BACKGROUND

B01411 is a biosimilar candidate manufactured by Jilin Huisheng Biopharmaceutical Co. Ltd for the reference insulin degludec (Tresiba) (IDeg). This study aimed to evaluate the pharmacokinetics (PK), pharmacodynamics (PD), and safety of the two IDeg products and to assess the PK/PD similarity of B01411 compared with the reference IDeg product.

RESEARCH DESIGN & METHODS

A single-center, single-dose, randomized, crossover, open-labeled, phase I, euglycemic clamp study in healthy Chinese subjects to examine the bioequivalence of B01411 (0.4 U/kg) compared with the reference IDeg product. Blood samples were collected at a predefined time for the analysis of blood glucose (BG), IDeg, and C-peptide concentrations. The glucose infusion rate (GIR) was adjusted to maintain the BG at approximately 0.28 mmol/L below baseline throughout the clamp.

RESULTS

Thirty-two subjects (20 males and 12 females) were enrolled, 31 of whom received both treatments. The 90% confidence intervals for the ratio of the least-squares geometric means for AUCIDeg,0-24 h, AUCGIR,0-24 h, IDegmax, and GIRmax were all in the range of 0.80-1.25. Only one adverse event of puncture site bruising occurred once in a subject in the B01411 group.

CONCLUSION

B01411 exhibited a pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic similarity to the reference product. Both IDeg products were well tolerated.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

http://www.chinadrugtrials.org.cn/index.html#. Identifier is CTR20192122.

Recent trends and advances in type 1 diabetes therapeutics: A comprehensive review

Type 1 diabetes (T1D) is a chronic autoimmune disease characterized by the destruction of pancreatic β-cells, leading to insulin deficiency. Insulin replacement therapy is the current standard of care for T1D, but it has significant limitations. However, stem cell-based replacement therapy has the potential to restore β-cell function and achieve glycaemic control eradicating the necessity for drugs or injecting insulin externally. While significant progress has been made in preclinical studies, the clinical translation of stem cell therapy for T1D is still in its early stages. In continuation, further research is essentially required to determine the safety and efficacy of stem cell therapies and to develop strategies to prevent immune rejection of stem cell-derived β-cells. The current review highlights the current state of cellular therapies for T1D including, different types of stem cell therapies, gene therapy, immunotherapy, artificial pancreas, and cell encapsulation being investigated, and their potential for clinical translation.

Factors Affecting Performance of Insulin Pen Injector Technology: A Narrative Review

BACKGROUND

Insulin treatment is an essential hormone replacement therapy for the survival of people with type 1 diabetes and is often used for treatment in type 2 diabetes, particularly as the disease progresses. Advances in insulin therapy have been made since its discovery, including production of human insulin and development of insulin analogs with improved efficacy and safety profiles. The different types of available insulin formulations allow health care professionals to personalize treatment to an individual's needs. Generally, insulin requires parenteral administration via subcutaneous injection owing to very low oral bioavailability.

METHODS

This article reviews the human, technological, economical, and regulatory factors affecting the performance of insulin pens and the relationship between them. Opportunities and challenges that insulin pen injections may encounter in the future are also considered.

RESULTS

Insulin delivery devices, together with other factors, influence dose accuracy, convenience, and quality of life, contributing to easier medication administration with high efficacy and safety. For patients, ease of use, fast and accurate drug delivery, and painless injection are the most valuable features of an insulin injection device. For manufacturers, technological feasibility and economic viability also need to be considered when developing injection devices.

CONCLUSION

Insulin pen injectors are generally preferred over vial and syringe, although access may be limited in some health care systems. Insulin pen injectors can adapt to different insulin regimens and formulations and have the potential to acquire dosing data in real time.

Hypoglycaemia in type 1 diabetes mellitus: risks and practical prevention strategies

Hypoglycaemia, which occurs when blood levels of glucose fall below what is considered a normal range, is a well-known complication of insulin therapy in individuals with type 1 diabetes mellitus. Despite advances in diabetes mellitus management, hypoglycaemia has continued to affect the majority of these individuals, leading to suboptimal care and decreased quality of life. Multiple epidemiological studies have demonstrated the risks associated with hypoglycaemic events. With this understanding, various advances have been made in therapeutics for diabetes mellitus management. Diabetes mellitus education continues to form the foundation for management and prevention of hypoglycaemia. The advent of newer diabetes mellitus technologies and newer insulins herald improvements in management strategies and hypoglycaemia prevention. Improved understanding of these newer approaches is needed to ensure delivery of safe and effective care to individuals with type 1 diabetes mellitus, leading to reductions in both the short-term and long-term morbidity and mortality associated with hypoglycaemic events.

Glycaemic Control in People with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Switching from Basal Insulin to Insulin Glargine 300 U/ml (Gla-300): Results from the REALI Pooled Database

INTRODUCTION

Using pooled data from the REALI European database, we evaluated the impact of previous basal insulin (BI) type on real-life effectiveness and safety of switching to insulin glargine 300 U/ml (Gla-300) in people with suboptimally controlled type 2 diabetes.

METHODS

Patient-level data were pooled from 11 prospective, open-label, 24-week studies. Participants were classified according to the type of prior BI. Of the 4463 participants, 1282 (28.7%) were pre-treated with neutral protamine Hagedorn (NPH) insulin and 2899 (65.0%) with BI analogues (BIAs), and 282 (6.3%) had undetermined prior BI.

RESULTS

There were no meaningful differences in baseline characteristics between subgroups, except for a higher prevalence of diabetic neuropathy in the NPH subgroup (21.6% versus 7.8% with BIAs). Mean ± standard deviation haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) decreased from 8.73 ± 1.15% and 8.35 ± 0.95% at baseline to 7.71 ± 1.09% and 7.82 ± 1.06% at week 24 in the NPH and BIA subgroups, respectively. Least squares (LS) mean change in HbA1c was - 0.85% (95% confidence interval - 0.94 to - 0.77) in NPH subgroup and - 0.70% (- 0.77 to - 0.64) in BIA subgroup, with a LS mean absolute difference between subgroups of 0.16 (0.06-0.26; p = 0.002). Gla-300 mean daily dose was slightly increased at week 24 by 0.07 U/kg/day (approximately 6 U/day) in both subgroups. Incidences of symptomatic and severe hypoglycaemia were low, without body weight change.

CONCLUSIONS

Irrespective of previous BI therapy (NPH insulin or BIAs), switching to Gla-300 improved glycaemic control without weight gain and with low symptomatic and severe hypoglycaemia incidences. However, a slightly greater glucose-lowering effectiveness was observed in people pre-treated with NPH insulin.

Continuous glucose monitoring-based time-in-range using insulin glargine 300 units/ml versus insulin degludec 100 units/ml in type 1 diabetes: The head-to-head randomized controlled InRange trial

AIM

To use continuous glucose monitoring (CGM)-based time-in-range (TIR) as a primary efficacy endpoint to compare the second-generation basal insulin (BI) analogues insulin glargine 300 U/ml (Gla-300) and insulin degludec 100 U/ml (IDeg-100) in adults with type 1 diabetes (T1D).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

InRange was a 12-week, multicentre, randomized, active-controlled, parallel-group, open-label study comparing glucose TIR and variability between Gla-300 and IDeg-100 using blinded 20-day CGM profiles. The inclusion criteria consisted of adults with T1D treated with multiple daily injections, using BI once daily and rapid-acting insulin analogues for at least 1 year, with an HbA1c of 7% or higher and of 10% or less at screening.

RESULTS

Overall, 343 participants were randomized: 172 received Gla-300 and 171 IDeg-100. Non-inferiority (10% relative margin) of Gla-300 versus IDeg-100 was shown for the primary endpoint (percentage TIR ≥ 70 to ≤ 180 mg/dl): least squares (LS) mean (95% confidence interval) 52.74% (51.06%, 54.42%) for Gla-300 and 55.09% (53.34%, 56.84%) for IDeg-100; LS mean difference (non-inferiority): 3.16% (0.88%, 5.44%) (non-inferiority P = .0067). Non-inferiority was shown on glucose total coefficient of variation (main secondary endpoint): LS mean 39.91% (39.20%, 40.61%) and 41.22% (40.49%, 41.95%), respectively; LS mean difference (non-inferiority) -5.44% (-6.50%, -4.38%) (non-inferiority P < .0001). Superiority of Gla-300 over IDeg-100 was not shown on TIR. Occurrences of self-measured and CGM-derived hypoglycaemia were comparable between treatment groups. Safety profiles were consistent with known profiles, with no unexpected findings.

CONCLUSIONS

Using clinically relevant CGM metrics, InRange shows that Gla-300 is non-inferior to IDeg-100 in people with T1D, with comparable hypoglycaemia and safety profiles.

Efficacy and safety of basal insulin degludec 100 IU/mL versus glargine 300 IU/mL for type 1 diabetes: The single-center INEOX randomized controlled trial

AIMS

To compare efficacy and safety of degludec 100 IU/mL (Deg-100) and glargine 300 IU/mL (Gla-300) in adults with type 1 diabetes.

METHODS

Open-label, single-center, randomized, parallel-group, 24-week trial in adults with type 1 diabetes, on basal-bolus insulin therapy, HbA1c ≤ 10%, using self-monitoring blood glucose. Participants were randomized 1:1 to a basal-bolus insulin regimen with Deg-100 (N = 129) or Gla-300 (N = 131). Primary efficacy endpoint: mean change in HbA1c from baseline to week-24. Main safety outcome: incidence rate of hypoglycemia during the study. Quality of life (DQOL) and satisfaction with diabetes treatment (DTSQ) were assessed.

RESULTS

At week 24, after adjusting for baseline HbA1c, the decrease in HbA1c did not differ between groups: Deg-100 (-0.07 ± 0.7%) and Gla-300 (-0.16 ± 0.77%) (P = 0.320). There were no significant differences between groups in HbA1c, nocturnal hypoglycemia, severe hypoglycemia, DQOL, or DTSQ scores. The incidence rates of hypoglycemia < 3.9 mmol/L (Deg-100: 115.24 events/person-year vs Gla-300: 99.01 events/person-year, p < 0.001); and < 3.0 mmol/L (Deg-100: 41.17 events/person-year vs Gla-300: 34.29 events/person-year, p < 0.001) were different between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Deg-100 and Gla-300 have similar metabolic efficacy, incidence ratio of nocturnal and severe hypoglycemia, DQOL and DTSQ scores. Differences in the incidence rate of hypoglycemia < 3.9 mmol/L and < 3.0 mmol/L should be confirmed.

Real-world effectiveness and safety of insulin glargine 300 U/ml in insulin-naïve people with type 2 diabetes in the Latin America region: A subgroup analysis of the ATOS

AIM

To evaluate the real-world effectiveness and safety of insulin glargine 300 U/ml (Gla-300) in achieving glycaemic goals in insulin-naïve people with type 2 diabetes (T2D) in Mexico, Colombia and Peru (Latin America region) in the A Toujeo Observational Study (ATOS).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

ATOS was a multicentre, prospective, 12-month observational study, which included 4422 insulin-naïve adults (age ≥ 18 years) with T2D uncontrolled (HbA1c > 7% and ≤11%) on at least one oral antidiabetic drug (OAD) who initiated Gla-300 treatment as per routine practice. The primary endpoint was the percentage of participants achieving their predefined individualized HbA1c goal at month 6. Key secondary endpoints included change from baseline in HbA1c, fasting plasma glucose (FPG), fasting self-monitored blood glucose (SMBG), body weight and incidence of hypoglycaemia.

RESULTS

In this subgroup analysis, a total of 314 participants with T2D received Gla-300. At baseline, mean ± SD age was 56.0 ± 11.6 years, duration of diabetes was 9.7 ± 6.6 years and 65.9% of participants were on at least two OADs. The individualized HbA1c target was achieved by 25.8% of participants (95% confidence interval [CI]: 20.3-31.9) at month 6 and by 35.3% (95% CI: 28.5-42.5) at month 12. Gla-300 treatment improved glycaemic control with meaningful reductions in mean HbA1c, FPG and fasting SMBG. The incidence of hypoglycaemia reported was low and body weight remained stable.

CONCLUSIONS

In a real-world setting in the Latin America region, the initiation of Gla-300 in people with T2D uncontrolled on OADs resulted in improved glycaemic control with a low incidence of hypoglycaemia and no change in body weight.

Efficacy and safety of degludec U100 versus glargine U300 for the early postoperative management of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus undergoing coronary artery bypass graft surgery: A non-inferiority randomized trial

AIMS

To compare the efficacy and safety of degludec U100 versus glargine U300 for the early postoperative management of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2D) undergoing coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery.

METHODS

A total of 239 patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive a basal-bolus regimen in the early postoperative period using degludec U100 (n = 122) or glargine U300 (n = 117) as basal and glulisine before meals. The primary outcome was mean differences between groups in their daily BG concentrations. The major safety outcome was the occurrence of hypoglycemia.

RESULTS

There were no differences in mean daily BG concentrations (157 vs. 162 mg/dl), mean percentage of readings within target BG of 70-180 mg/dl (74% vs. 73%), daily basal insulin dose (19 vs. 21 units/day), length of stay (median [IQR]: 9 vs. 9 days), or hospital complications (21.3% vs. 21.4%) between treatment groups. There were no differences in the proportion of patients with BG <70 mg/dl (15.6% vs. 23.1%) or <54 mg/dl (1.6% vs. 4.3%) between degludec-100 and glargine-300 groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment with degludec U100 is as effective and safe as glargine U300 for the early postoperative hospital management of patients with T2D undergoing CABG.

Short-term Glycemic Variability and Its Association With Macrovascular and Microvascular Complications in Patients With Diabetes

The introduction of continuous glucose monitoring inaugurated a new era in clinical practice by shifting the characterization of glycemic control from HbA1c to novel metrics. The one that gained widespread attention over the past decades was glycemic variability (GV), which typically refers to peaks and nadirs of blood glucose measured over a given time interval. GV can be dichotomized into two main categories: short-term and long-term. Short-term GV reflects within-day and between-day glycemic oscillations, and its contribution to diabetic complications remains an enigma. In this review, we summarize the available data about short-term GV and its possible association with both microvascular and macrovascular complications, evaluating different pathogenic mechanisms and demonstrating nonpharmaceutical, as well as pharmaceutical, therapeutic interventions.

Pharmacotherapy of type 2 diabetes: An update and future directions

Type 2 diabetes (T2D) is a widely prevalent disease with substantial economic and social impact for which multiple conventional and novel pharmacotherapies are currently available; however, the landscape of T2D treatment is constantly changing as new therapies emerge and the understanding of currently available agents deepens. This review aims to provide an updated summary of the pharmacotherapeutic approach to T2D. Each class of agents is presented by mechanism of action, details of administration, side effect profile, cost, and use in certain populations including heart failure, non-alcoholic fatty liver disease, obesity, chronic kidney disease, and older individuals. We also review targets of novel therapeutic T2D agent development. Finally, we outline an up-to-date treatment approach that starts with identification of an individualized goal for glycemic control then selection, initiation, and further intensification of a personalized therapeutic plan for T2D.

Comparative effectiveness and safety of glargine 300 U/mL versus degludec 100 U/mL in insulin-naïve patients with type 2 diabetes. A multicenter retrospective real-world study (RESTORE-2 NAIVE STUDY)

AIMS

This study assessed comparative effectiveness of glargine 300 U/mL (Gla-300) versus degludec 100 U/mL (Deg-100) in insulin-naïve patients with T2D.

METHODS

This is a retrospective, multicenter, non-inferiority study based on electronic medical records. All patients initiating Gla-300 or Deg-100 were 1:1 propensity score-matched (PSM). Linear mixed models were used to assess the changes in continuous endpoints. Incidence rates (IR) of hypoglycemia were compared using Poisson's regression models.

RESULTS

Nineteen centers provided data on 357 patients in each PSM cohort. HbA1c after 6 months (primary endpoint) decreased by - 1.70% (95%CI - 1.90; - 1.50) in Gla-300 group and - 169% (95%CI - 1.89; - 1.49) in Deg-100 group, confirming non-inferiority of Gla-300 versus Deg-100. Fasting blood glucose (BG) decreased by ~60 mg/dl in both groups; body weight remained unchanged. In both groups, the mean starting dose was 12U (0.15U/kg) and it was slightly titrated to 16U (0.20U/kg). IR (episodes per patient-months) of BG ≤70 mg/dl was 0.13 in Gla-300 group and 0.14 in Deg-100 group (p=0.87). IR of BG <54 mg/dL was 0.02 in both groups (p=0.49). No severe hypoglycemia occurred.

CONCLUSION

Initiating Gla-300 or Deg-100 was associated with similar improvements in glycemic control, no weight gain and low hypoglycemia rates, without severe episodes during 6 months of treatment.

Once-weekly basal insulin icodec: Looking ONWARDS from pharmacology to clinical trials

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Insulin icodec is currently the most advanced candidate insulin suitable for once-weekly administration. We aim to conduct a systematic review of the literature to find out the efficacy and safety of insulin icodec in patients with diabetes mellitus.

METHODS

We systematically searched the electronic database of PubMed, and Google Scholar from inception until August 20, 2022, using MeSH keywords. Ongoing trials of insulin icodec were additionally searched from the ClinicalTrials.Gov. We retrieved all the available granular details of phase 1 to phase 3 studies of insulin icodec in both type 1 and type 2 diabetes.

RESULTS

Phase 1 study showed insulin icodec having a half-life of 196 h (>1 week) while a steady state is achieved after 3 to 4 weekly injections. Phase 2 studies compared once-weekly icodec to insulin glargine (U-100) and found a similar glucose control with no significantly greater hypoglycemia risks. Top-line results from the five phase 3 studies reported better glucose control with once-weekly icodec compared to both once-daily insulin glargine (ONWARDS 1) and once-daily degludec (in both ONWARDS 2 and 4) with similar rates of hypoglycemia in type 2 diabetes, although there was a higher hypoglycemic event with insulin icodec in type 1 diabetes (ONWARDS 6) compared to once-daily degludec despite a similar glycemic control.

CONCLUSION

A brighter prospect of once-weekly insulin icodec is on the card in particular in type 2 diabetes in terms of reducing injection pricks by >85% vs. once-daily basal insulin analogs, although few unknowns still exist.

Insulin: evolution of insulin formulations and their application in clinical practice over 100 years

The first preparation of insulin extracted from a pancreas and made suitable for use in humans after purification was achieved 100 years ago in Toronto, an epoch-making achievement, which has ultimately provided a life-giving treatment for millions of people worldwide. The earliest animal-derived formulations were short-acting and contained many impurities that caused adverse reactions, thereby limiting their therapeutic potential. However, since then, insulin production and purification improved with enhanced technologies, along with a full understanding of the insulin molecule structure. The availability of radio-immunoassays contributed to the unravelling of the physiology of glucose homeostasis, ultimately leading to the adoption of rational models of insulin replacement. The introduction of recombinant DNA technologies has since resulted in the era of both rapid- and long-acting human insulin analogues administered via the subcutaneous route which better mimic the physiology of insulin secretion, leading to the modern basal-bolus regimen. These advances, in combination with improved education and technologies for glucose monitoring, enable people with diabetes to better meet individual glycaemic goals with a lower risk of hypoglycaemia. While the prevalence of diabetes continues to rise globally, it is important to recognise the scientific endeavour that has led to insulin remaining the cornerstone of diabetes management, on the centenary of its first successful use in humans.

Controlling glycemic variability in people living with type 1 diabetes receiving insulin glargine 300 U/mL (Gla-300)

Short-term glycemic variability is associated with the risk of hypoglycemia and hyperglycemia in people living with type 1 diabetes and can potentially affect clinical outcomes. Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) is of increasing importance to evaluate glycemic variability in greater detail. Specific metrics for assessing glycemic variability were proposed, such as the SD of mean glucose level and associated coefficient of variation, and time in target glucose range to guide study designs, therapy and allow people with diabetes more transparency in interpreting their own CGM data. Randomized controlled trials (RCT) and real-world evidence provide complementary information about the efficacy/effectiveness and safety of interventions. Insulin glargine 300 U/mL (Gla-300) has a longer lasting and less variable action than insulin glargine U100 (Gla-100) with a lower risk of hypoglycemia. While insulin degludec U100 (iDeg-100) was associated with lower glucose values but more time below range in one randomized study compared with Gla-300, Gla-300 was associated with a higher per cent time in range, but also above the therapeutic range. However, a real-world study did not find differences during the day between Gla-300 and iDeg-100. The upcoming InRange RCT is the first head-to-head comparison of Gla-300 with iDeg-100 using CGM in an international population using CGM metrics as the primary endpoint. The non-interventional COMET-T real-world study will determine the real-world effectiveness of Gla-300 using CGM metrics and cover a broad spectrum of clinical practice decisions irrespective of the prior basal insulin.

Comparison of the Impact of Insulin Degludec U100 and Insulin Glargine U300 on Glycemic Variability and Oxidative Stress in Insulin-Naive Patients With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: Pilot Study for a Randomized Trial

Background

There is an ongoing discussion about possible differences between insulin degludec (IDeg-100) and glargine U300 (IGlar-300). There is little data and head-to-head comparison of IDeg-100 and IGlar-300 regarding their simultaneous impact on glycemic variability and oxidative stress in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM).

Objective

In our randomized, open-label, crossover study, we compared the impact of IDeg-100 and IGlar-300 on glycemic variability and oxidative stress in insulin-naive patients with T2DM.

Methods

We recruited a total of 25 adult patients with T2DM (7 females) whose diabetes was uncontrolled (HbA1c ≥7.5%) on two or more oral glucose-lowering drugs; a total of 22 completed the study. Mean age was 57.3 (SD 6.99) years and duration of diabetes was 9.94 (SD 5.01) years. After the washout period, they were randomized alternately to first receive either IDeg-100 or IGlar-300 along with metformin. Each insulin was administered for 12 weeks and then switched. At the beginning and end of each phase, biochemical and oxidative stress parameters were analyzed. On 3 consecutive days prior to each control point, patients performed a 7-point self-monitoring of blood glucose profile. Oxidative stress was assessed by measuring thiol groups and hydroperoxides (determination of reactive oxygen metabolites test) in serum.

Results

IGlar-300 reduced mean glucose by 0.02-0.13 mmol/L, and IDeg-100 reduced glucose by 0.10-0.16 mmol/L, with no significant difference. The reduction of the coefficient of glucose variation also did not show a statistically significant difference. IGlar-300 increased thiols by 0.08 µmol/L and IDeg-100 increased thiols by 0.15 µmol/L, with no significant difference (P=.07) between them. IGlar-300 reduced hydroperoxides by 0.040 CARR U and IDeg-100 increased hydroperoxides by 0.034 CARR U, but the difference was not significant (P=.12).

Conclusions

The results of our study do not show a significant difference regarding glycemic variability between patients receiving either insulin IDeg-100 or IGlar-300, although IGlar-300 showed greater dispersion of data. No significant difference in oxidative stress was observed. In a larger study, doses of insulins should be higher to achieve significant impact on glycemic parameters and consequently on glycemic variability and oxidative stress.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04692415; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04692415

Efficacy and Safety of Insulin Glargine 300 U/mL in People with Type 2 Diabetes Uncontrolled on Basal Insulin: The 26-Week Interventional, Single-Arm ARTEMIS-DM Study

INTRODUCTION

The efficacy and safety of switching to insulin glargine 300 U/mL (Gla-300) in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) uncontrolled on basal insulin (BI) has been demonstrated in the North American and Western European populations; however, there is limited data from other geographical regions with different ethnicities. The ARTEMIS-DM study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of Gla-300 in people with T2DM uncontrolled on BI from Asia, Latin America and Middle East Africa.

METHODS

The ARTEMIS-DM was a 26-week, prospective, interventional, single-arm, phase IV study (NCT03760991). Adults with T2DM previously uncontrolled (glycated haemoglobin [HbA_1c] 7.5-10%) on BI were switched to Gla-300. The primary endpoint was change in HbA_1c from baseline to 26 weeks. Key secondary endpoints were changes in HbA_1c (week 12), fasting plasma glucose (FPG), self-monitored plasma glucose (SMPG) and BI dose from baseline to week 26. The safety and tolerability of Gla-300 were also assessed.

RESULTS

A total of 372 (50% male) participants were included, with mean (standard deviation [SD]) age 60.9 (10.0) years, duration of diabetes 13.11 (7.48) years and baseline HbA_1c 8.67 (0.77)% (71.22 [8.44] mmol/mol). A total of 222 (59.7%) participants were using insulin glargine 100 U/mL and 107 (28.8%) were using neutral protamine Hagedorn insulin as previous BI. There were clinically significant reductions in mean HbA_1c (- 0.82%; primary endpoint), FPG and SMPG levels at week 26. With a pre-defined titration algorithm, mean Gla-300 dose increased from 27.48 U (0.35 U/kg) at baseline to 39.01 U (0.50 U/kg) at week 26. Hypoglycaemia events occurred in 20.4% of the participants; 1 (0.3%) participant had a severe hypoglycaemia event.

CONCLUSION

In people with T2DM uncontrolled on previous BI, switching to Gla-300 with optimal titration guided by an algorithm was associated with improved glycaemic control and low incidence of hypoglycaemia across multiple geographic regions.

GOV IDENTIFIER

NCT03760991.

[Switching insulin degludec to insulin glulisine improved nocturnal hypoglycemia and ventricular arrythmia in an elderly type 1 diabetes patient with chronic heart failure: A case report]

The patient was 82-year-old man with type 1 diabetes mellitus. He had been using insulin degludec (IDeg) and insulin glulisine (IGlu) for treatment. He was admitted to our hospital due to diabetic ketoacidosis. As he started eating after recovery, we restarted intensive insulin therapy for glycemic control. Although he had eaten almost whole meals, his fasting blood glucose was extremely low, and the existence of nocturnal hypoglycemia was apparent. We reduced the dose and changed the injection time (evening→morning) of IDeg. We also stopped the evening IGlu injection; however, his nocturnal hypoglycemia did not improve. We decided to switch IDeg to insulin glargine U300 and to attach an intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitor (isCGM). His nocturnal hypoglycemia improved three days later. Since he had chronic heart failure and premature ventricular contractions, we used a Holter electrocardiogram to investigate the difference in arrythmia during hypoglycemia and non-hypoglycemia. As a result, the number of premature ventricular contractions was apparently high during hypoglycemia. In the present case, which involved an elderly patient with type 1 diabetes mellitus, chronic heart failure and nocturnal hypoglycemia, switching IDeg to insulin glargine U300 improved nocturnal hypoglycemia. IDeg differs from insulin glargine U300 in that it has a fatty acid side chain, which leads IDeg to combine with serum albumin. We thought that the increased level of free fatty acid due to hypoglycemia was competing against albumin combined IDeg, which increased free IDeg, and as a result, encouraged hypoglycemia.

Real-world persistence, adherence, health care resource utilization, and costs in people with type 2 diabetes switching from a first-generation basal insulin to a second-generation (insulin glargine 300 U/mL) vs an alternative first-generation basal insulin

BACKGROUND: People with type 2 diabetes (T2D) who change their basal insulin (BI) may have variable persistence with therapy. Compared with first-generation (long-acting) BI analogs (insulin glargine 100U/mL [Gla-100]; insulin detemir [IDet]), second-generation (longer-acting) BI analogs (insulin glargine 300U/mL [Gla-300]; insulin degludec) have similar glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) attainment and lowered hypoglycemia risk, which could impact treatment persistence. OBJECTIVE: To compare persistence, adherence, health care resource utilization (HRU), and costs for individuals switching from neutral protamine Hagedorn insulin or a first-generation BI analog with either the second-generation BI, Gla-300, or an alternative first-generation BI analog (Gla-100 or IDet). METHODS: We used Optum Clinformatics claims data from adults (aged ≥ 18 years) with T2D who had received BI (neutral protamine Hagedorn, Gla-100, IDet) in the 6-month baseline period, and switched to either Gla-300 or an alternative first-generation BI (Gla-100 or IDet; treatment switch = index date) between April 1, 2015, and August 31, 2019. Participants were followed for 12 months, until plan disenrollment, or until death, whichever occurred first. Cohorts were propensity score matched (PSM) on baseline characteristics. The primary outcome was the proportion who were persistent with therapy at 12 months. Secondary outcomes were adherence (proportion of days covered); change in HbA1c; and all-cause, diabetes-related, and hypoglycemia-related HRU and costs. RESULTS: PSM generated 3,077 participants/group (mean age: 68 years, 52% female). Cohorts were well balanced except for hospitalization, which was adjusted in models as a covariate. During the 12-month follow-up period, participants who received Gla-300 vs first-generation BI had greater persistence with (45.5% vs 42.1%; adjusted P = 0.0001), and adherence to (42.8% vs 38.2%; adjusted P = 0.0006), BI therapy and a statistically larger reduction in HbA1c at 12 months (-0.65% vs -0.45%; adjusted P = 0.0040). The proportion of participants achieving HbA1c less than 8% (47.2% vs 40.9%; P < 0.0001), but not less than 7% (21.2% vs 20.8%), was significantly higher for Gla-300 vs first-generation BI. All-cause (45.3 vs 65.9 per 100 patient-years [P100PY]) and diabetes-related (21.5 vs 29.1 P100PY), but not hypoglycemia-related, hospitalizations (1.0 vs 1.5 P100PY) were significantly (P < 0.0001) lower for Gla-300 vs first-generation BI. Similarly, all-cause (111.9 vs 148.8 P100PY), diabetes-related (54.8 vs 74.2 P100PY), and hypoglycemia-related (2.9 vs 5.7 P100PY) emergency department (ED) visits were significantly lower for Gla-300 (all P < 0.0001). Costs for all-cause hospitalizations and hypoglycemia-related ED visits were significantly lower for Gla-300 vs first-generation BI. Although pharmacy costs were significantly higher for Gla-300 vs first-generation BI, all-cause total health care costs were not significantly different: $41,255 vs $45,316 per person per year, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In this claims-based analysis of people with T2D receiving BI, switching to Gla-300 was associated with significantly better persistence, adherence, and HbA1c reduction compared with switching to an alternative first-generation BI analog. All-cause HRU was significantly lower; despite significantly higher pharmacy costs, total health care costs were similar. DISCLOSURES: This study was funded by Sanofi US. Medical writing support was provided by Helen Jones, PhD, CMPP, of Evidence Scientific Solutions and funded by Sanofi US. Dr Wright is on the speakers' bureau and sits on the advisory boards for Abbot Diabetes, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, and Sanofi; sits on the advisory board for Medtronic; and is a consultant for Abbot Diabetes, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Eli Lilly. Dr Malone is on advisory boards for Novartis and Avalere and consults for Pear Therapeutics, Sarepta, and Strategic Therapeutics. Dr Trujillo sits on advisory boards for Novo Nordisk and Sanofi. Drs Gill, Zhou, and Preblick and Mr Li are employees and stockholders of Sanofi. Mr Huse is an employee of Evidera and a contractor for Sanofi. Dr Reid is a speaker and consultant for Novo Nordisk and Sanofi-Aventis and is a consultant for AstraZeneca and Intarcia.

Effect of the Concomitant Use of Subcutaneous Basal Insulin and Intravenous Insulin Infusion in the Treatment of Severe Hyperglycemic Patients

BACKGRUOUND

No consensus exists regarding the early use of subcutaneous (SC) basal insulin facilitating the transition from continuous intravenous insulin infusion (CIII) to multiple SC insulin injections in patients with severe hyperglycemia other than diabetic ketoacidosis. This study evaluated the effect of early co-administration of SC basal insulin with CIII on glucose control in patients with severe hyperglycemia.

METHODS

Patients who received CIII for the management of severe hyperglycemia were divided into two groups: the early basal insulin group (n=86) if they received the first SC basal insulin 0.25 U/kg body weight within 24 hours of CIII initiation and ≥4 hours before discontinuation, and the delayed basal insulin group (n=79) if they were not classified as the early basal insulin group. Rebound hyperglycemia was defined as blood glucose level of >250 mg/dL in 24 hours following CIII discontinuation. Propensity score matching (PSM) methods were additionally employed for adjusting the confounding factors (n=108).

RESULTS

The rebound hyperglycemia incidence was significantly lower in the early basal insulin group than in the delayed basal insulin group (54.7% vs. 86.1%), despite using PSM methods (51.9%, 85.2%). The length of hospital stay was shorter in the early basal insulin group than in the delayed basal insulin group (8.5 days vs. 9.6 days, P=0.027). The hypoglycemia incidence did not differ between the groups.

CONCLUSION

Early co-administration of basal insulin with CIII prevents rebound hyperglycemia and shorten hospital stay without increasing the hypoglycemic events in patients with severe hyperglycemia.

Evaluation of Patient Reported Satisfaction and Clinical Efficacy of Insulin Glargine 300 U/mL Versus 100 U/mL in Patients With Type 1 Diabetes Using Flash Glucose Monitoring System

Background and Aims:

To analyze patient-reported satisfaction and clinical effectiveness of concentrated insulin glargine 300 U/mL (Gla-300) among patients with type 1 diabetes (T1D) using a flash glucose monitoring (FGM) system.

Methods:

This comparative study was conducted among 86 patients with T1D (aged 14-40 years), who were treated with Glargine 100 U/mL (Gla-100) and switched to Gla-300 at day 1 (baseline). The following data were collected from each patient: demographic information, clinical parameters, and glycemic control markers. All patients completed the Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire (Arabic version), first at baseline and then after 12 weeks. A comparison was done for all the data recorded at baseline (on Gla-100) and after 12 weeks (on Gla-300) and subjected to analysis.

Results:

Compared to patients treated with Gla-100, significant improvements were observed in the Gla-300 group, in terms of the ambulatory glucose profile (AGP) markers, such as percentage of time spent within the target range of the glucose levels (70-180 mg/dL) (P = .037), percentage which fell below the target (<70 mg/dL) (P = .027), and percentage of time spent (<54 mg/dL) (P = .043). Compared to Gla-100, patients treated with Gla-300 experienced significant improvements in the current treatment satisfactions (P = .047), convenient finding treatment recently (P = .034), and flexible finding treatment recently (P = .041), recommend the current treatment (P = .042) and satisfied to continue the current treatment (P = .035).

Conclusion:

Compared to the patients on Gla-100, patients treated with Gla-300 exhibited significant improvements in the AGP markers and degree of treatment satisfaction.

Clinical Use of Insulin Glargine 300 U/mL in Adults with Type 2 Diabetes: Hypothetical Case Studies

Type 2 diabetes (T2D) is a progressive disease, with many individuals eventually requiring basal insulin therapy to maintain glycaemic control. However, there exists considerable therapeutic inertia to the prompt initiation and optimal titration of basal insulin therapy due to barriers that include fear of injections, hypoglycaemia, weight gain, and burdensome regimens. Hypoglycaemia is thought to be a major barrier to optimal glycaemic control and is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Newer second-generation basal insulin analogues provide comparable glycaemic control with lower risk of hypoglycaemia compared with first-generation basal insulin analogues. The present review article discusses clinical evidence for one such second-generation basal insulin analogue, insulin glargine 300 U/mL (Gla-300), in the context of hypothetical case studies that are representative of individuals who may attend routine clinical practice. These case studies discuss individualised treatment needs for people with T2D who are insulin-naïve or pre-treated. Clinical characteristics such as older age, frequent nocturnal hypoglycaemia, and renal impairment, which are known risk factors for hypoglycaemia, are also considered.

New Horizons: Next-Generation Insulin Analogues: Structural Principles and Clinical Goals

Design of "first-generation" insulin analogues over the past 3 decades has provided pharmaceutical formulations with tailored pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic (PD) properties. Application of a molecular tool kit-integrating protein sequence, chemical modification, and formulation-has thus led to improved prandial and basal formulations for the treatment of diabetes mellitus. Although PK/PD changes were modest in relation to prior formulations of human and animal insulins, significant clinical advantages in efficacy (mean glycemia) and safety (rates of hypoglycemia) were obtained. Continuing innovation is providing further improvements to achieve ultrarapid and ultrabasal analogue formulations in an effort to reduce glycemic variability and optimize time in range. Beyond such PK/PD metrics, next-generation insulin analogues seek to exploit therapeutic mechanisms: glucose-responsive ("smart") analogues, pathway-specific ("biased") analogues, and organ-targeted analogues. Smart insulin analogues and delivery systems promise to mitigate hypoglycemic risk, a critical barrier to glycemic control, whereas biased and organ-targeted insulin analogues may better recapitulate physiologic hormonal regulation. In each therapeutic class considerations of cost and stability will affect use and global distribution. This review highlights structural principles underlying next-generation design efforts, their respective biological rationale, and potential clinical applications.

Insulins for the long term management of diabetes mellitus in dogs: a review

The year 2021 marked the centenary of the isolation of a therapeutic form of insulin and its successful use in dogs. This was a landmark moment that subsequently and rapidly led to the commercial manufacture of insulin for use in humans. The impact of insulin was almost miraculous as those destined to die from their diabetes mellitus returned to life. Over the past 100 years, insulin formulations have been modified to attempt to provide a predictable and prolonged duration of action while avoiding the development of hypoglycaemia. This has led to an ever-growing variety of insulin types in human medicine, many of which have subsequently been used in dogs. The purpose of this review article is to provide an overview of available insulin types and their application to the chronic management of canine diabetes mellitus.

Significance of Glycemic Variability in Diabetes Mellitus

The goal of diabetes treatment is to maintain good glycemic control, prevent the development and progression of diabetic complications, and ensure the same quality of life and life expectancy as healthy people. Hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) is used as an index of glycemic control, but strict glycemic control using HbA1c as an index may lead to severe hypoglycemia and cardiovascular death. Glycemic variability (GV), such as excessive hyperglycemia and hypoglycemia, is associated with diabetic vascular complications and has been recognized as an important index of glycemic control. Here, we reviewed the definition and evaluated the clinical usefulness of GV, and its relationship with diabetic complications and therapeutic strategies to reduce GV.

Insulin Degludec Versus Insulin Glargine on Glycemic Variability in Diabetic Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Currently, glycemic variability has more deleterious effects than sustained hyperglycemia and is closely associated with acute and chronic complications of diabetes. Reducing glycemic excursion is becoming another vital goal of glycemic control in clinical practice. This study aimed to determine whether insulin degludec (IDeg) or insulin glargine (IGla) was more beneficial for reducing glycemic fluctuations.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This research was constructed according to the PRISMA guidelines. We searched eight databases and ClinicalTrials.gov from their inception to 30 November 2021. All randomized controlled trials comparing the efficacy of glucose variability between IDeg and IGla in diabetic patients were included.

RESULTS

Fourteen trials with 8,683 participants were included. In patients with T1DM, IDeg was associated with a lower mean (MD: -16.25, 95% CI -29.02 to -3.07, P = 0.01) and standard deviation (P = 0.03) compared to IGla in fasting blood glucose (FBG); in people with T2DM, IDeg was related to a lower mean of FBG versus insulin glargine 100 U/ml (IGla100) (P <0.001) and had a more extended time in the range (TIR) than IGla100 (SMD: 0.15, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.27, P = 0.02) but not longer than insulin glargine 300 U/ml (IGla300). Moreover, IDeg had a lower coefficient of variation of FBG than IGla (P = 0.0254). For other indicators of glycemic variability, namely, standard deviation of blood glucose for 24 h, the mean of 24-h blood glucose, mean amplitude of glycemic excursion, the coefficient of variation for 24 h, the mean of daily differences, area under the glucose curve, and M-value, no significant differences were identified between IDeg and IGla, regardless of T1DM or T2DM.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the current studies, there was comparable efficacy between IDeg and IGla from multiple aspects of glycemic variability, regardless of T1DM or T2DM. However, IDeg may be superior to IGla in reducing FBG variability in T1DM and T2DM. Nonetheless, due to the limitations of the original studies, it is still unclear whether IDeg is superior to both IGla100 and IGla300. In T2DM, IDeg had more extended TIR than IGla100 but not longer than IGla300. Additionally, more well-designed randomized controlled trials comparing IDeg with IGla300 for different indicators of glycemic variability are still warranted.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO, CRD42021283203.

Insulin Centennial: Milestones influencing the development of insulin preparations since 1922

During 1921 to 1922, a team effort by Banting, Macleod, Collip and Best isolated and purified insulin and demonstrated its life-giving properties, giving rise to the birth of insulin therapy. In the early years (1922-1950), priorities revolved around the manufacture of insulin to meet demand, improving purity to avoid allergic reactions, establishing insulin standards and increasing its duration of action to avoid multiple daily injections. Shortly after the emergence of insulin, Joslin and Allen advocated the need to achieve and maintain good glycaemic control to realize its full potential. Although this view was opposed by some during a dark period in the history of insulin, it was subsequently endorsed some 60 years later endorsed by the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial and United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study. Major scientific advances by the Nobel Laureates Sanger, Hodgkin, Yalow and Gilbert and also by Steiner have revolutionized the understanding of diabetes and facilitated major advances in insulin therapy. The more recent advent of recombinant technology over the last 40 years has provided the potential for unlimited source of insulin, and the ability to generate various insulin 'analogues', in an attempt to better replicate normal insulin secretory patterns. The emerging biosimilars now provide the opportunity to improve availability at a lower cost.

The ongoing evolution of basal insulin therapy over 100 years and its promise for the future

The evolution of basal insulin therapy over the past 100 years since the discovery of insulin is a testimony to the biomedical bench-to-bedside process, wherein incremental advances in the basic sciences are progressively translated over time into a series of enhancements in clinical care, each building upon the success of its predecessors. The emergence of recombinant DNA technology and the resultant biosynthesis of human insulin in the 1980s provided the critical capacity to bioengineer designer insulin analogues with pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties that can better mimic, although not fully replicate, the effects of endogenous insulin secretion. Through these efforts, basal insulin therapy has progressed over this time from first-generation analogues (glargine U-100, detemir) to second-generation analogues (glargine U-300, degludec) to ultra-long-acting formulations that are suitable for administration once weekly (icodec). Each iteration in this progression has represented a step closer towards the goal of replicating the continuous secretion of insulin that normally comprises the basal output of the pancreatic beta-cells between meals, during episodes of fasting and overnight. However, it may be that we may have reached the achievable limit in the context of an "open-loop" approach, such that only with the addition of closed loop control will we be able to achieve physiologic basal insulin replacement. In this review, we will examine the evolution of basal insulin therapy over the past 100 years and its implications for patient care and outcomes in current practice and the future.

Insulin Glargine 300 U/mL Therapy in Children and Adolescents with Type 1 Diabetes

The pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties of the second-generation basal insulin glargine 300 Units/mL (Gla-300) may be of benefit in the treatment of type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM). Gla-300 provides a stable and sustained time-action profile, which is associated with glycaemic control and flexible dosing schedule. This review summarises the available evidence on the safety and efficacy of Gla-300 in children and adolescents with T1DM. Gla-300 is as effective as the first-generation basal insulin glargine 100 Units/mL (Gla-100), a standard of care for patients with diabetes in reducing HbA1c, and shows a lower risk of severe hypoglycaemia and hyperglycaemia in children and adolescents with T1DM. However, Gla-300 and Gla-100 are not bioequivalent and are not directly interchangeable. Real-world studies on patients aged 6-17 years are limited. To date, only one small study assessed the effectiveness and safety of Gla-300 versus Gla-100 in newly diagnosed T1DM paediatric patients, confirming the treatment safety and effectiveness of Gla-300 in clinical practice. Gla-300 is a longer-acting basal insulin alternative in the management of children (aged ≥ 6 years) and adolescents with T1DM.

Basal weekly insulins: the way of the future!

Basal insulin treatment is indispensable for patients with type 1 diabetes and often required by many with type 2 diabetes. Incremental advances lengthening the duration of action of insulin analogs and reducing pharmacodynamic variability have resulted in truly once-daily, long-acting basal insulin analogs. In the quest for better basal insulins to facilitate improvements in glycemic control and long-term outcomes, the driving need is to remove barriers delaying timely initiation of basal insulin, to maximize treatment adherence and persistence and reduce treatment burden without increasing risk of hypoglycemia. We review the range of investigational once-weekly insulins and their molecular strategies and profiles. Currently, the two most advanced clinical development programs are: (1) basal insulin icodec, an insulin analog acylated with a C20 fatty diacid (icosanedioic acid) side chain (Novo Nordisk) and (2) basal insulin Fc, a fusion protein that combines a single-chain insulin variant with a human immunoglobulin G fragment crystallizable domain (Eli Lilly). Available phase 2 data for these two once-weekly agents show comparable glycemic control to existing once-daily insulin analogs, with no greater risk of hypoglycemia. While phase 3 data are awaited to confirm efficacy and safety, we provide future clinical perspectives on practical considerations for the potential use of once-weekly insulins.