Twenty-four hour action of insulin glargine (Lantus) may be too short for once-daily dosing: a case report

Retrospective Analysis of Once-Daily Versus Twice-Daily Insulin Glargine Dosing in Noncritically Ill Individuals

Background

Insulin is the treatment of choice for diabetes care in the hospital. There is some debate regarding the efficacy and safety of once-daily versus twice-daily insulin glargine in the hospital, particularly in the critically ill population.

Objective

The purpose of this pilot study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of insulin glargine administered as a once-daily versus twice-daily regimen in the noncritically ill population.

Methods

A retrospective chart review was conducted from 1 June 2020 to 31 May 2021. Inclusion criteria were age ≥18 years and on a regimen of either once-daily or twice-daily insulin glargine for ≥72 hours during the specified time frame. The primary end point was a comparison of the number of days with all blood glucose measurements within the range of 70-180 mg/dL throughout a 24-hour period. Secondary end points included the number of hyperglycemic (>180 mg/dL) and hypoglycemic (<70 mg/dL) events that occurred in each study group.

Results

Group 1 included 101 individuals who received once-daily dosing, and group 2 included 103 individuals who received twice-daily dosing. Baseline characteristics were similar between the groups except for a higher BMI at admission (P = 0.01) and a higher pre-admission A1C (P = 0.02) in group 2. No differences were found for the primary end point (P = 0.5) or for hypoglycemic (P = 0.6) or hyperglycemic (P = 0.7) events.

Conclusion

There were no significant differences in efficacy or safety between once-daily and twice-daily insulin glargine in the noncritically ill population. A larger prospective study could confirm these results.

Insulin Glargine in Critically ill Patients: Once/Day versus Twice/Day Dosing

OBJECTIVE

Twice/day dosing of insulin glargine has been used to treat hyperglycemia in clinical practice; however, data supporting its use in the critically ill population are lacking. This study was designed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of twice/day insulin glargine in critically ill patients.

METHODS

A retrospective study was conducted in adult patients admitted to the intensive care units between February 2013 and June 2017 who received insulin glargine twice/day or 40 units or more once/day for 48 hours or longer. Post cardiovascular surgery patients were excluded. Data were collected for up to 14 patient-days. The efficacy outcomes included the incidence of hyperglycemia (blood glucose [BG] above 180 mg/dl), predose hyperglycemia rate (BG above 180 mg/dl within 4 hrs before the dose), and BG variability (standard deviation). The safety outcome was assessed by the development of hypoglycemia (BG below 70 mg/dl).

RESULTS

A total of 58 patients (twice/day = 23; once/day = 35) were included in the analysis. Demographics were similar between the groups including history of diabetes mellitus, baseline hemoglobin A_1C , and home insulin use. No difference was observed between the twice/day and once/day groups in the mean BG (153 vs 154 mg/dl, p=0.95, respectively), and BG variability (46 vs 44 mg/dl, p=0.29, respectively). Although the overall incidence of hyperglycemia was similar between twice/day and once/day groups (96% vs 97%, p=1.00, respectively), the twice/day group had a significantly lower predose hyperglycemia rate (twice/day 0.27 vs once/day 0.43, p=0.02). Additionally, the twice/day group did not experience an increased incidence of hypoglycemia (twice/day 23% vs once/day 34%, p=0.57) or hypoglycemia without having anything by mouth (twice/day 0% vs once/day 9%, p=0.27).

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first study demonstrating that twice/day insulin glargine reduced the rate of predose hyperglycemia without increasing the risk of hypoglycemia in critically ill patients. A large randomized study is needed to confirm the safety and efficacy of twice/day glargine in the critically ill.

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.

Usefulness of insulin detemir in Japanese children with type 1 diabetes

BACKGROUND

This multicenter observational study was conducted to investigate the efficacy and safety of insulin detemir (detemir) for diabetes management in Japanese children and adolescents.

METHODS

Data from the Japanese Study Group of Insulin Therapy for Childhood and Adolescent Diabetes database were analyzed. Ninety children (32 boys, 58 girls; mean age, 11.9 ± 3.8 years) who transferred from a neutral protamine Hagedorn insulin or insulin glargine basal-bolus regimen to detemir basal-bolus therapy and who were observed for at least 12 months were identified. Clinical data obtained at 0, 3, 6, and 12 months were analyzed to determine the type of bolus insulin used, number and timing of detemir injections, detemir dose as a proportion of the total insulin dose, hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), fasting blood glucose (FBG) and frequency of severe hypoglycemia.

RESULTS

Twelve months after switching to detemir, the detemir dose represented 39.8% of the total insulin dose, and 37.8% of patients were being treated with twice-daily injections. HbA1c and FBG were significantly reduced from baseline at 3 and 6 months but not at 12 months. Considering the seasonal HbA1c variation in the Japanese population, a separate analysis was performed using data for 65 children (21 boys, 44 girls; mean age, 11.6 ± 2.9 years) who switched to detemir during the winter. Subset analysis showed significant HbA1c reductions from baseline at all specified times. The incidence of severe hypoglycemia during detemir treatment was 4.4 episodes per 100 patient-years.

CONCLUSIONS

Detemir is an effective and safe basal insulin for diabetes management in Japanese children and adolescents.

Diabetes mellitus: Exploring the challenges in the drug development process

Diabetes mellitus has reached epidemic proportions and continues to be a major burden on society globally. The International Diabetes Federation (IDF) estimated the global burden of diabetes to be 366 million in 2011 and predicted that by 2030 this will have risen to 552 million. In spite of newer and effective treatment options, newer delivery and diagnostic devices, stricter glycaemic targets, better treatment guidelines and increased awareness of the disease, baseline glycosylated hemoglobin remains relatively high in subjects diagnosed and treated with type 2 diabetes. The search continues for an ideal anti diabetic drug that will not only normalize blood glucose but also provide beta cell rest and possibly restoration of beta cell function. The development of anti diabetic drugs is riddled with fundamental challenges. The concept of beta cell rest and restoration is yet to be completely understood and proven on a long term. The ideal therapeutic approach to treating type 2 diabetes is not yet determined. Our understanding of drug safety in early clinical development is primarily limited to "Type A" reactions. Until marketing authorization most drugs are approved based on the principle of confirming non-inferiority with an existing gold standard or determining superiority to a placebo. The need to obtain robust pharmaco-economic data prior to marketing authorization in order to determine appropriate pricing of a new drug remains a major challenge. The present review outlines some of the challenges in drug development of anti-diabetic drugs citing examples of pulmonary insulin, insulin analogues, thiazolidinediones and the GLP1 analogues.

Critical appraisal of the safety and efficacy of insulin detemir in glycemic control and cardiovascular risk management in diabetics

Insulin detemir is an analog of human insulin designed to provide a long duration of basal insulin action. This is achieved by protracted absorption from the injection depot, which results in part from increased self-association of insulin detemir molecules and in part from reversible albumin binding. Subsequent albumin binding in the circulation is thought to buffer changes in the effects at target tissues that could otherwise arise from variability in absorption rate. In consequence, insulin detemir has shown a less variable pharmacodynamic profile than alternative basal insulins; this manifests as more consistent temporal glucose reduction profiles in repeat-clamp studies. In clinical trials, insulin detemir has been characterized by consistent risk reductions in hypoglycemia, as well as reduced weight gain in comparison with other basal insulins. Given some recent associations that have been made in prospective and epidemiologic studies between glucose variability and/or hypoglycemia and increased cardiovascular risk, and the long-known association between excess weight and cardiovascular risk, it is possible that the clinical profile of insulin detemir may carry prognostic value with regard to cardiovascular safety, although this is yet to be substantiated. There have also been some concerns raised recently over the use of insulin analogs and cancer risk, but available clinical data and the receptor interaction profile of insulin detemir suggest no excess in risk in comparison with human insulin therapy. Optimal approaches for the clinical use of insulin detemir have been emerging through an increasing clinical study base, and the analog is becoming established as a potentially valuable therapy option.

pI-shifted insulin analogs with extended in vivo time action and favorable receptor selectivity

A long-acting (basal) insulin capable of delivering flat, sustained, reproducible glycemic control with once daily administration represents an improvement in the treatment paradigm for both type 1 and type 2 diabetes. Optimization of insulin pharmacodynamics is achievable through structural modification, but often at the expense of alterations in receptor affinity and selectivity. A series of isoelectric point (pI)-shifted insulin analogs based on the human insulin sequence or the GlyA21 acid stable variant were prepared by semi-synthetic methods. The pI shift was achieved through systematic addition of one or more arginine (Arg) or lysine (Lys) residues at the N terminus of the A chain, the N terminus of the B chain, the C terminus of the B chain, or through a combination of additions at two of the three sites. The analogs were evaluated for their affinity for the insulin and IGF-1 receptors, and aqueous solubility under physiological pH conditions. Notably, the presence of positively charged amino acid residues at the N terminus of the A chain was consistently associated with an enhanced insulin to IGF-1 receptor selectivity profile. Increased IGF-1 receptor affinity that results from Arg addition to the C terminus of the B chain was attenuated by cationic extension at the N terminus of the A chain. Analogs 10, 17, and 18 displayed in vitro receptor selectivity similar to that of native insulin and solubility at physiological pH that suggested the potential for extended time action. Accordingly, the in vivo pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic profiles of these analogs were established in a somatostatin-induced diabetic dog model. Analog 18 (A0:Arg, A21:Gly, B31:Arg, B32:Arg human insulin) exhibited a pharmacological profile comparable to that of analog 15 (insulin glargine) but with a 4.5-fold more favorable insulin:IGF-1 receptor selectivity. These results demonstrate that the selective combination of positive charge to the N terminus of the A chain and the C terminus of the B chain generates an insulin with sustained pharmacology and a near-native receptor selectivity profile.

Optimization of basal insulin delivery in Type 1 diabetes: a retrospective study on the use of continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion and insulin glargine

AIMS

To compare the effects on glycaemic control after using continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) or insulin glargine.

METHODS

Data were obtained from 17 diabetes outpatient clinics in Sweden, employing the same diabetes data management system. Type 1 diabetic patients using multiple dose injections were included prior to starting on either CSII (n = 563) or glargine (n = 513). The median duration of therapy was 25 months for CSII and 6 months for glargine. The comparison between the treatment modalities was carried out by multiple regression analysis and logistic regression analysis in an attempt at reducing the influence of confounding factors.

RESULTS

The mean HbA1c decrease was 0.59 +/- 1.19% for CSII and 0.20 +/- 1.07% for glargine (P < 0.001, when assessed by logistic regression). An additional 0.1% lower HbA1c would be expected if glargine had been optimized with basal insulin 40-60% of the daily dose. The more pronounced effect of CSII was achieved with a lower daily dosage of insulin. In a multiple regression analysis with a change of HbA1c as the dependent variable, the following variables were significant: choice of treatment (P < 0.001), HbA1c prior to treatment (P < 0.001) and BMI prior to treatment (P < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

Both regimes improved metabolic control, but CSII resulted in significantly higher reduction in HbA1c than after insulin glargine treatment, particularly in those individuals who had higher levels of HbA1c at baseline.

Initiation of insulin glargine in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes

BACKGROUND

Glargine (Lantus) is a recently approved, long-acting insulin analog that is increasingly being used in children with diabetes. The aim of this retrospective chart review was to summarize our experience in starting glargine in children and adolescents with diabetes. SUBJECTS AND STUDY METHODS: We reviewed the medical records of 71 children with type 1 diabetes (29 boys and 42 girls) who initiated glargine therapy to improve glycemic control between 1 June 2001 and 30 June 2002. Data were collected for 6 months before and 6 months after adding glargine.

RESULTS

Subjects' mean age [+/-standard deviation (SD)] at diagnosis of diabetes was 7.5 +/- 4.1 yr. Mean age at initiation of glargine therapy was 11.5 +/- 4.9 yr. The total daily long-acting insulin dose decreased by about 20% after initiating glargine therapy. There were no significant differences in hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) and blood glucose control prior to and after initiating glargine therapy (HbA1c at baseline 8.9 +/- 1.6% and HbA1c after 6 months of glargine therapy was 8.9 +/- 1.5%). Overall, blood glucose concentrations did not differ significantly throughout the study. Patients who switched to glargine because of nocturnal hypoglycemia had a 65% decrease in nocturnal blood glucose reading less than 50 mg/dL. There were three seizures in the first week after initiating glargine therapy.

CONCLUSION

This retrospective study suggests that glargine is at least as effective as other long-acting insulins but that care must be taken during the conversion process to avoid hypoglycemia.