Therapy-Related Satisfaction and Quality of Life for Japanese People with Diabetes Using Rapid-Acting Insulin Analogs: A Web-Based Survey

INTRODUCTION

People with diabetes require insulin to regulate blood glucose (BG); rapid-acting insulin analogs (RAIA) represent one approach for BG management. New fast-acting RAIA administered at the start of a meal suppress postprandial BG better than conventional RAIA. New RAIA are expected to confer higher treatment satisfaction and improved quality of life (QOL) than conventional RAIA.

METHODS

This cross-sectional, web-based survey in Japan (November 2022) included people with diabetes (type 1/2), aged ≥ 18 years, registered in the Rakuten Insight Diabetes Panel, using new and/or conventional RAIA. RAIA-specific satisfaction was evaluated by questions on RAIA use (scores: 1 [not at all satisfied]; 7 [very satisfied]) and QOL by the Diabetes Therapy-Related (DTR)-QOL questionnaire (scores: 0-100, 100 = best) for the whole population (primary endpoint) and for new versus conventional RAIA users (secondary endpoint). Multiple regression models were used to compare new versus conventional RAIA users.

RESULTS

The analysis population comprised 217 people with diabetes (new RAIA, n = 109; conventional RAIA, n = 108). Mean (standard deviation) RAIA-specific satisfaction scores ranged from 5.1 (1.2) to 5.4 (1.2); DTR-QOL total score was 51.6 (20.4). RAIA satisfaction scores were numerically higher for new versus conventional RAIA users; no difference in DTR-QOL total score was observed. DTR-QOL satisfaction with treatment domain score was significantly higher in new versus conventional RAIA users (least squares mean difference [standard error]: 7.3 [3.1]; 95% confidence interval: 1.2, 13.4; P = 0.0197). RAIA-specific satisfaction was higher among patients who discussed BG sufficiently with their doctor versus those who did not.

CONCLUSIONS

New RAIA users have greater treatment satisfaction than conventional RAIA users. QOL was similar among new and conventional RAIA users, except for satisfaction with treatment, which was significantly higher among new RAIA users. Detailed explanations from the doctor to the person with diabetes about the relationship between new RAIA and BG status are essential. A graphical plain language summary is available with this article.

Effectiveness of Faster Aspart versus Insulin Aspart in Children with Type 1 Diabetes: A Meta-Analysis

Background

Intensive insulin regimens are recommended to achieve glycemic goals in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes. Fast-acting insulin aspart (faster aspart) is a new formulation of insulin aspart (IAsp) in which L-arginine and niacinamide are added to assure formulation stability, early absorption, and ultra-fast action. This meta-analysis compares faster aspart with IAsp for blood sugar control in children with type 1 diabetes. This study suggested treating diabetes with insulin, especially in children with type 1 diabetes.

Methods

PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Google Scholar were searched from 2000 to 2023 without language restrictions. Blood glucose monitoring, HbA1c, care model, insulin aspart, IAsp, faster aspart, type 1 diabetes, and pediatrics are Mesh keywords. Cochrane Q statistics and index tested heterogeneity. To account for heterogeneity, Q=145.99 (P-value < 0.001) and =97.26%, and the random-effect model was used to aggregate primary study results. The meta-analysis of randomized-controlled trials was conducted in accordance with PRISMA standards.

Results

The overall estimate measure i.e. mean difference was found to be 5.44 [0.45, 10.44] and 7.71 [7.16, 8.26] which indicate significant reduction in the HbA1C level in the fast acting insulin aspart group as compared to the IAsp in T1D. However, the mean difference with respect to BMI was found to be -0.06 [-0.60, 0.48] which indicate non-significant reduction.

Conclusion

Faster aspart had faster onset and more early exposure than IAsp in children and adolescents with greater and more variable anti-insulin antibody levels than adults did. Hence fast-acting insulin aspart may provide better glucose control than IAsp in T1D.

Probing the molecular interactions between cholinium-based ionic liquids and insulin aspart: A combined computational and experimental study

Despite extensive studies revealing the potential of cholinium-based ionic liquids (ILs) in protein stabilization, the nature of interaction between ILs' constituents and protein residues is not well understood. In this work, we used a combined computational and experimental approach to investigate the structural stability of a peptide hormone, insulin aspart (IA), in ILs containing a choline cation [Ch]+ and either dihydrogen phosphate ([Dhp]-) or acetate ([Ace]-) as anions. Although IA remained stable in both 1 M [Ch][Dhp] and 1 M [Ch][Ace], [Dhp]- exhibited a much stronger stabilization effect than [Ace]-. Both the hydrophilic ILs intensely hydrated IA and increased the number of water molecules in IA's solvation shell. Undeterred by the increased number of water molecules, the native state of IA's hydrophobic core was maintained in the presence of ILs. Importantly, our results reveal the importance of IL concentration in the medium which was critical to maintain a steady population of ions in the microenvironment of IA and to counteract the denaturing effect of water molecules. Through molecular docking, we confirm that the anions exert the dominant effect on the structure of IA, while [Ch]+ have the secondary influence. The computational results were validated using spectroscopic analyses (ultra-violet, fluorescence, and circular dichroism) along with dynamic light scattering measurements. The extended stability of IA at 30 °C for 28 days in 1 M [Ch][Dhp] and [Ch][Ace] demonstrated in this study reveals the possibility of stabilizing IA using cholinium-based ILs.

Functional insulin aspart/insulin degludec-based microneedles for promoting postprandial glycemic control

Insulin aspart (IAsp) and insulin degludec (IDeg), as the third generation of insulin, have a faster onset time or a more durable action period, which may simulate the secretion of insulin under physiological conditions. Microneedles (MNs) are transdermal delivery devices that may allow diabetic patients to easily deploy transdermal insulin therapy while considerably reducing injection pain. In this study, we investigated the combination of dissolving MNs with IAsp or IDeg therapy as an alternative to daily multiple insulin injections, aiming to improve glycemic control and patient compliance. Mechanical properties of the MNs, structural stability of insulin encapsulated in the MNs, and transdermal application characteristics were studied to assess the practicality of insulin-loaded MNs for diabetes therapy. In vivo experiments conducted on diabetic rats demonstrated that the IAsp- and IDeg-loaded MNs have comparable blood glucose control abilities to that of subcutaneous injections. In addition, the therapeutic properties of insulin-loaded MNs under diverse dietary conditions and application strategies were further investigated to provide new information to support future clinical trials. Taken together, the proposed MNs have the potential to improve balances between glycemic control, hypoglycemia risk, and convenience, providing patients with simpler regimens. STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE: 1. The fabricated functional insulin-loaded dissolving microneedles closely matched the glucose rise that occurs in response to meals, demonstrating promising alternatives for multiple daily insulin injections. 2. The hypoglycemic properties of insulin microneedles were investigated under diverse dietary conditions and application strategies, yielding new information to support future clinical trials. 3. Molecular dynamics simulations were utilized to study the interactions between the insulin and microneedle matrix materials, providing a strategy for theoretically understanding drug stability as well as the release mechanism of drug-loaded microneedles.

Effects of insulin aspart and metformin on gestational diabetes mellitus and inflammatory markers

BACKGROUND

Gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) refers to hyperglycemia caused by insulin resistance or insufficient insulin secretion during pregnancy. Patients with GDM have a high risk of pregnancy complications, which can adversely affect both maternal and fetal health. Therefore, early diagnosis, treatment and monitoring of GDM are essential. In recent years, a new treatment scheme represented by insulin aspart combined with metformin has received increasing attention.

AIM

To explore the effects of insulin aspart combined with metformin on patients with GDM and inflammatory markers.

METHODS

From April 2020 to September 2022, 124 patients with GDM in Sanya Women and Children's Hospital Managed by Shanghai Children's Medical Center were collected and analyzed retrospectively. The control group (CG) comprised 62 patients treated with insulin aspart alone, and 62 patients treated with insulin aspart and metformin formed the observation group (OG). Before and after treatment, improvement of blood-glucose-related indexes [fasting blood glucose (FBG), 2-h postprandial glucose (2h PG) and hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c)], serum related factor [serum homocysteine (Hcy)], serum inflammatory cytokines [tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α, interleukin (IL)-6 and C-reactive protein (CRP)] were compared between the two groups. The clinical efficacy, adverse pregnancy outcomes and incidence of pregnancy complications were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

After treatment, the levels of FBG, 2h PG, HbA1c, Hcy, TNF-α, IL-6 and CRP in both groups were significantly decreased (P < 0.05), and the levels of FBG, 2h PG, HbA1c, Hcy, TNF-α, IL-6 and CRP in the OG were lower than in the CG (P < 0.05). The total clinical effectiveness in the OG was higher than that in the CG (P < 0.05). The total incidence of adverse pregnancy outcomes and complications in the OG was significantly lower than in the CG (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Insulin aspart combined with metformin are effective for treatment of GDM, which can reduce blood-glucose-related indexes, Hcy and serum inflammatory cytokines, and risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes and complications.

Practical guide in using insulin degludec/insulin aspart: A multidisciplinary approach in Malaysia

Insulin degludec/insulin aspart (IDegAsp) co-formulation provides both basal and mealtime glycaemic control in a single injection. The glucose level-lowering efficacy of IDegAsp is reported to be superior or non-inferior to that of the currently available insulin therapies with a lower rate of overall hypoglycaemia and nocturnal hypoglycaemia. An expert panel from Malaysia aims to provide insights into the utilisation of IDegAsp across a broad range of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (i.e. treatment-naive or insulin-naive patients or patients receiving treatment intensification from basal-only regimens, premixed insulin and basal-bolus insulin therapy). IDegAsp can be initiated as once-daily dosing for the main meal with the largest carbohydrate content with weekly dose adjustments based on patient response. A lower starting dose is recommended for patients with cardiac or renal comorbidities. Dose intensification with IDegAsp may warrant splitting into twice-daily dosing. IDegAsp twice-daily dosing does not need to be split at a 50:50 ratio but should be adjusted to match the carbohydrate content of meals. The treatment of patients choosing to fast during Ramadan should be switched to IDegAsp early before Ramadan, as a longer duration of titration leads to better glycated haemoglobin level reductions. The pre-Ramadan breakfast/lunch insulin dose can be reduced by 30%-50% and taken during sahur, while the preRamadan dinner dose can be taken without any change during iftar. Education on the main meal concept is important, as carbohydrates are present in almost all meals. Patients should not have a misconception of consuming more carbohydrates while taking IDegAsp.

In vitro Stability of Biosimilar Insulin Aspart SAR341402 in the Medtronic MiniMed Insulin Pumps

SAR341402 (Insulin aspart Sanofi®) is an insulin aspart biosimilar that can be used for continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) in pump systems. The physicochemical stability of SAR341402 for CSII use was evaluated in several in vitro experiments. Insulin aspart products (SAR341402, NovoLog®, NovoRapid®) were filled into pump reservoirs and pumped through Medtronic insulin pumps (MiniMed^TM 530G-Model 751, Medtronic, Northridge, CA) and their related infusion sets under simulated stress conditions, including elevated temperature and mechanical agitation on a continuously vibrating platform, up to 13 days. Samples pumped through the infusion sets and retained in reservoirs (non-pumped) were analyzed using suitable analytical methods. All products showed stable insulin aspart content and no unwanted impurities. Minor pH changes were seen in all products but were not considered relevant. A time-dependent increase in high-molecular-weight proteins and largest other insulin aspart impurities was observed for each product but each remained within acceptance limits. Concentrations of phenol and metacresol decreased but remained at levels to ensure preservative efficacy. Samples collected from the infusion sets were clear of visible particles and showed comparable subvisible particle counts. No occlusion events were observed. Leachable profiles from pump and reservoir samples were similar in all product batches. Like NovoLog®/NovoRapid®, SAR341402 demonstrates appropriate physicochemical stability when used in these insulin pump systems.

Efficacy of IDegLira Versus IDegAsp Therapy in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes: A Randomized Crossover Study by isCGM

Introduction

We aimed to compare the efficacy of insulin degludec/insulin aspart (IDegAsp) and insulin degludec/liraglutide (IDegLira) in controlling glucose fluctuation and suppressing postprandial glucose levels using intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitoring.

Methods

Twenty-four patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus were randomly allocated to receive either IDegLira or IDegAsp followed by IDegAsp or IDegLira, respectively. A crossover study was conducted with intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitoring. We compared the postprandial blood glucose level, time in range, and time below range from a 3-day intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitoring period for each treatment group.

Results

The time in range was significantly higher in IDegLira than in IDegAsp. Postprandial glucose levels 90 and 120 min after breakfast and 60, 90, and 120 min after lunch were significantly lower for IDegLira than for IDegAsp. However, postprandial glucose levels 90 and 120 min after supper were significantly lower for IDegAsp than for IDegLira. There was no significant difference in the time below range between IDegLira and IDegAsp.

Conclusion

IDegLira was more effective in treating type 2 diabetes mellitus than IDegAsp, as indicated by a higher time in range and lower postprandial glucose level at breakfast and lunch. This study was registered with the University Hospital Medical Information Network Clinical Trial Registry (UMIN 000039221).

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12325-022-02138-w.

Enhanced structural stability of insulin aspart in cholinium aminoate ionic liquids

Cholinium aminoates [Ch][AA] have gained tremendous interest as a promising ionic liquid medium for the synthesis and storage of proteins. However, high alkalinity of [Ch][AA] limits its usage with pH-sensitive proteins. Here, we probed the structure, stability, and interactions of a highly unstable therapeutic protein, insulin aspart (IA), in a range of buffered [Ch][AA] (b-[Ch][AA]) using a combination of biophysical tools and in silico pipeline including ultraviolet-visible, fluorescence, and circular dichroism spectroscopies, dynamic light scattering measurements and molecular docking. b-[Ch][AA] used in the study differed in concentrations and their anionic counterparts. We reveal information on ion and residue specific solvent-protein interactions, demonstrating that the structural stability of IA was enhanced by a buffered cholinium prolinate. In comparison to the glycinate and alaninate anions, the hydrophilic prolinate anions established more hydrogen bonds with the residues of IA and provided a less polar environment that favours the preservation of IA in its active monomeric form, opening new opportunities for utilizing [Ch][AA] as storage medium.

Glycaemic Control in People with Diabetes Starting Treatment with Fast-Acting Insulin Aspart: a US Database Study

INTRODUCTION

This study investigated glycaemic control in individuals with type 1 (T1D) or type 2 diabetes (T2D) 6 months after initiating fast-acting insulin aspart (faster aspart) in a real-world setting.

METHODS

This was a single-arm, observational study using extracted patient data from the IBM^® Explorys^® database (USA) for individuals with T1D or T2D initiating faster aspart (at least one prescription of faster aspart) in the study period 1 January 2018 to 27 October 2020. Clinical characteristics, including age, body mass index, and baseline HbA1c, were extracted, as well as recorded events of hypoglycaemia. The primary endpoint was the change in HbA1c from baseline to 6 months.

RESULTS

A total of 787 individuals were included; 36.6% of these individuals had T1D and 63.4% had T2D (of whom 46.9% were new users of rapid-acting insulin when initiating faster aspart [T2D new users] and 53.1% were switching from another rapid-acting insulin to faster aspart [T2D switchers]). For individuals with T1D, T2D new users, or T2D switchers, estimated mean change in HbA1c from baseline to 6 months was - 0.20% (95% CI - 0.53, 0.14; p  =  0.252), - 1.00% (95% CI -  1.34, -  0.67; p < 0.0001), and - 0.70% (95% CI - 1.06,  - 0.35; p = 0.0001), respectively. In the baseline HbA1c > 8.5% subgroup, there was a significant estimated decrease in HbA1c from baseline to 6 months in individuals with T1D (-  1.2% [95% CI - 1.80,  -  0.60]; p = 0.0001) or T2D (- 0.6% [95% CI - 0.92, -  0.35]; p <  0.0001). Event rates of hypoglycaemia after 12 months were 0.68, 0.38, and 0.59 events/year for individuals with T1D, T2D new users, and T2D switchers, respectively.

CONCLUSION

US IBM^® Explorys^® data demonstrated a clinically relevant reduction in HbA1c 6 months after initiating faster aspart treatment for individuals with T2D, but not T1D overall, although patients with baseline HbA1c > 8.5% had significant HbA1c reductions regardless of diabetes type.

ARISE-a prospective, non-interventional, single-arm study assessing clinical parameters associated with the use of insulin degludec/insulin aspart in patients with type 2 diabetes in real-world settings: rationale and design

PURPOSE

IDegAsp, a co-formulation of long-acting basal (insulin degludec) and rapid-acting bolus (insulin aspart) insulin, provides separate prandial and basal glucose-lowering effects with relatively low risk of hypoglycaemia. Its efficacy and safety have been investigated in a large clinical trial programme (BOOST). We present the rationale and design of the ARISE study, which aims to assess glycaemic control and other clinical parameters associated with IDegAsp use in real world.

METHODS

ARISE is a ~26-wk-long, prospective, non-interventional, single-arm study of patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) initiating IDegAsp treatment. Approximately 1112 patients with T2D aged ≥18 years previously on anti-hyperglycaemic drugs except IDegAsp will be enroled across six countries from 15 Aug 2019 to 12 Nov 2020. IDegAsp treatment will be initiated at the physicians' discretion and as per the local label. Key exclusion criteria include previous participation, or previous IDegAsp treatment. The primary and secondary endpoints are change in HbA_1c from baseline (wk 0) to study end (wk 26-36) and the proportion of patients achieving the target HbA_1c level of <7% at the study end, respectively. A mixed model for repeated measurements will analyse the primary endpoint.

CONCLUSION

Between-country differences in the prescription patterns of glucose-lowering agents in people with T2D warrant examination of their clinical use in different geographical settings. The ARISE study is designed to assess the clinical use of IDegAsp from real world in six different countries. Findings from the ARISE study will supplement those of previous randomised controlled studies by establishing real-world evidence of IDegAsp use in the participating countries.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04042441. Registered 02 August 2014, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04042441.

Optimising insulin aspart practices in a neonatal intensive care unit: a clinical and pharmaco-technical study

Neonatal hyperglycaemia is frequent and requires insulin therapy. To resolve the difficulties encountered by paediatricians in stabilising glycaemia, the preparation and administration of insulin aspart were assessed and optimised. After high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC-UV) assessment of insulin aspart preparations made according to the old protocol, a new protocol was drawn up. Dosage reliability of solutions prepared by paediatric nurses was evaluated by HPLC-UV. This new protocol was also tested in a Y-infusion situation and the need to saturate infusion tubes assessed. Wide deviations in insulin aspart concentrations were found between theoretical concentrations and preparations made according to the old protocol. Glycated insulin aspart was found in the majority of these preparations. The new protocol significantly reduced the variability of data and relative deviations around the target value. It also eliminated the formation of glycated insulin even in the case of co-infusion of parenteral nutrition and confirmed the need to saturate infusion tubes.Conclusion: The revision of the insulin therapy protocol reduced the variability of insulin concentration in preparations and avoided the administration of glycated derivatives potentially toxic for neonates. What is Known: • Insulin preparation in NICUs is a risky task because it is a two-step preparation • Diluted in dextrose, insulin aspart is unstable, with formation of potentially toxic glycated derivatives What is New: • This work proposes a new insulin therapy protocol validated by HPLC-UV for NICU allowing suppression of the formation of glycated insulin, to significantly reduce deviations from theoretical concentrations and to limit adsorption phenomena • This protocol is validated in case of co-infusion of parenteral nutrition.

Indirect comparison of efficacy and safety of insulin glargine/lixisenatide and insulin degludec/insulin aspart in type 2 diabetes patients not controlled on basal insulin

BACKGROUND

Fixed-dose combinations of insulin glargine/lixisenatide (IGlarLixi) or insulin degludec/insulin aspart (IDegAsp) constitute treatment intensification in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2D).

OBJECTIVES

Compare efficacy and safety of IGlarLixi and IDegAsp (as intensification from basal insulin), by indirect comparison of phase III trials, in the absence of head-to-head trials.

STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Studies comparing treatment intensification by once-daily IDegAsp or IGlarLixi to basal insulin. Data were extracted from two trials (BOOST: Intensify-Basal and LixiLan-L) retained for analysis.

SYNTHESIS METHODS

Treatments were compared in terms of estimated treatment difference (ETD) in glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c), fasting and postprandial plasma glucose (FPG and PPG) change from baseline; in addition to hypoglycaemia incidence and weight changes.

RESULTS

In a fixed-effect model examining HbA1c control, IGlarLixi was more effective than IDegAsp in reducing HbA1c (ETD 0.53%, P<0.0001]), PPG (ETD 2.65%, P<0.0001), and body weight (ETD 1.73kg, P<0.0001). Patients on IGlarLixi were more likely to achieve HbA1c<7% than patients on IDegAsp (odds ratio [OR]=0.40, P<0.0001), with lower incidence of hypoglycaemia (OR=1.33, P<0.001).

LIMITATIONS

Limited number of studies; different baseline HbA1c and FPG.

CONCLUSION

Once-daily IGlarLixi is more efficient than once-daily IDegAsp in controlling HbA1c and PPG and associates with greater weight loss and lower hypoglycaemia incidence.

Efficacy, Safety, and Immunogenicity of Insulin Aspart Biosimilar SAR341402 Compared with Originator Insulin Aspart in Adults with Diabetes (GEMELLI 1): A Subgroup Analysis by Prior Type of Mealtime Insulin

INTRODUCTION

The biosimilar SAR341402 insulin aspart (SAR-Asp) was compared to its originator NovoLog®/NovoRapid® insulin aspart (NN-Asp) in terms of efficacy, safety, and immunogenicity, in adults with type 1 or type 2 diabetes switching from different rapid-acting insulin analogs.

METHODS

This phase 3, randomized, open-label, multinational, 52-week study (GEMELLI 1) enrolled participants with type 1 or type 2 diabetes (n = 597). At randomization, participants transitioned from NovoLog/NovoRapid (n = 380) or Humalog®/Liprolog® (n = 217) to equivalent (1:1) doses (or a dose at the discretion of the investigator) of either SAR-Asp or NN-Asp (1:1 randomization). Participants were treated with multiple daily injections in combination with insulin glargine 100 U/mL (Lantus®). In this subgroup analysis, efficacy measures (change in hemoglobin A1c [HbA1c], insulin dose [total, basal and mealtime]), and safety outcomes (hypoglycemia incidence, adverse events, anti-insulin aspart antibodies) of SAR-Asp were compared with those of NN-Asp separately according to the participants' prestudy mealtime insulin.

RESULTS

At week 26 (primary efficacy endpoint), change in HbA1c was similar between SAR-Asp and NN-Asp in those participants pre-treated with NovoLog/NovoRapid (least squares [LS] mean difference - 0.04%, 95% confidence interval [CI] - 0.182 to 0.106%) or Humalog/Liprolog (LS mean difference - 0.15%, 95% CI - 0.336 to 0.043%) (P value for treatment by subgroup interaction = 0.36). This HbA1c response persisted over the 52 weeks of the study similarly for both treatments within each subgroup. In both subgroups, changes in insulin doses were similar between treatments over 26 weeks and 52 weeks, as were the incidences of severe or any hypoglycemia, adverse events (including hypersensitivity and injection site reactions), and anti-insulin aspart antibodies.

CONCLUSIONS

Efficacy and safety (including immunogenicity) profiles of SAR-Asp are similar to those of NN-Asp over 52 weeks in adults with diabetes irrespective of prior type of mealtime insulin.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03211858.

Extent and prevalence of post-exercise and nocturnal hypoglycemia following peri-exercise bolus insulin adjustments in individuals with type 1 diabetes

AIM

To detail the extent and prevalence of post-exercise and nocturnal hypoglycemia following peri-exercise bolus insulin dose adjustments in individuals with type 1 diabetes (T1D) using multiple daily injections of insulins aspart (IAsp) and degludec (IDeg).

METHODS AND RESULTS

Sixteen individuals with T1D, completed a single-centred, randomised, four-period crossover trial consisting of 23-h inpatient phases. Participants administered either a regular (100%) or reduced (50%) dose (100%; 5.1 ± 2.4, 50%; 2.6 ± 1.2 IU, p < 0.001) of individualised IAsp 1 h before and after 45-min of evening exercise at 60 ± 6% V̇O_2max. An unaltered dose of IDeg was administered in the morning. Metabolic, physiological and hormonal responses during exercise, recovery and nocturnal periods were characterised. The primary outcome was the number of trial day occurrences of hypoglycemia (venous blood glucose ≤ 3.9 mmol L ^-1). Inclusion of a 50% IAsp dose reduction strategy prior to evening exercise reduced the occurrence of in-exercise hypoglycemia (p = 0.023). Mimicking this reductive strategy in the post-exercise period decreased risk of nocturnal hypoglycemia (p = 0.045). Combining this strategy to reflect reductions either side of exercise resulted in higher glucose concentrations in the acute post-exercise (p = 0.034), nocturnal (p = 0.001), and overall (p < 0.001) periods. Depth of hypoglycemia (p = 0.302), as well as ketonic and counter-regulatory hormonal profiles were similar.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings demonstrate the glycemic safety of peri-exercise bolus dose reduction strategies in minimising the prevalence of acute and nocturnal hypoglycemia following evening exercise in people with T1D on MDI. Use of newer background insulins with current bolus insulins demonstrates efficacy and advances current recommendations for safe performance of exercise.

CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTER

DRKS00013509.

Safety and Tolerability of Insulin Aspart Biosimilar SAR341402 Versus Originator Insulin Aspart (NovoLog) When Used in Insulin Pumps in Adults with Type 1 Diabetes: A Randomized, Open-Label Clinical Trial

Background: The aim was to assess the safety and tolerability of the insulin aspart biosimilar/follow-on product SAR341402 (100 U/mL solution; SAR-Asp) and originator insulin aspart (100 U/mL; NN-Asp; NovoLog^®) self-administered through an insulin pump. Materials and Methods: This randomized, open-label, 2 × 4-week crossover study enrolled 45 adults with type 1 diabetes (T1D). Participants were randomized 1:1 to the treatment sequence SAR-Asp/NN-Asp or NN-Asp/SAR-Asp. The basal and prandial insulin doses were individually titrated. The primary outcome was the number of participants with at least one infusion set occlusion (infusion set change due to failure-to-correct hyperglycemia [plasma glucose ≥250 mg/dL] by insulin pump bolus) during the 4-week treatment. The main secondary outcome was the number of participants with at least one episode of unexplained hyperglycemia (regardless of correction by an insulin pump bolus without apparent material defect, medical, dietary, insulin dosing reason, or pump problem). Results: The number of participants reporting ≥1 infusion set occlusion were similar between treatments: 14/43 on SAR-Asp (33 events) and 12/43 on NN-Asp (24 events). The estimated difference in infusion set occlusion risk for SAR-Asp versus NN-Asp was 4.1% (95% confidence interval: -9.3% to 17.4%). The number of participants with ≥1 episode of unexplained hyperglycemia was similar between treatments (31/43 on SAR-Asp [154 events]; 32/43 on NN-Asp [175 events]). Hypoglycemia, treatment-emergent adverse events, hypersensitivity, and injection site reactions were similar between treatments. Conclusions: SAR-Asp and NN-Asp were well tolerated and had similar infusion set occlusions over a 4-week period in insulin pump users with T1D.

Safety, Immunogenicity, and Glycemic Control of Insulin Aspart Biosimilar SAR341402 Versus Originator Insulin Aspart in People with Diabetes Also Using Insulin Glargine: 12-Month Results from the GEMELLI 1 Trial

Background: SAR341402 (SAR-Asp) is a biosimilar/follow-on of the originator insulin aspart-NovoLog^®/NovoRapid^® (NN-Asp). This study investigated whether the efficacy, safety, and immunogenicity findings for SAR-Asp versus NN-Asp, observed over 6 months in people with type 1 (n = 497) or type 2 diabetes (n = 100) treated with multiple daily injections in combination with insulin glargine (Lantus^®), are maintained after 12 months. Materials and Methods: GEMELLI 1 was a multicenter, randomized, open-label, phase 3 study. Participants completing the initial 6-month treatment period continued on SAR-Asp or NN-Asp, as randomized, for a 6-month safety extension. Results: Of the 597 participants randomized, 264 out of 301 (87.7%) and 263 out of 296 (88.9%) assigned to SAR-Asp and NN-Asp, respectively, completed 12 months of treatment. Improved glycemic control was sustained at 12 months in both treatment groups, with similar least-squares mean reductions in glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) from baseline (SAR-Asp: -0.25%; NN-Asp: -0.26%). Fasting plasma glucose and seven-point self-monitored plasma glucose profile changes, including postprandial glucose excursions, and changes in mealtime and basal insulin dosages were similar between groups. Safety and tolerability, including anti-insulin aspart antibodies (AIAs; incidence, prevalence, titers, cross-reactivity to human insulin), neutralizing antibodies (incidence, prevalence), hypoglycemia, and treatment-emergent adverse events (including hypersensitivity events and injection site reactions), were similar between groups. No relationship was observed between maximum individual AIA titers and change in HbA1c or insulin dose, hypoglycemia, or hypersensitivity reactions or between efficacy/safety measures and subgroups by presence or absence of treatment-emergent AIA. Conclusions: SAR-Asp and NN-Asp demonstrated similar efficacy and safety (including immunogenicity) in people with diabetes over 12 months of treatment.

Single-Dose Euglycemic Clamp Study Demonstrating Pharmacokinetic and Pharmacodynamic Similarity Between SAR341402 Insulin Aspart and US- and EU-Approved Versions of Insulin Aspart in Subjects with Type 1 Diabetes

Background: The objective of this study was to demonstrate the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic similarity among SAR341402 insulin aspart biosimilar/follow-on product, United States-sourced insulin aspart (NovoLog^®), and European Union-sourced insulin aspart (NovoRapid^®). Materials and Methods: This was a single-center, randomized, double-blind, 3-treatment, 3-period, single-dose, crossover euglycemic study (NCT03202875) in 30 adult male subjects with type 1 diabetes (T1D). Subjects received 0.3 U/kg of each treatment under fasted conditions and underwent a 12-h euglycemic clamp technique to assess pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic activity for up to 12 h. Primary endpoints were area under the plasma insulin concentration-time curve from time zero to the last quantifiable concentration (INS-AUC_last), and extrapolated to infinity (INS-AUC_inf), maximum plasma insulin concentration (INS-C_max), and the area under the body weight-standardized glucose infusion rate (GIR)-time curve from 0 to 12 hours (GIR-AUC_0-12h) among the three treatments. GIR_max was the main secondary endpoint. Results: Of the 30 subjects randomized, 29 completed all 3 treatment periods. Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic profiles were similar in all groups. The extent of exposure (INS-C_max, INS-AUC_last, and INS-AUC_inf) and glucodynamic activity (GIR-AUC_0-12h, GIR_max) was similar among the three treatments. The corresponding 90% confidence intervals for pairwise treatment ratios were completely contained within the limits of 80%-125%. SAR341402 was well tolerated. Conclusions: The present study demonstrated similar pharmacokinetic exposure profiles and glucodynamic potency among SAR341402, NovoLog, and NovoRapid in subjects with T1D, supporting further clinical evaluation of SAR341402 as a biosimilar/follow-on product.

Efficacy and Safety of Insulin Aspart Biosimilar SAR341402 Versus Originator Insulin Aspart in People with Diabetes Treated for 26 Weeks with Multiple Daily Injections in Combination with Insulin Glargine: A Randomized Open-Label Trial (GEMELLI 1)

Background: This study compared the efficacy, safety, and immunogenicity of insulin aspart biosimilar/follow-on biologic product SAR341402 (SAR-Asp) with originator insulin aspart-NovoLog^®/NovoRapid^® (NN-Asp) in people with type 1 diabetes (T1D) or type 2 diabetes (T2D) treated with multiple daily injections in combination with insulin glargine (Lantus^®; Gla-100). Materials and Methods: This 6-month, randomized, open-label, phase 3 study (NCT03211858) enrolled 597 people with T1D (n = 497) or T2D (n = 100). Participants were randomized 1:1 to mealtime SAR-Asp (n = 301) or NN-Asp (n = 296) in combination with Gla-100. The primary objective was to demonstrate noninferiority (by 0.3% margin in the intent-to-treat population) of SAR-Asp versus NN-Asp in HbA1c change from baseline to week 26. Immunogenicity was also assessed in terms of anti-insulin aspart antibody (AIA) status (positive/negative) and titers during the study. Results: HbA1c was similarly improved in both treatment groups (SAR-Asp -0.38%; NN-Asp -0.30%); the least squares mean difference at week 26 for SAR-Asp minus NN-Asp was -0.08% (95% confidence interval: -0.192 to 0.039), thus meeting the criteria for noninferiority between SAR-Asp and NN-Asp and inverse noninferiority of NN-Asp versus SAR-Asp. Changes in fasting plasma glucose and seven-point self-monitored plasma glucose profile, including postprandial glucose excursions, and insulin dosages were similar in both groups at week 26. Safety and tolerability, including AIA responses (incidence, prevalence), hypoglycemia, and adverse events (including hypersensitivity events and injection site reactions), were similar between groups. Conclusions: SAR-Asp demonstrated effective glycemic control with a similar safety and immunogenicity profile to NN-Asp in people with diabetes treated for 26 weeks.

Fast-Acting Insulin Aspart: The Rationale for a New Mealtime Insulin

Attenuating postprandial hyperglycaemia is a critical factor in the achievement of optimal glucose control. Prandial insulin analogues have been developed to replicate the physiology of normal endogenous insulin secretion and action, with the aim of limiting postprandial glucose excursions. There is still, however, a significant unmet need, with many people failing to achieve desired glycaemic control targets despite the current armamentarium of prandial insulin analogues. Such insulins have a delayed onset and a longer duration of action than endogenous insulin production. There has been considerable focus on attempts to accelerate the time-action profile of prandial exogenous insulin in order to produce a more physiological profile. One such approach is to modify the insulin formulation. Fast-acting insulin aspart is a modified formulation of insulin aspart containing niacinamide and L-arginine. It has an earlier onset of action than aspart. In an extensive trial programme, this faster aspart demonstrated similar HbA1c reductions to those achieved with aspart but superior postprandial glucose reductions, with no increase in hypoglycaemia. Furthermore, administration of faster aspart up to 20 min after the start of a meal permitted similar glucose control to aspart given preprandially. These data, taken in totality, illustrate the potential role of faster insulin aspart in clinical practice.

Investigating the Association Between Baseline Characteristics (HbA1c and Body Mass Index) and Clinical Outcomes of Fast-Acting Insulin Aspart in People with Diabetes: A Post Hoc Analysis

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this study was to investigate the association between baseline characteristics [HbA1c and body mass index (BMI)] and the effect of mealtime fast-acting insulin aspart (faster aspart) relative to insulin aspart (IAsp) or basal-only insulin therapy on several efficacy and safety outcomes in people with diabetes.

METHODS

Post hoc analysis of three randomised phase 3a trials in people with type 1 diabetes (T1D; onset 1) and type 2 diabetes (T2D; onset 2 and 3). Participants (N = 1686) were stratified according to baseline BMI (< 25 kg/m², 25-< 30 kg/m², ≥ 30 kg/m²) or HbA1c (≤ 58 mmol/mol, > 58-< 64 mmol/mol, ≥ 64 mmol/mol; ≤ 7.5%, > 7.5-< 8.0%, ≥ 8.0%).

RESULTS

In participants with T2D, the estimated treatment difference for change in HbA1c was similar for all BMI and HbA1c subgroups. No major differences between treatments were observed in risk of overall hypoglycaemia or insulin dose across subgroups. In participants with T1D, change in HbA1c was similar across BMI and HbA1c subgroups, and no major differences between treatments were observed for severe or blood glucose-confirmed hypoglycaemia across subgroups. Total daily insulin dose (U/kg) was similar across all baseline HbA1c groups and the BMI < 25 kg/m² and 25-30 kg/m² groups, but was significantly lower with mealtime faster aspart compared with IAsp in the BMI > 30 kg/m² subgroup.

CONCLUSIONS

In participants with T1D and T2D, treatment differences (for change in HbA1c and overall hypoglycaemia) between mealtime faster aspart and insulin comparators were similar to the corresponding overall analysis across baseline HbA1c and BMI subgroups. The finding of a lower total daily insulin dose in participants with obesity (BMI > 30 kg/m²) and T1D treated with faster aspart, versus those treated with IAsp, may warrant further investigation.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01831765 (onset 1); NCT01819129 (onset 2); NCT01850615 (onset 3).

FUNDING

Novo Nordisk A/S, Søborg, Denmark.

Improved Postprandial Glucose with Inhaled Technosphere Insulin Compared with Insulin Aspart in Patients with Type 1 Diabetes on Multiple Daily Injections: The STAT Study

BACKGROUND

The majority of therapies have generally targeted fasting glucose control, and current mealtime insulin therapies have longer time action profiles than that of endogenously secreted insulin. The primary purpose of this study was to assess both glucose time-in-range (TIR: 70-180 mg/dL) and postprandial glucose excursions (PPGE) in 1-4 h using a real-time continuous glucose monitor (CGM) with Technosphere insulin (TI) versus insulin aspart in patients with type 1 diabetes (T1DM) on multiple daily injections (MDI).

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

This pilot, investigator-led, collaborative, open-label, multicenter, clinical research trial enrolled 60 patients with T1DM with HbA1c levels ≥6.5% and ≤10%. Individuals were randomized to treatment with titrated TI (n = 26) or titrated insulin aspart (n = 34), stratified by baseline HbA1c levels (≤8% or >8%). All were required to wear a real-time CGM throughout the trial. All patients in the TI group were advised to take supplemental inhalations at 1 and 2 h after meals if indicated based on postprandial glucose (PPG) values. The coprimary outcomes were assessed both in the full intent-to-treat population and in those individuals randomized to TI who were compliant with supplemental doses ≥90% of the time (n = 15). The CGM data were analyzed using linear regression models.

RESULTS

Overall, those treated with TI versus aspart achieved comparable TIR, but less time spent in hypoglycemia (<60 and <50 mg/dL, both P < 0.05). In the TI-compliant group (n = 15), TIR was significantly greater (62.5% ± 2.6% vs. 53.8% ± 1.7%, P = 0.009) and time in hyperglycemia >180 mg/dL was lower (34.2% ± 2.7% vs. 41.0% ± 1.7%, P = 0.045) as compared with the aspart group. PPG was also significantly lower in the TI cohort at 60 and 90 min postmeal, and PPGE were lower in the TI-compliant group as compared with the aspart group over 1-4-h postmeal (P < 0.05). In addition, there was weight gain in the aspart group compared with weight loss in the TI group (P = 0.006) despite higher prandial TI insulin dose.

CONCLUSIONS

We conclude that using TI appropriately at mealtimes with supplemental dosing improves prandial glucose (TIR and 1-4 h) control without any increase in time in hypoglycemia or weight gain in patients with T1DM on MDI. The study results support a larger study using a treat-to-target design to confirm these findings. Clinical trial reg. no. NCT03143816, clinicaltrials.gov .

Comparison of subcutaneous insulin aspart and intravenous regular insulin for the treatment of mild and moderate diabetic ketoacidosis in pediatric patients

PURPOSE

To compare the safety/efficacy of intermittent subcutaneous rapid-acting insulin aspart with the standard low-dose intravenous infusion protocol of regular insulin for treatment of pediatric diabetic-ketoacidosis.

METHODS

For a prospective randomized-controlled clinical trial on 50 children/adolescents with mild/moderate diabetic-ketoacidosis, the diagnostic criteria for ketoacidosis included: blood glucose level >250 mg/dl, ketonuria>++, venous pH <7.3 and/or bicarbonate <15 mEq/l.

DATA COLLECTED

age, sex, clinical/laboratory parameters including blood sugar, arterial blood gases, urine ketones, severity of diabetic-ketoacidosis, amount of insulin administered to correct acidosis, time to recover from diabetic-ketoacidosis, number of days of hospitalization, and complications. Patients were randomly assigned to intervention (subcutaneous) and control (intravenous) groups. Controls received 0.05-0.1 unit/kg/hour intravenous regular insulin infusion until resolution of diabetic-ketoacidosis and stayed in the intensive care unit. Interventions received 0.15 unit/kg subcutaneous insulin aspart every two hours and stayed in regular medical ward.

RESULTS

From 50 children (age 2-17 years), 56% (28) were females, and 48% (24) had established-type I diabetes. Intervention and control groups had similar baseline clinical/laboratory findings. Average age (years) was 8.6 ± 0.8 for intervention and 8.86 ± 0.7 for control group (p = 0.4) with 64% having moderate diabetic-ketoacidosis. The mean total-dose of insulin units needed for treatment of diabetic-ketoacidosis in intervention (subcutaneous insulin aspart) was lower than controls (intravenous regular insulin) (p < 0.001). No mortality/serious events happened. Three diabetic-ketoacidosis recurrences among interventions and one among controls occurred.

CONCLUSIONS

To manage mild/moderate diabetic-ketoacidosis in children/adolescents, subcutaneous rapid-acting insulin aspart is an alternative to intravenous infusion of regular insulin. Subcutaneous insulin treated moderate DKA with faster recovery/shorter hospital stay.

Severe allergic reaction to human insulin in the patient with diabetic ketoacidosis

Diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) is an acute and major life-threatening complication of diabetes mellitus. Fluid resuscitation, insulin therapy, and electrolyte replacement are essential for DKA treatment. Rarely, life threatening allergic reactions might develop in a patient treated with insulin. If anaphylaxis develops after insulin, the DKA treatment options are restricted. A limited number of case reports have been reported in patients with severe anaphylactic reactions to human insulin who were then treated with synthetic insulin analogues. We present a case of a 45-year-old male patient with allergic reactions to human insulin. The patient was successfully treated with insulin aspart and hemodialysis.

Complex Assessment of Metabolic Effectiveness of Insulin Pump Therapy in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Beyond HbA1c Reduction

BACKGROUND

This prospective single-center study recruited insulin-resistant continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) therapy-naive patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) using insulin analog-based multiple daily injections (MDI) therapy and metformin.

METHODS

A total of 23 individuals with T2D (70% male), aged a mean ± standard deviation 57.2 ± 8.03 years, with body mass index of 36.2 ± 7.02 kg/m², diabetes duration of 13.3 ± 4.64 years, and HbA1c of 10.0% ± 1.05% were randomly assigned to a CSII arm or an MDI continuation arm to explore glucose control, weight loss, total daily insulin dose (TDD), and insulin resistance. Insulin dosing was optimized over a 2-month run-in period.

RESULTS

At 6 months, patients assigned to the CSII arm achieved a significant mean HbA1c reduction of -0.9% (95% confidence interval [CI] = -1.6, -0.1), while reducing their TDD by -29.8 ± 28.41 U/day (33% of baseline [92.1 ± 20.35 U/day]) and achieving body mass (BM) reduction of -0.8 ± 5.61 kg (0.98% of baseline [104.8 ± 16.15 kg]). MDI patients demonstrated a nonsignificant HbA1c reduction of -0.3% (95% CI = -0.8, 0.1) with a TDD reduction of 5% from baseline (99.0 ± 25.25 U/day to 94.3 ± 21.25 U/day), and a BM reduction of -1.0 ± 2.03 kg (0.99% of baseline [108.9 ± 20.55 kg]). After 6 months, the MDI arm crossed over to CSII therapy. At 12 months, patients continuing CSII demonstrated an additional mean 0.7% HbA1c reduction with 54.6% achieving HbA1c<8%. The final TDD reduction was -9.7 U/day in comparison to baseline; BM increased by 1.1 ± 6.5 kg from baseline. The MDI patients that crossed to CSII showed an HbA1c reduction of -0.5% ± 1.04%, HbA1c response rate of 27.3%, a TDD reduction of -17.4 ± 21.06 U/day, and a BM reduction of -0.3 ± 3.39 kg. Diabetic ketoacidosis or severe hypoglycemia did not occur in either arm.

CONCLUSION

CSII therapy safely and significantly improved metabolic control with less insulin usage, with no sustainable reduction of BM, blood pressure, and lipid profile, in insulin-resistant T2D patients. Treatment adherence and satisfaction in these patients were excellent.

Use of 50/50 Premixed Insulin Analogs in Type 2 Diabetes: Systematic Review and Clinical Recommendations

INTRODUCTION

Premixed insulin analogs represent an alternative to basal or basal-bolus insulin regimens for the treatment of type 2 diabetes (T2D). "Low-mix" formulations with a low rapid-acting to long-acting analog ratio (e.g., 25/75) are commonly used, but 50/50 formulations (Mix50) may be more appropriate for some patients. We conducted a systematic literature review to assess the efficacy and safety of Mix50, compared with low-mix, basal, or basal-bolus therapy, for insulin initiation and intensification.

METHODS

MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, ClinicalTrials.gov, LillyTrials.com, and NovoNordisk-trials.com were searched (11 or 13 Dec 2016) using terms for T2D, premixed insulin analogs, and/or Mix50. Studies (randomized, nonrandomized, or observational; English only) comparing Mix50 with other insulins (except human) and reporting key efficacy [glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c), fasting and postprandial glucose] and/or safety (hypoglycemia, weight gain) outcomes were eligible for inclusion. Narrative reviews, letters, editorials, and conference abstracts were excluded. Risk of bias in randomized trials was assessed using the Cochrane tool.

RESULTS

MEDLINE and EMBASE searches identified 716 unique studies, of which 32 met inclusion criteria. An additional three studies were identified in the other databases. All 19 randomized trials except one were open label; risk of other biases was generally low. Although not conclusive, the evidence suggests that Mix50 may provide better glycemic control (HbA1c reduction) and, particularly, postprandial glucose reduction in certain patients, such as those with high carbohydrate diets and Asian patients, than low-mix and basal therapy. Based on this evidence and our experience, we provide clinical guidance on factors to consider when deciding whether Mix50 is appropriate for individual patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Mix50 may be more suitable than low-mix therapy for certain patients. Clinicians should consider not only efficacy and safety but also patient characteristics and preferences when tailoring insulin treatment to individuals with T2D.

FUNDING

Eli Lilly.

Development of Insulin Detemir/Insulin Aspart Cross-Reacting Antibodies Following Treatment with Insulin Detemir: 104-week Study in Children and Adolescents with Type 1 Diabetes Aged 2-16 Years

BACKGROUND

To study the long-term development (104 weeks) of insulin antibodies during treatment with insulin detemir (IDet) and insulin aspart (IAsp) in children with type 1 diabetes aged 2-16 years.

METHODS

A 52-week, two-arm, randomized trial comparing IDet and neutral protamine Hagedorn insulin, both in combination with IAsp, was followed by a one-arm, 52-week extension trial of the IDet + IAsp arm. The present analysis was conducted in children who completed the randomized trial and entered into the extension trial.

RESULTS

Of the 177 children randomized to IDet treatment, 146 entered the extension trial. IDet-IAsp cross-reacting antibodies peaked within the first 39 weeks of treatment before gradually declining. A similar pattern was seen for IDet-specific and IAsp-specific antibodies. At end of trial (EOT), no correlation was observed between the level of IDet-specific or IAsp-specific antibodies or IDet-IAsp cross-reacting antibodies and either glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) or basal insulin dose. Mean HbA1c was stable during the treatment period, with a slight increase over time from 8.41% (68.4 mmol/mol) at baseline to 8.74% (72 mmol/mol) at EOT. Mean IDet dose increased from 0.43 U/kg at baseline to 0.66 U/kg at EOT. Mean IAsp dose increased from 0.46 U/kg to 0.51 U/kg at EOT.

CONCLUSION

Although treatment with IDet and IAsp is associated with development of specific and cross-reacting antibodies, no correlation between insulin antibodies and basal insulin dose or HbA1c was found.

FUNDING

Novo Nordisk A/S. ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers: NCT00435019 and NCT00623194.

Clinical Effects and Safety of Direct-Acting Insulin Analogs in Patients with Type 1 Diabetes: A Nation-Wide Observational Cohort Study

INTRODUCTION

Studies comparing direct-acting insulin analogs (DAIs) in terms of effectiveness and long-term safety are scarce. Our aim was to explore these variables in clinical practice among patients with type 1 diabetes, including the elderly and those with renal impairment.

METHODS

We linked four national registers in a population-based cohort study. Patients with type 1 diabetes and continuous use of all currently available DAIs (lispro, aspart, or glulisine) in 2005-2013 were monitored for up to 7.5 years. Inverse probability of treatment weighting was used to adjust for differences in baseline characteristics between treatment groups. Unadjusted mean HbA1c and weights were plotted. Hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals of cardiovascular events (CVEs) and mortality were estimated using Cox proportional hazards regression models.

RESULTS

We included 41,165 patients-14,047 lispro, 26,813 aspart, and 305 glulisine users. At baseline, the mean age was highest among glulisine users (49.4 years), followed by 41.0 years for lispro users and 40.1 years for aspart users. A total of 9.2% of the patients were 65 years or older. Diabetes duration was shortest among glulisine users (11.6 years), followed by 15.4 years for aspart users and 19.5 years for lispro users. The mean HbA1c and weights during the follow-up period were similar. The numerical differences at baseline were subsequently adjusted for. There were no significant differences between groups regarding hyperglycemia requiring hospitalization, CVE, or mortality, while Cox regression suggested lower rates of hypoglycemia among glulisine users. Severe hypoglycemia was more common, and severe hyperglycemia was less common among patients aged 65 years or older, while severe hypoglycemia and hyperglycemia were more common in patients with low renal function (estimated glomerular filtration rate).

CONCLUSION

There were no pronounced differences in effectiveness and long-term cardiovascular safety and mortality between the DAIs, although there were some differences in clinical characteristics between patients using the three types of insulin. Severe hypoglycemia was more common among older patients, while severe hypoglycemia and hyperglycemia were more common among patients with impaired renal function.

FUNDING

Sanofi.

Spatial distribution of soluble insulin in pig subcutaneous tissue: Effect of needle length, injection speed and injected volume

The spatial distribution of a soluble insulin formulation was visualized and quantified in 3-dimensions using X-ray computed tomography. The drug distribution was visualized for ex vivo injections in pig subcutaneous tissue. Pig subcutaneous tissue has very distinct layers, which could be separated in the tomographic reconstructions and the amount of drug in each tissue class was quantified. With a scan time of about 45min per sample, and a robust segmentation it was possible to analyze differences in the spatial drug distribution between several similar injections. It was studied how the drug distribution was effected by needle length, injection speed and injected volume. For an injected volume of 0.1ml and injection depth of 8mm about 50% of the injections were partly intramuscular. Using a 5mm needle resulted in purely subcutaneous injections with minor differences in the spatial drug distribution between injections. Increasing the injected volume from 0.1ml to 1ml did not increase the intramuscular volume fraction, but gave a significantly higher volume fraction placed in the fascia separating the deep and superficial subcutaneous fat layers. Varying the injection speed from 25l/s up to 300l/s gave no changes in the drug concentration distribution. The method presented gives novel insight into subcutaneous injections of soluble insulin drugs and can be used to optimize the injection technique for subcutaneous drug administration in preclinical studies of rodents.

Insulin degludec/insulin aspart versus biphasic insulin aspart 30 in Asian patients with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled on basal or pre-/self-mixed insulin: a 26-week, randomised, treat-to-target trial

AIMS

Insulin degludec/insulin aspart (IDegAsp) is a soluble co-formulation of IDeg and IAsp. This pan-Asian, 26-week trial investigated efficacy and safety of IDegAsp vs biphasic insulin aspart 30 (BIAsp 30) in Asian adults with type 2 diabetes (T2DM), inadequately controlled on once- or twice-daily (BID) basal, premixed or self-mixed insulin.

METHODS

Participants (mean age 59.8 years, HbA1c 8.4%, FPG 7.9 mmol/L, BMI 25.4 kg/m(2)) were randomised 2:1 to BID IDegAsp (n=282) or BIAsp 30 (n=142) and continued existing metformin treatment. Insulins were administered with breakfast and main evening meal, titrated to a pre-breakfast and pre-main evening meal self-measured plasma glucose target of 4-5 mmol/L.

RESULTS

IDegAsp achieved the primary endpoint of non-inferiority to BIAsp 30 for mean change in HbA₁c (estimated treatment difference [ETD] IDegAsp-BIAsp 30: 0.05% points [95% CI -0.10; 0.20]). IDegAsp was superior in lowering fasting plasma glucose (FPG) (ETD -1.06 mmol/L, 95% CI -1.43; -0.70, p<0.001), and resulted in a lower final mean daily insulin dose (0.79 U/kg vs 0.99 U/kg, estimated rate ratio [RR] 0.79, 95% CI 0.73; 0.85, p<0.0001). Rates of overall confirmed and severe hypoglycaemia were similar between treatments, while rate of nocturnal confirmed hypoglycaemia was numerically (p=ns) lower with IDegAsp. During the maintenance period there was a trend (p=ns) towards lower hypoglycaemia rates for IDegAsp.

CONCLUSION

In Asian adults with T2DM, IDegAsp BID effectively improves long-term glycaemic control, and compared to BIAsp 30, provides superior reductions in FPG with a lower dose, and numerically less nocturnal hypoglycaemia.

Insulin aspart pharmacokinetics: an assessment of its variability and underlying mechanisms

BACKGROUND

Insulin aspart (IAsp) is used by many diabetics as a meal-time insulin to control post-prandial glucose levels. As is the case with many other insulin types, the pharmacokinetics (PK), and consequently the pharmacodynamics (PD), is associated with clinical variability, both between and within individuals. The present article identifies the main physiological mechanisms that govern the PK of IAsp following subcutaneous administration and quantifies them in terms of their contribution to the overall variability.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

CT scanning data from Thomsen et al. (2012) are used to investigate and quantify the properties of the subcutaneous depot. Data from Brange et al. (1990) are used to determine the effects of insulin chemistry in subcutis on the absorption rate. Intravenous (i.v.) bolus and infusion PK data for human insulin are used to understand and quantify the systemic distribution and elimination (Pørksen et al., 1997; Sjöstrand et al., 2002). PK and PD profiles for type 1 diabetics from Chen et al. (2005) are analyzed to demonstrate the effects of IAsp antibodies in terms of bound and unbound insulin. PK profiles from Thorisdottir et al. (2009) and Ma et al. (2012b) are analyzed in the nonlinear mixed effects software Monolix® to determine the presence and effects of the mechanisms described in this article.

RESULTS

The distribution of IAsp in the subcutaneous depot show an initial dilution of approximately a factor of two in a single experiment. Injected insulin hexamers exist in a chemical equilibrium with monomers and dimers, which depends strongly on the degree of dilution in subcutis, the presence of auxiliary substances, and a variety of other factors. Sensitivity to the initial dilution in subcutis can thus be a cause of some of the variability. Temporal variations in the PK are explained by variations in the subcutaneous blood flow. IAsp antibodies are found to be a large contributor to the variability of total insulin PK in a study by Chen et al. (2005), since only the free fraction is eliminated via the receptors. The contribution of these and other sources of variability to the total variability is quantified via a population PK analysis and two recent clinical studies (Thorisdottir et al., 2009; Ma et al., 2012b), which support the presence and significance of the identified mechanisms.

CONCLUSIONS

IAsp antibody binding, oligomeric transitions in subcutis, and blood flow dependent variations in absorption rate seem to dominate the PK variability of IAsp. It may be possible via e.g. formulation design to reduce some of these variability factors.

The effectiveness and safety of beginning insulin aspart together with basal insulin in people with type 2 diabetes in non-Western nations: results from the A₁chieve observational study

AIMS

The aim of this A₁chieve sub-group analysis was to examine populations beginning insulin aspart together with any basal insulin, all ± oral glucose lowering drugs: insulin aspart added to existing basal insulin (n=519); switched from biphasic insulin (n=947); switched from NPH plus human meal-time insulins (n=586); and insulin-naïve begun with basal plus insulin aspart (n=1594).

METHODS

A₁chieve was a 24-week non-interventional study evaluating insulin analogues in 66,726 people with type 2 diabetes in routine clinical care in 28 non-Western countries. Major endpoints were analysed as change from baseline using Student's paired t-test.

RESULTS

Baseline glycaemic control was poor (mean HbA1c: 9.4-10.1% [79-87 mmol/mol]). HbA₁c, FPG and PPPG improved significantly from baseline in all groups (mean change from baseline in HbA1c: -2.8 to -1.8% [-31 to -20 mmol/mol]; FPG: -4.9 to -2.9 mmol/L; PPPG: -6.7 to -3.9 mmol/L; p<0.001 for all), resulting in a similar level of blood glucose control for all groups at study end. Unsurprisingly, hypoglycaemia rates increased in those starting insulin, but decreased in the other groups. Clinically significant improvements in serum lipids and quality of life occurred across all groups.

CONCLUSIONS

These data support the use of basal plus prandial insulin regimens in routine clinical practice in people with type 2 diabetes with inadequate glycaemic control.

Safety and effectiveness of insulin analogues in type 2 diabetic patients from Algeria: a sub-analysis of the A₁chieve study

AIM

To determine the safety and effectiveness of insulin analogues in type 2 diabetes (T2D) patients in the Algerian cohort of the A₁chieve study and to examine the status of T2D management across different regions in Algeria.

METHODS

Patients starting therapy with biphasic insulin aspart 30, insulin detemir, insulin aspart (IAsp) or IAsp + basal insulin at their physicians' decision were included. The primary outcome was the incidence of serious adverse drug reactions (SADRs), including major hypoglycaemia. Secondary outcomes included changes from baseline to Week 24 in hypoglycaemia, glycated haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), fasting plasma glucose (FPG), postprandial plasma glucose (PPPG), weight and quality of life (QoL, evaluated using the EQ-5D questionnaire).

RESULTS

Overall, 1494 patients (mean ± SD age: 60.1 ± 10.3 years; body mass index: 28.1 ± 4.9 kg/m(2); HbA1c: 9.2 ± 1.8%) were enrolled. Poor baseline glucose control was revealed across the different Algerian regions with mean HbA1c varying from 8.9% to 9.6%. Two SADRs were reported during the study. The proportion of patients reporting major hypoglycaemic events decreased from 1.1% at baseline to 0.2% at Week 24 (p = 0.0017). Significant improvements in mean HbA1c (-1.3 ± 2.0%), FPG (-38.8 ± 79.9 mg/dL) and post-breakfast PPPG (-51.4 ± 97.1 mg/dL) were observed in the entire cohort (all p < 0.001). The mean body weight increased by 0.9 ± 3.8 kg, while QoL increased by 9.2 ± 16.7 points after 24 weeks.

CONCLUSIONS

Insulin analogue therapy was well-tolerated and significantly improved blood glucose control over 24 weeks in the Algerian cohort.