Insulin Glargine Associated Nausea in a Patient Seen by a Collaborative Drug Therapy Management Pharmacist in an Urban Community Hospital: A Case Report

Background: Diabetes mellitus has become increasingly prevalent and a considerable health risk in the United States. Early introduction of insulin can improve overall health outcomes of patients with diabetes. With the development of long-acting insulin analogs, such as insulin glargine, limitations such as variable absorption and hypoglycemia were reduced. Majority of reported adverse drug effects secondary to insulin glargine include injection site reaction and hypoglycemia. There is limited data on gastrointestinal adverse effects, including nausea, of insulin glargine. Case Presentation: A 51-year-old female with a past medical history of type 2 diabetes was referred to the collaborative drug therapy management pharmacist for diabetes education and management. The patient was initiated on insulin glargine (Lantus®) and began to experience episodes of nausea and emesis over a 9 week period. Once the patient was switched from insulin glargine (Lantus®) to insulin detemir, symptoms subsided. Upon re-trial of insulin glargine (Lantus®), nausea and emesis-like symptoms resumed. A probable relationship between insulin glargine (Lantus®) and the reaction was estimated using the Naranjo Adverse Drug Reaction Probability Scale. Conclusion: Potential mechanisms behind the relationship of insulin glargine (Lantus®) and nausea are hypothesized, however there is limited literature supporting this claim and further investigation is warranted.

Tirzepatide

Each month, subscribers to The Formulary Monograph Service receive 5 to 6 well-documented monographs on drugs that are newly released or are in late phase 3 trials. The monographs are targeted to Pharmacy & Therapeutics Committees. Subscribers also receive monthly 1-page summary monographs on agents that are useful for agendas and pharmacy/nursing in-services. A comprehensive target drug utilization evaluation/medication use evaluation (DUE/MUE) is also provided each month. With a subscription, the monographs are available online to subscribers. Monographs can be customized to meet the needs of a facility. Through the cooperation of The Formulary, Hospital Pharmacy publishes selected reviews in this column. For more information about The Formulary Monograph Service, contact Wolters Kluwer customer service at 866-397-3433.

Clinical and Economic Implications of Restrictions on Calcitonin Utilization in a Health System

Background: Hypercalcemia is a relatively common problem that may require hospital admission based on severity. A treatment option for hypercalcemia is calcitonin given intramuscularly or subcutaneously. Purpose: In 2015, calcitonin was on our health system formulary, but due to a sharp rise in cost, restrictions were placed to ensure appropriate utilization. Intervention: These restrictions reserved calcitonin for patients with symptomatic hypercalcemia or severe hypercalcemia, which was defined as an ionized calcium of greater than 1.5 mmol/L and/or total/corrected calcium (Ca) of greater than 13 mg/dL. In addition to providing criteria for its use, calcitonin orders also had an automatic stop date of 24 hours to ensure no more than 2 doses were provided in a 24-hour period. After the initial 24 hours, a patient would have to be reviewed again before any further doses were ordered and administered. If the patient met criteria, an additional 2 doses could be given in the next 24 hours for a total maximum treatment of 4 doses over a 48-hour time frame. Results: An evaluation to assess health system-wide compliance of the usage of calcitonin restrictions regarding utilization, effectiveness, and cost was conducted. In the 2-month study time frame that was examined, there was a decrease in 66 vials of calcitonin that were dispensed. This represents a 43% reduction in usage and an estimated US $450,000 reduction in the total money spent for calcitonin annually. No notable differences in Ca reduction were identified between the groups. Conclusion: This evaluation revealed that putting health system-wide restrictions in use for a high-cost medication can have a major financial impact without compromising clinical efficacy.

Evaluation of Insulin Use and Hypoglycemia in Hospitalized Elderly Patients

Background: Routine administration of correctional insulin is no longer recommended as a primary strategy to treat hyperglycemia in hospitalized patients. Studies have demonstrated significant improvement in glycemic control in patients treated with basal and correctional insulin (B+C) versus correctional insulin alone (C). However, the effect of C or B+C on hypoglycemic events is not well understood. Objective: The objective of this study was to investigate the effect of B+C versus C on hypoglycemic events in hospitalized elderly patients. Methods: A single-center retrospective review of patients at least 65 years old that were admitted between April and July 2016, who were prescribed any type of insulin. Exclusion criteria included admission to the intensive care unit (ICU) on hospital admission, history of hypersensitivity to insulin, or insulin use for the management of hyperkalemia. Patients were divided based on the insulin regimen prescribed, B+C or C. The primary outcome of the study was the incidence of hypoglycemic episodes between groups. Secondary outcomes included severity of hypoglycemia, hospital length of stay (LOS), hospital mortality, and ICU transfer. Hypoglycemia was defined as a blood glucose level less than 70 mg/dL. Results: A total of 709 patients were included, with 144 (20.3%) prescribed B+C and 565 (79.7%) prescribed C. Incidence of hypoglycemia was greater in the B+C group than C (29.1% vs 12.6%, p=0.012). The average blood glucose readings during hypoglycemic episodes between B+C and C were 50 mg/dL and 52.5 mg/dL, respectively (p<0.01). There was no difference observed in hospital LOS. No patients required ICU admission within 24 hours of a hypoglycemic event or died during the index hospitalization. Conclusion: There is a higher incidence of hypoglycemia in elderly patients prescribed basal plus correctional insulin than correctional insulin alone.

Formulary Drug Review: Etelcalcetide

Each month, subscribers to The Formulary Monograph Service receive 5 to 6 well-documented monographs on drugs that are newly released or are in late phase 3 trials. The monographs are targeted to Pharmacy & Therapeutics Committees. Subscribers also receive monthly 1-page summary monographs on agents that are useful for agendas and pharmacy/nursing in-services. A comprehensive target drug utilization evaluation/medication use evaluation (DUE/MUE) is also provided each month. With a subscription, the monographs are available online to subscribers. Monographs can be customized to meet the needs of a facility. Through the cooperation of The Formulary, Hospital Pharmacy publishes selected reviews in this column. For more information about The Formulary Monograph Service, contact Wolters Kluwer customer service at 866-397-3433. The November 2017 monograph topics are Ertugliflozin, Glecaprevir / pibrentasvir, Neratinib, Sofosbuvir, velpatasvir, voxilaprevir and SQ C1 esterase inhibitor. The MUE is on glecaprevir, pibrentasvir.