Different insulin concentrations in resuspended vs. unsuspended NPH insulin: Practical aspects of subcutaneous injection in patients with diabetes.

AIMS: This study measured the insulin concentration (Ins[C]) of NPH insulin in vials and cartridges from different companies after either resuspension (R+) or not (R-; in the clear/cloudy phases of unsuspended NPH). METHODS: Measurements included Ins[C] in NPH(R+) and in the clear/cloudy phases of NPH(R-), and the time needed to resuspend NPH and time for NPH(R+) to separate again into clear/cloudy parts. RESULTS: In vials of NPH(R+) (assumed to be 100%), Ins[C] in the clear phase of NPH(R-) was<1%, but 230±41% and 234±54% in the cloudy phases of Novo Nordisk and Eli Lilly NPH, respectively. Likewise, in pen cartridges, Ins[C] in the clear phase of NPH(R-) was<1%, but 182±33%, 204±22% and 229±62% in the cloudy phases of Novo, Lilly and Sanofi NPH. Time needed to resuspend NPH (spent in tipping) in vials was brief with both Novo (5±1s) and Lilly NPH (6±1s), but longer with all pen cartridges (50±8s, 40±6s and 30±4s from Novo, Lilly and Sanofi, respectively; P=0.022). Time required for 50% separation into cloudy and clear parts of NPH was longer with Novo (60±7min) vs. Lilly (18±3min) in vials (P=0.021), and affected by temperature, but not by the different diameter sizes of the vials. With pen cartridges, separation into clear and cloudy parts was significantly faster than in vials (P<0.01). CONCLUSION: Ins[C] in NPH preparations varies depending on their resuspension or not. Thus, subcutaneous injection of the same number of units of NPH in patients with diabetes may deliver different amounts of insulin depending on its prior NPH resuspension.

Glargine metabolism over 24 h following its subcutaneous injection in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: a dose-response study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: After subcutaneous injection insulin glargine is rapidly metabolized to M1 and M2. In vitro, both M1 and M2 have metabolic effects and bind to IGF-1R similarly to human insulin, whereas glargine exhibits a higher affinity for the IGF-1R and greater mitogenetic effects. The present study was specifically designed to establish the dose-response metabolism of glargine over 24 h following s.c. injection in T2DM subjects on long-term use of glargine. METHODS AND RESULTS: Ten subjects with T2DM were studied during 24 h after s.c. injection of 0.4 (therapeutic) and 0.8 (high dose) U/kg of glargine on two separate occasions during euglycaemic clamps (cross-over design). Glargine, M1 and M2 over 24 h period were determined in appropriately processed plasma samples by a specific liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry assay. Plasma M1 concentration (AUC0-24 h) was detected in all subjects and increased by increasing the glargine dose from therapeutic to high dose (p = 0.008). Glargine was detectable in 6 (therapeutic dose) and 9 (high dose) out of the 10 subjects and also increased by increasing the dose (p = 0.031). However, glargine concentration (AUC0-24 h--high dose) represented at most only 9.7% (4.6-15%) of the total amount of insulin measured in the blood. M2 was not detected at all. CONCLUSION: In T2DM people on long-term use of insulin glargine, even with higher doses (0.8 U/kg), glargine is nearly totally metabolized to the active metabolite M1. Glargine is often detectable in plasma, but its concentration remains well below that needed in vitro to potentiate IGF-1R binding and mitogenesis.