Ultra rapid lispro (Lyumjev®) shortens time to recovery from hyperglycaemia compared to Humalog® in individuals with type 1 diabetes on continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion.

AIMS: To compare the time to hyperglycaemia recovery after ultra rapid lispro (URLi; Lyumjev®) versus Humalog in a randomized, double-blind crossover study. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty-two adults with type 1 diabetes on continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion participated in two periods: each period included hyperglycaemia induced by a missed mealtime bolus (day 1) and by suspension of basal insulin delivery (day 2). When hyperglycaemia [plasma glucose (PG) >240 mg/dl] occurred, a correction bolus of URLi or Humalog was given and time to hyperglycaemia recovery (PG = 140 mg/dl), pharmacokinetics and glucodynamics were compared. RESULTS: Following a missed mealtime bolus, URLi significantly reduced maximum PG (-13 mg/dl; p = .02), and produced numerically more rapid decline in PG (23 mg/dl/h; p = .07), and faster recovery from hyperglycaemia (-23 min; p = .1) versus Humalog, although differences were not significant. Following basal suspension, URLi significantly reduced maximum PG (-6 mg/dl; p = .02), and produced faster PG decline (24 mg/dl/h; p < .001) and faster recovery from hyperglycaemia (-16 min; p < .01) vs. Humalog. Following a correction bolus of URLi, accelerated insulin lispro absorption was observed versus Humalog: early 50% tmax was reduced by 6 or 12 min, and AUC0-15min was increased 2.5- or 4.3-fold after correction boluses by subcutaneous infusion (day 1) or injection (day 2), respectively (all p < .001). CONCLUSIONS: During episodes of hyperglycaemia commonly experienced in people with type 1 diabetes, URLi provided a faster recovery versus Humalog from a missed mealtime bolus or during basal insulin suspension. URLi shows significant acceleration of insulin absorption versus Humalog when boluses are administered by subcutaneous infusion or injection.

Safety, tolerability, pharmacodynamics and pharmacokinetics following once-daily doses of BI 187004, an inhibitor of 11 beta-hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase-1, over 28 days in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and overweight or obesity.

AIMS: To study the oral 11 beta-hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase-1 (11ß-HSD1) inhibitor BI 187004 (NCT02150824), as monotherapy and in combination with metformin, versus placebo in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) affected by overweight or obesity. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This Phase II, randomized controlled trial investigated multiple rising doses of BI 187004 as monotherapy (Arm 1: 20, 80 or 240 mg) and in combination with metformin (Arm 2: 240 mg), in adults with T2DM and a body mass index of 28-40 kg/m2 . RESULTS: In total, 103 patients (Arm 1: n = 62, Arm 2: n = 41) were included in this study. BI 187004 was rapidly absorbed and exposure increased approximately dose-dependently. Target engagement of 11ß-HSD1 was observed with near-full inhibition of 11ß-HSD1 in the liver [decreased (5α-tetrahydrocortisol + 5ß-tetrahydrocortisol)/tetrahydrocortisone ratio]; hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis activation was also seen (increased total urinary corticosteroids). No clinically relevant changes from baseline with BI 187004 treatment were observed for bodyweight or meal tolerance test parameters, or in most efficacy endpoints testing glucose and lipid metabolism; a significant increase was observed in weighted mean plasma glucose (p < .05 for 80 and 240 mg BI 187004) but not fasting plasma glucose. Drug-related adverse events were reported for 14 patients (22.6%) in Arm 1 and 10 patients (24.4%) in Arm 2, most frequently headache, diarrhoea, flushing and dizziness. A dose-dependent increase in heart rate was seen with BI 187004 treatment. CONCLUSIONS: BI 187004 was generally well tolerated in patients with T2DM. Despite complete 11ß-HSD1 inhibition, no clinically relevant effects were observed with BI 187004.

Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic bioequivalence of Gan & Lee insulin analogues aspart (rapilin®), lispro (prandilin®) and glargine (basalin®) with EU- und US-sourced reference insulins.

AIM: For the successful approval and clinical prescription of insulin biosimilars, it is essential to show pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic (PD) bioequivalence to the respective reference products sourced from the European Union and the United States. METHODS: Three phase 1, randomized, double-blind, three-period crossover trials compared single doses of the proposed biosimilar insulin analogues aspart (GL-Asp, n = 36), lispro (GL-Lis, n = 38) and glargine (GL-Gla, n = 113), all manufactured by Gan & Lee pharmaceuticals, to the respective EU- and US-reference products in healthy male participants (GL-Asp and GL-Lis) or people with type 1 diabetes (GL-Gla). Study participants received 0.2 U/kg (aspart and lispro) or 0.5 U/kg (glargine) of each treatment under automated euglycaemic clamp conditions. The clamp duration was 12 h (aspart and lispro) or 30 h (glargine). Primary PK endpoints were the total area under the PK curves (AUCins.total ) and maximum insulin concentrations (Cins.max ). Primary PD endpoints were the total area under the glucose infusion rate curve (AUCGIR.total ) and maximum glucose infusion rate (GIRmax ). RESULTS: Bioequivalence to both EU- and US-reference products were shown for all three GL insulins. Least squares mean ratios for the primary PK/PD endpoints were close to 100%, and both 90% and 95% confidence intervals were within 80%-125% in all three studies. There were no noticeable differences in the safety profiles between test and reference insulins, and no serious adverse events were reported for the GL insulins. CONCLUSION: GL-Asp, GL-Lis and GL-Gla are bioequivalent to their EU- and US-reference products.

Phase I studies of the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of the dual glucagon receptor/glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist BI 456906.

AIM: To report two phase I studies of the novel subcutaneous glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor/glucagon receptor (GLP-1R/GCGR) dual agonist BI 456906 versus placebo in healthy volunteers and people with overweight/obesity. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A phase Ia study (NCT03175211) investigated single rising doses (SRDs) of BI 456906 in 24 males with a body mass index (BMI) of 20-<30 kg/m2 . A phase Ib study (NCT03591718) investigated multiple rising doses (MRDs) of BI 456906 (escalated over 6 [Part A] or 16 [Part B] weeks) in 125 adults with a BMI of 27-40 kg/m2 . RESULTS: In the SRD study (N = 24), mean body weight decreased with increasing BI 456906 dose. In the MRD study, the maximum decreases in placebo-corrected mean body weight were at week 6 (-5.79%, dosage schedule [DS] 1; Part A) and week 16 (-13.8%, DS7; Part B). BI 456906 reduced plasma amino acids and glucagon, indicating target engagement at GCGRs and GLP-1Rs. Drug-related adverse events (AEs) increased with BI 456906 dose. The most frequent drug-related AE with SRDs was decreased appetite (n = 9, 50.0%), and two subjects (8.3%) did not complete the trial because of AEs (nausea and vomiting). During MRD Part A (N = 80), 10 subjects (12.5%) discontinued BI 456906, most commonly because of a cardiac or vascular AE (n = 6, 7.5%); during Part B (N = 45), eight subjects (17.8%) discontinued BI 456906, mainly because of AEs (n = 6, 13.3%), most commonly gastrointestinal disorders. CONCLUSIONS: BI 456906 produced a placebo-corrected body weight loss of 13.8% (week 16), highlighting its potential to promote clinically meaningful body weight loss in people with overweight/obesity.

Integrated safety and efficacy analysis of dasiglucagon for the treatment of severe hypoglycaemia in individuals with type 1 diabetes.

AIMS: To perform an integrated analysis of the safety and efficacy of dasiglucagon, a glucagon analogue available in a ready-to-use aqueous formulation, to treat severe hypoglycaemia (SH) in type 1 diabetes (T1D). MATERIALS AND METHODS: An integrated analysis of dasiglucagon safety was conducted on data from two placebo-controlled trials (placebo-controlled pool) and two placebo-controlled and four non-placebo-controlled trials (broad pool) in adults with T1D. An integrated analysis of dasiglucagon efficacy was conducted of pooled data and within demographic subgroups from the two placebo-controlled and two non-placebo-controlled trials in adults with T1D. RESULTS: Dasiglucagon had a similar safety and tolerability profile to that of reconstituted glucagon. In the placebo-controlled datasets, no serious adverse events (AEs), AEs leading to withdrawal from the trial, or deaths were reported. The most common causally related AEs were nausea (56.5%) and vomiting (24.6%). The broad pool safety analysis showed similar results. Dasiglucagon efficacy in time to plasma glucose recovery from insulin-induced SH was similar to that of reconstituted glucagon (median 10.0 and 12.0 minutes, respectively) and superior to placebo (median 40.0 minutes; P < 0.0001). The median recovery time was consistent across all placebo-controlled trial subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: Dasiglucagon was well tolerated and effective as a rapid rescue agent for insulin-induced SH in people with T1D.

Acute effects of linagliptin on intact and total glucagon-like peptide-1 and gastric inhibitory polypeptide levels in insulin-dependent type 2 diabetes patients with and without moderate renal impairment.

AIMS: To investigate the effect of renal impairment on incretin metabolism in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) before and after treatment with the dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitor linagliptin. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Long-standing T2DM patients with normal (estimated glomerular filtration rate [eGFR] >90 mL/min/1.73m2 ) and impaired (eGFR <60 mL/min/1.73m2 ) renal function on stable treatment with insulin were included. Before and after 8 days of treatment with 5 mg linagliptin once daily, patients underwent a 75-g oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) and total and intact glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) and gastric inhibitory polypeptide (GIP), glucose, insulin, C-peptide and glucagon concentrations were measured. The primary outcome was the difference between the study groups in change of intact GLP-1 concentrations. RESULTS: Of 115 patients screened, 29 were analysed (15 [51.7%] with and 14 [48.3%] without renal impairment). Renal function differed significantly between the groups (101 ± 11 vs. 47 ± 13 mL/min/1.73m2 ; P < 0.0001), while glycaemic control was similar (glycated haemoglobin 68 ± 5 vs. 66 ± 5 mmol/mol; P = 0.45). Baseline GLP-1 and GIP levels were comparable. Glucose concentrations during the OGTT were significantly lowered by linagliptin treatment in patients with renal impairment (P = 0.017), but not in those with normal renal function (P = 0.17). Treatment with linagliptin resulted in a significant increase in intact GLP-1 and GIP levels in patients with normal (P = 0.048 and P = 0.0001, respectively) and impaired (P = 0.040 and P = 0.0011, respectively) renal function during the OGTT. However, the primary outcome (difference between the groups in change of intact GLP-1 concentrations) was not significant (P = 0.22). Overall, linagliptin was well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with linagliptin increases intact incretin levels in patients with T2DM. Impaired renal function does not compromise the effects of linagliptin on active or total incretin levels as well as on glucagon secretion. Thus, treatment with linagliptin is suitable for patients with T2DM, independently of renal function.

Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic equivalence of Biocon's biosimilar Insulin-R with the US-licensed Humulin® R formulation in healthy subjects: Results from the RHINE-1 (Recombinant Human INsulin Equivalence-1) study.

AIM: To establish equivalence in the pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic (PD) endpoints between proposed biosimilar Insulin-R (Biocon's Insulin-R) and Humulin® R using the euglycaemic clamp technique in healthy subjects. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this phase-1 automated euglycaemic glucose clamp study, 42 healthy subjects were randomized (1:1) to receive a single dose of 0.3 IU/kg of Biocon's Insulin-R and Humulin-R. Plasma insulin concentrations and glucose infusion rates (GIRs) were assessed over 12 hours. Primary PK endpoints were area under the insulin concentration-time curve from 0 to 12 hours (AUCins.0-12h ) and maximum insulin concentration (Cins.max ). Primary PD endpoints were area under the GIR time curve from 0 to 12 hours (AUCGIR.0-12h ) and maximum GIR (GIRmax ). RESULTS: Equivalence was demonstrated between Biocon's Insulin-R and Humulin-R for the primary PK and PD endpoints. The 90% confidence intervals were within 80.00% to 125.00% limits. The PK and PD profiles were comparable. There were no significant differences in the safety profiles of the two treatments, and no serious adverse events were reported. CONCLUSION: PK and PD equivalence was demonstrated between Biocon's Insulin-R and Humulin-R in healthy subjects. Treatment with Biocon's Insulin-R and Humulin-R was well tolerated.

Ultra rapid lispro (URLi) shows accelerated pharmacokinetics and greater reduction in postprandial glucose versus Humalog® in patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus in a randomized, double-blind meal test early-phase study.

AIM: To compare the pharmacokinetics (PK), glucodynamics (GD), and tolerability following single and multiple daily subcutaneous (SC) doses of ultra rapid lispro (URLi) and Humalog® in patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1D). MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a two-part, randomized, double-blind, Phase 1b study. Part A used a six-period crossover design to assess PK and GD response to a solid mixed meal tolerance test (MMTT) following a single dose of URLi or Humalog administered 15 min before, immediately before, and 15 min after the start of the meal. Part B evaluated URLi or Humalog during 2 weeks of multiple daily dosing with a parallel design. The PK and GD were assessed following MMTTs at the beginning and end of the 2-week period when insulins were administered immediately before the start of the meal. RESULTS: URLi increased the insulin exposure within the first 30 min postdose by 2.2-fold and reduced the time to early half-maximal drug concentration by 37% compared with Humalog. Overall, URLi resulted in better postprandial glucose lowering when dosed before, immediately before, or after a meal compared with Humalog. Comparing the same meal-to-dose timing between the insulins, postprandial glucose excursion over 5 hours was reduced by 40%-44% for all three dose timings (-15, 0, and +15 min) with URLi, achieving statistical significance for the 0- and +15-min timings. The PK and GD profiles were sustained after daily SC dosing for 2 weeks in patients with T1D. The number of documented hypoglycaemic events was similar between URLi and Humalog during the postprandial period of the MMTTs and the outpatient period. CONCLUSIONS: URLi showed accelerated insulin lispro absorption and greater postprandial glucose reduction at different meal-to-dose timings compared with Humalog and was well tolerated in patients with T1D.

Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic equivalence of Biocon's biosimilar Insulin 70/30 with US-licensed HUMULIN® 70/30 formulation in healthy subjects: Results from the RHINE-3 (Recombinant Human INsulin Equivalence-3) study.

AIM: To establish the pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic (PD) equivalence of proposed biosimilar insulin 70/30 (Biocon's Insulin-70/30) and HUMULIN® 70/30 (HUMULIN-70/30; Eli Lilly and Company, IN). MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this phase 1, automated euglycaemic glucose clamp study, 78 healthy subjects were randomized (1:1) to receive a single dose of 0.4 IU/kg of Biocon's Insulin-70/30 and HUMULIN-70/30. Plasma insulin concentrations and glucose infusion rates (GIRs) were assessed over 24 hours. Primary PK endpoints were area under the insulin concentration-time curve from 0 to 24 hours - AUCins.0-24h - and maximum insulin concentration - Cins.max . Primary PD endpoints were area under the GIR time curve from 0 to 24 hours - AUCGIR.0-24h - and maximum GIR - GIRmax . RESULTS: Equivalence was shown between Biocon's Insulin-70/30 and HUMULIN-70/30 for the primary PK/PD endpoints. The 90% confidence intervals of the treatment ratios were entirely within the acceptance range of 80.00%-125.00%. The secondary PK/PD profiles were also comparable. There were no clinically relevant differences in the safety profiles of the two treatments and no serious adverse events were reported. CONCLUSION: PK/PD equivalence was demonstrated between Biocon's Insulin-70/30 and HUMULIN-70/30 in healthy subjects. Treatment with Biocon's Insulin-70/30 and HUMULIN-70/30 was well tolerated.

Endothelial-protective effects of a G-protein-biased sphingosine-1 phosphate receptor-1 agonist, SAR247799, in type-2 diabetes rats and a randomized placebo-controlled patient trial.

AIMS: SAR247799 is a G-protein-biased sphingosine-1 phosphate receptor-1 (S1P1 ) agonist designed to activate endothelial S1P1 and provide endothelial-protective properties, while limiting S1P1 desensitization and consequent lymphocyte-count reduction associated with higher doses. The aim was to show whether S1P1 activation can promote endothelial effects in patients and, if so, select SAR247799 doses for further clinical investigation. METHODS: Type-2 diabetes patients, enriched for endothelial dysfunction (flow-mediated dilation, FMD <7%; n = 54), were randomized, in 2 sequential cohorts, to 28-day once-daily treatment with SAR247799 (1 or 5 mg in ascending cohorts), placebo or 50 mg sildenafil (positive control) in a 5:2:2 ratio per cohort. Endothelial function was assessed by brachial artery FMD. Renal function, biomarkers and lymphocytes were measured following 5-week SAR247799 treatment (3 doses) to Zucker diabetic fatty rats and the data used to select the doses for human testing. RESULTS: The maximum FMD change from baseline vs placebo for all treatments was reached on day 35; mean differences vs placebo were 0.60% (95% confidence interval [CI] -0.34 to 1.53%; P = .203) for 1 mg SAR247799, 1.07% (95% CI 0.13 to 2.01%; P = .026) for 5 mg SAR247799 and 0.88% (95% CI -0.15 to 1.91%; P = .093) for 50 mg sildenafil. Both doses of SAR247799 were well tolerated, did not affect blood pressure, and were associated with minimal-to-no lymphocyte reduction and small-to-moderate heart rate decrease. CONCLUSION: These data provide the first human evidence suggesting endothelial-protective properties of S1P1 activation, with SAR247799 being as effective as the clinical benchmark, sildenafil. Further clinical testing of SAR247799, at sub-lymphocyte-reducing doses (≤5 mg), is warranted in vascular diseases associated with endothelial dysfunction.

Better glycaemic control with BioChaperone glargine lispro co-formulation than with insulin lispro Mix25 or separate glargine and lispro administrations after a test meal in people with type 2 diabetes.

Because of its physico-chemical properties, insulin glargine is usually not mixable with rapid insulins. BioChaperone BC147 is a polyanionic amphiphilic polymer, solubilizing insulin glargine at neutral pH, and thus enabling stable glargine formulation with fast-acting insulin lispro (BioChaperone glargine lispro co-formulation [BC Combo]). We investigated pharmacokinetic (PK) endpoints and postprandial glucose (PPG) control after administration of BC Combo (75% insulin glargine, 25% insulin lispro), insulin lispro Mix25 (LMix) and separate injections of insulins glargine (75% total dose) and lispro (25% total dose [G + L]) immediately before ingestion of a mixed meal in people with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), using a randomized, double-blind, double-dummy crossover study design. Participants received individualized bolus doses (mean 0.62 U/kg) of BC Combo, LMix or G + L, together with a solid mixed meal (610 kcal, 50% carbohydrate, 30% fat, 20% protein). Insulin dosages were kept constant for each study day. Thirty-nine participants with T2DM (mean ± SD age and glycated haemoglobin 60.8 ± 7.5 years and 64 ± 6 mmol/mol, respectively) were randomized. BC Combo improved the predefined primary endpoint, early PPG control, compared to LMix (incremental area under the blood glucose concentration-time curve from 0 to 2 hours after the meal [ΔAUCBG,0-2h ] reduction of 18%; P = 0.0009) and G + L (ΔAUCBG,0-2h reduction of 10%; P = 0.0450). The number of mealtime hypoglycaemic episodes per participant was lower with BC Combo (22 episodes in 14 participants) compared to LMix (43 episodes in 20 participants; P = 0.0028), but not significantly different from G + L (28 episodes in 19 participants; P = 0.2523). BC Combo demonstrated superior early PPG control with fewer hypoglycaemic episodes compared to LMix and superior early PPG control compared to separate G + L administrations.

Sequential Treatment Escalation with Dapagliflozin and Saxagliptin Improves Beta Cell Function in Type 2 Diabetic Patients on Previous Metformin Treatment: An Exploratory Mechanistic Study.

We investigated the effect of sequential treatment escalation with dapagliflozin and saxagliptin on beta cell function in patients with T2DM insufficiently controlled on metformin monotherapy during a hyperglycaemic clamp investigation. Twenty-six patients (19 males, age 63.5±7.0 years; duration of diabetes 8.8±4.7 years; HbA1c 63.9±15.8 mmol/mol; mean±SD) were enrolled in the study. During a first treatment period (TP1) all patients received 10 mg dapagliflozin for one month, followed by the addition of 5 mg saxagliptin or placebo for another month (TP2). At baseline and at the end of each treatment period, fasting glucose and insulin levels were analysed, and a hyperglycaemic clamp with the measurement of plasma C-peptide, insulin, proinsulin, and glucagon was performed. Treatment with dapagliflozin reduced fasting glucose levels and insulin resistance (TP1). Within the hyperglycaemic clamp, C-peptide and insulin concentrations increased after the addition of dapagliflozin in TP1 (0.48±0.45 nmol*h/l; 6.24±17.9 mU*h/l) and further improved after the addition of saxagliptin in TP2 (0.38±0.34 nmol*h/l; 6.59±10.15 mU*h/l). Acute insulin response did not change after the addition of dapagliflozin (TP1), but significantly improved after the addition of saxagliptin in TP2 (0.89±0.76 mU*h/l). Both drugs improved the C-peptide/proinsulin ratio. After the addition of saxagliptin, the glucagon/insulin ratio significantly declined (TP2). Treatment escalation with dapagliflozin and saxagliptin exhibit additive effects on beta cell capacity, and improves alpha and beta cell integrity.

Injecting without pressing a button: An exploratory study of a shield-triggered injection mechanism.

AIMS: To evaluate the injection success and user perception of a shield-triggered pen-injector mechanism. METHODS: The trial (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02627287) was an exploratory, two-centre, one-visit, open-label, randomized controlled trial conducted in Germany in 150 injection-experienced individuals with type 1 or type 2 diabetes. Participants self-administered subcutaneous injections of a placebo solution using a prototype shield-triggered pen-injector, DV3316 (Novo Nordisk, Bagsvaerd, Denmark), and FlexPen (Novo Nordisk, Bagsvaerd, Denmark). Injection success was evaluated on a yes/no basis by the investigator. Participant confidence, leakage of fluid and pain were evaluated after each injection. Pain and device experience were assessed after completion of all injections with each pen-injector. Overall preference was assessed after completion of all injections with both pen-injectors. RESULTS: Injection success was high with both pen-injectors (97.0%, DV3316 vs 99.7%, FlexPen). Participant confidence in dose delivery was similar for the two devices (88% of injections with DV3316 vs 81% with FlexPen were scored as "extremely confident"). The median injection pain score on a visual analogue scale (0-100) was 3 with DV3316 vs 4 with FlexPen after each injection, and 4 with DV3316 vs 5 with FlexPen after all injections with each device. After all injections were completed, 55% of participants reported an overall preference for DV3316 vs 21% for FlexPen. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates that injection-experienced individuals can achieve a high injection success rate with a shield-triggered pen-injector, with similar patient confidence and injection pain compared with FlexPen.

Effects on α- and ß-cell function of sequentially adding empagliflozin and linagliptin to therapy in people with type 2 diabetes previously receiving metformin: An exploratory mechanistic study.

AIMS: To investigate the effect of sequential treatment escalation with empagliflozin and linagliptin on laboratory markers of α- and ß-cell function in people with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) insufficiently controlled on metformin monotherapy. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: A total of 44 people with T2DM received 25 mg empagliflozin for a duration of 1 month in an open-label fashion (treatment period 1 [TP1]). Thereafter, they were randomized to a double-blind add-on therapy with linagliptin 5 mg or placebo (treatment period 2 [TP2]) for 1 additional month. α- and ß-cell function was assessed using a standardized liquid meal test and an intravenous (i.v.) glucose challenge. Efficacy measures comprised the areas under the curve for glucose, insulin, proinsulin and glucagon after the liquid meal test and the assessment of fast and late-phase insulin release after an i.v. glucose load with a subsequent hyperglycaemic clamp. RESULTS: Empagliflozin reduced fasting and postprandial plasma glucose levels, associated with a significant reduction in postprandial insulin levels and an improvement in the conversion rate of proinsulin (TP1). The addition of linagliptin during TP2 further improved postprandial glucose levels, probably as a result of a marked reduction in postprandial glucagon concentrations (TP2). The insulin response to an i.v. glucose load increased during treatment with empagliflozin (TP1), and further improved after the addition of linagliptin (TP2). CONCLUSION: After metformin failure, sequential treatment escalation with empagliflozin and linagliptin is an attractive treatment option because of the additive effects on postprandial glucose control, probably mediated by complementary effects on α- and ß-cell function.

Euglycaemic glucose clamp: what it can and cannot do, and how to do it.

The hyperinsulinaemic-euglycaemic glucose clamp has always been regarded as the "gold standard" for the assessment of pharmacodynamic (PD) properties of insulin preparations; however, there has been controversy over a variety of methodogical details, such as study population, dosing time and the initial stabilization of blood glucose (BG) concentrations at the clamp target level, among clamp groups. As the impact of these details on PD results is unclear, the present review provides an overview of different methodological approaches for both the manual and the automated hyperinsulinaemic-euglycaemic glucose clamp. The advantages and limitations of several methodological details are discussed as well as the relevance of clamp results for the prediction of clinical outcomes. Overall, the best method strongly depends on the exact objective of the trial. If, for instance, duration of action is the primary objective, studies should be carried out in patients with type 1 diabetes to avoid any interference of endogenous insulin. This is less important for variables such as onset of action or early metabolic activity. The hyperinsulinaemic-euglycaemic glucose clamp has a high sensitivity to detect even minor differences between different insulin preparations. The practical relevance of potential differences, however, needs to be investigated in clinical studies. A major prerequisite for obtaining reliable glucose clamp results is the attainment of high clamp quality (i.e. keeping BG concentrations close to the clamp target throughout the experiments). Unfortunately, measures of clamp quality are often under-reported, as is the variability in PD profiles, although these might explain some unconfirmed extreme results obtained in a few clamp studies.

Pharmacokinetic and Pharmacodynamic Characteristics of Insulin Icodec After Subcutaneous Administration in the Thigh, Abdomen or Upper Arm in Individuals with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Individuals with diabetes mellitus may prefer different body regions for subcutaneous insulin administration. This trial investigated whether choice of injection region affects exposure and glucose-lowering effect of once-weekly basal insulin icodec. METHODS: In a randomised, open-label, crossover trial, 25 individuals with type 2 diabetes received single subcutaneous icodec injections (5.6 U/kg) in the thigh, abdomen or upper arm (9-13 weeks' washout). Pharmacokinetic blood sampling occurred frequently until 35 days post-dose. Partial glucose-lowering effect was assessed 36-60 h post-dose in a glucose clamp (target 7.5 mmol/L). Steady-state pharmacokinetics following multiple once-weekly dosing were simulated using a two-compartment pharmacokinetic model. RESULTS: Total icodec exposure (area under the curve from zero to infinity after single dose; AUC0-∞,SD) was similar between injection in the thigh, abdomen and upper arm (estimated AUC0-∞,SD ratios [95% confidence interval]: abdomen/thigh 1.02 [0.96-1.09], p = 0.473; upper arm/thigh 1.04 [0.98-1.10], p = 0.162; abdomen/upper arm 0.98 [0.93-1.05], p = 0.610). Maximum icodec concentration (Cmax) after single dose was higher for abdomen (by 17%, p = 0.002) and upper arm (by 24%, p < 0.001) versus thigh. When simulated to steady state, smaller differences in Cmax were seen for abdomen (by 11%, p = 0.004) and upper arm (by 16%, p < 0.001) versus thigh. Geometric mean [coefficient of variation] glucose-lowering effect 36-60 h post-dose was comparable between the thigh (1961 mg/kg [51%]), abdomen (2130 mg/kg [52%]) and upper arm (2391 mg/kg [40%]). CONCLUSION: Icodec can be administered subcutaneously in the thigh, abdomen or upper arm with no clinically relevant difference in exposure and with a similar glucose-lowering effect. GOV IDENTIFIER: NCT04582448.

Noninvasive Continuous Glucose Monitoring With a Novel Wearable Dial Resonating Sensor: A Clinical Proof-of-Concept Study.

BACKGROUND: A noninvasive, wearable continuous glucose monitor would be a major advancement in diabetes therapy. This trial investigated a novel noninvasive glucose monitor which analyzes spectral variations in radio frequency/microwave signals reflected from the wrist. METHODS: A single-arm, open-label, experimental study compared glucose values from a prototype investigational device with laboratory glucose measurements from venous blood samples (Super GL Glucose Analyzer, Dr. Müller Gerätebau GmbH) at varying levels of glycemia. The study included 29 male participants with type 1 diabetes (age range = 19-56 years). The study comprised three stages with the following aims: (1) demonstrate initial proof-of-principle, (2) test an improved device design, and (3) test performance on two consecutive days without device recalibration. The co-primary endpoints in all trial stages were median and mean absolute relative difference (ARD) calculated across all data points. RESULTS: In stage 1, the median and mean ARDs were 30% and 46%, respectively. Stage 2 produced marked performance improvements with a median and mean ARD of 22% and 28%, respectively. Stage 3 showed that, without recalibration, the device performed as well as the initial prototype (stage 1) with a median and mean ARD of 35% and 44%, respectively. CONCLUSION: This proof-of-concept study shows that a novel noninvasive continuous glucose monitor was capable of detecting glucose levels. Furthermore, the ARD results are comparable to first models of commercially available minimally invasive products without the need to insert a needle. The prototype has been further developed and is being tested in subsequent studies. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05023798.

Dasiglucagon-A Next-Generation Glucagon Analog for Rapid and Effective Treatment of Severe Hypoglycemia: Results of Phase 3 Randomized Double-Blind Clinical Trial.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of dasiglucagon, a ready-to-use, next-generation glucagon analog in aqueous formulation for subcutaneous dosing, for treatment of severe hypoglycemia in adults with type 1 diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: This randomized, double-blind trial included 170 adult participants with type 1 diabetes, each randomly assigned to receive a single subcutaneous dose of 0.6 mg dasiglucagon, placebo, or 1 mg reconstituted glucagon (2:1:1 randomization) during controlled insulin-induced hypoglycemia. The primary end point was time to plasma glucose recovery, defined as an increase of ≥20 mg/dL from baseline without rescue intravenous glucose. The primary comparison was dasiglucagon versus placebo; reconstituted lyophilized glucagon was included as reference. RESULTS: Median (95% CI) time to recovery was 10 (10, 10) minutes for dasiglucagon compared with 40 (30, 40) minutes for placebo (P < 0.001); the corresponding result for reconstituted glucagon was 12 (10, 12) minutes. In the dasiglucagon group, plasma glucose recovery was achieved within 15 min in all but one participant (99%), superior to placebo (2%; P < 0.001) and similar to glucagon (95%). Similar outcomes were observed for the other investigated time points at 10, 20, and 30 min after dosing. The most frequent adverse effects were nausea and vomiting, as expected with glucagon treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Dasiglucagon provided rapid and effective reversal of hypoglycemia in adults with type 1 diabetes, with safety and tolerability similar to those reported for reconstituted glucagon injection. The ready-to-use, aqueous formulation of dasiglucagon offers the potential to provide rapid and reliable treatment of severe hypoglycemia.

Randomised clinical trial: semaglutide versus placebo reduced liver steatosis but not liver stiffness in subjects with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease assessed by magnetic resonance imaging.

BACKGROUND: Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists may be a treatment option in patients with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD). AIMS: To investigate the effects of semaglutide on liver stiffness and liver fat in subjects with NAFLD using non-invasive magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) methods. METHODS: This randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial enrolled subjects with liver stiffness 2.50-4.63 kPa by magnetic resonance elastography (MRE) and liver steatosis ≥10% by MRI proton density fat fraction (MRI-PDFF). The primary endpoint was change from baseline to week 48 in liver stiffness assessed by MRE. RESULTS: Sixty-seven subjects were randomised to once-daily subcutaneous semaglutide 0.4 mg (n = 34) or placebo (n = 33). Change from baseline in liver stiffness was not significantly different between semaglutide and placebo at week 48 (estimated treatment ratio 0.96 (95% CI 0.89, 1.03; P = 0.2798); significant differences in liver stiffness were not observed at weeks 24 or 72. Reductions in liver steatosis were significantly greater with semaglutide (estimated treatment ratios: 0.70 [0.59, 0.84], P = 0.0002; 0.47 [0.36, 0.60], P < 0.0001; and 0.50 [0.39, 0.66], P < 0.0001) and more subjects achieved a ≥ 30% reduction in liver fat content with semaglutide at weeks 24, 48 and 72, (all P < 0.001). Decreases in liver enzymes, body weight and HbA1c were also observed with semaglutide. CONCLUSIONS: The change in liver stiffness in subjects with NAFLD was not significantly different between semaglutide and placebo. However, semaglutide significantly reduced liver steatosis compared with placebo which, together with improvements in liver enzymes and metabolic parameters, suggests a positive impact on disease activity and metabolic profile. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03357380.