Multicenter, Randomized Trial of a Bionic Pancreas in Type 1 Diabetes.

BACKGROUND: Currently available semiautomated insulin-delivery systems require individualized insulin regimens for the initialization of therapy and meal doses based on carbohydrate counting for routine operation. In contrast, the bionic pancreas is initialized only on the basis of body weight, makes all dose decisions and delivers insulin autonomously, and uses meal announcements without carbohydrate counting. METHODS: In this 13-week, multicenter, randomized trial, we randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio persons at least 6 years of age with type 1 diabetes either to receive bionic pancreas treatment with insulin aspart or insulin lispro or to receive standard care (defined as any insulin-delivery method with unblinded, real-time continuous glucose monitoring). The primary outcome was the glycated hemoglobin level at 13 weeks. The key secondary outcome was the percentage of time that the glucose level as assessed by continuous glucose monitoring was below 54 mg per deciliter; the prespecified noninferiority limit for this outcome was 1 percentage point. Safety was also assessed. RESULTS: A total of 219 participants 6 to 79 years of age were assigned to the bionic-pancreas group, and 107 to the standard-care group. The glycated hemoglobin level decreased from 7.9% to 7.3% in the bionic-pancreas group and did not change (was at 7.7% at both time points) in the standard-care group (mean adjusted difference at 13 weeks, -0.5 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.6 to -0.3; P<0.001). The percentage of time that the glucose level as assessed by continuous glucose monitoring was below 54 mg per deciliter did not differ significantly between the two groups (13-week adjusted difference, 0.0 percentage points; 95% CI, -0.1 to 0.04; P<0.001 for noninferiority). The rate of severe hypoglycemia was 17.7 events per 100 participant-years in the bionic-pancreas group and 10.8 events per 100 participant-years in the standard-care group (P = 0.39). No episodes of diabetic ketoacidosis occurred in either group. CONCLUSIONS: In this 13-week, randomized trial involving adults and children with type 1 diabetes, use of a bionic pancreas was associated with a greater reduction than standard care in the glycated hemoglobin level. (Funded by the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04200313.).

Comparative assessment of immunogenicity of recombinant insulin Aspart from BioGenomics and its originator NovoRapid® in adult patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

OBJECTIVES: To assess and compare the immunogenicity of recombinant Insulin Aspart [manufactured by BioGenomics Limited (BGL-ASP)] with its originator NovoRapid® (manufactured by Novo Nordisk) in adult patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: BGL-IA-CTP301 study was a randomized, open label, parallel group, multicenter phase-III clinical study to compare the efficacy and safety of recombinant Insulin Aspart 100 U/mL [manufactured by BioGenomics Limited (BGL-ASP)] with its reference medicinal product (RMP); NovoRapid® [manufactured by Novo Nordisk], in adult patients with Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). The primary objective of the study was to compare the immunogenicity of BGL-ASP and RMP; NovoRapid® in patient serum samples collected from phase-III clinical study. Immunogenicity was studied as the incidence of patients positive for anti-insulin Aspart (AIA) antibodies, developed against BGL-ASP/RMP at baseline, end of 12 week and end of 24 week of the treatment period. The changes in incidence of patients positive for AIA antibodies post-baseline were also studied to assess and compare the treatment-emergent antibody response (TEAR) between the treatment groups (BGL-ASP and RMP). Statistical evaluation was done by Fisher's exact test to compare the overall incidence of patients positive for AIA antibodies and the TEAR positives observed post-baseline in both the treated groups. An in-vitro neutralizing antibody assay (Nab assay) was also performed to study the effect of AIA antibodies in neutralizing the biological activity/metabolic function of the insulin. The neutralizing potential of AIA was studied by its effect on %glucose uptake. We also evaluated the association between AIA antibody levels and its impact on biological activity by studying the correlation between them. RESULTS: Analysis of immunogenicity data suggested that the percentage of patients positive for AIA antibodies until week 24 was similar and comparable in both the treatment groups, BGL-ASP and RMP; NovoRapid®. The changes in incidence of patients positive for AIA post-baseline in terms of TEAR positives were also similar and comparable between the treatment groups. The results of the Nab assay with confirmed positive AIA samples from BGL-ASP- and RMP-treated groups did not have any negative impact on %glucose uptake by the cells in Nab assay, confirming the absence of neutralizing antibodies in both the treatment groups. The correlation studies also showed absence of association between AIA antibody levels and percentage glucose uptake in both BGL-ASP and RMP-NovoRapid® treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: The immunogenicity assessment based on the overall incidence of patients positive for AIA, changes in incidence of patients positive for AIA post-baseline, TEAR rates and absence of neutralizing antibodies, were found to be apparently similar and comparable in both the treatment groups (BGL-ASP and RMP). We conclude from our studies that the immunogenicity of BGL-ASP is similar and comparable to RMP and the observed immunogenicity in terms of anti-insulin Aspart antibody levels had no impact on the biological activity of insulin.

Glycaemic efficacy and safety of mealtime faster-acting insulin aspart administered by injection as compared to insulin aspart in people with diabetes mellitus: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

AIMS: To summarize all relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and provide precise effect estimates of glycaemic efficacy/safety of faster-acting insulin aspart administered by injection as compared to insulin aspart in people with diabetes mellitus. METHODS: PubMed/Cochrane Library were systematically searched till October 10, 2020, to identify RCTs with duration ≥16 weeks, evaluating efficacy/safety of mealtime injections of faster aspart compared to insulin aspart in people with type 1 diabetes mellitus and type 2 diabetes mellitus. Studies using faster aspart as continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion were excluded. Continuous and dichotomous outcome variables (expressed as estimated treatment difference and rate ratio in RCTs, respectively) were pooled using generic inverse variance method with fixed/random-effects model. For each outcome variable, subgroup analysis between type 1 diabetes mellitus and type 2 diabetes mellitus was performed. RESULTS: We included five RCTs; three of type 1 diabetes mellitus (n = 1963) and two of type 2 diabetes mellitus (n = 1780). All had low risk of bias. Faster aspart was associated with small but significant improvement in HbA1c than insulin aspart (MD: -0.06%, 95% CI: -0.10, -0.02, p = 0.005, I2  = 19%). HbA1c reduction was statistically significant only in type 1 diabetes mellitus on subgroup analysis (MD: -0.08%, 95% CI: -0.14, -0.02, p = 0.005, I2  = 47%). Besides, faster aspart was associated with reduced postprandial plasma glucose (PPG) increment at 1 h/2 h after meal test and increased 1,5-anhydroglucitol compared to insulin aspart. Early postprandial hypoglycaemic episodes were higher with faster aspart; however, overall and nocturnal hypoglycaemic episodes were not different from insulin aspart. CONCLUSIONS: Faster aspart is associated with reduced HbA1c , PPG increment and comparable overall hypoglycaemic episodes with regard to insulin aspart.

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% V̇O2max. 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.

Comparison of the effects of twice-daily exenatide and insulin on carotid intima-media thickness in type 2 diabetes mellitus patients: a 52-week randomized, open-label, controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Exenatide, a glucagon like peptide 1 analog, has been suggested to reduce the cardiovascular disease risk factors, such as body weight, blood pressure and subclinical atherosclerosis in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). This was the first randomized, open-label, controlled trial to compare the effects of exenatide versus insulin on subclinical atherosclerosis, as assessed by carotid-intima media thickness (CIMT), in patients with T2DM. METHODS: A total of 66 patients with T2DM admitted from March 10, 2015 to June 20, 2017 in the Department of Endocrinology, Beijing Hospital were randomized to receive twice-daily exenatide or aspartate 70/30 insulin for 52 weeks. The primary endpoint was change from baseline in CIMT, and secondary endpoints included changes at week 52 from baseline in body weight, glycemic markers, lipid metabolism markers, blood pressure, C-reactive protein, fibrinogen, 8-hydroxydeoxyguanosine, irisin, and brain natriuretic peptide. RESULTS: Exenatide more significantly reduced the CIMT from baseline compared with insulin after 52 weeks, with a mean difference of - 0.14 mm (95% interval confidence: - 0.25, - 0.02; P = 0.016). Weight and body mass index were both significantly reduced in the exenatide group over 52 weeks. Exenatide reduced total lipoprotein and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels more significantly than insulin at weeks 16 and 40. Correlation analyses showed that CIMT was positively correlated with low-density lipoprotein cholesterol. CONCLUSIONS: Twice-daily exenatide could prevent atherosclerosis progression in patients with T2DM over a 52-week treatment period compared with insulin therapy. Trial registration Chinese Clinical Trial Registry ChiCTR-1800015658.

The association between anti-insulin aspart antibodies and the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic characteristics of fast-acting insulin aspart in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes.

BACKGROUND: Fast-acting insulin aspart (faster aspart) is a novel formulation of insulin aspart (IAsp) ensuring ultrafast absorption and effect. AIM: To compare the pharmacokinetics between faster aspart and IAsp, based on free or total IAsp measurement, and investigate the association between anti-IAsp antibodies and faster aspart and IAsp pharmacological properties in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes (T1D). METHODS: In a randomized, two-period crossover trial, 12 children, 16 adolescents, and 15 adults (6-11, 12-17, and 18-64 years) received 0.2 U/kg double-blindsingle-dose subcutaneous faster aspart or IAsp followed by a standardized liquid meal test. RESULTS: Across age groups, the pharmacokinetic profile was left-shifted including greater early exposure for faster aspart vs IAsp irrespective of free or total IAsp assay. Onset of appearance occurred 2.4 to 5.0 minutes (free) or 1.8 to 3.0 minutes (total) earlier for faster aspart vs IAsp (P < .05). Treatment ratios (faster aspart/IAsp) for 0 to 30 minutes IAsp exposure were 1.60 to 2.11 and 1.62 to 1.96, respectively (children, free: P = .062; otherwise P < .05). The ratio of free/total IAsp for overall exposure (AUCIAsp,0-t ) was negatively associated with anti-IAsp antibody level across age. Pooling with a previous similar trial showed no clear association between anti-IAsp antibodies and meal test 1- or 2-hour postprandial glucose increment independent of age and insulin treatment (R2 ≤ .070; P ≥ .17). CONCLUSIONS: In children and adolescents with T1D, faster aspart provides ultrafast pharmacokinetics irrespective of free or total IAsp assay. Elevated anti-IAsp antibodies are associated with higher total IAsp concentration, but do not impact faster aspart and IAsp glucose-lowering effect.

Fully closed-loop insulin delivery improves glucose control of inpatients with type 2 diabetes receiving hemodialysis.

Inpatient diabetes management of those on hemodialysis poses a major challenge. In a post hoc analysis of a randomized controlled clinical trial, we compared the efficacy of fully automated closed-loop insulin delivery vs. usual care in patients undergoing hemodialysis while in hospital. Compared to control patients receiving conventional subcutaneous insulin therapy, those patients receiving closed-loop insulin delivery significantly increased the proportion of time when a continuous glucose monitor was in the target range of 5.6-10.0 mmol/l by 37.6 percent without increasing the risk of hypoglycemia. Thus, closed-loop insulin delivery offers a novel way to achieve effective and safe glucose control in this vulnerable patient population.

Mealtime fast-acting insulin aspart versus insulin aspart for controlling postprandial hyperglycaemia in people with insulin-resistant Type 2 diabetes.

AIM: This post hoc analysis explored whether mealtime fast-acting insulin aspart treatment provided an advantage in postprandial plasma glucose (PPG) control vs. insulin aspart in people with Type 2 diabetes receiving high doses of bolus insulin. METHODS: A post hoc, post-randomization, subgroup analysis of a 26-week, randomized, double-blind, treat-to-target trial (onset 2) that compared mealtime fast-acting insulin aspart vs. mealtime insulin aspart, both in a basal-bolus regimen, in people with Type 2 diabetes uncontrolled on basal insulin therapy and metformin. At the end of trial, the impact of fast-acting insulin aspart and insulin aspart on PPG control was assessed with a standard liquid meal test and participants were grouped into three post-randomization subgroups: meal test bolus insulin dose ≤ 10 units per dose (n = 171), > 10-20 units per dose (n = 289) and > 20 units per dose (n = 146). RESULTS: A statistically significant treatment difference in favour of fast-acting insulin aspart vs. insulin aspart was observed for the change in PPG increment at all post-meal time points (from 1 to 4 h) for those in the > 20 units bolus insulin subgroup. There was no difference in the magnitude of change from baseline in HbA1c level between fast-acting insulin aspart and insulin aspart in any of the bolus insulin dose subgroups (data herein). CONCLUSION: Fast-acting insulin aspart may hold promise as a more effective treatment compared with insulin aspart for controlling PPG in people with insulin-resistant Type 2 diabetes.

Short-term fully closed-loop insulin delivery using faster insulin aspart compared with standard insulin aspart in type 2 diabetes.

We evaluated the efficacy and safety of short-term fully closed-loop insulin delivery using faster versus standard insulin aspart in type 2 diabetes. Fifteen adults with insulin-treated type 2 diabetes underwent 22 hours of closed-loop insulin delivery with either faster or standard insulin aspart in a double-blind randomized crossover design. Basal-bolus regimen was replaced by model predictive control algorithm-directed insulin delivery based on sensor glucose levels. The primary outcome was time with plasma glucose in target range (5.6-10.0 mmol/L) and did not differ between treatments (mean difference [95% CI] 3.3% [-8.2; 1.7], P = 0.17). Mean glucose and glucose variability were comparable, as was time spent below and above target range. Hypoglycaemia (<3.5 mmol/L) occurred once with faster insulin aspart and twice with standard insulin aspart. Mean total insulin dose was higher with faster insulin aspart (mean difference [95% CI] 3.7 U [0.7; 6.8], P = 0.021). No episodes of severe hypoglycaemia or other serious adverse events occurred. In conclusion, short-term fully closed-loop in type 2 diabetes may require higher dose of faster insulin aspart compared with standard insulin aspart to achieve comparable glucose control.

BioChaperone Lispro versus faster aspart and insulin aspart in patients with type 1 diabetes using continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion: A randomized euglycemic clamp study.

We investigated the pharmacodynamics (PD) and pharmacokinetics (PK) of BioChaperone insulin Lispro (BCLIS), faster insulin aspart (FIA) and insulin aspart (ASP) in patients with type 1 diabetes using an insulin pump. In this randomized, double-blind, three-way crossover glucose clamp study, 43 patients received a bolus dose of each insulin (0.15 U/kg) in addition to a basal rate (0.01 U/kg/h), delivered via an insulin pump. With BCLIS, the AUC-GIR,0-60 minutes (primary endpoint) was improved compared to ASP (least square means ratio, 1.63; 95% CI, 1.44-1.88; P < 0.0001) and was similar compared to FIA (least square means ratio, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.94-1.18; P = 0.4609). BCLIS showed faster-on PD (tearly0.5GIRmax ) than ASP and faster-off PD (tlate0.5GIRmax ) than both FIA and ASP. BCLIS also demonstrated significantly higher early exposure (AUCins, 0-60 minutes) and lower late exposure (AUCins,120-600 minutes) than both other insulins. In patients with type 1 diabetes using an insulin pump, BCLIS better mimics prandial insulin secretion and action than ASP and shows a faster off-PD than FIA.

Use of fast-acting insulin aspart in insulin pump therapy in clinical practice.

Fast-acting insulin aspart (faster aspart) is a novel formulation of insulin aspart (IAsp) containing the additional excipients niacinamide and L-arginine. The improved pharmacological profile and greater early glucose-lowering action of faster aspart compared with IAsp suggests that faster aspart may be advantageous for people with diabetes using continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII). The recent onset 5 trial was the first to evaluate the efficacy and safety of an ultra-fast-acting insulin in CSII therapy in a large number of participants with type 1 diabetes (T1D). Non-inferiority of faster aspart to IAsp in terms of change from baseline in HbA1c was confirmed, with an estimated treatment difference (ETD) of 0.09% (95% CI, 0.01; 0.17; P < 0.001 for non-inferiority [0.4% margin]). Faster aspart was superior to IAsp in terms of change from baseline in 1-hour post-prandial glucose (PPG) increment after a meal test (ETD [95% CI], -0.91 mmol/L [-1.43; -0.39]; P = 0.001), with statistically significant improvements also at 30 minutes and 2 hours. The overall rate of severe or blood glucose-confirmed hypoglycaemia was not statistically significantly different between treatments, with an estimated rate ratio of 1.00 (95% CI, 0.85; 1.16). A numerical imbalance in severe hypoglycaemic episodes between faster aspart and IAsp was seen in the treatment (21 vs 7) and the 4-week run-in periods (4 vs 0). Experience from clinical practice indicates that all pump settings should be reviewed when initiating faster aspart with CSII, and that the use of continuous glucose monitoring or flash glucose monitoring, along with a good understanding of meal content and bolus type, may also facilitate optimal use. This review summarizes the available clinical evidence for faster aspart administered via CSII and highlights practical considerations based on clinical experience that may help healthcare providers and individuals with T1D successfully initiate and adjust faster aspart with CSII.

A randomized trial comparing the efficacy and safety of treating patients with type 2 diabetes and highly elevated HbA1c levels with basal-bolus insulin or a glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist plus basal insulin: The SIMPLE study.

AIM: To compare the efficacy and safety of a glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP1RA) plus basal insulin versus basal-bolus insulin treatment in patients with very uncontrolled type 2 diabetes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The SIMPLE study was a 6-month pragmatic, randomized, open-label trial testing the effectiveness of two approaches to treat patients with type 2 diabetes and HbA1c ≥10%. We randomized patients to detemir plus liraglutide or detemir plus aspart (before each meal). The primary endpoint was change in HbA1c; changes in body weight, insulin dose, hypoglycaemia and diabetes-related quality-of-life were secondary outcomes. RESULTS: We randomized 120 participants aged 47.4 ± 9.5 years, Hispanic 40%, African American 42%, diabetes duration 10 [25th-75th percentile (6 to 15)] years, body mass index 37.2 ± 10.3 kg/m2 . HbA1c decreased more with GLP1RA plus basal insulin [12.2% (95% CI 11.8% to 12.6%) to 8.1% (95% CI 7.4% to 8.7%)] compared with basal-bolus insulin [11.8% (95% CI 11.5% to 12.2%) to 8.8% (95% CI 88.1% to 9.55%)]; estimated treatment difference (ETD) of -1.1% (95% CI -2.0% to -0.1%) (non-inferiority margin 0.4% and P = .0001, superiority P = .026). Compared with basal-bolus insulin, treatment with GLP1RA plus basal insulin led to a body weight ETD of -3.7 kg (95% CI -5.8 to -1.5; P = .001), fewer patients experiencing hypoglycaemia [66.1% vs 35.2% (P = .002)], and greater improvements in general/current health perception, treatment satisfaction, and fear of hypoglycaemia, while taking a lower total daily dose of insulin [estimated treatment ratio 0.68 (95% CI 0.55 to 0.84)]. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with HbA1c ≥10% treatment with GLP1RA plus basal insulin, compared with basal-bolus insulin, resulted in better glycaemic control and body weight, lower insulin dosage and hypoglycaemia, and improved quality of life. This treatment strategy is an effective and safe alternative to a basal-bolus insulin regimen.

Elucidating the Mechanism of Absorption of Fast-Acting Insulin Aspart: The Role of Niacinamide.

PURPOSE: Fast-acting insulin aspart (faster aspart) is a novel formulation of insulin aspart containing two additional excipients: niacinamide, to increase early absorption, and L-arginine, to optimize stability. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of niacinamide on insulin aspart absorption and to investigate the mechanism of action underlying the accelerated absorption. METHODS: The impact of niacinamide was assessed in pharmacokinetic analyses in pigs and humans, small angle X-ray scattering experiments, trans-endothelial transport assays, vascular tension measurements, and subcutaneous blood flow imaging. RESULTS: Niacinamide increased the rate of early insulin aspart absorption in pigs, and pharmacokinetic modelling revealed this effect to be most pronounced up to ~30-40 min after injection in humans. Niacinamide increased the relative monomer fraction of insulin aspart by ~35%, and the apparent permeability of insulin aspart across an endothelial cell barrier by ~27%. Niacinamide also induced a concentration-dependent vasorelaxation of porcine arteries, and increased skin perfusion in pigs. CONCLUSION: Niacinamide mediates the acceleration of initial insulin aspart absorption, and the mechanism of action appears to be multifaceted. Niacinamide increases the initial abundance of insulin aspart monomers and transport of insulin aspart after subcutaneous administration, and also mediates a transient, local vasodilatory effect.

The rate of hyperglycemia and ketosis with insulin degludec-based treatment compared with insulin detemir in pediatric patients with type 1 diabetes: An analysis of data from two randomized trials.

BACKGROUND: Historically, data on the rate of hyperglycemia and ketosis have not been collected in clinical trials. However, it is clinically important to assess the rate of these events in children with type 1 diabetes (T1D). This question was addressed in two pediatric trials using insulin degludec (degludec). OBJECTIVE: To assess the rate of hyperglycemia and ketosis in two-phase 3b trials investigating degludec (Study 1) and degludec with insulin aspart (IDegAsp [Study 2]) vs insulin detemir (IDet). SUBJECTS: Patients (aged 1-17 years inclusive) with T1D treated with insulin for ≥3 months. METHODS: Study 1: patients were randomized to degludec once daily (OD) or IDet OD/twice daily (BID) for 26 weeks, followed by a 26-week extension phase. Study 2: patients were randomized to IDegAsp OD or IDet OD/BID for 16 weeks. Bolus mealtime IAsp was included in both studies. In Study 1, hyperglycemia was recorded if plasma glucose (PG) was >11.1 mmol/L, with ketone measurement required with significant hyperglycemia (>14.0 mmol/L). In Study 2, hyperglycemia was recorded with PG >14.0 mmol/L where the subject looked/felt ill, with ketone measurement also required in these hyperglycemic patients. In this post hoc analysis, the hyperglycemia threshold was 14.0 mmol/L for uniformity. RESULTS: Despite similar rates of hyperglycemia with degludec/IDegAsp compared with IDet, the rates of ketosis were lower with degludec/IDegAsp. CONCLUSIONS: These trials, the first to systematically collect data on ketosis in pediatric patients with T1D, demonstrate the potential of degludec/IDegAsp to reduce rates of metabolic decompensation, compared with IDet.

Comparison between preprandial vs. postprandial insulin aspart in patients with type 1 diabetes on insulin pump and real-time continuous glucose monitoring.

BACKGROUND: The objective was to compare glycemic control between preprandial and postprandial bolus administration (15 min before [PRE] or immediately after the meal [POST]) in patients with type 1 diabetes using insulin pump and real-time continuous glucose monitoring. METHODS: Between September 2015 and February 2016, a single-centre, open randomized, 2-way crossover study of patients on bolus insulin aspart administration was conducted during two 14-day periods and according to 2 administration regimen schedules (PRE/POST or POST/PRE). Inclusion criteria were as follows: patients with type 1 diabetes, ≥18 and ≤ 65 years old, treated with insulin aspart using a Medtronic® insulin pump and trained on functional insulin therapy. Patients were randomly assigned to either regimen schedule. At the beginning of each period, each patient was provided with a standardized high fat meal. Primary outcome was the area under the curve for interstitial glucose above 140 mg/dL per minute (AUC > 140 mg/dL/min) during each period. Secondary outcomes were time spent in hypo/eu/hyperglycemia, glycemic variability indices, and AUC during 4 hours after high fat meal calculated with continuous glucose monitoring data. RESULTS: Twenty-two patients were included. Mean AUC > 140 mg/dL/min was statistically higher in patients on POST (43.70 mg/dL/min; 95%CI: 34.08 to 53.31) versus PRE insulin aspart regimen (37.24 mg/dL/min 95%CI: 27.63 to 46.85) (P = 0.03). Mean interstitial glycemia and glycemic variability indices were also increased (P < 0.05) on POST regimen. The mean AUC 4 hours after the high fat meal was higher on POST regimen but not statistically different (P = 0.06). CONCLUSIONS: In our study, postprandial administration of insulin aspart appears to mildly increase glycemic excursion and glycemic variability.

Optimal prandial timing of bolus insulin in diabetes management: a review.

The inability to achieve optimal diabetes glucose control in people with diabetes is multifactorial, but one contributor may be inadequate control of postprandial glucose. In patients treated with multiple daily injections of insulin, both the dose and timing of meal-related rapid-acting insulin are key factors in this. There are conflicting opinions and evidence on the optimal time to administer mealtime insulin. We performed a comprehensive literature search to review the published data, focusing on the use of rapid-acting insulin analogues in patients with Type 1 diabetes. Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic studies of rapid-acting insulin analogues, together with postprandial glucose excursion data, suggest that administering these 15-20 min before food would provide optimal postprandial glucose control. Data from clinical studies involving people with Type 1 diabetes receiving structured meals and rapid-acting insulin analogues support this, showing a reduction in post-meal glucose levels of ~30% and less hypoglycaemia when meal insulin was taken 15-20 min before a meal compared with immediately before the meal. Importantly, there was also a greater risk of postprandial hypoglycaemia when patients took rapid-acting analogues after eating compared with before eating.

A randomized, open-label, multicentre, parallel-controlled study comparing the efficacy and safety of biphasic insulin aspart 30 plus metformin with biphasic insulin aspart 30 monotherapy for type 2 diabetes patients inadequately controlled with oral antidiabetic drugs: The merit study.

AIM: To confirm non-inferiority of biphasic insulin aspart 30 (BIAsp 30) plus metformin to BIAsp 30 in lowering glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) in Chinese patients with inadequately controlled type 2 diabetes using oral antidiabetic drugs. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this 16-week, prospective, randomized, open-label, multicentre, parallel-controlled study, patients aged 18-79 years with HbA1c ≥7% were randomized to BIAsp 30 plus metformin (n = 130) or BIAsp 30 (n = 127). Initially, 500 mg metformin was administered twice daily and BIAsp 30 was administered at 0.2-0.3 U/kg/d. Changes in HbA1c % from baseline to week 16 as well as secondary and safety endpoints were assessed. RESULTS: In total, 83.66% of patients in the BIAsp 30 plus metformin (n = 110) and the BIAsp 30 (n = 105) groups completed the study. Mean (±standard deviation) change in HbA1c from baseline to endpoint was -1.74 ± 1.64% and -1.32 ± 2.05% with BIAsp 30 plus metformin and BIAsp 30, respectively. Least squares mean treatment difference was -0.67% (95% CI, -1.06; -0.28). The upper limit of the 95% CI was <0.4 (non-inferiority margin). A significantly higher proportion of individuals reached HbA1c <7% with BIAsp 30 plus metformin than with BIAsp 30 (53.15% vs 35.19%; P = 0.0074). At endpoint, daily BIAsp 30 dose (P < 0.001) and weight gain were significantly lower (P < 0.05) in the BIAsp 30 plus metformin group compared with the BIAsp 30 group. No between-group differences in number of hypoglycaemic events were observed. CONCLUSION: BIAsp 30 plus metformin was non-inferior to BIAsp 30 in safely reducing HbA1c in this study.

Efficacy and safety of fast-acting insulin aspart in comparison with insulin aspart in type 1 diabetes (onset 1): A 52-week, randomized, treat-to-target, phase III trial.

AIMS: To compare the safety and efficacy of fast-acting insulin aspart (faster aspart) with conventional insulin aspart (IAsp) in adults with type 1 diabetes (T1D). MATERIALS AND METHODS: onset 1 was a randomized, multicentre, treat-to-target, phase III, 52-week (initial 26 weeks + additional 26 weeks) trial conducted at 165 sites across 9 countries. Adults with T1D were randomly allocated to double-blind mealtime faster aspart or IAsp, each with once- or twice-daily insulin detemir. The primary endpoint, change in glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) from baseline after the initial 26 weeks, has been reported previously. In the present paper, we report data from the full 52-week study period. RESULTS: Between August 2013 and June 2015, 381 participants were assigned to double-blind faster aspart and 380 participants to IAsp. After 52 weeks, estimated mean changes from baseline in HbA1c levels were -0.08% (faster aspart) and +0.01% (IAsp); estimated treatment difference significantly favoured faster aspart (-0.10% [95% confidence interval {CI} -0.19;-0.00]; P = .0424). Changes from baseline in 1-hour postprandial plasma glucose (PPG) increment (meal test; faster aspart -1.05 mmol/L; IAsp -0.14 mmol/L) also significantly favoured faster aspart (estimated treatment difference -0.91 mmol/L [95% CI -1.40;-0.43]; -16.48 mg/dL [95% CI -25.17;-7.80]; P = .0002). There was no difference in overall severe or blood glucose-confirmed hypoglycaemic episodes or treatment-emergent adverse events between treatments. CONCLUSIONS: At 52 weeks, overall glycaemic control had significantly improved with faster aspart vs IAsp, consistent with the 26-week study findings. Achieving an insulin profile closer to physiological insulin secretion with faster aspart translates into lower PPG and HbA1c levels compared with those achieved with IAsp in people with T1D.

The management of type 2 diabetes with fixed-ratio combination insulin degludec/liraglutide (IDegLira) versus basal-bolus therapy (insulin glargine U100 plus insulin aspart): A short-term cost-effectiveness analysis in the UK setting.

AIM: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of IDegLira versus basal-bolus therapy (BBT) with insulin glargine U100 plus up to 4 times daily insulin aspart for the management of type 2 diabetes in the UK. METHODS: A Microsoft Excel model was used to evaluate the cost-utility of IDegLira versus BBT over a 1-year time horizon. Clinical input data were taken from the treat-to-target DUAL VII trial, conducted in patients unable to achieve adequate glycaemic control (HbA1c <7.0%) with basal insulin, with IDegLira associated with lower rates of hypoglycaemia and reduced body mass index (BMI) in comparison with BBT, with similar HbA1c reductions. Costs (expressed in GBP) and event-related disutilities were taken from published sources. Extensive sensitivity analyses were performed. RESULTS: IDegLira was associated with an improvement of 0.05 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) versus BBT, due to reductions in non-severe hypoglycaemic episodes and BMI with IDegLira. Costs were higher with IDegLira by GBP 303 per patient, leading to an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of GBP 5924 per QALY gained for IDegLira versus BBT. ICERs remained below GBP 20 000 per QALY gained across a range of sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSIONS: IDegLira is a cost-effective alternative to BBT with insulin glargine U100 plus insulin aspart, providing equivalent glycaemic control with a simpler treatment regimen for patients with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled on basal insulin in the UK.

A diabetic ketoacidosis in a context of hyperglycemia addiction.

We herein present a case of a 20-year-old woman who suffered from type I diabetes mellitus and died from a diabetic ketoacidosis in a context of addiction to hyperglycemia. Diabetic ketoacidosis is a lethal complication of insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus, which can result from insulin therapy stoppage. This can occur voluntarily with suicidal intent or involuntarily due to treatment inaccessibility, forgotten injections, or material deficiency. A new possibility is investigated in our case study: hyperglycemia addiction. The patient was treated by insulin glargine and insulin aspartate. She regularly stopped insulin glargine injections seeking the asthenia sensation produced by hyperglycemia, keeping the insulin aspartate injections to treat the disabling symptom related to hyperketonemia.