Equipotency of insulin glargine 300 and 100 U/mL with intravenous dosing but differential bioavailability with subcutaneous dosing in dogs.

AIMS: Insulin glargine 300 U/mL (Gla-300) contains the same units versus glargine 100 U/mL (Gla-100) in three-fold lower volume, and higher subcutaneous (SC) doses are required in people with diabetes. To investigate blood glucose (BG) lowering potency, Gla-300 and Gla-100 were compared after intravenous (IV, for 4 h) and SC (for 24 h) injection in healthy Beagle dogs. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The dose of 0.15 U/kg Gla-300 and Gla-100 was injected IV in 12 dogs. BG, C-peptide, glucagon and the active metabolite 21A-Gly-human insulin (M1; liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry method) were measured. Twelve other dogs were studied after SC injection of 0.3 U/kg Gla-300 and Gla-100. RESULTS: After IV injection, Gla-300 and Gla-100 were equally potent [BG_AUC0-4 h ratio 1.01 (95% confidence interval, 0.94; 1.09)]. After SC injection, BG decreased slower and less with Gla-300. Similar metabolism of Gla-300 and Gla-100 to M1 occurred with IV dosing [M1_AUC0-1 h ratio 0.99 (95% confidence interval, 0.82; 1.22)], but with SC dosing M1_Cmax and AUC0-24h were 44% and 17% lower; mean residency time and bioavailability were 32% longer and 50% lower, with Gla-300. CONCLUSIONS: IV Gla-300 and Gla-100 have the equivalent of BG-lowering potency and M1 metabolism. SC Gla-300 has lower M1 bioavailability with a reduced BG-lowering effect and need for greater doses versus Gla-100.

Comparable efficacy with similarly low risk of hypoglycaemia in patient- vs physician-managed basal insulin initiation and titration in insulin-naïve type 2 diabetic subjects: The Italian Titration Approach Study.

AIMS: People with uncontrolled type 2 diabetes (T2DM) often delay initiating and titrating basal insulin. Patient-managed titration may reduce such deferral. The Italian Titration Approach Study (ITAS) compared the efficacy and safety of insulin glargine 300 U/mL (Gla-300) initiation and titration using patient- (nurse-supported) or physician-management in insulin-naïve patients with uncontrolled T2DM. MATERIALS AND METHODS: ITAS was a multicentre, phase IV, 24-week, open-label, randomized (1:1), parallel-group study. Insulin-naïve adults with T2DM for ≥1 year with poor metabolic control initiated Gla-300 after discontinuation of SU/glinides, and were randomized to self-titrate insulin dose (nurse-assisted) or have it done by the physician. The primary endpoint was change in HbA1c . Secondary outcomes included hypoglycaemia incidence and rate, change in fasting self-monitored plasma glucose, patient-reported outcomes (PROs), and adverse events. RESULTS: Three hundred and fifty five participants were included in the intention-to-treat population. At Week 24, HbA1c reduction from baseline was non-inferior in patient- vs physician-managed arms [least squares mean (LSM) change (SE): -1.60% (0.06) vs -1.49% (0.06), respectively; LSM difference: -0.11% (95% CI: -0.26 to 0.04)]. The incidence and rates of hypoglycaemia were similarly low in both arms: relative risk of confirmed and/or severe nocturnal (00:00-05:59 hours) hypoglycaemia was 0.77 (95% CI: 0.27 to 2.18). No differences were observed for improvement in PROs. No safety concerns were reported. CONCLUSIONS: In the T2DM insulin-naïve, SU/glinides discontinued population, patient-managed (nurse-assisted) titration of Gla-300 may be a suitable option as it provides improved glycaemic control with low risk of hypoglycaemia, similar to physician-managed titration.

Prevention and Management of Severe Hypoglycemia and Hypoglycemia Unawareness: Incorporating Sensor Technology.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: In addition to assisting in achieving improved glucose control, continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) sensor technology may also aid in detection and prevention of hypoglycemia. In this paper, we report on the current scientific evidence on the effectiveness of this technology in the prevention of severe hypoglycemia and hypoglycemia unawareness. RECENT FINDINGS: Recent studies have found that the integration of CGM with continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) therapy, a system known as sensor-augmented pump (SAP) therapy, very significantly reduces the occurrence of these conditions by providing real-time glucose readings/trends and automatically suspending insulin infusion when glucose is low (LGS) or, even, before glucose is low but is predicted to soon be low (PLGS). Initial data indicate that even for patients with type 1 diabetes treated with multiple daily injections, real-time CGM alone has been found to reduce both severe hypoglycemia and hypoglycemia unawareness. Closed loop systems (artificial pancreas) comprised of CGM and CSII without patient intervention to adjust basal insulin, which automatically reduce, increase, and suspend insulin delivery, represent a potential new option that is moving toward becoming a reality in the near future. Sensor technology promises to continue to improve patients' lives not only by attaining glycemic control but also by reducing hypoglycemia, a goal best achieved in conjunction with structured individualized patient education.

The role of gastric emptying in glucose homeostasis and defense against hypoglycemia: Innocent bystander or partner in crime?

Maintenance of plasma glucose (PG) homeostasis is due to a complex network system. Even a minor fall in PG activates multiple neuroendocrine actions promoting hormonal, metabolic and behavioral responses, which prevent and ultimately recover hypoglycemia, primarily neuroglycopenia. Among these responses, gastric emptying (GE) plays an important role by coordinated mechanisms which regulate transit and absorption of nutrients through the small intestine. A bidirectional relationship between GE and glycemia has been established: GE may explain the up to 30-40 % variance in glycemic response following a carbohydrate-rich meal. In addition, acute and chronic hyperglycemia induce deceleration of GE after meals. Hypoglycemia accelerates GE, but its role in counterregulation has been poorly investigated. The role of GE as a counterregulatory mechanism has been confirmed in pathophysiological conditions, such as gastroparesis or following recurrent hypoglycemia. Therefore, it could represent an "ancestral" mechanism, highly conservative and effective in all individuals, conditions and clinical contexts. Recent guidelines recommend GLP-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) either as the first injectable therapy for type 2 diabetes mellitus or in combination with insulin. Considering the potential impact on GE, it would be important to study subjects on GLP-1 RAs during hypoglycemia, to establish whether a possible deceleration of GE impairs glucose counterregulation.

Diurnal Cycling of Insulin Sensitivity in Type 2 Diabetes: Evidence for Deviation From Physiology at an Early Stage.

The aim of this study was to establish the contribution of insulin resistance to the morning (a.m.) versus afternoon (p.m.) lower glucose tolerance of people with type 2 diabetes (T2D). Eleven subjects with T2D (mean [SD] diabetes duration 0.79 [0.23] years, BMI 28.3 [1.8] kg/m2, A1C 6.6% [0.26%] [48.9 (2.9) mmol/mol]), treatment lifestyle modification only) and 11 matched control subjects without diabetes were monitored between 5:00 and 8:00 a.m. and p.m. (in random order) on one occasion (study 1), and on a subsequent occasion, they underwent an isoglycemic clamp (a.m. and p.m., both between 5:00 and 8:00, insulin infusion rate 10 mU/m2/min) (study 2). In study 1, plasma glucose, insulin, C-peptide, and glucagon were higher and insulin clearance lower in subjects with T2D a.m. versus p.m. and versus control subjects (P < 0.05), whereas free fatty acid, glycerol, and ß-hydroxybutyrate were lower a.m. versus p.m. However, in study 2 at identical hyperinsulinemia a.m. and p.m. (∼150 pmol/L), glucose Ra and glycerol Ra were both less suppressed a.m. versus p.m. (P < 0.05) in subjects with T2D. In contrast, in control subjects, glucose Ra was more suppressed a.m. versus p.m. Leucine turnover was no different a.m. versus p.m. In conclusion, in subjects with T2D, insulin sensitivity for glucose (liver) and lipid metabolism has diurnal cycles (nadir a.m.) opposite that of control subjects without diabetes already at an early stage, suggesting a marker of T2D. ARTICLE HIGHLIGHTS: In people with type 2 diabetes (T2D), fasting hyperglycemia is greater in the morning (a.m.) versus the afternoon (p.m.), and insulin sensitivity for glucose and lipid metabolism is lower a.m. versus p.m. This pattern is the reverse of the physiological diurnal cycle of people without diabetes who are more insulin sensitive a.m. versus p.m. These new findings have been observed in the present study in people without obesity but with recent-onset T2D, with good glycemic control, and in the absence of confounding pharmacological treatment. It is likely that the findings represent a specific marker of T2D, possibly present even in prediabetes before biochemical and clinical manifestations.

Type 1 Diabetes (T1D) and Latent Autoimmune Diabetes in Adults (LADA): The Difference Between a Honeymoon and a Holiday.

Type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1D) is a chronic autoimmune disease in which destruction of the insulin-producing ß-cells in the pancreatic islets requires regular lifelong insulin replacement therapy, the only lifesaving treatment available at this time. In young persons with a genetic predisposition, it usually manifests after being exposed to environmental triggers. A subtype of autoimmune diabetes mellitus (ADM) that typically occurs in adulthood is often referred to as latent autoimmune diabetes of adults (LADA). LADA is characterized by a milder process of ß-cells destruction and less intensive insulin treatment, which may become necessary even many years after diagnosis. Genetic predisposition of T1D carries an increased risk for other autoimmune diseases, such as autoimmune thyroiditis, the most frequently associated condition, and pernicious anaemia (PA), present in approximately 4% of all individuals with T1D. Here, we describe the case of a 90-year-old woman with vitiligo and a mute medical history who was admitted to our University Hospital in Perugia with hyperglycaemia and severe anaemia due to vitamin B12 (VB12) depletion. A short time after setting the beginning treatment with a basal-bolus insulin regimen, her insulin requirement rapidly declined and treatment with sitagliptin, a dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor (DPP4), was started. A complete autoimmunity screening panel showed that GAD65 and intrinsic factor autoantibodies were positive.

One-hundred year evolution of prandial insulin preparations: From animal pancreas extracts to rapid-acting analogs.

The first insulin preparation injected in humans in 1922 was short-acting, extracted from animal pancreas, contaminated by impurities. Ever since the insulin extracted from animal pancreas has been continuously purified, until an unlimited synthesis of regular human insulin (RHI) became possible in the '80s using the recombinant-DNA (rDNA) technique. The rDNA technique then led to the designer insulins (analogs) in the early '90s. Rapid-acting insulin analogs were developed to accelerate the slow subcutaneous (sc) absorption of RHI, thus lowering the 2-h post-prandial plasma glucose (PP-PG) and risk for late hypoglycemia as comparing with RHI. The first rapid-acting analog was lispro (in 1996), soon followed by aspart and glulisine. Rapid-acting analogs are more convenient than RHI: they improve early PP-PG, and 24-h PG and A1C as long as basal insulin is also optimized; they lower the risk of late PP hypoglycemia and they allow a shorter time-interval between injection and meal. Today rapid-acting analogs are the gold standard prandial insulins. Recently, even faster analogs have become available (faster aspart, ultra-rapid lispro) or are being studied (Biochaperone lispro), making additional gains in lowering PP-PG. Rapid-acting analogs are recommended in all those with type 1 and type 2 diabetes who need prandial insulin replacement.

The physiological basis of insulin therapy in people with diabetes mellitus.

Insulin therapy has been in use now for 100 years, but only recently insulin replacement has been based on physiology. The pancreas secretes insulin at continuously variable rates, finely regulated by sensitive arterial glucose sensing. Pancreatic insulin is delivered directlyin the portal blood to insulinize preferentially the liver. In the fasting state, insulin is secreted at a low rate to modulate hepatic glucose output. After liver extraction (50%), insulin concentrations in peripheral plasma are 2.4-4 times lower than in portal, but still efficacious to restrain lipolysis. In the prandial condition, insulin is secreted rapidly in large amounts to increase portal and peripheral concentrations to peaks 10-20 times greater vs the values of fasting within 30-40 min from meal ingestion. The prandial portal hyperinsulinemia fully suppresses hepatic glucose production while peripheral hyperinsulinemia increases glucose utilization, thus limitating the post-prandial plasma glucose elevation. Physiology of insulin indicates that insulin should be replaced in people with diabetes mimicking the pancreas, i.e. in a basal-bolus mode, for fasting and prandial state, respectively. Despite the presently ongoing limitations (subcutaneous and peripheral rather than portal and intravenous insulin delivery), basal-bolus insulin allows people with diabetes to achieve A1c in the range with minimal risk of hypoglycaemia, to prevent vascular complications and to ensure good quality of life.

Pharmacokinetic and Pharmacodynamic Head-to-Head Comparison of Clinical, Equivalent Doses of Insulin Glargine 300 units · mL-1 and Insulin Degludec 100 units · mL-1 in Type 1 Diabetes.

OBJECTIVE: To prove equivalence of individual, clinically titrated basal insulin doses of glargine 300 units ⋅ mL-1 (Gla-300) and degludec 100 units ⋅ mL-1 (Deg-100) under steady state conditions in a single-blind, randomized, crossover study, on the glucose pharmacodynamics (PD) in people with type 1 diabetes (T1D). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Subjects with T1D (N = 22, 11 men, age 44.3 ± 12.4 years, disease duration 25.5 ± 11.7 years, A1C 7.07 ± 0.63% [53.7 ± 6.9 mmol ⋅ mL-1], BMI 22.5 ± 2.7 kg · m-2), naïve to Gla-300 and Deg-100, underwent 24-h euglycemic clamps with individual clinical doses of Gla-300 (0.34 ± 0.08 units ⋅ kg-1) and Deg-100 (0.26 ± 0.06 units ⋅ kg-1), dosing at 2000 h, after 3 months of optimal titration of basal (and bolus) insulin. RESULTS: At the end of 3 months, Gla-300 and Deg-100 reduced slightly and, similarly, A1C versus baseline. Clamp average plasma glucose (0-24 h) was euglycemic with both insulins. The area under curve of glucose infused (AUC-GIR[0-24 h]) was equivalent for the two insulins (ratio 1.04, 90% CI 0.91-1.18). Suppression of endogenous glucose production, free fatty acids, glycerol, and ß-hydroxybutyrate was 9%, 14%, 14%, and 18% greater, respectively, with Gla-300 compared with Deg-100 during the first 12 h, while glucagon suppression was no different. Relative within-day PD variability was 23% lower with Gla-300 versus Deg-100 (ratio 0.77, 90% CI 0.63-0.92). CONCLUSIONS: In T1D, individualized, clinically titrated doses of Gla-300 and Deg-100 at steady state result in similar glycemic control and PD equivalence during euglycemic clamps. Clinical doses of Gla-300 compared with Deg-100 are higher and associated with quite similar even 24-h distribution of PD and antilipolytic effects.

Estimating plasma glucose from interstitial glucose: the issue of calibration algorithms in commercial continuous glucose monitoring devices.

Evaluation of metabolic control of diabetic people has been classically performed measuring glucose concentrations in blood samples. Due to the potential improvement it offers in diabetes care, continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) in the subcutaneous tissue is gaining popularity among both patients and physicians. However, devices for CGM measure glucose concentration in compartments other than blood, usually the interstitial space. This means that CGM need calibration against blood glucose values, and the accuracy of the estimation of blood glucose will also depend on the calibration algorithm. The complexity of the relationship between glucose dynamics in blood and the interstitial space, contrasts with the simplistic approach of calibration algorithms currently implemented in commercial CGM devices, translating in suboptimal accuracy. The present review will analyze the issue of calibration algorithms for CGM, focusing exclusively on the commercially available glucose sensors.

Greater Suppression of Glucagon, Lipolysis, and Ketogenesis with Insulin Glargine U300 as Compared with Glargine U100 in Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus.

The aim of this study was to establish the effects of clinical doses of Gla-300 versus Gla-100 on suppression of glucagon, lipolysis, and ketogenesis in type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM). Eighteen persons with T1DM (age 40 ± 12 years, diabetes duration 26 ± 12 years, body mass index 23.4 ± 2 kg/m2, A1C 7.19% ± 0.52% [55 ± 6 mmol/mol]) were studied after 3 months of titration with Gla-300 and Gla-100 (randomized, crossover design) with a 24-h euglycemic clamp (s.c. injection of individual insulin daily doses used by subjects for previous 2 weeks, Gla-300 0.35 ± 0.08 and Gla-100 0.28 ± 0.07 U/kg). Gla-300 resulted in (1) less increase in insulin concentration for 0-12 h, but greater insulin concentration in 12-24 h (no differences for 24 h); (2) greater glucagon suppression; (3) greater prehepatic insulin-to-glucagon molar ratio, primarily in 12-24 h (ratio 1.78, 90% confidence intervals [CIs] 1.5-2.1); and (4) lower 24-h free fatty acid (0.81; 90% CI 0.73-0.89), glycerol (0.78; 90% CI 0.65-0.94), and ß-hydroxybutyrate (0.72; 90% CI 0.58-0.90). Over the 24 h postinjection, as compared with Gla-100, clinical doses of Gla-300 exhibit greater suppressive effects on glucagon, lipolysis, and ketogenesis, whereas the effects on glucose metabolism are equivalent.

Pharmacokinetics, Pharmacodynamics, and Modulation of Hepatic Glucose Production With Insulin Glargine U300 and Glargine U100 at Steady State With Individualized Clinical Doses in Type 1 Diabetes.

OBJECTIVE: This study characterized the pharmacokinetics (PK), pharmacodynamics (PD), and endogenous (hepatic) glucose production (EGP) of clinical doses of glargine U300 (Gla-300) and glargine U100 (Gla-100) under steady-state (SS) conditions in type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: T1DM subjects (N = 18, age 40 ± 12 years, T1DM duration 26 ± 12 years, BMI 23.4 ± 2 kg/m2, A1C 7.19 ± 0.52% [55 ± 5.7 mmol · mol-1-1]) were studied after 3 months of Gla-300 or Gla-100 (evening dosing) titrated to fasting euglycemia (random, crossover) with the euglycemic clamp using individualized doses (Gla-300 0.35 ± 0.08, Gla-100 0.28 ± 0.07 units · kg-1). RESULTS: Plasma free insulin concentrations (free immunoreactive insulin area under the curve) were equivalent over 24 h with Gla-300 versus Gla-100 (point estimate 1.11 [90% CI 1.03; 1.20]) but were reduced in the first 6 h (0.91 [90% CI 0.86; 0.97]) and higher in the last 12 h postdosing (1.38 [90% CI 1.21; 1.56]). Gla-300 and Gla-100 both maintained 24 h euglycemia (0.99 [90% CI 0.98; 1.0]). The glucose infusion rate was equivalent over 24 h (1.03 [90% CI 0.88; 1.21]) but was lower in first (0.77 [90% CI 0.62; 0.95]) and higher (1.53 [90% CI 1.23; 1.92]) in the second 12 h with Gla-300 versus Gla-100. EGP was less suppressed during 0-6 h but more during 18-24 h with Gla-300. PK and PD within-day variability (fluctuation) was 50% and 17% lower with Gla-300. CONCLUSIONS: Individualized, clinical doses of Gla-300 and Gla-100 resulted in a similar euglycemic potential under SS conditions. However, Gla-300 exhibited a more stable profile, with lower variability and more physiological modulation of EGP compared with Gla-100.

Superiority of insulin analogues versus human insulin in the treatment of diabetes mellitus.

The modern goals of insulin replacement in Type 1 and Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T1, T2DM) are A1C <6.5% long-term, and prevention of hypoglycaemia (blood glucose, BG <70 mg/dl). In addition to appropriate education and motivation of diabetic subjects, the use of rapid- and long-acting insulin analogues, is critical to achieve these goals. The benefits of rapid-acting analogues (lispro, aspart and glulisine have similar pharmacodynamic effects) compared with non-modified human regular insulin, are: (a) lower 1- and 2-h post-prandial blood glucose; (b) lower risk of late post-prandial hypoglycaemia (and therefore lower BG variability); (c) better quality of life (greater flexibility in timing and dosing of insulin). In T1DM, rapid-acting analogues improve A1C only by the extent to which replacement of basal insulin is optimized at the same time, either by multiple daily NPH administrations, or continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII), or use of the long-acting insulin analogues glargine or detemir. In T2DM, rapid-acting analogues reduce post-prandial hyperglycaemia more than human regular insulin, but systematic studies are needed to examine the effects on A1C. The benefits of long-acting insulin analogues glargine and detemir vs. NPH, are: (1) lower fasting BG combined with lower risk of hypoglycaemia in the interprandial state (night); (2) lower variability of BG. Glargine and detemir differ in terms of potency and duration of action. Detemir should be given twice daily in the large majority of people with T1DM, and in a large percentage of subjects with T2DM as well, usually at doses greater vs those of the once daily glargine. However, when used appropriately for individual pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics, glargine and detemir result into similar effects on BG, risk of hypoglycaemia and A1C. Rapid- and long-acting insulin analogues should always be combined in the treatment of T1 and T2DM.

Plasma Insulin Levels and Hypoglycemia Affect Subcutaneous Interstitial Glucose Concentration.

BACKGROUND: Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) accuracy during hypoglycemia is suboptimal. This might be partly explained by insulin or hypoglycemia-induced changes in the plasma interstitial subcutaneous (SC) fluid glucose gradient. The aim of the present study was to assess the role of plasma insulin (PI) and hypoglycemia itself in the plasma and interstitial SC fluid glucose concentration in patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus. METHODS: Eleven subjects with type 1 diabetes (age 36.5 ± 9.1 years, HbA1c 7.9 ± 0.4% [62.8 ± 2.02 mmol/mol]; mean ± standard deviation) were evaluated under hyperinsulinemic euglycemia and hypoglycemia. Each subject underwent two randomized crossover clamps with either a primed 0.3 (low insulin) or 1 mU/(kg·min) (high insulin) insulin infusion. The raw CGM signal was normalized with median preclamp values to obtain a standardized measure of the interstitial glucose (IG) concentration before statistical analysis. RESULTS: The mean PI concentration was greater in high insulin studies (HISs) versus low insulin studies (LISs) (412.89 ± 13.63 vs. 177.22 ± 10.05 pmol/L). During hypoglycemia, glucagon, adrenaline, free fatty acids, glycerol, and beta-OH-butyrate were higher in the LIS (P < 0.0001). Likewise, the IG concentration was significantly different (P < 0.0001). This was due to lower IG concentration than plasma glucose (PG) concentration during the euglycemic hyperinsulinemic phases in the HIS. In contrast, no difference was observed during hypoglycemia. This was the result of an unchanged PG/IG gradient during the entire LIS, while in the HIS, this gradient increased during the hyperinsulinemic euglycemia phase. CONCLUSION: Both PI levels and hypoglycemia affect the relationship between IG and PG concentration. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01714895.

A multistep approach for the stratification of the risk of severe hypoglycemia in patients with type 2 diabetes.

INTRODUCTION: Hypoglycemia is the major limiting factor in the glycemic management of diabetes. Aim of this study was to produce a risk stratification tool to support the medical decision making, by facilitating the identification of patients at higher risk of hypoglycemia. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: A multistep approach was adopted, including a systematic review of observational studies investigating risk factors for severe hypoglycemia in type 2 diabetes (T2DM), followed by an expert input forum to identify factors perceived as relevant and at the same time reliably detectable, to be used for the development of a risk score. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: The systematic review led to the identification of 41 studies. Many factors have been seldom investigated, and their association with the risk of hypoglycemia is still unclear. Factors more frequently associated with a high risk of hypoglycemia were: low level of education, ethnicity, irregular meals/malnutrition, insulin and sulfonylurea therapy, polypharmacy, previous hypoglycemia, impaired renal function, cognitive impairment, depression and frailty. The expert input forum involved 35 diabetologists. Following the ranking of the relevance of the factors identified, a parsimonious yet comprehensive set of risk factors was identified. CONCLUSIONS: The process led to the identification of relevant factors, to be used for the development of a hypoglycemia risk score. An ad-hoc study will be performed to assess the contribution of these risk factors and their relative weight. If the risk score will confirm its ability to correctly stratify patients according to their risk of hypoglycemia, it will represent a useful support to optimize the care of people with T2DM.

Impact of patient and treatment characteristics on glycemic control and hypoglycemia in patients with type 2 diabetes initiated to insulin glargine or NPH: A post hoc, pooled, patient-level analysis of 6 randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: The goal of this post hoc analysis was to determine key patient and treatment-related factors impacting glycosylated hemoglobin (A1C) and hypoglycemia in patients with uncontrolled type 2 diabetes who were initiated to basal insulin (neutral protamine Hagedorn [NPH] or glargine). METHODS: Using individual patient-level data pooled from 6 treat-to-target trials, 2600 patients with type 2 diabetes on oral antidiabetic agents initiated to insulin glargine or NPH and treated for 24 to 36 weeks were analyzed. RESULTS: Both treatments led to significant reduction in A1C levels compared with baseline, with no differences between treatment groups (mean ±â€Šstandard deviation; glargine: -1.32 ±â€Š1.2% vs NPH: -1.26 ±â€Š1.2%; P = 0.15), with greater reduction in the BMI ≥30 kg/m group than in the BMI <30 kg/m group. Glargine reduced A1C significantly more than NPH in the BMI <30 kg/m group (-1.30 ±â€Š1.18% vs -1.14 ±â€Š1.22, respectively; P = 0.008), but not in the BMI ≥ 30 kg/m group (-1.37 ±â€Š1.19 vs -1.48 ±â€Š1.22, respectively; P = 0.18). Similar proportions of patients achieved A1C target of <7% (glargine 30.6%, NPH 29.1%; P = 0.39). Incidence of severe and severe nocturnal hypoglycemia was significantly lower in glargine versus NPH-treated patients (2.0% vs 3.9%; P = 0.04, and 0.7% vs 2.1%; P = 0.002, respectively), and occurred primarily in the BMI <30 kg/m group. CONCLUSIONS: Initiation of basal insulin is highly effective in lowering A1C after oral antidiabetic agent failure. Glargine decreases A1C more than NPH in nonobese patients, and reduces the risk for severe and severe nocturnal hypoglycemia versus NPH both in obese and nonobese patients, but more so in nonobese patients. Thus, it is the nonobese patients who may benefit more from initiation of basal insulin as glargine than NPH.

Counterregulatory hormone and symptom responses to insulin-induced hypoglycemia in the postprandial state in humans.

Plasma counterregulatory hormones and symptoms were measured during hypoglycemia in the postprandial and in the fasting state in humans to establish differences in physiological responses. We studied 8 nondiabetic subjects and 10 subjects with type 1 diabetes on two different occasions during clamped insulin-induced hypoglycemia (2.4 mmol/l) in the sitting position. On one occasion, subjects ate a standard mixed meal, and on the other they remained fasting. In response to postprandial as compared with fasting hypoglycemia, nondiabetic subjects exhibited lower total symptom scores (6.6 +/- 0.4 vs. 11.5 +/- 0.8, P = 0.001), which was due to less hunger (1.1 +/- 0.1 vs. 4.2 +/- 0.2), lower suppression of plasma C-peptide (0.23 +/- 0.1 vs. 0.08 +/- 0.07 nmol/l, P = 0.032), and greater responses of plasma glucagon (248 +/- 29 vs. 163 +/- 25 ng x l(-1) x min(-1), P = 0.018), plasma adrenaline (4.5 +/- 0.6 vs. 3.1 +/- 0.4 nmol x l(-1) x min(-1), P = 0.037), norepinephrine (3.8 +/- 0.3 vs. 3.2 +/- 0.2 nmol x l(-1) x min(-1), P = 0.037), and pancreatic polypeptide (217 +/- 12 vs. 159 +/- 22 pmol x l(-1) x min(-1), P = 0.08). Except for plasma C-peptide, responses in diabetic subjects were similarly affected. Notably, in diabetic subjects responses of glucagon, which were absent in the fasting state, nearly normalized after a meal. In conclusion, in the postprandial compared with the fasting hypoglycemic state, total symptoms are less, but counterregulatory hormones are greater and responses of glucagon nearly normalize in type 1 diabetic subjects.

Insulin is required for prandial ghrelin suppression in humans.

Accumulating evidence indicates that ghrelin plays a role in regulating food intake and energy homeostasis. In normal subjects, circulating ghrelin concentrations decrease after meal ingestion and increase progressively before meals. At present, it is not clear whether nutrients suppress the plasma ghrelin concentration directly or indirectly by stimulating insulin secretion. To test the hypothesis that insulin regulates postprandial plasma ghrelin concentrations in humans, we compared the effects of meal ingestion on plasma ghrelin levels in six C-peptide-negative subjects with type 1 diabetes and in six healthy subjects matched for age, sex, and BMI. Diabetic subjects were studied during absence of insulin (insulin withdrawal study), with intravenous infusion of basal insulin (basal insulin study) and subcutaneous administration of a prandial insulin dose (prandial insulin study). Meal intake suppressed plasma ghrelin concentrations (nadir at 105 min) by 32 +/- 4% in normal control subjects, 57 +/- 3% in diabetic patients during the prandial insulin study (P < 0.002 vs. control subjects), and 38 +/- 8% during basal insulin study (P = 0.0016 vs. hyperinsulinemia; P = NS vs. control subjects) but did not have any effect in the insulin withdrawal study (P < 0.001 vs. other studies). In conclusion, 1). insulin is essential for meal-induced plasma ghrelin suppression, 2). basal insulin availability is sufficient for postprandial ghrelin suppression in type 1 diabetic subjects, and 3). lack of meal-induced ghrelin suppression caused by severe insulin deficiency may explain hyperphagia of uncontrolled type 1 diabetic subjects.

Administration of neutral protamine Hagedorn insulin at bedtime versus with dinner in type 1 diabetes mellitus to avoid nocturnal hypoglycemia and improve control. A randomized, controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Intensive insulin treatment of type 1 diabetes mellitus increases the risk for nocturnal hypoglycemia. OBJECTIVE: To demonstrate that splitting the evening insulin regimen reduces the risk for nocturnal hypoglycemia in intensive treatment of type 1 diabetes mellitus. DESIGN: Randomized, open, two-treatment crossover trial in two 4-month periods. SETTING: University research center in Italy. PATIENTS: 22 C-peptide-negative persons with type 1 diabetes mellitus (mean age [+/-SD], 29 +/- 3 years). INTERVENTIONS: Each patient was randomly assigned to one of two insulin regimens for 4 months and then switched to the other regimen for another 4 months. The two treatment regimens were 1) mixed treatment--a mixture of human regular and neutral protamine Hagedorn (NPH) insulin administered before dinner and 2) split treatment--human regular insulin administered at dinner and NPH insulin administered at bedtime. MEASUREMENTS: Frequency of nocturnal hypoglycemia. Secondary end points were levels of fasting blood glucose and hemoglobin A1c and responses to experimental hypoglycemia. RESULTS: During the split-regimen treatment period, patients had fewer episodes of nocturnal hypoglycemia (mean [+/-SE], 0.10 +/- 0.02 episode/patient-day vs. 0.28 +/- 0.04 episode/patient-day; P = 0.002), a lower fasting blood glucose level (mean [+/-SE], 7.6 +/- 0.2 mmol/L vs. 8.3 +/- 0.5 mmol/L [137 +/- 4 mg/dL vs. 160 +/- 8 mg/dL]; P = 0.030), less variable fasting blood glucose levels (SD range, 2.0 +/- 0.4 vs. 3.5 +/- 0.6; P = 0.001), and lower hemoglobin A1c value (mean [+/-SE], 7.0% +/- 0.11% vs. 7.5% +/- 0.15%; P = 0.004) than during the mixed regimen. Responses to experimental hypoglycemia were better preserved with the split regimen than with the mixed regimen. CONCLUSION: When the goal of insulin therapy in type 1 diabetes mellitus is near-normoglycemia, splitting the evening insulin treatment regimen into short-acting insulin at dinner and NPH insulin at bedtime reduces the risks for nocturnal hypoglycemia and hypoglycemia unawareness and decreases the hemoglobin A1c value compared with mixing short-acting insulin and NPH insulin at dinner.