How many people with type 2 diabetes fulfil the eligibility criteria for randomized, controlled trials of insulin glargine 300 U/mL in a real-world setting?

Randomized controlled trial (RCT) populations often do not reflect those typically seen in clinical practice. This retrospective, observational cohort study analysed the real-world data of people with type 2 diabetes (T2DM) prescribed basal insulin analogues from electronic medical records (EMRs) in the Explorys database, which includes data from 39 integrated healthcare systems in the United States, to determine how representative selected RCTs investigating insulin glargine 300 U/mL (Gla-300) are of T2DM populations in a real-world setting. Applying eligibility criteria derived from the EDITION 1, 2 and 3 (Gla-300 vs. insulin glargine 100 U/mL [Gla-100]) and BRIGHT (Gla-300 vs. insulin degludec) RCTs, we observed that only 17% (33 345/191 218) of people captured in the real-world database would have been eligible for such trials. Those who were ineligible tended to be older, had more comorbidities and a higher baseline hypoglycaemia rate than the eligible group. Using another large US EMR database (Optum Humedica) as corroboration, we found that 15% (36 285/235 697) would have been eligible to participate in the EDITION/BRIGHT RCTs. Furthermore, only 7% (1734/24 547) would have been eligible for the CONCLUDE (insulin degludec vs. Gla-300) RCT. Our findings remind us of the value of real-world data studies, complementing the results of RCTs, and providing additional insights into groups who would typically be excluded from RCTs.

Regular insulin added to total parenteral nutrition vs subcutaneous glargine in non-critically ill diabetic inpatients, a multicenter randomized clinical trial: INSUPAR trial.

BACKGROUND: There is no established insulin regimen in T2DM patients receiving parenteral nutrition. AIMS: To compare the effectiveness (metabolic control) and safety of two insulin regimens in patients with diabetes receiving TPN. DESIGN: Prospective, open-label, multicenter, clinical trial on adult inpatients with type 2 diabetes on a non-critical setting with indication for TPN. Patients were randomized on one of these two regimens: 100% of RI on TPN or 50% of Regular insulin added to TPN bag and 50% subcutaneous GI. Data were analyzed according to intention-to-treat principle. RESULTS: 81 patients were on RI and 80 on GI. No differences were observed in neither average total daily dose of insulin, programmed or correction, nor in capillary mean blood glucose during TPN infusion (165.3 ± 35.4 in RI vs 172.5 ± 43.6 mg/dL in GI; p = 0.25). Mean capillary glucose was significantly lower in the GI group within two days after TPN interruption (160.3 ± 45.1 in RI vs 141.7 ± 43.8 mg/dL in GI; p = 0.024). The percentage of capillary glucose above 180 mg/dL was similar in both groups. The rate of capillary glucose ≤70 mg/dL, the number of hypoglycemic episodes per 100 days of TPN, and the percentage of patients with non-severe hypoglycemia were significantly higher on GI group. No severe hypoglycemia was detected. No differences were observed in length of stay, infectious complications, or hospital mortality. CONCLUSION: Effectiveness of both regimens was similar. GI group achieved better metabolic control after TPN interruption but non-severe hypoglycemia rate was higher in the GI group. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRY: This trial is registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT02706119.

Effects of basal insulin glargine and omega-3 on lower limb arterial disease outcome in patients with dysglycaemia: An analysis of the Outcome Reduction with an Initial Glargine INtervention (ORIGIN) trial.

The impact of insulin or omega-3 supplements on the incidence and progression of peripheral artery disease (PAD) in patients with dysglycaemia has not been well studied. The Outcome Reduction with an Initial Glargine INtervention (ORIGIN) trial randomized participants with dysglycaemia and cardiovascular risk factors to titrated insulin glargine vs standard care, and to either 1 g of omega-3 per day or placebo. We assessed incident PAD, defined as the composite of either asymptomatic or symptomatic PAD according to the randomized interventions in the 11 119 ORIGIN participants whose baseline ankle-brachial index (ABI) was >0.9 (no PAD), and PAD progression in the 971 ORIGIN participants whose baseline ABI was ≤0.9. Hazard ratios (HR) were adjusted for confounders. During a 6.2-year follow-up period, allocation to insulin glargine vs standard care had a neutral effect on the composite of PAD incidence (HR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.86-1.15) and progression (HR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.63-1.22). Similar findings were noted for allocation to omega-3 vs placebo for PAD incidence (HR, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.89-1.18) and progression (HR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.67-1.28). In this large study, neither insulin glargine nor omega-3 affected the incidence or progression of PAD.

Management of glycemic variation in diabetic patients receiving parenteral nutrition by continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) therapy.

To compare the continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) or insulin glargine based multiple injections (MDI) therapy on glycemic variations in diabetic patients receiving PN outside of intensive care settings. This was a single-center, randomized, open-label trial. Patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) who were receiving parenteral nutrition (PN) were recruited. After baseline data were collected, recruited patients were then randomized 1:1 to a CSII group or a MDI group. All patients were subjected to a 4-day retrospective Continuous Glucose Monitoring (CGM). The primary endpoint was the differences of the 24-hrs mean amplitude of glycemic excursion (MAGE) in patients receiving the PN therapy between the two groups. A total of 102 patients with T2D receiving PN were recruited. Patients in the CSII group had a significantly decreased mean glucose level (MBG), the standard deviation of MG (SDBG), MAGE, and the coefficient of variation (CV%) compared to those in MDI group (all P < 0.01). Furthermore, we found that the patients who received a bolus insulin dose required maintaining euglycemic control was gradually decreased during the PN period in both groups at the endpoint. The administration of insulin via CSII led to a significant decrease in glycemic variations in patients receiving PN.

Real-world evidence concerning clinical and economic outcomes of switching to insulin glargine 300 units/mL vs other basal insulins in patients with type 2 diabetes using basal insulin.

This retrospective cohort study compared real-world clinical and healthcare-resource utilization (HCRU) data in patients with type 2 diabetes using basal insulin (BI) who switched to insulin glargine 300 units/mL (Gla-300) or another BI. Data from the Predictive Health Intelligence Environment database 12 months before (baseline) and 6 months after (follow-up) the switch date (index date, March 1, 2015 to May 31, 2016) included glycated haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), hypoglycaemia, HCRU and associated costs. Baseline characteristics were balanced using propensity score matching. Change in HbA1c from baseline was similar in both matched cohorts (n = 1819 in each). Hypoglycaemia incidence and adjusted event rate were significantly lower with Gla-300. Patients switching to Gla-300 had a significantly lower incidence of HCRU related to hypoglycaemia. All-cause and diabetes-related hospitalization and emergency-department HCRU were also favourable for Gla-300. Lower HCRU translated to lower costs in patients using Gla-300. In this real-world study, switching to Gla-300 reduced the risk of hypoglycaemia in patients with type 2 diabetes when compared with those switching to another BI, resulting in less HCRU and potential savings of associated costs.

Transition from intravenous insulin to subcutaneous long-acting insulin in critical care patients on enteral or parenteral nutrition / Transición de insulina intravenosa a insulina de acción prolongada subcutánea en pacientes de cuidados críticos con nutrición enteral o parenteral

Background and aims: The optimal initial dose of subcutaneous (SC) insulin after intravenous (IV) infusion is controversial, especially in patients receiving continuous enteral nutrition (EN) or total parenteral nutrition (TPN). The aim of this study was to evaluate the strategy used at our hospital intensive care unit (ICU) in patients switched from IV insulin to SC insulin glargine while receiving EN or TPN. Design and methods: A retrospective analysis was made of 27 patients on EN and 14 on TPN switched from IV infusion insulin to SC insulin. The initial dose of SC insulin was estimated as 50% of the daily IV insulin requirements, extrapolated from the previous 12h. A corrective dose of short-acting insulin (lispro) was used when necessary. Results: Mean blood glucose (BG) level during SC insulin treatment was 136±35mg/dL in the EN group and 157±37mg/dL in the TPN group (p=0.01). In the TPN group, mean BG was >180mg/dL during the first three days after switching, and a 41% increase in the glargine dose was required to achieve the target BG. In the EN group, mean BG remained <180mg/dL throughout the days of transition and the dose of glargine remained unchanged. Conclusions: In the transition from IV to SC insulin therapy, initial insulin glargine dose estimated as 50% of daily IV insulin requirements is adequate for patients on EN, but inadequate in those given TPN (AU)

Introducción y objetivo: La dosis óptima inicial de insulina subcutánea (SC) después de la infusión intravenosa (IV) es controvertida, especialmente en pacientes que reciben nutrición enteral continua (NE) o nutrición parenteral total (NPT). El objetivo de este estudio fue evaluar la estrategia utilizada en nuestra unidad de cuidados intensivos (UCI) en pacientes sometidos a transición de infusión IV a insulina glargina SC mientras recibían NE o NPT. Diseño y métodos: Se analizaron retrospectivamente 27 pacientes con NE y 14 con NPT que cambiaron de infusión IV a insulina SC. La dosis inicial de insulina SC se estimó como el 50% de los requerimientos diarios de insulina IV, extrapolado de las 12 horas anteriores. Se utilizó dosis correctiva de insulina ultrarrápida (lispro), cuando fue necesaria. Resultados: La media de glucemia plasmática (GP) con insulina SC fue de 136,35mg/dl en el grupo NE y de 157,37mg/dl en el grupo NPT, p=0.01. En el grupo de NPT la GP media fue>180mg/dL durante los tres primeros días después de la transición y fue necesario un aumento del 41% en la dosis de glargina para alcanzar la GP objetivo. En el grupo NE, la GP media permaneció<180mg/dl durante los días de transición y la dosis de glargina permaneció sin cambios. Conclusiones: En la transición de la terapia de insulina IV a insulina SC, la dosis inicial de insulina glargina estimada como el 50% de los requerimientos diarios de insulina IV es adecuada para los pacientes que reciben NE, pero insuficiente para los que reciben NPT (AU)

Insulin Regimens to Treat Hyperglycemia in Hospitalized Patients on Nutritional Support: Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses.

BACKGROUND: The best insulin regimen to treat hyperglycemia in hospitalized patients on nutritional support (NS) is unclear. METHODS: We searched electronic databases to identify cohort studies or randomized clinical trials in order to evaluate the efficacy of different insulin regimens used to treat hyperglycemia in hospitalized patients on NS on diverse outcomes: mean blood glucose (MBG), hypoglycemia, length of stay in hospital, and mortality. RESULTS: Seventeen studies from a total of 5,030 were included. Enteral Group included 8 studies; 1,203 patients using rapid, glargine, NPH, or Premix insulin; MBG 108-225 mg/dL; hypoglycemia 0-13%. In indirect meta-analyses, NPH insulin ranked best for glucose control (MD 95% CI -2.50 mg/dL [2.65 to -2.35]). Parenteral Group included 4 studies; 228 patients using regular and glargine or NPH insulin; MBG 137-202 mg/dL; hypoglycemia 0-40%. In meta-analyses comparing regular insulin added to parenteral nutrition bag with glargine, MBG (MD 95% CI -3.78 mg/dL [-11.93 to 4.37]; I2 = 0%) or hypoglycemia frequency (RR 95% CI 1.37 [0.43-4.32]; I2 = 70.7%) did not differ. The description related to hospital length of stay and mortality was inconsistent between groups. CONCLUSIONS: The best insulin regimen to treat hyperglycemia in hospitalized patients on NS has not been established; best results using insulin regimens with NPH in enteral nutrition do not seem to be clinically relevant.

Piloting a Remission Strategy in Type 2 Diabetes: Results of a Randomized Controlled Trial.

Context: Medical strategies targeting remission of type 2 diabetes have not been systematically studied. Objective: This trial assessed the feasibility, safety, and potential to induce remission of a short-term intensive metabolic strategy. Design: A randomized, parallel, open-label pilot trial with 83 participants followed for 52 weeks. Setting: Ambulatory care. Participants: Patients with type 2 diabetes of up to 3 years in duration. Interventions: Participants were randomized to: (1) an 8-week intensive metabolic intervention, (2) a 16-week intensive metabolic intervention, or (3) standard diabetes care. During the intensive intervention period, weight loss and normoglycemia were targeted using lifestyle approaches and treatment with metformin, acarbose, and insulin glargine. Diabetes drugs were then discontinued in the intervention groups and participants were followed for hyperglycemic relapse. Primary Outcome: On-treatment normoglycemia. Results: At 8 weeks, 50.0% of the 8-week intervention group vs 3.6% of controls achieved normoglycemia on therapy [relative risk (RR), 14.0; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.97 to 99.38), and at 16 weeks, these percentages were 70.4% in the 16-week group and 3.6% in controls (RR, 19.7; 95% CI, 2.83 to 137.13). Twelve weeks after completion of the intervention, 21.4% of the 8-week group compared with 10.7% of controls (RR, 2.00; 95% CI, 0.55 to 7.22) and 40.7% of the 16-week group compared with 14.3% of controls (RR, 2.85; 95% CI, 1.03 to 7.87) met hemoglobin A1C criteria for complete or partial diabetes remission. Conclusions: A short course of intensive lifestyle and drug therapy achieves on-treatment normoglycemia and promotes sustained weight loss. It may also achieve prolonged, drug-free diabetes remission and strongly supports ongoing studies of novel medical regimens targeting remission.

Glargine Insulin Use Versus Continuous Regular Insulin in Diabetic Surgical Noncritically Ill Patients Receiving Parenteral Nutrition: Randomized Controlled Study.

BACKGROUND: Hyperglycemia is a major complication of parenteral nutrition (PN). Guidelines for hyperglycemia management in noncritically ill patients cite basal insulin administration but do not recommend a regimen. The GLUCOSE-in-PN study aimed to compare the efficacy of glargine insulin versus continuously infused regular insulin in PN (RI-in-PN) to achieve glycemic control in noncritically ill surgical patients with diabetes who were receiving PN. METHODS: This prospective randomized open-label study was conducted at King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Centre. Noncritically ill surgical patients with diabetes who were receiving PN were randomized to receive basal glargine insulin or RI-in-PN on day 4 of PN support. Mean blood glucose levels were compared on study days 5-9. The percentages of blood glucose measurements at goal were compared between groups. RESULTS: Sixty-seven PN treatment episodes were analyzed. There were no statistically significant differences in mean glucose levels between groups on any study day ( P > .1). Overall glycemic control rates were 52.24% (glargine insulin) and 47.76% (RI-in-PN; P = .06). A significantly higher percentage of hyperglycemia was observed on day 5 for glargine insulin versus RI-in-PN (22.39% vs 5.97%, P = .0059). Blood glucose measurements indicated 6 hypoglycemic events: 2 for glargine insulin (5.7%) and 4 for RI-in-PN (11.4%; P > .1). CONCLUSION: Both glargine insulin and RI-in-PN are effective basal insulin modalities for blood glucose control in noncritically ill surgical patients with diabetes who are receiving PN. Uncontrolled hyperglycemic events occurred more frequently with glargine insulin, and the rate of hypoglycemia was acceptable for both regimens.

Efficacy and Safety of LixiLan, a Titratable Fixed-Ratio Combination of Insulin Glargine Plus Lixisenatide in Type 2 Diabetes Inadequately Controlled on Basal Insulin and Metformin: The LixiLan-L Randomized Trial.

OBJECTIVE: This study was conducted to demonstrate the efficacy and safety of LixiLan (iGlarLixi), a novel, titratable, fixed-ratio combination of insulin glargine (iGlar) (100 units) and lixisenatide, compared with iGlar in patients with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled on basal insulin with or without up to two oral glucose-lowering agents. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: After a 6-week run-in when iGlar was introduced and/or further titrated, and oral antidiabetic drugs other than metformin were stopped, 736 basal insulin-treated patients (mean diabetes duration 12 years, BMI 31 kg/m2) were randomized 1:1 to open-label, once-daily iGlarLixi or iGlar, both titrated to fasting plasma glucose <100 mg/dL (<5.6 mmol/L) up to a maximum dose of 60 units/day. The primary outcome was change in HbA1c levels at 30 weeks. RESULTS: HbA1c decreased from 8.5% (69 mmol/mol) to 8.1% (65 mmol/mol) during the run-in period. After randomization, iGlarLixi showed greater reductions in HbA1c from baseline compared with iGlar (-1.1% vs. -0.6%, P < 0.0001), reaching a mean final HbA1c of 6.9% (52 mmol/mol) compared with 7.5% (58 mmol/mol) for iGlar. HbA1c <7.0% (53 mmol/mol) was achieved in 55% of iGlarLixi patients compared with 30% on iGlar. Mean body weight decreased by 0.7 kg with iGlarLixi and increased by 0.7 kg with iGlar (1.4 kg difference, P < 0.0001). Documented symptomatic hypoglycemia (≤70 mg/dL) was comparable between groups. Mild gastrointestinal adverse effects were very low but more frequent with iGlarLixi. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with iGlar, a substantially higher proportion of iGlarLixi-treated patients achieved glycemic targets with a beneficial effect on body weight, no additional risk of hypoglycemia, and low levels of gastrointestinal adverse effects in inadequately controlled, basal insulin-treated, long-standing type 2 diabetes.

Cost-effectiveness of insulin glargine versus sitagliptin in insulin-naïve patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

PURPOSE: In the EASIE (Evaluation of Insulin Glargine Versus Sitagliptin in Insulin-Naïve Patients) trial, insulin glargine found a significant reduction in glycosylated hemoglobin compared with sitagliptin in patients with type 2 diabetes who are inadequately controlled with metformin. The objective of this study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of insulin glargine compared with sitagliptin in type 2 diabetes patients, from the perspective of the publicly funded Canadian health care system. METHODS: The IMS CORE Diabetes Model, a standard Markov structure and Monte Carlo simulation model, was used. The model used a lifetime horizon to capture the long-term complications associated with type 2 diabetes. The efficacy of insulin glargine and sitagliptin in terms of glycosylated hemoglobin reduction and corresponding rates of hypoglycemia were obtained from the EASIE trial. Health utility and cost data were obtained from recently published Canadian publications. Univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted. FINDINGS: In the lifetime base-case analysis, treatment with insulin glargine resulted in cost savings of $1434 CAD in 2012 and a gain of 0.08 quality-adjusted life years per patient. A probabilistic sensitivity analysis found the robustness of the base-case analysis, with 88% probability of insulin glargine being dominant (ie, cost savings and more quality-adjusted life years). IMPLICATIONS: Insulin glargine is a clinically superior and cost-effective alternative to sitagliptin in patients with type 2 diabetes who are inadequately controlled with metformin.

Clinical effectiveness of Novolin® 30R versus Lantus® combined with Glucobay® treatment in elderly patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus controlled by oral hypoglycaemic agents: A randomized study.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the treatment effects of Novolin® 30R(a), versus Lantus(®a) combined with acarbose (Glucobay®), in elderly patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. METHODS: Patients (aged > 60 years) with type 2 diabetes mellitus were randomized to receive either Novolin® 30R(a) (initial dose 0.5 IU/kg) or Lantus(®a) (initial dose 0.2 IU/kg) combined with 50 mg acarbose. After a 32-week treatment period, the following parameters were measured: blood glucose control; blood lipid levels; body mass index; proportion of patients achieving a glycosylated haemoglobin (HbA1c) level <7.5%; rate of hypoglycaemic events; change in fasting blood glucose levels from baseline in patients stratified according to their baseline HbA1c level. RESULTS: A total of 188 patients were enrolled in the study. After 32 weeks' treatment, compared with baseline levels, there were significant reductions in FBG, 2 h-postprandial blood glucose during an oral glucose tolerance test, HbA1c, total cholesterol, triglycerides and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol values in both groups. Although there were fewer hypoglycaemic events in the Lantus® combined with Glucobay® group compared with the Novolin® 30R group, the difference was not significant. CONCLUSION: Novolin® 30R and Lantus® combined with acarbose both had beneficial effects on blood glucose control and blood lipid levels in elderly patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.