What is the value of faster acting prandial insulin? Focus on ultra rapid lispro.

Rapid-acting insulins (RAIs) have been instrumental in the management of diabetes because of their improved postprandial glucose (PPG) control compared with regular human insulin. However, their absorption rate and time action following subcutaneous administration still falls short of the normal physiological response to meal consumption, increasing the risk of early postmeal hyperglycaemia and late postmeal hypoglycaemia. Increased demand for faster acting insulins, which can quickly control PPG excursions without increasing the risk of late hypoglycaemia, led to the development of ultra-rapid-acting insulins, including ultra-rapid lispro (URLi). URLi is a novel formulation of insulin lispro with accelerated absorption driven by two excipients: treprostinil, which increases local vasodilation, and citrate, which increases local vascular permeability. Clinical pharmacology studies consistently showed an earlier onset and shorter duration of action with URLi compared with Lispro. In a head-to-head study with Faster aspart, Aspart and Lispro, URLi was absorbed faster, provided earlier insulin action, and more closely matched physiological glucose response than the other insulins tested. URLi's unique pharmacokinetic properties increase its potential for improved PPG control beyond that achieved with RAIs. Indeed, in pivotal phase 3 trials, URLi was superior to Lispro for PPG control both at 1 and 2 hours after a meal in type 1 and type 2 diabetes with multiple daily injections, and in type 1 diabetes with continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion. This was achieved without increasing the risk of hypoglycaemia. In this review, we focus on the clinical and pharmacological evidence for URLi in the treatment of diabetes and discuss the potential benefits and considerations with URLi compared with RAIs.

Fasting and postprandial plasma glucose contribution to glycated haemoglobin and time in range in people with type 2 diabetes on basal and bolus insulin therapy: Results from a pooled analysis of insulin lispro clinical trials.

AIMS: To investigate the interrelations between glycaemic metrics of fasting plasma glucose (FPG), postprandial glucose (PPG), glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c), and percentage of time in target range 3.9 to 10.0 mmol/L (%TIR) in patients on insulin therapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A pooled analysis was conducted using datasets extracted from an integrated database of insulin lispro clinical trials (Eli Lilly and Company). Studies in patients with type 2 diabetes on basal-bolus or basal-plus insulin therapy, and with ≥7-point self-monitored blood glucose profiles were included in the analysis. A multivariate regression model was used to quantify the contribution of FPG and PPG change to the change in HbA1c and %TIR. In addition, a linear regression model was used to describe the relationship between %TIR and HbA1c. RESULTS: Five studies encompassing 1572 patients met the criteria for inclusion. On average, a 1-mmol/L change in FPG was associated with 2.7 mmol/mol (0.25%) change in HbA1c (range 2.0 to 2.8 mmol/mol [0.18%-0.26%]; all P <0.0001), and a 1-mmol/L change in PPG with 1.8 mmol/mol (0.16%) change in HbA1c (range 1.2 to 2.1 mmol/mol [0.11%-0.19%]; all P <0.01). Furthermore, a 1-mmol/L reduction in FPG and PPG was associated with an increase in TIR of 6.5% (range 5.8%-9.2%) and 5.3% (range 4.1%-8.7%), respectively, all P <0.0001. A decrease in HbA1c of 10.9 mmol/mol (1%) corresponded with an increase in TIR of 8.3%, on average. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with type 2 diabetes on basal-bolus or basal-plus insulin therapy, management of both FPG and PPG is important for achievement of HbA1c and TIR goals.

Fasting and postprandial plasma glucose contributions to hemoglobin A1c and time in range in people with diabetes on multiple daily injection insulin therapy: Results from the PRONTO-T1D and PRONTO-T2D clinical trials.

AIMS: To investigate contributions of changes in fasting plasma glucose (FPG) and postprandial glucose (PPG) to changes in hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) and time-in-range (TIR, 70-180 mg/dL) in people with type 1 diabetes (T1D) and type 2 diabetes (T2D) treated with multiple daily injections (MDI) of insulin lispro (rapid/ultra-rapid formulations). METHODS: Multivariate regression models were used to quantify the contributions of FPG and PPG reductions to change in HbA1c and TIR using data from the PRONTO-T1D (N = 1222) and PRONTO-T2D (N = 673) clinical trials. TIR was derived from 10-point self-monitored blood glucose (SMBG) profiles overall, as well as from continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) in the PRONTO-T1D CGM substudy (n = 269/1222). RESULTS: A 1 mmol/L FPG reduction corresponded with a 0.09-0.12 % (95 % confidence interval [CI] 0.06-0.15 %) HbA1c reduction in PRONTO-T1D and 0.17-0.26 % (95 % CI 0.13-0.30 %) in PRONTO-T2D (both p < 0.0001). A 1 mmol/L PPG reduction corresponded with a 0.05-0.09 % (95 % CI 0.01-0.12 %) HbA1c reduction in PRONTO-T1D (p < 0.001) and 0.10-0.15 % (95 % CI 0.05-0.19 %) in PRONTO-T2D (p < 0.0001). Reductions in FPG and PPG were significantly associated with increased TIR whether derived from SMBG (7.87-12.95 % [95 % CI 6.81-14.23 %]; all p < 0.0001) or CGM (3.35-4.18 % [95 % CI 2.11-5.39 %]; all p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: FPG and PPG significantly impact HbA1c and TIR. Balanced management of both FPG and PPG is important to achieve glycemic goals for people with diabetes on MDI insulin therapy. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: PRONTO-T1D ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03214367; PRONTO-T2D ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03214380.

Insulin Use During Gestational and Pre-existing Diabetes in Pregnancy: A Systematic Review of Study Design.

INTRODUCTION: Insulin is the first-line pharmacologic therapy for women with diabetes in pregnancy. However, conducting well-designed randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and achieving recommended glycemic targets remains a challenge for this unique population. This systematic literature review (SLR) aimed to understand the evidence for insulin use in pregnancy and the outcome metrics most often used to characterize its effect on glycemic, maternal and fetal outcomes in gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) and in pregnant women with diabetes. METHODS: An SLR was conducted using electronic databases in Medline, EMBASE via Ovid platform, evidence-based medicine reviews (2010-2020) and conference proceedings (2018-2019). Studies were included if they assessed the effect of insulin treatment on glycemic, maternal or fetal outcomes in women with diabetes in pregnancy. Studies on any type of diabetes other than gestational or pre-existing diabetes as well as non-human studies were excluded. RESULTS: In women diagnosed with GDM or pre-existing diabetes, most studies compared treatment of insulin with metformin (n = 35) followed by diet along with lifestyle intervention (n = 24) and glibenclamide (n = 12). Most studies reporting on glycemic outcomes compared insulin with metformin (n = 22) and glibenclamide (n = 4). Fasting blood glucose was the most reported clinical outcome of interest. Among the studies reporting maternal outcomes, method of delivery and delivery complications were most commonly reported. Large for gestational age, stillbirth and perinatal mortality were the most common fetal outcomes reported. CONCLUSION: This SLR included a total of 108 clinical trials and observational studies with diverse populations and treatment arms. Outcomes varied across the studies, and a lack of consistent outcome measures to manage diabetes in pregnant women was observed. This elucidates a need for global consensus on study design and standardized clinical, maternal and fetal outcomes metrics.

Satisfaction, Preference and Injection Habits of Switching to 200 Units/ml Insulin Lispro Pen from 100 Units/ml: A Patient Survey in Germany.

INTRODUCTION: The study was designed to assess patient satisfaction, preferences and injection habits for patients using insulin lispro 200 units/ml pen (IL200) compared to their previously used disposable 100 units/ml mealtime insulin pen ("MTI-100 pen") in Germany. METHODS: A site-based, cross-sectional study involving a self-reported survey and medical record extraction in patients with diabetes currently using IL200 for between 3 and 12 months and had previously used any disposable MTI-100 pen. RESULTS: Of 114 patients included, 83.3% were satisfied with IL200 and 3.5% were dissatisfied; 70.2% preferred IL200 over their previous MTI-100 pen and 4.4% preferred their previous MTI-100 pen. The main reasons for IL200 preference were the amount of insulin the pen carries, longer use before discarding, number of non-empty pens discarded, injection volume and frequency replacing pens. Patients discarded (median) 4 IL200 pens per month with 5.3% discarding more than 10 units in their last pen. When insufficient insulin remained to complete a dose, 74.6% injected the remainder and completed with a new pen, 19.3% discarded the pen with remaining insulin, 7.0% saved it for future use and 1.8% left the dose incomplete. CONCLUSIONS: Satisfaction and preference for IL200 was high in this sample of patients using IL200 for 3-12 months. Reasons were consistent with IL200 features, explaining the better patient experience and potential resource saving transitioning from a disposable MTI-100 pen.

Patient perspectives on the use of half-unit insulin pens by people with type 1 diabetes: a cross-sectional observational study.

BACKGROUND: Half-unit pens offer the ability to dose insulin more precisely. Information about half-unit pen use and evidence of their benefits and drawbacks is limited. This study aims to characterize people with type 1 diabetes (T1D) who have used (current/former = EVER) vs. those who have never used half-unit pens (NEVER users) and to understand their perspective. METHODS: An observational cross-sectional online survey was administered through T1D Exchange's online patient community, myGlu.org, to understand the use of half-unit insulin pens. RESULTS: The 278 adult participants (156 EVER, 122 NEVER) had a mean age of 41.8 ± 12.7 years, body mass index of 26.0 ± 3.8 kg/m2, glycated hemoglobin of 6.3% ± 1.0%, and 55% were male. EVER users had T1D for a shorter duration than NEVER users (p < .001). EVER users were less likely to use continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (p < .001) and more likely to start correcting high blood glucose at a lower level (p < .001) and low blood glucose at a higher level (p < .001). The highest ranked benefits of half-unit pen reported by its current users (N = 131) included prevention of hyperglycemia (40.5%), less anxiety or worry (23.7%), and prevention of hypoglycemia (16.8%). CONCLUSIONS: Half-unit insulin pen is perceived as an insulin device that may help people with T1D to avoid hypo- and hyperglycemic events and decrease their level of disease worry and anxiety. This study highlights the need for patients and health care providers to understand the benefits of half-unit pens while considering options for individualized diabetes management.

Patient characteristics of insulin lispro 200 units/mL users in real world setting in Germany.

OBJECTIVE: Insulin lispro 200 U/mL (IL200) is a treatment choice for people with diabetes who have daily mealtime insulin (MTI) requirements of >20 U/day. We report clinical characteristics of real world IL200 users in Germany to understand clinical settings and the type of patients who would benefit from IL200 treatment. METHODS: This retrospective database analysis used the patient-level data from "IMS Disease Analyzer" in Germany from February 2015 to June 2016. Clinical and demographic information were collected and analyzed for IL200 users alongside that of those who were using more than 20 U a day of 100 U/mL analog MTI. RESULTS: Of the 17,261 patients using insulin, 811 were identified in IL200 group. The IL200 group had 60% men, mean ± SD age of 63.6 ± 11.9 years, and BMI of 36.2 ± 6.7 kg/m2. Of these, 63.5% (n = 515) were seen by diabetologists, while 36.5% (n = 296) were seen by general practitioners (GPs). In the IL200 group, 77.7% used basal insulin concomitantly, >90% had ≥1 comorbidity, and 52% had ≥4 comorbidities; the most common being hypertension (75.2%), neuropathy (66.0%), and nephropathy (59.6%). Diabetologist-treated IL200 users were more likely to have multiple comorbidities as compared with those treated by GPs (15.0% vs. 12.9% for >5 comorbidities). CONCLUSIONS: IL200 is prescribed to people with diabetes who need more than 20 U/day of mealtime insulin and tend to be more obese, older, and with multiple comorbidities. Future research should explore how concentrated MTI can impact adherence and long-term glycemia.

An assessment of physician reasons for prescribing Insulin Lispro 200 units/ml in Germany.

OBJECTIVE: To understand physicians' reasons for prescribing Insulin Lispro 200 units/ml (IL200) and their experience with IL200 treatment in Germany. METHODS: The survey consisted of 28 questions on physician's profile, average IL200 patients' characteristics and rationales for prescribing IL200. Questions were rated on a scale of 0 ('not at all important'/'strongly disagree') to 4 ('absolutely important'/'strongly agree'). RESULTS: The surveyed physicians had a mean (SD) experience of 18.1 (7.0) years managing diabetes, consulted an average of 226.8 patients with diabetes/month and prescribed IL200 to 56.1% of their patients on mealtime insulin (MTI). About 80.0% of IL200 patients had type 2 diabetes mellitus, were overweight/obese, and received >20 units/day of MTI. More than 70.0% of physicians rated patient's insulin dose, pattern of self-measured glucose levels, hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) (clinical); adherence, hypoglycemia knowledge, motivation to improve lifestyle, desire to reduce injection volume and emotional struggle with controlling HbA1c (behavioral) as 'very important'/'absolutely important' factors when prescribing IL200. CONCLUSION: Physicians considered IL200 a promising treatment option that reduces the injection burden for patients on MTI. Physicians adopted a patient-centered perspective by aligning IL200 prescribing decisions with each patient's medical needs and non-clinical preferences, with an aim to encourage treatment adherence through resorting to IL200's advantageous attributes.

Growth Hormone Treatment for Short Stature in the USA, Germany and France: 15 Years of Surveillance in the Genetics and Neuroendocrinology of Short-Stature International Study (GeNeSIS).

BACKGROUND/AIMS: To describe characteristics, auxological outcomes and safety in paediatric patients with growth disorders treated with growth hormone (GH), for cohorts from the USA, Germany and France enrolled in GeNeSIS, a post-authorisation surveillance programme. METHODS: Diagnosis and biochemical measurement data were based on reporting from, and GH treatment was initiated at the discretion of, treating physicians. Auxological outcomes during the first 4 years of GH treatment and at near-adult height (NAH) were analysed. Serious and treatment-emergent adverse events were described. RESULTS: Children in the USA (n = 9,810), Germany (n = 2,682) and France (n = 1,667) received GH (dose varied between countries), most commonly for GH deficiency. Across diagnostic groups and countries, mean height velocity standard deviation score (SDS) was > 0 and height SDS increased from baseline during the first 4 years of treatment, with greatest improvements during year 1. Most children achieved NAH within the normal range (height SDS >-2). No new or unexpected safety concerns were noted. CONCLUSION: GH treatment improved growth indices to a similar extent for patients in all three countries despite variations in GH doses. Data from these three countries, which together contributed > 60% of patients to GeNeSIS, indicated no new safety signals and the benefit-risk profile of GH remains unchanged.