Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics of Human Regular U-500 Insulin Administered via Continuous Subcutaneous Insulin Infusion Versus Subcutaneous Injection in Adults With Type 2 Diabetes and High-Dose Insulin Requirements.

INTRODUCTION: Human regular U-500 insulin (U-500R) is approved for subcutaneous (SC) injection in patients with diabetes requiring >200 units/day of insulin. Here, pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) profiles following U-500R administered by continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) and SC injection in adults with type 2 diabetes (T2D) on high-dose insulin were studied. METHODS: In this randomized, crossover, euglycemic clamp study, patients received a 100-unit bolus of U-500R via SC injection or CSII with basal infusion using a U-500R specific pump. PK parameters were estimated using non-compartmental methods. PD estimates were derived from the glucose infusion rate during the euglycemic clamp procedure. RESULTS: When corrected for the basal infusion, the PK profiles for the 100-unit bolus of U-500R were similar for CSII and SC injection. Without correction for basal infusion, PK and PD profiles showed a greater insulin concentration and effect when U-500R was administered via CSII compared to SC injection, primarily due to basal insulin infusion for CSII. The ratio of geometric least squares AUC0-tlast means SC:CSII (90% CI) is 0.857 (0.729, 1.01) with correction (mean AUC0-tlast: 5230 pmol*L/h [SC injection] and 6070 pmol*L/h [CSII, with correction]) and 0.424 (0.361, 0.499) without correction (mean AUC0-tlast: 12300 pmol*L/h [CSII, without correction]). Median time-to-peak insulin concentration was six hours (range 0.5-8 hours) via SC injection and five hours (0.5-12 hours) via CSII. CONCLUSIONS: In adults with T2D on high-dose insulin, U-500R PK/PD parameters were similar for a 100-unit bolus when given by SC injection or CSII via a U-500R pump.

Implementing a Just Culture: Perceptions of Nurse Managers of Required Knowledge, Skills and Attitudes.

BACKGROUND: Healthcare organizations have been challenged to create a just culture as part of their culture of safety. PURPOSE: To explore perceptions of nurse managers in developing personal competencies in order to enable them to effectively implement a just culture in their units. METHOD: Qualitative content analysis of semi-structured interviews with nine nurse managers identified themes. Data were independently analyzed by three members of the research team. FINDINGS: Analysis of interview transcripts identified the following four themes: need for education of managers and employees, need for a variety of new skills for nurse managers, need to change attitudes from the long-standing punitive culture and fault of individual and challenges in implementation because of time constraints. CONCLUSION: Implementing a just culture is complex. Education of nurse managers is crucial. A series of educational strategies is recommended. Findings support the need for new competencies to enable nurse managers to effectively implement a just culture in their units.

Better glycemic control and weight loss with the novel long-acting basal insulin LY2605541 compared with insulin glargine in type 1 diabetes: a randomized, crossover study.

OBJECTIVE To compare effects of LY2605541 versus insulin glargine on daily mean blood glucose as part of a basal-bolus regimen for type 1 diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS In this randomized, Phase 2, open-label, 2 × 2 crossover study, 137 patients received once-daily basal insulin (LY2605541 or glargine) plus mealtime insulin for 8 weeks, followed by crossover treatment for 8 weeks. Daily mean blood glucose was obtained from 8-point self-monitored blood glucose profiles. The noninferiority margin was 10.8 mg/dL. RESULTS LY2605541 met noninferiority and superiority criteria compared with insulin glargine in daily mean blood glucose (144.2 vs. 151.7 mg/dL, least squares mean difference = -9.9 mg/dL [90% CI -14.6 to -5.2], P < 0.001). Fasting blood glucose variability and A1C were reduced with LY2605541 compared with insulin glargine (both P < 0.001). Mealtime insulin dose decreased with LY2605541 and increased with insulin glargine. Mean weight decreased 1.2 kg with LY2605541 and increased 0.7 kg with insulin glargine (P < 0.001). The total hypoglycemia rate was higher for LY2605541 (P = 0.04) and the nocturnal hypoglycemia rate was lower (P = 0.01), compared with insulin glargine. Adverse events (including severe hypoglycemia) were similar, although more gastrointestinal-related events occurred with LY2605541 (15% vs. 4%, P < 0.001). Mean changes (all within normal range) were higher for alanine aminotransferase, aspartate aminotransferase, triglycerides, and LDL-cholesterol and lower for HDL-cholesterol with LY2605541 compared with insulin glargine (all P < 0.02). CONCLUSIONS In type 1 diabetes, compared with insulin glargine, LY2605541, a novel, long-acting basal insulin, demonstrated greater improvements in glycemic control, increased total hypoglycemia, and reduced nocturnal hypoglycemia, as well as reduced weight and lowered mealtime insulin doses.

Characterization of renal glucose reabsorption in response to dapagliflozin in healthy subjects and subjects with type 2 diabetes.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the effect of dapagliflozin, a sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitor, on the major components of renal glucose reabsorption (decreased maximum renal glucose reabsorptive capacity [TmG], increased splay, and reduced threshold), using the pancreatic/stepped hyperglycemic clamp (SHC) technique. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Subjects with type 2 diabetes (n=12) and matched healthy subjects (n=12) underwent pancreatic/SHC (plasma glucose range 5.5-30.5 mmol/L) at baseline and after 7 days of dapagliflozin treatment. A pharmacodynamic model was developed to describe the major components of renal glucose reabsorption for both groups and then used to estimate these parameters from individual glucose titration curves. RESULTS: At baseline, type 2 diabetic subjects had elevated TmG, splay, and threshold compared with controls. Dapagliflozin treatment reduced the TmG and splay in both groups. However, the most significant effect of dapagliflozin was a reduction of the renal threshold for glucose excretion in type 2 diabetic and control subjects. CONCLUSIONS: The SGLT2 inhibitor dapagliflozin improves glycemic control in diabetic patients by reducing the TmG and threshold at which glucose is excreted in the urine.

Glucokinase activators AZD6370 and AZD1656 do not affect the central counterregulatory response to hypoglycemia in healthy males.

CONTEXT: Glucokinase is expressed in the hypothalamus, but effects of glucokinase activators (GKAs) on counterregulatory responses to hypoglycemia are unknown. OBJECTIVE: Two separate studies assessed the counterregulatory hormone responses to hypoglycemia induced by the GKAs, AZD6370 and AZD1656, compared with insulin infusion. DESIGN AND SETTING: Both studies were randomized, open, two-way crossover studies, conducted in separate clinical research centers. PARTICIPANTS: Both studies involved 12 healthy adult male volunteers. INTERVENTIONS: Each subject received two treatments in randomized order, separated by a washout. In the AZD6370 study, overnight-fasted subjects received either a single oral AZD6370 dose (300 mg) or insulin infusion (0.8 mU/kg · min). In the AZD1656 study, overnight-fasted subjects received either a single oral dose of AZD1656 (80 mg) plus supporting insulin (1 mU/kg · min) or insulin alone (1 mU/kg · min). Insulin was added to support AZD1656 because AZD1656 alone did not produce the desired hypoglycemia. Plasma glucose was lowered during a stepwise hypoglycemic clamp with a glycemic nadir of 2.7 mmol/liter for 30 min. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Epinephrine, norepinephrine, GH, cortisol, and glucagon plasma levels were assessed. RESULTS: No safety issues were raised. AZD6370 and AZD1656 had no effect on counterregulatory responses for norepinephrine, GH, or cortisol, but epinephrine increased slightly with AZD1656. Glucagon responses were reduced by approximately 30% with both GKAs vs. insulin. CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest the central nervous system-mediated counterregulatory response during GKA-induced hypoglycemia was preserved, whereas the glucagon response was attenuated; the latter was possibly mediated by a local pancreatic effect (intraislet hyperinsulinemia) rather than by impairment of the central nervous system-mediated response.

Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of high-dose human regular U-500 insulin versus human regular U-100 insulin in healthy obese subjects.

OBJECTIVE: Human regular U-500 (U-500R) insulin (500 units/mL) is increasingly being used clinically, yet its pharmacokinetics (PK) and pharmacodynamics (PD) have not been well studied. Therefore, we compared PK and PD of clinically relevant doses of U-500R with the same doses of human regular U-100 (U-100R) insulin (100 units/mL). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: This was a single-site, randomized, double-blind, crossover euglycemic clamp study. Single subcutaneous injections of 50- and 100-unit doses of U-500R and U-100R were administered to 24 healthy obese subjects. RESULTS: Both overall insulin exposure (area under the serum insulin concentration versus time curve from zero to return to baseline [AUC(0-)(t)(')]) and overall effect (total glucose infused during a clamp) were similar between formulations at both 50- and 100-unit doses (90% [CI] of ratios contained within [0.80, 1.25]). However, peak concentration and effect were significantly lower for U-500R at both doses (P < 0.05). Both formulations produced relatively long durations of action (18.3 to 21.5 h). Time-to-peak concentration and time to maximum effect were significantly longer for U-500R than U-100R at the 100-unit dose (P < 0.05). Time variables reflective of duration of action (late tR(max50), tR(last)) were prolonged for U-500R versus U-100R at both doses (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Overall exposure to and action of U-500R insulin after subcutaneous injection were no different from those of U-100R insulin. For U-500R, peaks of concentration and action profiles were blunted and the effect after the peak was prolonged. These findings may help guide therapy with U-500R insulin for highly insulin-resistant patients with diabetes.

Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of insulin lispro protamine suspension compared with insulin glargine and insulin detemir in type 2 diabetes.

OBJECTIVE: The primary aim was to evaluate duration of action of a single 0.8 U/kg dose of insulin lispro protamine suspension (ILPS) in type 2 diabetes (T2DM) patients; secondarily to compare onset and duration of action of ILPS, glargine (G), and detemir (D) (0.8 U/kg) and evaluate pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic (PD) dose responses of ILPS. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: In a single-center, double-blind, five-arm crossover study, 34 patients were randomized to a treatment sequence which included a single subcutaneous 0.8 U/kg dose of G and D and three doses of ILPS (0.4 U/kg, 0.8 U/kg, and 1.2 U/kg) and were studied using 24-hour euglycemic glucose clamps. PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURE: Duration of action was determined as the time to the last measurable glucose infusion rate (tR(last)) during glucose clamps. RESULTS: The duration of insulin action (tR(last)) for ILPS at 0.8 U/kg was >23 hours and was similar to G (p = 0.114) and D (p = 0.570). Post-hoc analysis demonstrated the probability of achieving 24 hours of glucose-lowering activity after a 0.8 U/kg dose: 48% (ILPS), 43% (G), and 26% (D). G(tot) and R(max) were significantly greater for ILPS versus G or D. The median ILPS time-dependent values demonstrated a significantly earlier maximum PD response (tR(max) and early 50% tR(max)) versus either G or D. ILPS demonstrated dose-dependent increases in PK and PD measures across the dose range. CONCLUSIONS: Following a single 0.8 U/kg dose in T2DM patients, ILPS, G, and D demonstrated similar durations of glucose-lowering activity and ILPS demonstrated significantly greater glucose-lowering activity (R(max) and G(tot)) and earlier maximum PD response. These results potentially support once-daily dosing of ILPS in T2DM. LIMITATIONS: The observed number of 24-hour censored observations was higher than expected and the wash-out period for basal insulin treated patients may have been too short to definitively rule out a carry-over effect; however, such an effect, if present, would potentially only affect onset of action and not the primary outcome measure.