Treatment responses to basal insulin glargine 300 U/ml and glargine 100 U/ml in newly defined subphenotypes of type 2 diabetes: A post hoc analysis of the EDITION 3 randomized clinical trial.

INTRODUCTION: To compare responses to basal insulin glargine 300 U/ml (IGlar-300) and 100 U/ml (IGlar-100) in newly defined subphenotypes of type 2 diabetes. METHODS: Insulin-naive participants (n = 858) from the EDITION 3 trial were assigned to subphenotypes 'Mild Age-Related Diabetes (MARD)', 'Mild Obesity Diabetes (MOD)', 'Severe Insulin Resistant Diabetes (SIRD)' and 'Severe Insulin Deficient Diabetes (SIDD)'. Key variables were analysed at baseline and 26 weeks. RESULTS: Participants were comprised of MOD 56.1% (n = 481), SIDD 22.1% (n = 190), MARD 18.2% (n = 156) and SIRD 3.0% (n = 26). After 26 weeks a similar decrease in glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) and fasting plasma glucose (FPG) of 16-19 mmol/mol and 1.4-1.7 mmol/L, respectively, occurred in MARD and MOD with both insulins. SIDD had the most elevated HbA1c and FPG (80-83 mmol/mol/11.1-11.4 mmol/L) and reduction in both HbA1c and FPG was greater with IGlar-100 than with IGlar-300 (-18 vs. -15 mmol/mol and -1.6 vs. -1.3 mmol/L, respectively; each p = .03). In SIDD, despite receiving the highest basal insulin doses, HbA1c decline (57-60 mmol/mol/7.3-7.6%) was suboptimal at week 26. In MOD and SIDD lower incidences with IGlar-300 were found for level 1 nocturnal hypoglycaemia [odds ratio (OR) 0.59, 95% confidence intervals (CI) 0.36-0.97; OR 0.49, 95% CI 0.24-0.99]. In addition, fewer level 2 hypoglycaemia episodes occurred at any time with IGlar-300 in SIDD (OR 0.31, 95% CI 0.13-0.77). CONCLUSION: Both insulins produce comparable outcomes in type 2 diabetes subphenotypes, but in SIDD, add-on treatment to basal insulin is required to achieve glycaemic targets.

Comparative efficacy and safety of Gla-300 versus IDegAsp in insulin-naïve people with type 2 diabetes mellitus uncontrolled on oral anti-diabetics.

AIM: To compare the efficacy and safety of insulin glargine-300 once daily (Gla-300) with insulin degludec/aspart (IDegAsp) once daily in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) inadequately controlled on oral anti-diabetic drugs (OADs). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic literature review of randomized controlled trials was followed by an indirect treatment comparison of studies involving insulin naïve adults, inadequately controlled [glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) ≥7.0%] on OADs, who received Gla-300 or IDegAsp once daily. Outcomes of interest were change in HbA1c, blood glucose, weight and insulin dose, as well as incidence and event rate of hypoglycaemia and other adverse events. RESULTS: Four trials with broadly similar baseline patient characteristics were included in the meta-analyses and indirect treatment comparison. At 24-28 weeks, the indirect comparison of Gla-300 to IDegAsp once daily estimated no statistically significant difference for change in HbA1c (%) from baseline [mean difference of 0.10% (95% CI: -0.20, 0.39; p = .52)]; a statistically significant mean difference of -1.31 kg (95% CI: -1.97, -0.65; p < .05) for change in body weight from baseline; statistically significant odds ratios of 0.62 (95% CI: 0.41, 0.93; p < .05) for incidence of any hypoglycaemia; and 0.47 (95% CI: 0.25, 0.87; p < .05) for incidence of anytime confirmed hypoglycaemia (plasma glucose <3.0-3.1 mmol/L). No significant differences were observed for insulin dose and adverse events. CONCLUSION: In insulin-naïve patients with T2D inadequately controlled on OADs, commencing Gla-300 shows a comparable HbA1c reduction, but with significantly less weight gain and a lower incidence of any and confirmed hypoglycaemia compared with commencing IDegAsp.

Response to insulin glargine 100 U/mL treatment in newly-defined subgroups of type 2 diabetes: Post hoc pooled analysis of insulin-naïve participants from nine randomised clinical trials.

AIMS: To assess insulin glargine 100 U/mL (IGlar-100) treatment outcomes according to newly-defined subgroups of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). METHODS: Insulin-naïve T2DM participants (n = 2684) from nine randomised clinical trials initiating IGlar-100 were pooled and assigned to subgroups "Mild Age-Related Diabetes (MARD)", "Mild Obesity Diabetes (MOD)", "Severe Insulin Resistant Diabetes (SIRD)", and "Severe Insulin Deficient Diabetes (SIDD)", according to age at onset of diabetes, baseline HbA1c, BMI, and fasting C-peptide using sex-specific nearest centroid approach. HbA1c, FPG, hypoglycemia, insulin dose, and body weight were analysed at baseline and 24 weeks. RESULTS: Subgroup distribution was MARD 15.3 % (n = 411), MOD 39.8 % (n = 1067), SIRD 10.5 % (n = 283), SIDD 34.4 % (n = 923). From baseline HbA1c 8.0-9.6% adjusted least square mean reductions after 24 weeks were similar between subgroups (1.4-1.5 %). SIDD was less likely to achieve HbA1c < 7.0 % (OR: 0.40 [0.29, 0.55]) than MARD. While the final IGlar-100 dose (0.36 U/kg) in MARD was lower than in other subgroups (0.46-0.50 U/kg), it had the highest hypoglycemia risk. SIRD had lowest hypoglycemia risk and SIDD exhibited greatest body weight gain. CONCLUSIONS: IGlar-100 lowered hyperglycemia similarly in all T2DM subgroups, but level of glycemic control, insulin dose, and hypoglycemia risk differed between subgroups.

Distribution and characteristics of newly-defined subgroups of type 2 diabetes in randomised clinical trials: Post hoc cluster assignment analysis of over 12,000 study participants.

AIMS: Newly-defined subgroups of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) have been reported from real-world cohorts but not in detail from randomised clinical trials (RCTs). METHODS: T2DM participants, uncontrolled on different pre-study therapies (n = 12.738; 82 % Caucasian; 44 % with diabetes duration > 10 years) from 14 RCTs, were assigned to new subgroups according to age at onset of diabetes, HbA1c, BMI, and fasting C-peptide using the nearest centroid approach. Subgroup distribution, characteristics and influencing factors were analysed. RESULTS: In both, pooled and single RCTs, "mild-obesity related diabetes" predominated (45 %) with mean BMI of 35 kg/m2. "Severe insulin-resistant diabetes" was found least often (4.6 %) and prevalence of "mild age-related diabetes" (23.9 %) was mainly influenced by age at onset of diabetes and age cut-offs. Subgroup characteristics were widely comparable to those from real-world cohorts, but all subgroups showed higher frequencies of diabetes-related complications which were associated with longer diabetes duration. A high proportion of "severe insulin-deficient diabetes" (25.4 %) was identified with poor pre-study glycaemic control. CONCLUSIONS: Classification of RCT participants into newly-defined diabetes subgroups revealed the existence of a heterogeneous population of T2DM. For future RCTs, subgroup-based randomisation of T2DM will better define the target population and relevance of the outcomes by avoiding clinical heterogeneity.

Hypoglycaemia risk with insulin glargine 300 U/mL compared with glargine 100 U/mL across different baseline fasting C-peptide levels in insulin-naïve people with type 2 diabetes: A post hoc analysis of the EDITION 3 trial.

The relationship between baseline fasting C-peptide (FCP) and glucose control was examined in insulin-naïve people with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled with oral antihyperglycaemic drugs commencing basal insulin glargine 300 U/mL (Gla-300) or 100 U/mL (Gla-100) in the absence of sulfonylurea/glinides. Participants with FCP measurement from the EDITION 3 trial (n = 867) were stratified according to baseline FCP (≤0.40, >0.40-1.20, >1.20 nmol/L); 11.0%, 70.9% and 18.1% contributed to each group. Glycaemic control, body weight, insulin dose and hypoglycaemia were determined at 26 weeks. Glycaemic control (HbA1c, FPG) at 26 weeks was similar in each FCP group between insulins. However, end-of-study insulin dose was greater with higher FCP for both insulins. More people with lower baseline FCP experienced hypoglycaemia with both insulins, but with numerically lower incidence for Gla-300 versus Gla-100 across all FCP groups for all definitions (time periods and levels) of hypoglycaemia. This suggests that Gla-300 might be particularly advantageous for people who are at higher risk of hypoglycaemia.

Fasting C-peptide, a biomarker for hypoglycaemia risk in insulin-naïve people with type 2 diabetes initiating basal insulin glargine 100 U/mL.

AIM: To examine the relationship between baseline fasting C-peptide (FCP) and outcomes in insulin-naïve people with type 2 diabetes initiating basal insulin glargine 100 U/mL (Gla-100). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Post hoc pooled analysis of nine randomized, treat-to-target trials in patients with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled on oral antihyperglycaemic drugs initiating once-daily Gla-100. Participants (n = 2165) were stratified at baseline according to FCP (≤0.40, >0.40-1.20, >1.20-2.00, >2.00 nmol/L). Glycaemic control, body weight, insulin dose and hypoglycaemia were determined at 24 weeks. RESULTS: At baseline low FCP levels were associated with longer known diabetes duration, lower body mass index and higher fasting plasma glucose (FPG). Following Gla-100 introduction, the mean HbA1c reduction at week 24 was similar in all four FCP groups, albeit fewer people in the lowest FCP group achieved HbA1c <7.0% versus FCP groups >0.40 nmol/L. By contrast, FPG reduction and proportion reaching FPG ≤5.6 mmol/L were greatest in the lowest FCP group, diminishing at higher FCP levels. Gla-100 dose at week 24 was lowest in the ≤0.40 nmol/L FCP group and highest in the >1.20 nmol/L FCP group. Incidence and event rate of overall, nocturnal and severe hypoglycaemia were higher at week 24 in groups with lower FCP levels. In multivariable regression analysis baseline FCP, concomitant sulphonylurea use and endpoint HbA1c were strong predictors of hypoglycaemia. CONCLUSIONS: FCP levels identified patients with type 2 diabetes experiencing different responses to basal insulin Gla-100. A low FCP identifies a markedly insulin-deficient, insulin-sensitive subgroup/phenotype with an enhanced risk of hypoglycaemia, which requires a low initial basal insulin dose, cautious titration and earlier addition of prandial glucose-lowering therapy.

Commencing insulin glargine 100 U/mL therapy in individuals with type 2 diabetes: Determinants of achievement of HbA1c goal less than 7.0.

AIMS: To identify factors associated with achievement of glycated haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) target at 24 weeks after commencing basal insulin therapy in individuals with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Post-hoc pooled analysis of 16 randomized, treat-to-target trials involving individuals with T2DM inadequately controlled with oral anti-hyperglycaemic drugs (n = 3415) initiated on once-daily insulin glargine 100 U/mL (Gla-100). Clinical outcomes were assessed by HbA1c response at 24 weeks and individuals were classified as "good responders" with HbA1c <7.0% (<53 mmol/mol) or as "poor responders" with HbA1c ≥7.0% (≥53 mmol/mol). Univariable and multivariable stepwise logistic regression analyses were performed to identify predictive factors for attaining HbA1c <7.0%. RESULTS: Lower levels of baseline HbA1c, fasting plasma glucose (FPG) and post-prandial plasma glucose (PPG), higher body mass index (BMI), shorter diabetes duration and male sex were associated with a good glycaemic response, but not age or baseline C-peptide levels. Gla-100 dose (U/kg) was highest in the poor-responder group, which had the fewest hypoglycaemia episodes. Univariable analysis for achievement of HbA1c <7.0% confirmed these observations. Multivariable analysis retained baseline HbA1c, body weight, BMI, sex, 2-hours PPG and diabetes duration as predictors of a good response. Continued use of sulfonylureas, hypoglycaemia and change in body weight were indicative of poor response. CONCLUSIONS: Baseline HbA1c was the strongest determinant for achieving target HbA1c <7.0% by supplementary Gla-100 therapy, while sex and BMI were also useful indicators. However, age and C-peptide levels at baseline did not predict glycaemic response to the introduction of basal insulin.

Hypoglycaemia risk in the first 8 weeks of titration with insulin glargine 100 U/mL in previously insulin-naive individuals with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

Patient characteristics associated with hypoglycaemia frequency during insulin glargine 100 U/mL (Gla-100) titration and clinical outcomes at Week 24 were examined using participant-level data from 16 treat-to-target trials involving individuals with type 2 diabetes mellitus who were inadequately controlled with oral antidiabetes drugs and were initiating Gla-100 (n = 3549). Hypoglycaemia (plasma glucose <3.9 mmol/L or severe) during the first 8 weeks of titration was stratified by number of events (0, 1-3 and ≥4), resulting in 72.5%, 20.6% and 6.9% of participants in each group, respectively. Changes in glycaemia, body weight and insulin dose from baseline to Weeks 12 and 24 were analysed. Hypoglycaemia was more common in participants with lower BMI and fasting C-peptide, and in those undergoing sulfonylurea treatment. Glycaemic outcomes at Week 24 were similar in each hypoglycaemia group, despite the fact that the Week 24 mean daily dose and dose increase for Gla-100 were highest in participants without hypoglycaemia and were lowest in those experiencing ≥4 events. The risk of hypoglycaemia during Gla-100 titration depends mainly on patient characteristics and on sulfonylurea use and may delay dose titration, which apparently has little effect on short-term glycaemic control in a clinical trial setting.

Glycaemic responses in Asian and non-Asian people with type 2 diabetes initiating insulin glargine 100 units/mL: A patient-level pooled analysis of 16 randomised controlled trials.

AIMS: To compare outcomes between Asian and non-Asian patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) inadequately controlled on oral antidiabetic drugs (OADs) initiating insulin glargine 100 units (U)/mL (Gla-100) in randomised controlled clinical trials. METHODS: Post hoc analysis of patient-level data (Asian n = 235; non-Asian n = 3351) from 16 trials. RESULTS: At baseline, Asian patients were younger with lower body mass index (BMI), fasting C-peptide, and fasting plasma glucose (FPG) than non-Asian patients (all P < .001). Asian patients had a higher mean glycosylated haemoglobin (HbA1c) at Week 24 and less reduction in HbA1c from baseline (7.4% vs. 7.2%; -1.3% vs. -1.6%, respectively; P = .0001), and were less likely to achieve HbA1c <7.0% (40% vs. 47%; P = .002) than non-Asian patients. Reductions in FPG and rates of hypoglycaemia were similar between Asian and non-Asian patients. Asian patients had less weight gain than non-Asian patients (+1.3 vs. +1.9 kg, respectively, P = .013). CONCLUSIONS: In our post hoc meta-analysis, Gla-100 effectively lowers HbA1c and FPG in Asian patients with T2D uncontrolled on OADs with similar incidence of hypoglycaemia and less absolute weight gain compared with non-Asian patients. At a similar FPG reduction, fewer Asian patients achieved HbA1c target <7.0%, suggesting that prandial glucose needs to be addressed.

The use of lipid-lowering therapy and effects of antihyperglycaemic therapy on lipids in subjects with type 2 diabetes with or without cardiovascular disease: a pooled analysis of data from eleven randomized trials with insulin glargine 100 U/mL.

BACKGROUND: Dyslipidaemia is a major contributor to the increased risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) associated with type 2 diabetes (T2D). This study aimed to characterize the extent of lipid-lowering therapy use and its impact on lipid and glycaemic outcomes in people with T2D uncontrolled on oral agents who were enrolled in insulin glargine 100 units/mL (Gla-100) randomized controlled trials (RCTs). METHODS: A post hoc patient-level pooled analysis of eleven RCTs (≥24 weeks' duration) comparing Gla-100 (±oral antidiabetes drugs [OADs]) with OADs alone in people with T2D was performed. Baseline and Week 24 or study endpoint lipid status (low-density lipoprotein cholesterol [LDL-C], high-density lipoprotein cholesterol [HDL-C], non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol [non-HDL-C] and triglycerides) and indices of glycaemic control (glycosylated haemoglobin, fasting plasma glucose [FPG]) were examined in patient groups according to treatment received and CVD status. Lipid-lowering therapy was provided at the discretion of physicians at baseline and throughout the studies. RESULTS: Of the 4768 participants included in the analysis, 41% (n = 1940) received lipid-lowering therapy. Only 51% of participants with CVD (1885/3672) were treated with lipid-lowering therapy; these participants had significantly lower levels of LDL-C, HDL-C and non-HDL-C, and higher levels of triglycerides versus patients not treated with lipid-lowering therapy at baseline and study endpoint (P < 0.001 for all). Antihyperglycaemia therapy resulted in decreases in glycosylated haemoglobin (-1.4 to -1.6%) and FPG (-68.9 to -75.3 mg/dL) at Week 24. Furthermore, slight improvements in non-HDL-C (-3.9 to -9.1 mg/dL) and triglyceride levels (-25.8 to -51.2 mg/dL) were observed. Similar changes were seen irrespective of lipid-lowering therapy or CVD status. CONCLUSIONS: In a T2D cohort included in Gla-100 clinical studies, many participants with T2D and CVD did not receive lipid-lowering therapy, and for most categories of lipid the levels were outside the optimal range. Even in patients treated with antihyperglycaemic therapy but not lipid-lowering therapy, there were modest improvements in non-HDL-C and triglyceride levels in all participants with T2D and CVD. There is a need for increased implementation of guideline recommendations such as American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association for the management of dyslipidaemia in patients with T2D.

Effects of age, gender, and body mass index on efficacy and hypoglycaemia outcomes across treat-to-target trials with insulin glargine 100 U/mL added to oral antidiabetes agents in type 2 diabetes.

AIMS: To analyse the effects of patient characteristics and different oral antidiabetes drug (OAD) use on standardised clinical outcomes in type 2 diabetes patients initiating insulin glargine 100 U/mL (Gla-100). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patient-level data from 16 randomized, treat-to-target clinical trials that added Gla-100 to existing metformin (MET), sulfonylurea (SU) or metformin plus sulfonylurea (MET+SU) treatment in insulin-naïve patients inadequately controlled by oral therapy were analysed and patients were followed for ≥24 weeks. Change in glycated haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) from baseline to week 24, other glycaemic endpoints and incidence of hypoglycaemia (overall, nocturnal, and severe) were analysed by age (<65 vs ≥65 years), gender (male vs female), body mass index (BMI; <25 vs ≥25 to <30 vs >30 kg/m2 ) and concomitant OAD (MET vs SU vs MET+SU). RESULTS: At baseline, the overall population (N = 3188) had a mean age of 57.7 years, BMI of 30.5 kg/m2 , HbA1c of 8.7%, fasting plasma glucose of 192 mg/dL, and 52.7% were male. Younger and older patients had similar HbA1c reductions with Gla-100 and a similar risk of hypoglycaemia. Females and patients with BMI <25 kg/m2 were less likely to achieve HbA1c targets and more likely to experience hypoglycaemia, regardless of concomitant OAD. Adding Gla-100 to SU therapy (alone or in combination with MET) increased hypoglycaemia risk across all analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Our data suggest that female patients with type 2 diabetes and normal-weight patients treated with Gla-100 and MET ± SU are less likely to achieve glycaemic targets and, therefore, may require more clinical attention. Addition of Gla-100 to SU regimens may increase hypoglycaemia risk irrespective of age, gender, or BMI.

Patient-level meta-analysis of efficacy and hypoglycaemia in people with type 2 diabetes initiating insulin glargine 100U/mL or neutral protamine Hagedorn insulin analysed according to concomitant oral antidiabetes therapy.

AIMS: Evaluate efficacy and hypoglycaemia according to concomitant oral antidiabetes drug (OAD) in people with type 2 diabetes initiating insulin glargine 100U/mL (Gla-100) or neutral protamine Hagedorn (NPH) insulin once daily. METHODS: Four studies (target fasting plasma glucose [FPG] ⩽100mg/dL [⩽5.6mmol/L]; duration ⩾24weeks) were included. Standardised data from 2091 subjects (Gla-100, n=1024; NPH insulin, n=1067) were analysed. Endpoints included glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) and FPG change, glycaemic target achievement, hypoglycaemia, weight change, and insulin dose. RESULTS: Mean HbA1c and FPG reductions were similar with Gla-100 and NPH insulin regardless of concomitant OAD (P=0.184 and P=0.553, respectively) and similar proportions of subjects achieved HbA1c <7.0% (P=0.603). There was a trend for more subjects treated with Gla-100 achieving FPG ⩽100mg/dL versus NPH insulin (relative risk [RR] 1.09 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.97-1.23]; P=0.135). Plasma glucose confirmed (<70mg/dL) overall and nocturnal hypoglycaemia incidences and rates were lower with Gla-100 versus NPH insulin (overall RR 0.93 [95% CI 0.87-1.00]; P=0.041; nocturnal RR 0.73 [95% CI 0.65-0.83]; P<0.001). After 24weeks, weight gain and insulin doses were higher with Gla-100 versus NPH insulin (2.7kg vs 2.3kg, P=0.009 and 0.42U/kg vs 0.39U/kg; P=0.003, respectively). Insulin doses were higher when either insulin was added to sulfonylurea alone. CONCLUSIONS: Pooled results from treat-to-target trials in insulin-naïve people with type 2 diabetes demonstrate a significantly lower overall and nocturnal hypoglycaemia risk across different plasma glucose definitions with Gla-100 versus NPH insulin at similar glycaemic control. OAD therapy co-administered with Gla-100 or NPH insulin impacts glycaemic control and overall nocturnal hypoglycaemia risk.

Recombinant Human Insulin in Global Diabetes Management - Focus on Clinical Efficacy.

Biosynthetic human insulin and insulin analogues are the mainstay of insulin therapy for both type 1 and type 2 diabetes although access to human insulin at affordable prices remains a global issue. The world is experiencing an exponential rise in the prevalence of diabetes presenting an urgent need to establish effective diabetes therapy in countries burdened by inadequate health care budgets, malnutrition and infectious diseases. Recombinant human insulin has replaced animal insulins and animal-based semisynthetic human insulin thereby available in sufficient quantities and at affordable prices able to provide global access to insulin therapy. In many patients, analog insulins can offer additional clinical benefit, although at a considerably higher price thus severely restricting availability in low income countries. The approval process for recombinant human insulins (i.e. biosimilars) and analogue insulins is highly variable in the developing countries in contrast to Europe and in North America, where it is well established within a strict regulatory framework. This review aims to discuss the future access to human insulin therapy in a global context with an ever increasing burden of diabetes and significant economic implications.

Recombinant Human Insulins - Clinical Efficacy and Safety in Diabetes Therapy.

Insulin replacement therapy is the standard of care for patients with type 1 and advanced type 2 diabetes mellitus. Porcine and bovine pancreatic tissue was the source of the hormone for many years, followed by semisynthetic human insulin obtained by modification of animal insulin. With the development of recombinant DNA technology, recombinant (biosynthetic) human insulin became available in large amounts by biosynthesis in microorganisms (Escherichia coli, yeast) providing reliable supplies of the hormone worldwide at affordable costs. The purity and pharmaceutical quality of recombinant human insulin was demonstrated to be superior to animal and semisynthetic insulin and patients with diabetes could be safely and effectively transferred from animal or semisynthetic human insulin to recombinant human insulin with no change expected in insulin dose. The decision for change remains a clinical objective, follow-up after any change of insulin product is recommended to confirm clinical efficacy. This review provides a summary and retrospective assessment of early clinical studies with recombinant insulins (Insuman®, Humulin®, Novolin®).

Treatment satisfaction and quality-of-life between type 2 diabetes patients initiating long- vs. intermediate-acting basal insulin therapy in combination with oral hypoglycemic agents--a randomized, prospective, crossover, open clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Pharmacological and clinical differences between insulin glargine and NPH insulin may translate into differences in patient reported outcomes, but existing data are equivocal. METHODS: In this 48-week, open-label, randomized, multi-center, crossover phase IV trial, insulin naïve type 2 diabetes patients with blood glucose not at target on oral hypoglycemic agents had basal insulin added to their treatment regimen. A total of 343 patients were randomized to either receive insulin glargine (n = 176; sequence A) or neutral protamine Hagedorn (NPH) insulin (n = 167; sequence B) in period 1 (weeks 1-24) and vice versa in period 2 (weeks 25-48). The primary objective was to assess patient reported outcomes using a composite Diabetes Related Quality of Life (DRQoL) score based on an unweighted Insulin Treatment Experience Questionnaire (ITEQ) score, a Problem Areas in Diabetes (PAID) questionnaire score, and the mental health score in the Short Form (SF)-12® Health Survey, analyzed by analysis of covariance (ANCOVA). RESULTS: Patients (mean age 62.3 ± 9.0; 39.5 % female) had a mean diabetes duration of 9.6 ± 5.9 years, a mean baseline HbA1c of 8.15 ± 0.72 %, and a mean fasting blood glucose (FBG) level of 9.37 ± 2.19 mmol/L. A total of 229 patients were available for primary endpoint evaluation (modified intention to treat population). Combining all data from both periods for each insulin treatment, on a 0-100 scale, the mean DRQoL score was 69.6 (±9.04) with insulin glargine and 70.0 (±9.40) with NPH insulin. Neither an effect of treatment with insulin glargine vs NPH insulin (p = 0.31) nor a period effect (p = 0.96), nor a sequence effect (p = 0.76) was observed using ANCOVA. CONCLUSIONS: The results show that in a patient population with sub-optimal glycemic control at baseline, and a low target achievement rate together with a low rate of hypoglycemia, differences in the patient reported outcomes evaluated in this study were negligible between insulin glargine and NPH insulin. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT00941369.

Insulin glargine compared with premixed insulin for management of insulin-naïve type 2 diabetes patients uncontrolled on oral antidiabetic drugs: the open-label, randomized GALAPAGOS study.

AIMS: Demonstrate superiority of insulin glargine (±glulisine) strategy versus premixed insulin strategy for percentage of patients reaching HbA1c <7% (<53 mmol/mol) at study end without any documented symptomatic hypoglycemia (bloof glucose [BG] ≤3.1 mmol/L) in type 2 diabetes (T2DM) patients failing oral agents. METHODS: This 24-week, open-label, multinational trial randomized patients to glargine OD or premix OD or BID, continuing metformin ± insulin secretagogue (IS). Second premix injection could be added any time; glulisine could be added with main meal in glargine OD patients with HbA1c ≥7% and fasting blood glucose (FBG) <7 mmol/L at week 12. IS was stopped with any second injection. Insulin titration targeted FBG ≤5.6 mmol/L. RESULTS: Modified intent-to-treat population comprised 923 patients (glargine, 462; premix, 461). Baseline characteristics were similar (mean T2DM duration: 9 years; HbA1c: 8.7% (72 mmol/mol); FBG: 10.4 mmol/L). Primary endpoint was achieved by 33.2% of glargine (±glulisine) and 31.4% of premix patients. Superiority was not demonstrated, but non-inferiority was (pre-specified margin: 25% of premix rate). More patients using premix achieved target (52.6% vs. 43.2%, p=0.005); symptomatic hypoglycemia was less with glargine (1.17 vs. 2.93 events/patient-year). CONCLUSIONS: Glargine (±glulisine) and premix strategies resulted in similar percentages of well-controlled patients without hypoglycemia, with more patients achieving target HbA1c with premix whereas overall symptomatic hypoglycemia was less with glargine.

Equivalent Recombinant Human Insulin Preparations and their Place in Therapy.

Recombinant human insulin was one of the first products of biotechnology. It was developed in response to the need for a consistent and sufficient worldwide supply. Recombinant human insulin replaced the animal insulins and semisynthetic insulins obtained by modification of animal insulins. Bioequivalence studies were required for regulatory approval. Three reference products were independently established during these procedures: Humulin® (Eli Lilly and Co), Novolin® (NovoNordisk) and Insuman® (Sanofi). Numerous brand names have been used during the commercial development of recombinant human insulin formulations. In this review, three current brand names are used for consistent identification. Human insulin for Humulin and Insuman are produced by fermentation in bacteria (Escherichia coli) and for Novolin in yeast (Saccharomyces cerevisiae). The bioequivalence of recombinant human insulin products was investigated in euglycaemic clamp studies. An overview of such bioequivalence studies is provided here. This paper will consider the relevance of human insulin formulations today and their place in therapy.

Insulin Glulisine in Pregnancy - Experience from Clinical Trials and Post-marketing Surveillance.

Pregnancies complicated by gestational diabetes or pre-existing type 1 or type 2 diabetes mellitus are associated with a higher rate of adverse outcomes compared with pregnancies in the background population. These outcomes include miscarriage, pre-term delivery, pre-eclampsia, perinatal mortality and congenital malformations. Insulin glulisine (Apidra®, Sanofi) is a rapid-acting insulin analogue indicated for the treatment of adults, adolescents and children 6 years or older with diabetes mellitus where treatment with insulin is required. Here, all post-marketing and clinical trials safety data with insulin glulisine in pregnancy available to Sanofi up to June 2014 are summarised together with the findings of a comprehensive literature search. Cumulatively, a total of 303 pregnancy exposures to insulin glulisine were received. Of these 303 pregnancy exposures, there were 116 live births, 12 spontaneous abortions, two late foetal intra-uterine deaths (>28 weeks), three elective abortions and 170 cases without a known pregnancy outcome. There were six cases of congenital malformations; of these, there were five live births; in the other case a live birth was not confirmed. The congenital malformations reported to date do not reveal a pattern of defects. In conclusion, the evidence to date does not suggest a causal association between insulin glulisine and an increased risk of pregnancy complications or congenital malformations.

Efficacy and safety of basal insulin glargine 12 and 24 weeks after initiation in persons with type 2 diabetes: a pooled analysis of data from treatment arms of 15 treat-to-target randomised controlled trials.

AIM: Evaluate early (0-12 weeks) and later (12-24 weeks) treatment outcomes in subjects with type 2 diabetes not achieving glycaemic control with oral antidiabetes drugs (OADs). METHODS: Selected data were pooled from 15 randomised, controlled treat-to-target (fasting plasma glucose < 100mg/dL [< 5.6 mmol/L]) trials adding insulin glargine to metformin, a sulphonylurea, or both. Glycaemic and hypoglycaemia parameters, insulin dose, and body weight at weeks 12 and 24 were assessed using individualised subject-level data. RESULTS: Data from 2837 subjects were analysed. HbA1c decreased from 8.8% (73 mmol/mol) at baseline by 1.4% (15 mmol/mol) at Week 12, and a further 0.2% (2 mmol/mol) at Week 24 in the pooled population. Similar reductions were observed across the different treatment groups. HbA1c < 7.0% (<53 mmol/mol) was reached by 34.8% of participants at Week 12 and an additional 24.3% by Week 24. Hypoglycaemia incidence and rates were similar during the early and continued treatment periods across all treatment combinations, but were markedly lower for insulin glargine plus metformin versus the other 2 regimens. CONCLUSIONS: Early and sustained glycaemic benefits with a low-risk of hypoglycaemia are observed after initiation of insulin glargine in a pooled type 2 diabetes cohort previously uncontrolled on OADs.

A Patient-level Analysis of Efficacy and Hypoglycaemia Outcomes Across Treat-to-target Trials with Insulin Glargine Added to Oral Antidiabetes Agents in People with Type 2 Diabetes.

Background: A better understanding of hypoglycaemia risk when insulin is used in combination with one or more oral antidiabetes agents may assist in the treatment decision-making process for the clinician and address concerns regarding hypoglycaemia when initiating or intensifying insulin therapy. The objective of this study was to analyse efficacy and hypoglycaemia outcomes in people with type 2 diabetes receiving insulin glargine (IG) with metformin (MET), sulphonylurea (SU) or MET+SU. Methods: Patient-level data were pooled from 15 randomised, treat-to-target trials (fasting plasma glucose [FPG] targets <5.6 mmol/l) with a duration >24 weeks. Efficacy outcomes included glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c), FPG and HbA1c target achievement. Overall hypoglycaemia events were assessed by a confirmed PG value of <3.9, <3.1 and <2.8 mmol/l or assistance required; daytime, nocturnal (00:01-05:59 AM); and severe (assistance required or with confirmed PG <2.0 mmol/l). Results: Overall, 2,837 IG patients were analysed, with either MET (634), SU (906) or MET+SU (1,297) as background oral antidiabetes agents. Endpoint HbA1c in IG+MET and IG+MET+SU-treated patients was significantly lower than in IG+SU-treated patients (adjusted difference -0.32 %; p=0.0001 and -0.33 %; p=0.0002, respectively). Fewer patients achieved endpoint HbA1c <7.0 % with IG+SU (32 %) versus IG+MET (57 %) or IG+MET+SU (49 %). IG+SU and IG+MET+SU led to significant increases in overall, daytime and nocturnal hypoglycaemia versus IG+MET; severe hypoglycaemia was rare. Weight gain was lowest in IG+MET patients (adjusted difference -1.51 kg versus IG+SU; p<0.0001; -0.78 kg versus IG+MET+SU; p=0.0037) despite higher insulin doses (0.51 U/kg versus 0.43 and 0.42 U/kg, respectively). Conclusions: Better glycaemic goal achievement and reduced risk of hypoglycaemia and weight gain were observed with IG+MET versus IG+SU and IG+MET+SU, albeit with an increased insulin dose requirement.