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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics of NPH Insulin in Type 1 Diabetes: The Importance of Appropriate Resuspension Before Subcutaneous Injection.

OBJECTIVE: Crystalline NPH insulin comes in a two-phase solution with either a solvent or a rapid-acting insulin (in premixed formulations) and needs adequate mixing for complete resuspension before injection. The aim of this study was to establish pharmacokinetics (PK) and pharmacodynamics (PD) after injection of appropriately resuspended versus nonresuspended NPH insulin. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: PK and PD were assessed after subcutaneous injection of NPH insulin 0.35 units/kg at steady state by pen either resuspended (R+, tipping of insulin pen 20 times) or nonresuspended (pen maintained in fixed position either horizontally [R- horizontal] or vertically with tip up [R- up] or tip down [R- down]). Eleven subjects with type 1 diabetes (age 31.5 ± 12 years, diabetes duration 17.5 ± 7.7 years, BMI 22.9 ± 1.5 kg/m2, A1C 7.2 ± 0.4% [55.2 ± 4.4 mmol/mol]) were studied (euglycemic clamp) with a randomized crossover design. RESULTS: Compared with resuspended NPH insulin (R+), nonresuspended NPH insulin resulted in profound PK/PD differences with either reduced (R- horizontal and R- up) or increased (R- down) plasma insulin concentrations [FIRI_AUC(0-end of study) (free immunoreactive insulin area under the concentration-time curve between 0 and end of study)] and PD activity [glucose infusion rate (GIR)_AUC(0-end of study)] (all P < 0.05). Duration of NPH insulin action was shorter in R- up (9.4 ± 1.7 h) but longer in R- down (15.4 ± 2.3 h) compared with R+ (11.8 ± 2.6 h) (P < 0.05). Within-subject variability (percent coefficient of variation) among studies was as high as 23% for PK [FIRI_AUC(0-end of study)] and 62% for PD [GIR_AUC(0-end of study)]. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with resuspended NPH insulin, lack of resuspension profoundly alters PK/PD and may importantly contribute to day-to-day glycemic variability of type 1 diabetes.

Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of insulin glargine given in the evening as compared with in the morning in type 2 diabetes.

OBJECTIVE: To compare pharmacokinetics (PK) and pharmacodynamics (PD) of insulin glargine in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) after evening versus morning administration. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Ten T2DM insulin-treated persons were studied during 24-h euglycemic glucose clamp, after glargine injection (0.4 units/kg s.c.), either in the evening (2200 h) or the morning (1000 h). RESULTS: The 24-h glucose infusion rate area under the curve (AUC0-24h) was similar in the evening and morning studies (1,058 ± 571 and 995 ± 691 mg/kg × 24 h, P = 0.503), but the first 12 h (AUC0-12h) was lower with evening versus morning glargine (357 ± 244 vs. 593 ± 374 mg/kg × 12 h, P = 0.004), whereas the opposite occurred for the second 12 h (AUC12-24h 700 ± 396 vs. 403 ± 343 mg/kg × 24 h, P = 0.002). The glucose infusion rate differences were totally accounted for by different rates of endogenous glucose production, not utilization. Plasma insulin and C-peptide levels did not differ in evening versus morning studies. Plasma glucagon levels (AUC0-24h 1,533 ± 656 vs. 1,120 ± 344 ng/L/h, P = 0.027) and lipolysis (free fatty acid AUC0-24h 7.5 ± 1.6 vs. 8.9 ± 1.9 mmol/L/h, P = 0.005; ß-OH-butyrate AUC0-24h 6.8 ± 4.7 vs. 17.0 ± 11.9 mmol/L/h, P = 0.005; glycerol, P < 0.020) were overall more suppressed after evening versus morning glargine administration. CONCLUSIONS: The PD of insulin glargine differs depending on time of administration. With morning administration insulin activity is greater in the first 0-12 h, while with evening administration the activity is greater in the 12-24 h period following dosing. However, glargine PK and plasma C-peptide levels were similar, as well as glargine PD when analyzed by 24-h clock time independent of the time of administration. Thus, the results reflect the impact of circadian changes in insulin sensitivity in T2DM (lower in the night-early morning vs. afternoon hours) rather than glargine per se.

Metabolism of insulin glargine after repeated daily subcutaneous injections in subjects with type 2 diabetes.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate concentration of plasma insulin glargine after its subcutaneous dosing compared with concentration of its metabolites 1 (M1) and 2 (M2) in subjects with type 2 diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Nine subjects underwent a 32-h euglycemic glucose clamp study (0.4 units/kg glargine after 1 week of daily glargine administration). Glargine, M1, and M2 were measured by a specific liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry assay. RESULTS: Glargine was detected in only five of the nine subjects, at few time points, and at negligible concentrations. M1 was detected in all subjects and exhibited the same pattern as traditional radioimmunoassay-measured plasma insulin. M2 was not detected at all. CONCLUSIONS: After subcutaneous injection, glargine was minimally detectable in blood, whereas its metabolite M1 accounted for most (>90%) of the plasma insulin concentration and metabolic action of the injected glargine.

Differential effects of adiposity on pharmacodynamics of basal insulins NPH, glargine, and detemir in type 2 diabetes mellitus.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the role of adiposity on the pharmacodynamics of basal insulins NPH, detemir, and glargine in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), as estimated by glucose infusion rate (GIR) and endogenous glucose production (EGP) rate in the euglycemic clamp. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We examined the variables that best predicted GIR and EGP in 32-h clamp studies after treatment with subcutaneous injection of 0.4 units/kg NPH, detemir, and glargine in 18 T2DM subjects (crossover). RESULTS: A multiple regression analysis revealed that BMI best predicted GIR variation during the clamp. BMI was inversely correlated with GIR in all three insulin treatments, but was statistically significant in detemir treatment only. BMI correlated positively with residual suppression of EGP in detemir, but not with glargine and NPH treatments. CONCLUSIONS: Adiposity blunts the pharmacodynamics of all basal insulins in T2DM. However, as adiposity increases, the effect of detemir is lower versus NPH and glargine.

Optimizing the replacement of basal insulin in type 1 diabetes mellitus: no longer an elusive goal in the post-NPH era.

In physiology, insulin is released continuously by the pancreas at a nearly constant rate between meals and in the fasting state (basal insulin secretion). The pivotal role of basal insulin is to restrain release of glucose from the liver and free fatty acids from adipose tissue, thus preventing hyperglycemia and ketosis. In type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) (absolute insulin deficiency), the replacement of basal insulin is challenging because the currently available pharmacological preparations of long-acting insulin do not exactly reproduce the fine physiology of flat action profile of basal insulin of subjects without diabetes. NPH and NPH-based insulin mixtures no longer have a place in the treatment of T1DM because of their early peak effects and relatively short duration of action, which result into risk of nocturnal hypoglycemia and fasting hyperglycemia, respectively, after the evening injection. Only continuous subcutaneous (s.c.) insulin infusion (CSII) or long-acting analogs such as glargine (>24 h in duration, once a day) and detemir (<24 h in duration, once or more often twice a day) should be used as basal insulin in T1DM in combination with mealtime rapid-acting analogs. CSII and the long-acting analogs are nearly peakless and therefore reduce the risk for hypoglycemia (especially at night), blood glucose (BG) variability, and lower A1C with similar or less hypoglycemia. CSII is the "gold standard" of replacement of basal insulin because of better reproducibility of subcutaneous absorption of soluble insulin. Although CSII is not superior to multiple daily insulin injections in the general T1DM population, CSII might be indicated in subsets of T1DM (long-term T1DM with insulin "supersensitivity" and needs for low-dose insulin, some individuals with variable subcutaneous absorption of long-acting analogs) to minimize BG variability, reduce hypoglycemia, and benefit A1C.