Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties of once-weekly insulin icodec in individuals with type 1 diabetes.

AIMS: To investigate the pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic properties of once-weekly insulin icodec in individuals with type 1 diabetes (T1D). MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this randomized, open-label, two-period crossover trial, 66 individuals with T1D (age 18-64 years; glycated haemoglobin ≤75 mmol/mol [≤ 9%]) were to receive once-weekly icodec (8 weeks) and once-daily insulin glargine U100 (2 weeks) at individualized fixed equimolar total weekly doses established during up to 10 weeks' run-in with glargine U100 titrated to pre-breakfast plasma glucose (PG) of 4.4-7.2 mmol/L (80-130 mg/dL). Insulin aspart was used as bolus insulin. Blood sampling for icodec pharmacokinetics was performed from the first icodec dose until 35 days after the last dose. The glucose infusion rate at steady state was assessed in glucose clamps (target 6.7 mmol/L [120 mg/dL]) at 16-52 h and 138-168 h after the last icodec dose and 0-24 h after the last glargine U100 dose. Icodec pharmacodynamics during 1 week were predicted by pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic modelling. Hypoglycaemia was recorded during the treatment periods based on self-measured PG. RESULTS: Icodec reached pharmacokinetic steady state on average within 2-3 weeks. At steady state, model-predicted daily proportions of glucose infusion rate during the 1-week dosing interval were 14.3%, 19.6%, 18.3%, 15.7%, 13.1%, 10.6% and 8.4%, respectively. Rates and duration of Level 2 hypoglycaemic episodes (PG <3.0 mmol/L [54 mg/dL]) were 32.8 versus 23.9 episodes per participant-year of exposure and 33 ± 25 versus 30 ± 18 min (mean ± SD) for icodec versus glargine U100. CONCLUSIONS: The pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic properties of icodec suggest its potential to provide basal coverage in a basal-bolus insulin regimen in people with T1D.

Ultra rapid lispro (Lyumjev®) shortens time to recovery from hyperglycaemia compared to Humalog® in individuals with type 1 diabetes on continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion.

AIMS: To compare the time to hyperglycaemia recovery after ultra rapid lispro (URLi; Lyumjev®) versus Humalog in a randomized, double-blind crossover study. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty-two adults with type 1 diabetes on continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion participated in two periods: each period included hyperglycaemia induced by a missed mealtime bolus (day 1) and by suspension of basal insulin delivery (day 2). When hyperglycaemia [plasma glucose (PG) >240 mg/dl] occurred, a correction bolus of URLi or Humalog was given and time to hyperglycaemia recovery (PG = 140 mg/dl), pharmacokinetics and glucodynamics were compared. RESULTS: Following a missed mealtime bolus, URLi significantly reduced maximum PG (-13 mg/dl; p = .02), and produced numerically more rapid decline in PG (23 mg/dl/h; p = .07), and faster recovery from hyperglycaemia (-23 min; p = .1) versus Humalog, although differences were not significant. Following basal suspension, URLi significantly reduced maximum PG (-6 mg/dl; p = .02), and produced faster PG decline (24 mg/dl/h; p < .001) and faster recovery from hyperglycaemia (-16 min; p < .01) vs. Humalog. Following a correction bolus of URLi, accelerated insulin lispro absorption was observed versus Humalog: early 50% tmax was reduced by 6 or 12 min, and AUC0-15min was increased 2.5- or 4.3-fold after correction boluses by subcutaneous infusion (day 1) or injection (day 2), respectively (all p < .001). CONCLUSIONS: During episodes of hyperglycaemia commonly experienced in people with type 1 diabetes, URLi provided a faster recovery versus Humalog from a missed mealtime bolus or during basal insulin suspension. URLi shows significant acceleration of insulin absorption versus Humalog when boluses are administered by subcutaneous infusion or injection.

Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic bioequivalence of Gan & Lee insulin analogues aspart (rapilin®), lispro (prandilin®) and glargine (basalin®) with EU- und US-sourced reference insulins.

AIM: For the successful approval and clinical prescription of insulin biosimilars, it is essential to show pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic (PD) bioequivalence to the respective reference products sourced from the European Union and the United States. METHODS: Three phase 1, randomized, double-blind, three-period crossover trials compared single doses of the proposed biosimilar insulin analogues aspart (GL-Asp, n = 36), lispro (GL-Lis, n = 38) and glargine (GL-Gla, n = 113), all manufactured by Gan & Lee pharmaceuticals, to the respective EU- and US-reference products in healthy male participants (GL-Asp and GL-Lis) or people with type 1 diabetes (GL-Gla). Study participants received 0.2 U/kg (aspart and lispro) or 0.5 U/kg (glargine) of each treatment under automated euglycaemic clamp conditions. The clamp duration was 12 h (aspart and lispro) or 30 h (glargine). Primary PK endpoints were the total area under the PK curves (AUCins.total ) and maximum insulin concentrations (Cins.max ). Primary PD endpoints were the total area under the glucose infusion rate curve (AUCGIR.total ) and maximum glucose infusion rate (GIRmax ). RESULTS: Bioequivalence to both EU- and US-reference products were shown for all three GL insulins. Least squares mean ratios for the primary PK/PD endpoints were close to 100%, and both 90% and 95% confidence intervals were within 80%-125% in all three studies. There were no noticeable differences in the safety profiles between test and reference insulins, and no serious adverse events were reported for the GL insulins. CONCLUSION: GL-Asp, GL-Lis and GL-Gla are bioequivalent to their EU- and US-reference products.

Noninvasive Continuous Glucose Monitoring With a Novel Wearable Dial Resonating Sensor: A Clinical Proof-of-Concept Study.

BACKGROUND: A noninvasive, wearable continuous glucose monitor would be a major advancement in diabetes therapy. This trial investigated a novel noninvasive glucose monitor which analyzes spectral variations in radio frequency/microwave signals reflected from the wrist. METHODS: A single-arm, open-label, experimental study compared glucose values from a prototype investigational device with laboratory glucose measurements from venous blood samples (Super GL Glucose Analyzer, Dr. Müller Gerätebau GmbH) at varying levels of glycemia. The study included 29 male participants with type 1 diabetes (age range = 19-56 years). The study comprised three stages with the following aims: (1) demonstrate initial proof-of-principle, (2) test an improved device design, and (3) test performance on two consecutive days without device recalibration. The co-primary endpoints in all trial stages were median and mean absolute relative difference (ARD) calculated across all data points. RESULTS: In stage 1, the median and mean ARDs were 30% and 46%, respectively. Stage 2 produced marked performance improvements with a median and mean ARD of 22% and 28%, respectively. Stage 3 showed that, without recalibration, the device performed as well as the initial prototype (stage 1) with a median and mean ARD of 35% and 44%, respectively. CONCLUSION: This proof-of-concept study shows that a novel noninvasive continuous glucose monitor was capable of detecting glucose levels. Furthermore, the ARD results are comparable to first models of commercially available minimally invasive products without the need to insert a needle. The prototype has been further developed and is being tested in subsequent studies. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05023798.

Evaluation of Insulin Lispro Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics Over 10 Days of Continuous Insulin Infusion in People With Type 1 Diabetes.

BACKGROUND: We evaluated the effect of meloxicam on insulin lispro pharmacokinetics and glucose pharmacodynamics over 10 days of continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) at one infusion site in people with type 1 diabetes (T1D). METHOD: This phase 1, randomized, double-blind, single-center, two-way crossover study enrolled adults with T1D for ≥1 year on stable CSII for ≥3 months. Participants randomly received U100 insulin lispro and LY900027 (U100 insulin lispro + 0.25 mg/mL meloxicam). Primary end points were area under the insulin lispro curve from 0 to 5 hours (AUCIns.0-5h) after bolus administration prior to a mixed-meal tolerance test (MMTT) and maximum observed concentration of insulin lispro (CIns.max) on days 5, 7, and 10, versus day 3 (baseline). RESULTS: A total of 20 participants were randomized. Insulin absorption was accelerated for insulin lispro and LY900027 from days 1 to 7. The AUCIns.0-5h was significantly lower on day 10 versus day 3 for LY900027 (-19%) and insulin lispro (-14%); the AUCIns.0-5h did not differ significantly between treatments. The CIns.max increased with LY900027 and insulin lispro (by ~14%-23% and ~16%-51%) on days 5, 7, and 10 versus day 3. The CIns.max of LY900027 was ~14%-23% lower than insulin lispro CIns.max on days 7 and 10 (P ≤ .0805). Accelerated insulin absorption and a modest loss of total insulin exposure led to a loss of MMTT glycemic control at later time points. CONCLUSIONS: The pharmacokinetics of insulin changed over catheter wear time even when an anti-inflammatory agent was present. Postprandial glycemic control was adversely affected by the accelerated insulin absorption and decreased insulin exposure.

An Investigation Into Local Infusion Site Pain After Infusion of Ultra Rapid Lispro Excipients Across Sites and Depths.

BACKGROUND: This phase 1, randomized, one-day, five-period crossover study in adults with type 1 diabetes on continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion investigated local infusion site pain following infusion of the excipients of ultra rapid lispro (URLi; without insulin) across infusion sites and depths. METHODS: Forty participants (mean age, 40.5 years; body mass index [BMI], 27.5) were randomized to one of five infusion site sequences consisting of the arm, thigh, buttock (6 mm cannula depth), and abdomen (6 and 9 mm depth). Basal infusion of sodium citrate and treprostinil in diluent with magnesium chloride was initiated (10 µL/h) and at three, six, and nine hours after basal initiation, 15 unit-equivalent boluses (150 µL) were given. Participants rated their pain on a 0 to 100 mm validated visual analog scale (VAS) at 5 minutes pre-bolus and 1 and 15 minutes post-bolus. RESULTS: At one minute post-bolus, increased VAS scores were occasionally reported. Most one minute post-bolus scores were ≤10 mm (little to no discomfort) while 7 of 577 were >45 mm (generally considered clinically meaningful pain). Painful infusions were reported more frequently for the arm, and mean VAS scores were higher for the arm compared with the thigh and abdomen. The VAS score distributions were similar between cannula depths. By 15 minutes post-bolus, VAS scores returned to pre-bolus levels. CONCLUSIONS: Local infusion site discomfort after infusion of URLi excipients was reported by a small subset of participants; it was transient, tolerable, and dependent on infusion site but not infusion depth. Given differences within individuals, patients may consider using a different infusion site if they experience discomfort. CLINICALTRIAL.GOV IDENTIFIER: NCT05067270.

Differences in Physiological Responses to Cardiopulmonary Exercise Testing in Adults With and Without Type 1 Diabetes: A Pooled Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate physiological responses to cardiopulmonary exercise (CPX) testing in adults with type 1 diabetes compared with age-, sex-, and BMI-matched control participants without type 1 diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We compared results from CPX tests on a cycle ergometer in individuals with type 1 diabetes and control participants without type 1 diabetes. Parameters were peak and threshold variables of VO2, heart rate, and power output. Differences between groups were investigated through restricted maximum likelihood modeling and post hoc tests. Differences between groups were explained by stepwise linear regressions (P < 0.05). RESULTS: Among 303 individuals with type 1 diabetes (age 33 [interquartile range 22; 43] years, 93 females, BMI 23.6 [22; 26] kg/m2, HbA1c 6.9% [6.2; 7.7%] [52 (44; 61) mmol/mol]), VO2peak (32.55 [26.49; 38.72] vs. 42.67 ± 10.44 mL/kg/min), peak heart rate (179 [170; 187] vs. 184 [175; 191] beats/min), and peak power (216 [171; 253] vs. 245 [200; 300] W) were lower compared with 308 control participants without type 1 diabetes (all P < 0.001). Individuals with type 1 diabetes displayed an impaired degree and direction of the heart rate-to-performance curve compared with control participants without type 1 diabetes (0.07 [-0.75; 1.09] vs. 0.66 [-0.28; 1.45]; P < 0.001). None of the exercise physiological responses were associated with HbA1c in individuals with type 1 diabetes. CONCLUSIONS: Individuals with type 1 diabetes show altered responses to CPX testing, which cannot be explained by HbA1c. Intriguingly, the participants in our cohort were people with recent-onset type 1 diabetes; heart rate dynamics were altered during CPX testing.

Pharmacokinetic and Glucodynamic Responses of Ultra Rapid Lispro vs Lispro Across a Clinically Relevant Range of Subcutaneous Doses in Healthy Subjects.

PURPOSE: Ultra rapid lispro (URLi) is a novel insulin lispro formulation developed to more closely match physiological insulin secretion and improve postprandial glucose control. This study compared the pharmacokinetic and glucodynamic parameters of URLi and Lispro (Humalog®) at 3 dose levels in healthy subjects. METHODS: This randomized, 6-period, subject- and investigator-blind, crossover study included 42 healthy subjects. At each period, subjects received a single subcutaneous dose of 7, 15, or 30 U of URLi or Lispro followed by a 10-h automated euglycemic clamp. Insulin lispro and blood glucose concentrations were measured. FINDINGS: Across all 3 doses, insulin lispro appeared in the serum 2-5 min faster, and exposure was 6- to 8-fold greater in the first 15 min, with URLi versus Lispro. Exposure beyond 3 h postdose was 45%-52% lower, and duration of exposure was 67-86 min shorter with URLi versus Lispro for all dose levels. Onset of insulin action was 7-9 min faster and insulin action was ~3-fold greater in the first 30 min with URLi versus Lispro across the dose levels. Insulin action beyond 4 h was reduced by 32%-45%, and duration of action was reduced by 47-67 min, with URLi versus Lispro for all 3 dose levels. Overall exposure and total glucose infused were similar between URLi and Lispro at each dose level. Dose proportionality was observed for maximum and overall exposure after URLi. Less than dose-proportional increases in maximum and total glucose infused were observed and were similar for both URLi and Lispro. IMPLICATIONS: URLi exhibited ultra-rapid pharmacokinetic and glucodynamic parameters across all 3 dose levels studied and exhibited dose-proportional increases in exposure in healthy subjects. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03286751.

Glucagon Administration by Nasal and Intramuscular Routes in Adults With Type 1 Diabetes During Insulin-Induced Hypoglycaemia: A Randomised, Open-Label, Crossover Study.

INTRODUCTION: Many commercially available glucagon products for treatment of severe hypoglycaemia require cumbersome reconstitution and potentially intimidating injection during an emergency. Nasal glucagon (NG) is a novel drug-device combination product consisting of a single-use dosing device that delivers glucagon dry powder through nasal administration. The present study assessed whether 3 mg NG was non-inferior to 1 mg intramuscular glucagon (IMG) in adults with type 1 diabetes. METHODS: This randomised, open-label, two-period, crossover trial was conducted at two clinical sites. Hypoglycaemia (plasma glucose [PG] target of < 3.3 mmol/l (60 mg/dl) was induced by an intravenous insulin infusion. Glucagon preparations were given by study staff. Treatment success was defined as an increase in PG to ≥ 3.9 mmol/l (70 mg/dl) or an increase of ≥ 1.1 mmol/l (20 mg/dl) from the PG nadir within 30 min of receiving glucagon. RESULTS: Of the 66 participants included in the primary efficacy analysis who received both NG and IMG, 100% achieved treatment success, thus demonstrating non-inferiority of NG to IMG. All participants achieved treatment success within 25 min with the mean time to treatment success of 11.4 min (NG) and 9.9 min (IMG). No serious adverse events occurred. Forty-eight treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) occurred after NG and 51 after IMG. Most TEAEs were mild and transient. CONCLUSION: Nasal glucagon was as efficacious and well tolerated as IMG for the treatment of insulin-induced hypoglycaemia in adults and will be as useful as IMG as a rescue treatment for severe hypoglycaemia. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03339453, ClinicalTrials.gov.

Ultra rapid lispro lowers postprandial glucose and more closely matches normal physiological glucose response compared to other rapid insulin analogues: A phase 1 randomized, crossover study.

AIMS: To compare the pharmacokinetic (PK) and glucodynamic (GD) characteristics of ultra rapid lispro (URLi; Eli Lilly and Company, Indianapolis, Indiana), Fiasp® (Novo Nordisk, Bagsvaerd, Denmark), Humalog® (Eli Lilly and Company) and NovoRapid® (Novo Nordisk), in patients with type 1 diabetes (T1D). MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a randomized, double-blind, four-period, crossover study, conducted in 68 patients with T1D. Patients received the same individualized subcutaneous dose of each study drug immediately prior to a liquid test meal. For comparison, 12 healthy subjects received the same test meal. RESULTS: URLi had a significantly faster insulin absorption compared to the other insulins tested. Early half-maximal drug concentration was reached 13 minutes after administration of URLi, which was 6 minutes faster than Fiasp, 13 minutes faster than Humalog, and 14 minutes faster than NovoRapid (all P <0.0001). Early insulin exposure was significantly greater and late insulin exposure was reduced after URLi compared to the other insulins. URLi achieved the greatest numerical reduction in postprandial glucose (PPG) at 2 hours post-meal (7 mg/dL vs Fiasp) and was significantly different from Humalog (21 mg/dL) and Novo Rapid (29 mg/dL). Additionally, glucose excursions over the first 3 hours post-meal with URLi were comparable to those in healthy subjects. CONCLUSIONS: URLi demonstrated the fastest insulin absorption and the greatest numeric PPG-lowering effect compared to the other insulins tested. URLi more closely matched the early physiological glucose control observed in healthy subjects.

Pharmacokinetics and Glucodynamics of Ultra Rapid Lispro (URLi) versus Humalog® (Lispro) in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: A Phase I Randomised, Crossover Study.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Ultra rapid lispro (URLi) is a novel insulin lispro formulation developed to more closely match physiological insulin secretion and improve postprandial glucose control. This study compared the insulin lispro pharmacokinetics and glucodynamics, safety and tolerability of URLi and Humalog® after a single subcutaneous dose in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). METHODS: This was a phase I, randomised, two-period, two-treatment, double-blind, crossover study in 38 patients with T2DM. At each dosing visit, patients received either 15 units of URLi or Humalog, followed by a 10 h automated euglycaemic clamp procedure. Serum insulin lispro and blood glucose were measured. RESULTS: Insulin lispro appeared in the serum 5 min faster (p < 0.0001) and exposure was 6.4-fold greater in the first 15 min (p < 0.0001) with URLi versus Humalog. Exposure beyond 3 h postdose was 26% lower and the duration of exposure was 51 min shorter with URLi versus Humalog. Onset of insulin action was 13 min faster (p < 0.0001) and insulin action was 4.2-fold greater within the first 30 min (p < 0.0001) with URLi versus Humalog. Insulin action beyond 4 h postdose was 20% lower (p = 0.0099) with URLi versus Humalog. Overall insulin lispro exposure and total glucose infused were similar for URLi and Humalog. Both treatments were well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study to investigate URLi in patients with T2DM using a euglycaemic clamp procedure. URLi demonstrated ultra-rapid pharmacokinetics and glucodynamics in patients with T2DM. CLINICALTRIALS. GOV IDENTIFIER: NCT03305822.

The Effect of Food Intake on the Pharmacokinetics of Oral Basal Insulin: A Randomised Crossover Trial in Healthy Male Subjects.

BACKGROUND: Oral insulin 338 is a novel tablet formulation of a long-acting basal insulin. This randomised, open-label, four-period crossover trial investigated the effect of timing of food intake on the single-dose pharmacokinetic properties of oral insulin 338. METHODS: After an overnight fast, 44 healthy males received single fixed doses of oral insulin 338 administered 0, 30, 60 or 360 min before consuming a standardised meal (500 kcal, 57 energy percent [E%] carbohydrate, 13 E% fat, 30 E% protein). Blood samples for pharmacokinetic assessment were taken up to 288 h post-dose. RESULTS: Total exposure (area under the concentration-time curve from time zero to infinity [AUCIns338,0-∞]) and maximum concentration (Cmax,Ins338) of insulin 338 were both significantly lower for 0 versus 360 min post-dose fasting (ratio [95% confidence interval (CI)]: 0.36 [0.26-0.49], p < 0.001, and 0.35 [0.25-0.49], p < 0.001, respectively). There were no significant differences in AUCIns338,0-∞ and Cmax,Ins338 for 30 or 60 versus 360 min post-dose fasting (ratio [95% CI] 30 versus 360 min: 0.85 [0.61-1.21], p = 0.36, and 0.86 [0.59-1.26], p = 0.42; ratio [95% CI] 60 versus 360 min: 0.96 [0.72-1.28], p = 0.77, and 0.99 [0.75-1.31], p = 0.95). The mean half-life was ~ 55 h independent of the post-dose fasting period. Oral insulin 338 was well-tolerated with no safety issues identified during the trial. CONCLUSIONS: Oral insulin 338 pharmacokinetics are not affected by food intake from 30 min after dosing, implying that patients with diabetes mellitus do not need to wait more than 30 min after a morning dose of oral insulin 338 before having their breakfast. This is considered important for convenience and treatment compliance. CLINICALTRIALS. GOV IDENTIFIER: NCT02304627.

Efficacy and safety of oral basal insulin versus subcutaneous insulin glargine in type 2 diabetes: a randomised, double-blind, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Oral insulin 338 (I338) is a long-acting, basal insulin analogue formulated in a tablet with the absorption-enhancer sodium caprate. We investigated the efficacy and safety of I338 versus subcutaneous insulin glargine (IGlar) in patients with type 2 diabetes. METHODS: This was a phase 2, 8-week, randomised, double-blind, double-dummy, active-controlled, parallel trial completed at two research institutes in Germany. Insulin-naive adult patients with type 2 diabetes, inadequately controlled on metformin monotherapy or combined with other oral antidiabetic drugs (HbA1c 7·0-10·0%; BMI 25·0-40·0 kg/m2), were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive once-daily I338 plus subcutaneous placebo (I338 group) or once-daily IGlar plus oral placebo (IGlar group). Randomisation occurred by interactive web response system stratified by baseline treatment with oral antidiabetic drugs. Patients and investigators were masked to treatment assignment. Weekly insulin dose titration aimed to achieve a self-measured fasting plasma glucose (FPG) concentration of 4·4-7·0 mmol/L. The recommended daily starting doses were 2700 nmol I338 or 10 U IGlar, and maximum allowed doses throughout the trial were 16 200 nmol I338 or 60 U IGlar. The primary endpoint was treatment difference in FPG concentration at 8 weeks for all randomly assigned patients receiving at least one dose of trial product (ie, the full analysis set). The trial has been completed and is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02470039. FINDINGS: Between June 1, 2015, and Oct 19, 2015, 82 patients were screened for eligibility and 50 patients were randomly assigned to the I338 group (n=25) or the IGlar group (n=25). Mean FPG concentration at baseline was 9·7 (SD 2·8) in the I338 group and 9·1 (1·7) in the IGlar group. Least square mean FPG concentration at 8 weeks was 7·1 mmol/L (95% CI 6·4-7·8) in the I338 group and 6·8 mmol/L (6·5-7·1) in the IGlar group, with no significant treatment difference (0·3 mmol/L [-0·5 to 1·1]; p=0·46). I338 and IGlar were well tolerated by patients. Adverse events were reported in 15 (60%) patients in the I338 group and 17 (68%) patients in the IGlar group. The most common adverse events were diarrhoea (three [12%] patients in each group) and nasopharyngitis (five [20%] in the I338 group and two [8%] in the IGlar group). Most adverse events were graded mild (47 of 68 events), and no severe adverse events were reported. One patient in the IGlar group had a treatment-emergent serious adverse event (urogenital haemorrhage of moderate intensity, assessed by the investigator as unlikely to be related to treatment; the patient recovered). Incidence of hypoglycaemia was low in both groups (n=7 events in the I338 group; n=11 in the IGlar group), with no severe episodes. INTERPRETATION: I338 can safely improve glycaemic control in insulin-naive patients with type 2 diabetes with no evidence of a difference compared with insulin glargine, a widely used subcutaneously administered basal insulin. Further development of this particular oral insulin project was discontinued because I338 doses were high and, therefore, production of the required quantities of I338 for wide public use was deemed not commercially viable. Improvement of technologies involved in the product's development is the focus of ongoing research. FUNDING: Novo Nordisk.

Analysis of "Laboratory and Benchtop Performance of a Mealtime Insulin Delivery System".

In the current issue of Journal of Diabetes Science and Technology, Dreon et al give a comprehensive overview of the technical performance of a wearable patch for bolus insulin delivery. The test results generated by the manufacturer of the bolus-patch provide the technical prerequisites for clinical application. As the device received FDA clearance already in 2010, positive results from the nonclinical performance testing were to be expected, but present nevertheless interesting insights into the device development. The single-dose accuracy verification results seem especially promising, but tighter accuracy criteria could have been specified and information on outliers is missing from the analysis. The clinical application of the bolus-patch is currently under investigation in a large-scale 44-week intervention trial.

Heart rate dynamics during cardio-pulmonary exercise testing are associated with glycemic control in individuals with type 1 diabetes.

INTRODUCTION: This study investigated the degree and direction (kHR) of the heart rate to performance curve (HRPC) during cardio-pulmonary exercise (CPX) testing and explored the relationship with diabetes markers, anthropometry and exercise physiological markers in type 1 diabetes (T1DM). MATERIAL AND METHODS: Sixty-four people with T1DM (13 females; age: 34 ± 8 years; HbA1c: 7.8 ± 1% (62 ± 13 mmol.mol-1) performed a CPX test until maximum exhaustion. kHR was calculated by a second-degree polynomial representation between post-warm up and maximum power output. Adjusted stepwise linear regression analysis was performed to investigate kHR and its associations. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was performed based on kHR for groups kHR < 0.20 vs. > 0.20 in relation to HbA1c. RESULTS: We found significant relationships between kHR and HbA1c (ß = -0.70, P < 0.0001), age (ß = -0.23, P = 0.03) and duration of diabetes (ß = 0.20, P = 0.04). Stepwise linear regression resulted in an overall adjusted R2 of 0.57 (R = 0.79, P < 0.0001). Our data revealed also significant associations between kHR and percentage of heart rate at heart rate turn point from maximum heart rate (ß = 0.43, P < 0.0001) and maximum power output relativized to bodyweight (ß = 0.44, P = 0.001) (overall adjusted R2 of 0.44 (R = 0.53, P < 0.0001)). ROC curve analysis based on kHR resulted in a HbA1c threshold of 7.9% (62 mmol.mol-1). CONCLUSION: Our data demonstrate atypical HRPC during CPX testing that were mainly related to glycemic control in people with T1DM.

Injecting without pressing a button: An exploratory study of a shield-triggered injection mechanism.

AIMS: To evaluate the injection success and user perception of a shield-triggered pen-injector mechanism. METHODS: The trial (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02627287) was an exploratory, two-centre, one-visit, open-label, randomized controlled trial conducted in Germany in 150 injection-experienced individuals with type 1 or type 2 diabetes. Participants self-administered subcutaneous injections of a placebo solution using a prototype shield-triggered pen-injector, DV3316 (Novo Nordisk, Bagsvaerd, Denmark), and FlexPen (Novo Nordisk, Bagsvaerd, Denmark). Injection success was evaluated on a yes/no basis by the investigator. Participant confidence, leakage of fluid and pain were evaluated after each injection. Pain and device experience were assessed after completion of all injections with each pen-injector. Overall preference was assessed after completion of all injections with both pen-injectors. RESULTS: Injection success was high with both pen-injectors (97.0%, DV3316 vs 99.7%, FlexPen). Participant confidence in dose delivery was similar for the two devices (88% of injections with DV3316 vs 81% with FlexPen were scored as "extremely confident"). The median injection pain score on a visual analogue scale (0-100) was 3 with DV3316 vs 4 with FlexPen after each injection, and 4 with DV3316 vs 5 with FlexPen after all injections with each device. After all injections were completed, 55% of participants reported an overall preference for DV3316 vs 21% for FlexPen. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates that injection-experienced individuals can achieve a high injection success rate with a shield-triggered pen-injector, with similar patient confidence and injection pain compared with FlexPen.

Impact of Injection Speed, Volume, and Site on Pain Sensation.

BACKGROUND: Painful subcutaneous insulin injections may decrease treatment compliance. Improving injection comfort therefore represents a particular area of technological research in which steady progress has been made since the introduction of the insulin pen in 1985. Injection pain can be influenced by many variables, but relatively little is known about their impact. This study investigated the impact of injection volume (range 0-2250 µL), speed (range 0-800 µL/sec), and site (abdomen vs thigh) on pain sensation. METHOD: In random order, patients (n = 80) with type 1 or type 2 diabetes received 24 saline injections subcutaneously through a 27G ultra-thin-wall needle. Injections were performed in the abdomen (n = 19) and thigh (n = 5) with predefined speed-volume combinations. For each injected speed-volume combination, patients scored their pain sensation on a 100 mm visual analog scale (VAS). RESULTS: The mean pain scores for speed-volume combinations were all in the lower part (<20 mm) of the VAS, indicating zero to mild pain. Pain sensation was statistically higher ( P < .05) with the 2250 µL volume compared to other injection volumes (range 4.3-5.1 mm) and with thigh compared to abdomen injections (2.1 mm). Pain sensation did not change with increasing injection speed. Patient acceptance of the injection pain was high for all injections (range 93.7-98.7%). CONCLUSIONS: In summary, large volume and thigh injections are rated more painful, but the clinical impact of these findings is likely marginal considering the low absolute pain levels and high patient acceptance rates. Injection speed does not influence pain sensation.

Investigation of Pump Compatibility of Fast-Acting Insulin Aspart in Subjects With Type 1 Diabetes.

BACKGROUND: Ultra-fast-acting insulins, such as fast-acting insulin aspart (faster aspart), have pharmacokinetic properties that may be advantageous for patients using continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII), provided that they are compatible with and safe to use in CSII. METHODS: Randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, actively controlled trial evaluating compatibility, efficacy, and safety of faster aspart in adults with type 1 diabetes using their own MiniMed Paradigm pump with Quick-Set or Silhouette infusion sets. Following run-in, subjects were randomized (2:1) to faster aspart (n = 25) or insulin aspart (n = 12) for 6 weeks. Primary endpoint was the number of microscopically confirmed episodes of infusion-set occlusions. RESULTS: No microscopically confirmed episodes of infusion-set occlusions were observed in either arm. Seven possible infusion-set occlusions were reported by five subjects (all faster aspart); none were prompted by a plug observed by the subject (prompted by unexplained hyperglycemia [n = 6] or leakage [n = 1]) and none were confirmed. Macroscopic and microscopic evaluation showed no color change or particle/crystal formation in the infusion sets. Premature infusion-set changes were reported in 44% and 16.7% of subjects in the faster aspart and insulin aspart groups, respectively. A nonsignificant trend toward better efficacy was observed with faster aspart (estimated treatment difference [ETD] [95% CI] in HbA1c change: -0.14% [-0.40, 0.11]). No new safety issues were found in either treatment group. CONCLUSIONS: Over 6 weeks of treatment, no microscopically confirmed infusion-set occlusions were observed for faster aspart or insulin aspart, indicating similar compatibility with CSII use.

Poor glycaemic control is associated with reduced exercise performance and oxygen economy during cardio-pulmonary exercise testing in people with type 1 diabetes.

BACKGROUND: To explore the impact of glycaemic control (HbA1c) on functional capacity during cardio-pulmonary exercise testing in people with type 1 diabetes. METHODS: Sixty-four individuals with type 1 diabetes (age: 34 ± 8 years; 13 females, HbA1c: 7.8 ± 1% (62 ± 13 mmol/mol), duration of diabetes: 17 ± 9 years) performed a cardio-pulmonary cycle ergometer exercise test until volitional exhaustion. Stepwise linear regression was used to explore relationships between HbA1c and cardio-respiratory data with p ≤ 0.05. Furthermore, participants were divided into quartiles based on HbA1c levels and cardio-respiratory data were analysed by one-way ANOVA. Multiple regression analysis was performed to explore the relationships between changes in time to exhaustion and cardio-respiratory data. Data were adjusted for confounder. RESULTS: HbA1c was related to time to exhaustion and oxygen consumption at the power output elicited at the sub-maximal threshold of the heart rate turn point (r = 0.47, R2 = 0.22, p = 0.03). Significant differences were found at time to exhaustion between QI vs. QIV and at oxygen consumption at the power output elicited at the heart rate turn point between QI vs. QII and QI vs. QIV (p < 0.05). Changes in oxygen uptake, power output and in oxygen consumption at the power output elicited at the heart rate turn point and at maximum power output explained 55% of the variance in time to exhaustion (r = 0.74, R2 = 0.55, p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Poor glycaemic control is related to less economical use of oxygen at sub-maximal work rates and an earlier time to exhaustion during cardio-pulmonary exercise testing. However, exercise training could have the same potential to counteract the influence of poor glycaemic control on functional capacity. Trial registration NCT01704417. Date of registration: October 11, 2012.