Tirzepatide vs Insulin Lispro Added to Basal Insulin in Type 2 Diabetes: The SURPASS-6 Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Tirzepatide is a glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist used for the treatment of type 2 diabetes. Efficacy and safety of adding tirzepatide vs prandial insulin to treatment in patients with inadequate glycemic control with basal insulin have not been described. Objective: To assess the efficacy and safety of tirzepatide vs insulin lispro as an adjunctive therapy to insulin glargine. Design, Setting, and Participants: This open-label, phase 3b clinical trial was conducted at 135 sites in 15 countries (participants enrolled from October 19, 2020, to November 1, 2022) in 1428 adults with type 2 diabetes taking basal insulin. Interventions: Participants were randomized (in a 1:1:1:3 ratio) to receive once-weekly subcutaneous injections of tirzepatide (5 mg [n = 243], 10 mg [n = 238], or 15 mg [n = 236]) or prandial thrice-daily insulin lispro (n = 708). Main Outcomes and Measures: Outcomes included noninferiority of tirzepatide (pooled cohort) vs insulin lispro, both in addition to insulin glargine, in HbA1c change from baseline at week 52 (noninferiority margin, 0.3%). Key secondary end points included change in body weight and percentage of participants achieving hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) target of less than 7.0%. Results: Among 1428 randomized participants (824 [57.7%] women; mean [SD] age, 58.8 [9.7] years; mean [SD] HbA1c, 8.8% [1.0%]), 1304 (91.3%) completed the trial. At week 52, estimated mean change from baseline in HbA1c with tirzepatide (pooled cohort) was -2.1% vs -1.1% with insulin lispro, resulting in mean HbA1c levels of 6.7% vs 7.7% (estimated treatment difference, -0.98% [95% CI, -1.17% to -0.79%]; P < .001); results met noninferiority criteria and statistical superiority was achieved. Estimated mean change from baseline in body weight was -9.0 kg with tirzepatide and 3.2 kg with insulin lispro (estimated treatment difference, -12.2 kg [95% CI, -13.4 to -10.9]). The percentage of participants reaching HbA1c less than 7.0% was 68% (483 of 716) with tirzepatide and 36% (256 of 708) with insulin lispro (odds ratio, 4.2 [95% CI, 3.2-5.5]). The most common adverse events with tirzepatide were mild to moderate gastrointestinal symptoms (nausea: 14%-26%; diarrhea: 11%-15%; vomiting: 5%-13%). Hypoglycemia event rates (blood glucose level <54 mg/dL or severe hypoglycemia) were 0.4 events per patient-year with tirzepatide (pooled) and 4.4 events per patient-year with insulin lispro. Conclusions and Relevance: In people with inadequately controlled type 2 diabetes treated with basal insulin, weekly tirzepatide compared with prandial insulin as an additional treatment with insulin glargine demonstrated reductions in HbA1c and body weight with less hypoglycemia. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04537923.

The vascular function effects of adding exenatide or meal insulin to basal insulin therapy in early type 2 diabetes.

OBJECTIVE: Basal insulin glargine has a neutral effect on cardiovascular risk in type 2 diabetes (T2DM). In practice, basal insulin is often paired with a glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP1-RA) or meal insulin; however, the cardiovascular implications of these combinations have not been fully elucidated. In this context, we sought to evaluate the vascular function effects of adding the GLP1-RA exenatide or meal insulin lispro to basal glargine therapy in early T2DM. METHODS: In this 20-week trial, adults with T2DM of < 7-years duration were randomized to 8-weeks treatment with (i) insulin glargine (Glar), (ii) glargine + thrice-daily lispro (Glar/Lispro), or (iii) glargine + twice-daily exenatide (Glar/Exenatide), followed by 12-weeks washout. At baseline, 8-weeks, and washout, fasting endothelial function was assessed with reactive hyperemia index (RHI) measurement by peripheral arterial tonometry. RESULTS: At baseline, there were no differences in blood pressure (BP), heart rate (HR) or RHI between participants randomized to Glar (n = 24), Glar/Lispro (n = 24), and Glar/Exenatide (n = 25). At 8-weeks, Glar/Exenatide decreased systolic BP (mean - 8.1 mmHg [95%CI - 13.9 to - 2.4], p = 0.008) and diastolic BP (mean - 5.1 mmHg [- 9.0 to - 1.3], p = 0.012) compared to baseline, with no significant changes in HR or RHI. Notably, baseline-adjusted RHI (mean ± SE) did not differ between the groups at 8-weeks (Glar 2.07 ± 0.10; Glar/Lispro 2.00 ± 0.10; Glar/Exenatide 1.81 ± 0.10; p = 0.19), nor did baseline-adjusted BP or HR. There were no differences between the groups in baseline-adjusted RHI, BP or HR after 12-weeks washout. CONCLUSION: Adding either exenatide or lispro to basal insulin therapy does not appear to affect fasting endothelial function in early T2DM. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.Gov NCT02194595.

Efficacy and safety of ultra-rapid lispro versus lispro in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes: The PRONTO-Peds trial.

AIMS: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of ultra-rapid lispro (URLi) versus lispro in a paediatric population with type 1 diabetes (T1D) in a Phase 3, treat-to-target study. MATERIALS AND METHODS: After a 4-week lead-in to optimize basal insulin, participants were randomized to double-blind URLi (n = 280) or lispro (n = 298) injected 0 to 2 minutes prior to meals (mealtime), or open-label URLi (n = 138) injected up to 20 minutes after start of meals (postmeal). Participants remained on pre-study basal insulin (degludec, detemir or glargine). The primary endpoint was glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) change from baseline after 26 weeks (noninferiority margin 4.4 mmol/mol [0.4%]). RESULTS: Both mealtime and postmeal URLi demonstrated noninferiority to lispro for HbA1c: estimated treatment difference (ETD) for mealtime URLi -0.23 mmol/mol (95% confidence interval [CI] -1.84, 1.39) and postmeal URLi -0.17 mmol/mol (95% CI -2.15, 1.81). Mealtime URLi reduced 1-hour postprandial glucose (PPG) daily mean (P = 0.001) and premeal to 1 hour postmeal PPG excursion daily mean (P < 0.001) versus lispro. The rate and incidence of severe, nocturnal or documented hypoglycaemia (<3.0 mmol/L [54 mg/dL]) were similar for all treatments. With mealtime URLi versus lispro, the rate of postdose hypoglycaemia (<3.0 mmol/L) was higher at ≤2 hours (P = 0.034). The incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events was similar for all treatments. More participants reported an injection site reaction with mealtime URLi (7.9%) versus postmeal URLi (2.9%) and lispro (2.7%). CONCLUSIONS: In children and adolescents with T1D, URLi demonstrated good glycaemic control, and noninferiority to lispro in HbA1c change for mealtime and postmeal URLi. When dosed at the beginning of meals, URLi reduced 1-hour PPG and PPG excursions versus lispro.

Multicenter, Randomized Trial of a Bionic Pancreas in Type 1 Diabetes.

BACKGROUND: Currently available semiautomated insulin-delivery systems require individualized insulin regimens for the initialization of therapy and meal doses based on carbohydrate counting for routine operation. In contrast, the bionic pancreas is initialized only on the basis of body weight, makes all dose decisions and delivers insulin autonomously, and uses meal announcements without carbohydrate counting. METHODS: In this 13-week, multicenter, randomized trial, we randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio persons at least 6 years of age with type 1 diabetes either to receive bionic pancreas treatment with insulin aspart or insulin lispro or to receive standard care (defined as any insulin-delivery method with unblinded, real-time continuous glucose monitoring). The primary outcome was the glycated hemoglobin level at 13 weeks. The key secondary outcome was the percentage of time that the glucose level as assessed by continuous glucose monitoring was below 54 mg per deciliter; the prespecified noninferiority limit for this outcome was 1 percentage point. Safety was also assessed. RESULTS: A total of 219 participants 6 to 79 years of age were assigned to the bionic-pancreas group, and 107 to the standard-care group. The glycated hemoglobin level decreased from 7.9% to 7.3% in the bionic-pancreas group and did not change (was at 7.7% at both time points) in the standard-care group (mean adjusted difference at 13 weeks, -0.5 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.6 to -0.3; P<0.001). The percentage of time that the glucose level as assessed by continuous glucose monitoring was below 54 mg per deciliter did not differ significantly between the two groups (13-week adjusted difference, 0.0 percentage points; 95% CI, -0.1 to 0.04; P<0.001 for noninferiority). The rate of severe hypoglycemia was 17.7 events per 100 participant-years in the bionic-pancreas group and 10.8 events per 100 participant-years in the standard-care group (P = 0.39). No episodes of diabetic ketoacidosis occurred in either group. CONCLUSIONS: In this 13-week, randomized trial involving adults and children with type 1 diabetes, use of a bionic pancreas was associated with a greater reduction than standard care in the glycated hemoglobin level. (Funded by the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04200313.).

Evaluation of the Pharmacokinetic Profile of Ultra Rapid Lispro Administered Subcutaneously at Different Injection Sites.

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 profile and glucodynamic response of URLi when administered subcutaneously into the abdomen, upper arm, or thigh. An intravenous (IV) bolus administration was included to determine the absolute bioavailability at each injection site. METHODS: In this Phase I, randomized, open-label, 4-period, crossover study, healthy subjects received a single dose of 15 U URLi subcutaneously into the abdomen, upper arm, or thigh, or by intravenous injection. Serum insulin lispro concentrations and glucodynamic response during a 10-hour euglycemic clamp procedure were assessed after URLi administration. FINDINGS: Total insulin lispro exposure was similar for the abdomen, upper arm, and thigh, and absolute bioavailability was ∼65% at each subcutaneous (SC) injection site. Total and peak insulin action were similar across these SC injection sites. The onset of appearance was <1 minute, and the time to early half-maximal drug concentration occurred at ∼10 minutes across these three SC injection sites. Onset of insulin action occurred at ∼22 minutes, and the early insulin action (for the first hour) was also similar across these SC injection sites. URLi was well tolerated after single SC injections and IV bolus administration. IMPLICATIONS: The pharmacokinetic and glucodynamic profiles of URLi were similar after a single SC dose into the abdomen, upper arm, or thigh. The rate of insulin lispro absorption and early insulin action were maintained regardless of the SC injection site. The current study supports SC injection of URLi into the abdomen, upper arm, and thigh. CLINICALTRIALS: gov identifier: NCT03232983.

Compatibility and Safety of Ultra Rapid Lispro with Continuous Subcutaneous Insulin Infusion in Patients with Type 1 Diabetes: PRONTO-Pump Study.

Background: Ultra rapid lispro (URLi) is a new insulin lispro formulation that has accelerated absorption and improved postprandial glucose control compared with insulin lispro (Humalog®). The compatibility and safety of URLi versus lispro were evaluated in patients with type 1 diabetes using continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (insulin pump). Methods: In this phase 3, double-blind, crossover study, 49 patients were randomized to two 6-week treatment periods, after a 2-week lead-in period on lispro. The primary endpoint was the rate of infusion set failures due to a pump occlusion alarm, or unexplained hyperglycemia with blood glucose >13.9 mmol/L (250 mg/dL) that did not decrease within 1 h after a correction bolus. Results: There was no significant difference in the rate of infusion set failures between URLi and lispro (0.03 vs. 0.05 events/30 days, P = 0.375). A higher rate of premature infusion set changes was observed with URLi (1.13 vs. 0.78 events/30 days; P = 0.028), translating to one additional infusion set change approximately every 3 months. A trend toward improved glycemic control was observed with URLi treatment: Time in range 3.9-10.0 mmol/L (71-180 mg/dL) was 65.7% ± 1.3% versus 63.0% ± 1.3%. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were reported by 46.9% of patients on URLi treatment and 18.8% on lispro. This difference was driven by an increase in infusion site reactions-more than 90% were mild. Incidence of all other TEAEs and severe hypoglycemia was similar between treatments. Conclusions: URLi was compatible with insulin pump use with a safety profile similar to lispro.

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

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

Randomized Double-Blind Clinical Trial Comparing Ultra Rapid Lispro With Lispro in a Basal-Bolus Regimen in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes: PRONTO-T2D.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of ultra rapid lispro (URLi) versus lispro in patients with type 2 diabetes on a basal-bolus insulin regimen. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: This was a phase 3, treat-to-target, double-blind 26-week study. After an 8-week lead-in to optimize basal insulin glargine or degludec in combination with prandial lispro treatment, patients were randomized to blinded URLi (n = 336) or lispro (n = 337) injected 0-2 min prior to meals. Patients could continue metformin and/or a sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor. The primary end point was change in HbA1c from baseline to 26 weeks (noninferiority margin 0.4%), with multiplicity-adjusted objectives for postprandial glucose (PPG) excursions during a standardized meal test. RESULTS: HbA1c improved for both URLi and lispro, and noninferiority was confirmed: estimated treatment difference (ETD) 0.06% (95% CI -0.05; 0.16). Mean change in HbA1c was -0.38% for URLi and -0.43% for lispro, with an end-of-treatment HbA1c of 6.92% and 6.86%, respectively. URLi was superior to lispro in controlling 1- and 2-h PPG excursions: 1-h ETD, -0.66 mmol/L (95% CI -1.01, -0.30); 2-h ETD, -0.96 mmol/L (-1.41, -0.52). Significantly lower PPG excursions were evident from 0.5 to 4.0 h postmeal with URLi treatment. There were no significant treatment differences in rates of severe or documented hypoglycemia (<3.0 mmol/L). Incidence of overall treatment-emergent adverse events was similar between treatments. CONCLUSIONS: URLi compared with lispro in a basal-bolus regimen was confirmed to be noninferior for HbA1c and superior to lispro for PPG control in patients with type 2 diabetes.

Use of lispro insulin for treatment of diabetic ketoacidosis in cats.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of lispro insulin for the treatment of feline diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA). Times to resolution of hyperglycaemia, ketosis and acidosis were compared between cats treated with continuous rate infusion (CRI) of lispro insulin and cats treated with CRI of regular insulin. METHODS: Client-owned cats with naturally occurring DKA, newly diagnosed with diabetes mellitus (DM) or already receiving treatment for DM, were included. Diagnosis of DKA involved the presence of at least two clinical signs consistent with DKA (eg, polyuria/polydipsia, anorexia, severe lethargy, vomiting and dehydration), blood glucose (BG) concentration >13.9 mmol/l (>250 mg/dl), blood beta hydroxybutyrate (BHB) concentration >2.5 mmol/l and venous pH <7.3 or bicarbonate <15 mEq/l. Cats were treated with a standard protocol of an intravenous (IV) CRI of regular insulin (group R) or lispro insulin (group L). The time to resolution of DKA was defined as the time interval from when the IV CRI of insulin began until marked hyperglycaemia (BG >13.9 mmol/l [>250 mg/dl]), ketosis (BHB concentration >1 mmol/l) and acidosis (venous pH <7.3 and/or bicarbonate <15 mEq/l) resolved. RESULTS: Eighteen DKA cases (nine per group) were enrolled into the study. There were no significant differences in the median time to resolution of three variables (hyperglycaemia, ketosis and acidosis) between the two groups. Two cats in group R developed hypoglycaemia during the CRI of insulin. One cat in group L and three cats in group R developed hypophosphataemia, which required phosphate supplementation. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: IV CRI of lispro insulin has few side effects and appears to be as effective as IV CRI of regular insulin in the treatment of cats with DKA.

A randomized controlled trial-based algorithm for insulin-pump therapy in hyperglycemic patients early after kidney transplantation.

Treating hyperglycemia in previously non-diabetic individuals with exogenous insulin immediately after kidney transplantation reduced the odds of developing Posttransplantation Diabetes Mellitus (PTDM) in our previous proof-of-concept clinical trial. We hypothesized that insulin-pump therapy with maximal insulin dosage during the afternoon would improve glycemic control compared to basal insulin and standard-of-care. In a multi-center, randomized, controlled trial testing insulin isophane for PTDM prevention, we added a third study arm applying continuous subcutaneous insulin lispro infusion (CSII) treatment. CSII was initiated in 24 patients aged 55±12 years, without diabetes history, receiving tacrolimus. The mean daily insulin lispro dose was 9.2±5.2 IU. 2.3±1.1% of the total insulin dose were administered between 00:00 and 6:00, 19.5±11.6% between 6:00 and 12:00, 62.3±15.6% between 12:00 and 18:00 and 15.9±9.1% between 18:00 and 24:00. Additional bolus injections were necessary in five patients. Mild hypoglycemia (52-60 mg/dL) occurred in two patients. During the first post-operative week glucose control in CSII patients was overall superior compared to standard-of-care as well as once-daily insulin isophane for fasting and post-supper glucose. We present an algorithm for CSII treatment in kidney transplant recipients, demonstrating similar safety and superior short-term efficacy compared to standard-of-care and once-daily insulin isophane.

A randomized, open-label, comparative, crossover trial on preference, efficacy, and safety profiles of lispro insulin u-100 versus concentrated lispro insulin u-200 in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: a possible contribution to greater treatment adherence.

BACKGROUND: Several outstanding pharmacological advances making innovative drugs sophisticateddevices available during the last few years. Nevertheless too many patients still disappointingly fail to meetthe metabolic targets suggested by current guidelines. Incorrect insulin administration techniques may greatly affect metabolic control in T2DM people. The aim of our study was to compare glycemic control associated with a concentrated insulin analog preparation (U-200 lispro) in people with T2DM to the one observed with standard U-100 lispro. The secondary endpoint of our study was patients' preference and performance ratings of U-200 lispro. METHODS: 126 patients with T2DM were enrolled. They were also assessed for limited joint mobility syndrome (LJMS),defined as limitation in at least two anatomical areas of the dominant upper extremity. After a 4-weekstructured insulin injection education period. Half of them were randomized to U-100 lispro, half to U-200 and after 12 weeks they were switched to the other preparation for 12 weeks. At the end a questionnaire was also administered to investigate patient preference. RESULTS: No significant variation in fasting blood glucose, HbA1c, severe or mild hypoglycemic rate and daily fast-acting insulin analog dose was observed with U-100 lispro while U-200 lispro treatment was associated with a significant improvement of all the above mentioned parameters and with around 20% decrease in insulin requirement. Moreover patients' answers to the questionnaire pointed out a higher preference for U-200 lispro for continuing treatment due to fewer difficulties completing injection. DISCUSSION: The explanation of better metabolic results with the U-200 device might be the lower inner piston inertia and volume and shorter duration of a complete injection. CONCLUSIONS: Checking for LJIMS before insulin prescription could be adopted as a standard practiceaimed at choosing the most suitable device for patient's specific characteristics and abilities. The use of U-200 lispro might improve treatment adherence and metabolic control. This would also result intocost reduction by saving about half the amount of pens per year and of time spent to both fill prescriptionand dump the pharmacy.

Dulaglutide 1.5 mg as an add-on option for patients uncontrolled on insulin: Subgroup analysis by age, duration of diabetes and baseline glycated haemoglobin concentration.

AIMS: To assess efficacy and safety of dulaglutide 1.5 mg combined with insulin, categorized by subgroups of baseline glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c; ≤9% and >9% [≤74.9 and >74.9 mmol/mol]), age (<65 and ≥65 years), and duration of diabetes (<10 and ≥10 years) at 6 months in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D). MATERIALS AND METHODS: This pooled analysis was conducted in a population of patients with T2D with similar baseline characteristics who were included in the AWARD-4 and AWARD-9 clinical trials and randomized to dulaglutide 1.5 mg (pooled mean baseline age 59 years, duration of diabetes 13 years, HbA1c 8.4% [68.3 mmol/mol]). Weight and hypoglycaemia were analysed by individual trial. In AWARD-4, dulaglutide plus lispro three times daily was assessed against glargine plus lispro three times daily. In AWARD-9, dulaglutide added to glargine was assessed against placebo added to glargine. Insulins were titrated to target in both trials. RESULTS: A total of 445 patients were included in this analysis (73% with HbA1c ≤9%, 27% [≤74.9 mmol/mol] with HbA1c >9% [>74.9 mmol/mol]; 70% aged <65 years, 30% aged ≥65 years; 36% with duration of diabetes <10 years, 64% with duration of diabetes ≥10 years). At 6 months, dulaglutide 1.5 mg significantly reduced HbA1c in all subgroups (P < .001), with the highest reduction observed in patients with baseline HbA1c >9% (>74.9 mmol/mol) (range - 1.3% to -2.5% [-14.2 to -27.3 mmol/mol]). The incidence rates of documented symptomatic and severe hypoglycaemia were similar in all subgroups in both trials. The most common adverse events observed in each trial were gastrointestinal in nature. CONCLUSION: Dulaglutide 1.5 mg combined with basal or prandial insulin is efficacious for patients with T2D irrespective of age, duration of diabetes or baseline HbA1c.

Basal insulin peglispro increases lipid oxidation, metabolic flexibility, thermogenesis and ketone bodies compared to insulin glargine in subjects with type 1 diabetes mellitus.

AIMS: When treated with basal insulin peglispro (BIL), patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) exhibit weight loss and lower prandial insulin requirements versus insulin glargine (GL), while total insulin requirements remain similar. One possible explanation is enhanced lipid oxidation and improved ability to switch between glucose and lipid metabolism with BIL. This study compared the effects of BIL and GL on glucose and lipid metabolism in subjects with T1DM. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifteen subjects with T1DM were enrolled into this open-label, randomised, crossover study, and received once-daily stable, individualised, subcutaneous doses of BIL and GL for 4 weeks each. Respiratory quotient (RQ) was measured using whole-room calorimetry, and energy expenditure (EE) and concentrations of ketone bodies (3-hydroxybutyrate) and acylcarnitines were assessed. RESULTS: Mean sleep RQ was lower during the BIL (0.822) than the GL (0.846) treatment period, indicating greater lipid metabolism during the post-absorptive period with BIL. Increases in carbohydrate oxidation following breakfast were greater during BIL than GL treatment (mean change in RQ following breakfast 0.111 for BIL, 0.063 for GL). Furthermore, BIL treatment increased total daily EE versus GL (2215.9 kcal/d for BIL, 2135.5 kcal/d for GL). Concentrations of ketone bodies and acylcarnitines appeared to be higher following BIL than GL treatment. CONCLUSIONS: BIL increased sleeping fat oxidation, EE, ketone bodies, acylcarnitines and post-prandial glucose metabolism when switching from conventional insulin, thus, restoring metabolic flexibility and increasing thermogenesis. These changes may explain the previously observed weight loss with BIL versus GL.

The PNPLA3 I148M variant is associated with transaminase elevations in type 2 diabetes patients treated with basal insulin peglispro.

Basal insulin peglispro (BIL) is a novel insulin with hepato-preferential action. In phase 3 trials, BIL showed significantly improved glycemic control but higher levels of transaminases (alanine aminotransferase (ALT) and aspartate aminotransferase (AST)), triglycerides (TGs) and liver fat content (LFC) compared with insulin glargine (GL). As variants in PNPLA3 (I148M) and TM6SF2 (E167K) are associated with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease, we assessed these variants in type 2 diabetes (T2D) patients randomized to receive BIL (n=1822) or GL (n=1270) in three phase 3 trials. Magnetic resonance imaging assessments of LFC were conducted in a subset of patients (n=296). Analyses showed α-corrected significant increases in change from baseline in AST (P=0.0004) and nominal increases in ALT (P=0.019), and LFC (P=0.035) for PNPLA3 (148M/M) genotypes in the BIL arm at 26 weeks but no significant associations in GL. PNPLA3 (148M/M) was also associated with increases in total cholesterol (P=0.014) and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (P=0.005) but not with hemoglobin A1c or TG. T2D patients with the PNPLA3 (148M/M) genotype treated with BIL may be more susceptible to increased liver fat deposition. The current data provide further insights into the biological role of PNPLA3 in lipid metabolism.

Identifying insulin treatment responders with a composite measure: beyond Hba1c < 7% in patients with type 2 diabetes.

OBJECTIVES: Many insulin-treated patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) do not reach hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) < 7%, but have clinically relevant HbA1c reductions. Using an integrated database (IDB) of 53 insulin lispro clinical trials and a real-world evidence (RWE) database of T2D patients initiating insulin therapy, an expanded HbA1c measure was used to identify responders to insulin therapy. METHODS: Analysis included 4,908 patients (IDB) and 1,134 patients (RWE) with T2D treated with any insulin regimen with a baseline and ≥1 post-baseline HbA1c. Responders were defined as patients with endpoint HbA1c < 7% (cut point [CP]) and/or either ≥1% absolute (ABS) decrease, and/or ≥10% relative (REL) decrease in HbA1c from baseline. The percentage of responders with CP vs ABS and concordance between ABS and REL were calculated. As the ABS and REL measures were highly correlated (94%), the ABS measure was used to compare characteristics of responders and non-responders by age, diabetes duration, race/ethnicity, baseline HbA1c, and insulin regimen at 24 weeks. RESULTS: In both databases, more responders were identified with ABS or REL (>62%) than CP (<41%). More ABS responders had a baseline HbA1c ≥ 9% and a shorter diabetes duration than non-responders. Basal insulin-treated patients in the IDB had 78.2% responders at 24 weeks, compared to 69.7% with basal/bolus or pre-mixed insulin (75.4%). Results were similar in the IDB and RWE. CONCLUSION: Composite HbA1c measures identified more patients with clinically meaningful responses to therapy than the broadly accepted HbA1c < 7% and may be useful in assessing clinical trials, clinical care, and quality measures.

Attenuated suppression of lipolysis explains the increases in triglyceride secretion and concentration associated with basal insulin peglispro relative to insulin glargine treatment in patients with type 1 diabetes.

AIMS: To test the hypothesis that, as well as lowering weight and increasing plasma triglyceride (TG) levels and hepatic fat compared with insulin glargine (GL) in patients with type 1 diabetes, the attenuated peripheral effects of basal insulin peglispro (BIL) may include increased free fatty acid flux to the liver, causing increased very-low-density lipoprotein (VLDL)-TG secretion and lipid oxidation, and decreased TG adipose tissue deposition. METHODS: In this open-label, randomized, 2-period crossover study, 14 patients with type 1 diabetes received once-daily, individualized, stable BIL or GL doses for 3 weeks. Palmitate flux was assessed using [9,10-3 H]palmitate infusion. VLDL-TG secretion, clearance and oxidation rate were assessed using primed-constant infusion of ex vivo labelled [1-14 C]VLDL-TG, while VLDL-TG storage rate was assessed using [9,10-3 H]VLDL-TG bolus injection. RESULTS: The VLDL-TG concentration and secretion rate, and palmitate flux were statistically significantly higher during BIL than during GL treatment (58%, 51% and 35%, respectively). The ratios of least squares (LS) geometric means for VLDL-TG clearance and oxidation were 0.92 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.72, 1.17) and 1.31 (95% CI 0.91, 1.90), respectively. The difference in LS means for VLDL-TG storage rate was -0.36 (95% CI -0.83, 0.12). CONCLUSIONS: BIL-treated patients had higher effective lipolysis, VLDL-TG secretion and VLDL-TG concentration compared with GL-treated patients, explaining the increased plasma TG concentrations reported previously. Data support attenuated effects of BIL on lipolysis, in addition to the recently described hepato-preferential glucodynamic effects.

Hypoglycemia Risk Related to Double Dose Is Markedly Reduced with Basal Insulin Peglispro Versus Insulin Glargine in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus in a Randomized Trial: IMAGINE 8.

BACKGROUND: Basal insulin peglispro (BIL) has a peripheral-to-hepatic distribution of action that resembles endogenous insulin and a prolonged duration of action with a flat pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic profile at steady state, characteristics that tend to reduce hypoglycemia risk compared to insulin glargine (GL). The primary objective was to demonstrate that clinically significant hypoglycemia (blood glucose ≤54 mg/dL [3.0 mmol/L] or symptoms of severe hypoglycemia) occurred less frequently within 84 h after a double dose (DD) of BIL than a DD of GL. METHODS: This was a randomized, double-blind, two-period crossover study in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) previously treated with insulin (N = 68). For the first 3 weeks of each of the two crossover periods, patients received an individualized dose of BIL or GL once nightly (stable dose for 2 weeks/period). Then, during a 7-day inpatient stay with frequent blood glucose monitoring and standardized meals, one DD of study insulin was given. Glucose was infused if blood glucose was ≤54 mg/dL (3.0 mmol/L) or for symptoms of severe hypoglycemia. RESULTS: Within 84 h after the DD, a significantly smaller proportion of patients experienced clinically significant hypoglycemia with BIL compared to GL (BIL, 6.6%; GL, 35.5%; odds ratio for BIL/GL 0.13 [95% confidence interval 0.04-0.39]; P < 0.001). Adverse event profiles were similar for the two insulins. Serum alanine aminotransferase and triglyceride levels were significantly higher with BIL versus GL. CONCLUSIONS: BIL has a markedly lower risk of hypoglycemia than GL when replicating a double-dose error in patients with T2D.

Efficacy and Safety of Biosimilar SAR342434 Insulin Lispro in Adults with Type 1 Diabetes Also Using Insulin Glargine-SORELLA 1 Study.

BACKGROUND: SAR342434 is a biosimilar follow-on of insulin lispro-Humalog®. This study aimed to show similar efficacy, safety, and immunogenicity of SAR342434 (SAR-Lis) versus insulin lispro-Humalog (Ly-Lis) in adult patients with type 1 diabetes (T1DM) treated with multiple daily injections while using basal insulin glargine (Lantus®; GLA-100). MATERIALS AND METHODS: SORELLA-1 was a randomized, open-label phase 3 study (NCT02273180). Patients completing the 6-month main study continued on SAR-Lis or Ly-Lis, as randomized, for a 6-month safety extension. Assessments included change in HbA1c, fasting plasma glucose (FPG), seven-point self-monitored plasma glucose (SMPG) profiles, hypoglycemic events, treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), and anti-insulin antibodies (AIAs). RESULTS: Five hundred seven patients were randomized (SAR-Lis n = 253; Ly-Lis n = 254). Least square (LS) mean (SEM) change in glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) (baseline to week 26; primary endpoint) was similar in both treatment groups (SAR-Lis: -0.42% [0.051]; Ly-Lis: -0.47% [0.050]). Noninferiority at prespecified 0.3% noninferiority margin and inverse noninferiority were demonstrated (LS mean difference of SAR-Lis vs. Ly-Lis: 0.06% [95% confidence interval: -0.084 to 0.197]). At week 52 (end of extension period) versus week 26, a small HbA1c increase was observed in both groups. FPG and seven-point SMPG profile changes, including postprandial glucose excursions, were similar between groups. At week 52, similar changes in mean daily mealtime and basal insulin doses were observed. Hypoglycemia, TEAEs, and AIAs (incidence, prevalence) did not differ between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Results from this controlled study in patients with T1DM also using GLA-100 support similar efficacy and long-term safety (including immunogenicity) of SAR-Lis and Ly-Lis.

The effects of basal insulin peglispro vs. insulin glargine on lipoprotein particles by NMR and liver fat content by MRI in patients with diabetes.

BACKGROUND: In Phase 2/3 studies of basal insulin peglispro (BIL) compared to insulin glargine, patients with type 1 or type 2 diabetes previously treated with insulin and randomized to BIL had an increase in serum triglycerides (TGs). To further understand lipoprotein changes, a lipid substudy which included liver fat content was designed to assess relationships among the measured variables for each diabetes cohort and compare the hepato-preferential insulin BIL to glargine. METHODS: In three cohorts of patients with diabetes (type 1, type 2 insulin naïve, and type 2 previously on insulin; n = 652), liver fat content (LFC) was determined by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and blood lipids were analyzed by nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) spectroscopy at baseline, 26 and 52 weeks of treatment. Apolipoproteins, adiponectin, and other lipid parameters were also measured. Descriptive statistics were done, as well as correlation analyses to look for relationships among LFC and lipoproteins or other lipid measures. RESULTS: In patients with type 1 diabetes treated with BIL, but not glargine, small LDL and medium and large VLDL subclass concentrations increased from baseline. In patients with type 2 diabetes previously on insulin and treated with BIL, large VLDL concentration increased from baseline. In insulin naïve patients with type 2 diabetes treated with BIL, there were very few changes, while in those treated with glargine, small LDL and large VLDL decreased from baseline. Baseline LFC correlated significantly in one or more cohorts with baseline large VLDL, small LDL, VLDL size, and Apo C3. Changes in LFC by treatment showed generally weak correlations with lipoprotein changes, except for positive correlations with large VLDL and VLDL size. Adiponectin was higher in patients with type 1 diabetes compared to patients with type 2 diabetes, but decreased with treatment with both BIL and glargine. CONCLUSIONS: The lipoprotein changes were in line with the observed changes in serum TGs; i.e., the cohorts experiencing increased TGs and LFC with BIL treatment had decreased LDL size and increased VLDL size. These data and analyses add to the currently available information on the metabolic effects of insulins in a very carefully characterized cohort of patients with diabetes. Clinicaltrials.gov registration numbers and dates NCT01481779 (2011), NCT01435616 (2011), NCT01454284 (2011), NCT01582451 (2012).

Once weekly glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist albiglutide vs. prandial insulin added to basal insulin in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: Results over 52 weeks.

We have previously reported that once-weekly albiglutide was noninferior to thrice-daily lispro for glycemic lowering, with decreased weight and risk of hypoglycemia, in patients inadequately controlled on basal insulin over 26 weeks. Findings after 52 weeks reveal similar responses to albiglutide as an add-on to insulin glargine.