Fasting and postprandial plasma glucose contributions to hemoglobin A1c and time in range in people with diabetes on multiple daily injection insulin therapy: Results from the PRONTO-T1D and PRONTO-T2D clinical trials.

AIMS: To investigate contributions of changes in fasting plasma glucose (FPG) and postprandial glucose (PPG) to changes in hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) and time-in-range (TIR, 70-180 mg/dL) in people with type 1 diabetes (T1D) and type 2 diabetes (T2D) treated with multiple daily injections (MDI) of insulin lispro (rapid/ultra-rapid formulations). METHODS: Multivariate regression models were used to quantify the contributions of FPG and PPG reductions to change in HbA1c and TIR using data from the PRONTO-T1D (N = 1222) and PRONTO-T2D (N = 673) clinical trials. TIR was derived from 10-point self-monitored blood glucose (SMBG) profiles overall, as well as from continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) in the PRONTO-T1D CGM substudy (n = 269/1222). RESULTS: A 1 mmol/L FPG reduction corresponded with a 0.09-0.12 % (95 % confidence interval [CI] 0.06-0.15 %) HbA1c reduction in PRONTO-T1D and 0.17-0.26 % (95 % CI 0.13-0.30 %) in PRONTO-T2D (both p < 0.0001). A 1 mmol/L PPG reduction corresponded with a 0.05-0.09 % (95 % CI 0.01-0.12 %) HbA1c reduction in PRONTO-T1D (p < 0.001) and 0.10-0.15 % (95 % CI 0.05-0.19 %) in PRONTO-T2D (p < 0.0001). Reductions in FPG and PPG were significantly associated with increased TIR whether derived from SMBG (7.87-12.95 % [95 % CI 6.81-14.23 %]; all p < 0.0001) or CGM (3.35-4.18 % [95 % CI 2.11-5.39 %]; all p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: FPG and PPG significantly impact HbA1c and TIR. Balanced management of both FPG and PPG is important to achieve glycemic goals for people with diabetes on MDI insulin therapy. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: PRONTO-T1D ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03214367; PRONTO-T2D ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03214380.

Postprandial Glucose Excursions with Ultra-Rapid Insulin Analogs in Hybrid Closed-Loop Therapy for Adults with Type 1 Diabetes.

Objective: To evaluate postprandial glucose control when applying (1) faster-acting insulin aspart (Fiasp) compared to insulin aspart and (2) ultra-rapid insulin lispro (Lyumjev) compared to insulin lispro using the CamAPS FX hybrid closed-loop algorithm. Research Design and Methods: We undertook a secondary analysis of postprandial glucose excursions from two double-blind, randomized, crossover hybrid closed-loop studies contrasting Fiasp to standard insulin aspart, and Lyumjev to standard insulin lispro. Endpoints included incremental area under curve (iAUC)-2h, iAUC-4h, 4 h postprandial time in target range, time above range, and time below range. It was approved by independent research ethics committees. Results: Two trials with 8 weeks of data from 51 adults with type 1 diabetes were analyzed and 7137 eligible meals were included. During Lyumjev compared with insulin lispro, iAUC-2h and iAUC-4h were significantly decreased following breakfast (mean difference 92 mmol/L per 2 h (95% confidence interval [CI]: 56 to 127); P < 0.001 and 151 mmol/L per 4 h (95% CI: 74 to 229); P < 0.001, respectively) and the evening meal (P < 0.001 and P = 0.011, respectively). Mean time in target range (3.9-10.0 mmol/L) for 4 h postprandially significantly increased during Lyumjev with a mean difference of 6.7 percentage points (95% CI: 3.3 to 10) and 5.7 percentage points (95% CI: 1.4 to 9.9) for breakfast and evening meal, respectively. In contrast, there were no significant differences in iAUC-2h, iAUC-4h, and the other measures of postprandial glucose control between insulin aspart and Fiasp during breakfast, lunch, and evening meal (P > 0.05). Conclusion: The use of Lyumjev with CamAPS FX closed-loop system improved postprandial glucose excursions compared with insulin lispro, while the use of Fiasp did not provide any advantage compared with insulin aspart. Clinical Trial Registration numbers: NCT04055480, NCT05257460.

Ultra rapid lispro improves postprandial glucose control versus lispro in combination with basal insulin: a study based on CGM in type 2 diabetes in China.

Aim: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of URLi (ultra rapid lispro insulin) compared to insulin lispro as bolus insulin with basal insulin using CGM in the individuals with type 2 diabetes(T2D) in China. Methods: This was a double-blind, randomized, parallel, prospective, phase 3 study. Subjects with uncontrolled T2D were recruited and randomized 1:2 into the insulin lispro and URLi groups. Subjects received a consistent basal insulin regimen during the study and self-administered insulin lispro or URLi before each meal throughout the treatment period. Subjects underwent a 3-day continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) at the baseline and endpoint respectively, and then CGM data were analyzed. The primary endpoint was to compare the difference in postprandial glucose (PPG) control using CGM between the two groups. Results: A total of 57 subjects with T2D completed the study. Our CGM data showed that postprandial glucose excursions after breakfast (BPPGE) in the URLi group was lower than that in the insulin lispro group (1.59 ± 1.57 mmol/L vs 2.51 ± 1.73 mmol/L, p = 0.046). 1-hour PPG was observed to decrease more in the URLi group than that in the insulin lispro group (-1.37 ± 3.28 mmol/L vs 0.24 ± 2.58 mmol/L, p = 0.047). 2-hour PPG was observed to decrease more in the URLi group than that in the insulin lispro group (-1.12 ± 4.00 mmol/L vs 1.22 ± 2.90 mmol/L, p = 0.021). The mean HbA1c level decreased by 1.1% in the URLi group and 0.99% in the insulin lispro group, with no treatment difference (p = 0.642). In the CGM profile, TBR was not significantly different between the two groups (p = 0.743). The weight gain also did not differ between the two groups (p = 0.303). Conclusion: URLi can control breakfast PPG better than insulin lispro in adults with T2D in China, while it is non-inferior in improving HbA1c. The incidence of hypoglycemic and weight gain were similar between the two groups.

Efficacy and Safety of Ultra-rapid Lispro Insulin in Managing Type-1 and Type-2 Diabetes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Background: Mechanistically, subcutaneous ultra-rapid lispro (URLi) is faster than lispro. Whether this translates into a better post-prandial glucose (PPG) and glycemic control in type-1 diabetes (T1DM) and type-2 diabetes (T2DM) is unclear. Hence, we undertook this meta-analysis. Methods: Databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving patients with T1DM/T2DM receiving URLi in intervention-arm, and placebo/prandial insulin as control. The primary outcome was a change in PPG. Secondary outcomes were alterations in glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c), fasting plasma glucose (FPG), time in range (TIR), and adverse events. Results: Data from six RCTs (3687 patients) were analyzed. Lispro was the control arm in all RCTs. T1DM patients receiving mealtime URLi had lower HbA1c [mean difference (MD) -0.07%; 95% confidence interval (CI): -0.12 to - 0.01; P = 0.02; I2 = 42%] and 1-h PPG [MD - 1.18 mmol/L; 95% CI: -1.91 to - 0.44; P = 0.002; I2 = 100%]. T1DM patients receiving post-meal URLi had comparable HbA1c [MD 0.07%; 95% CI: -0.01 to 0.15; P = 0.07; I2 = 55%] and 1-h PPG [MD 0.22 mmol/L; 95% CI: -0.80 to 1.24; P = 0.67; I2 = 100%). T1DM patients on pumps receiving URLi had comparable TIR [MD 1.70; 95% CI: -0.29 to 3.69; P = 0.09; I2 = 98%], lower time in blood glucose <3 mmol/L with increased infusion-set reactions. T2DM patients receiving mealtime URLi had lower 1-h PPG [MD - 0.66 mmol/L; 95% CI: -0.69 to - 0.63; P < 0.00001; I2 = 0%(LH), 2-h-PPG [MD - 0.96 mmol/L; 95% CI: -1.00 to - 0.92; P < 0.00001; I2 = 0%], higher FPG [MD 0.18 mmol/L; 95% CI: 0.11-0.24; P < 0.00001; I2 = 20%], and higher HbA1c [MD 0.07%; 95% CI: -0.06 to 0.08; P < 0.00001; I2 = 0%]. Conclusion: Pre-meal URLi is better than lispro with regard to PPG control. Post-meal URLi is as good as lispro for PPG control. Post-meal URLi is inferior to pre-meal URLi for PPG control.

Increased Time in Range with Ultra Rapid Lispro Treatment in Participants with Type 2 Diabetes: PRONTO-Time in Range.

INTRODUCTION: To evaluate time in range metrics and HbA1c in people with type 2 diabetes (T2D) treated with ultra rapid lispro (URLi) using continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) for the first time in this population. METHODS: This was a Phase 3b, 12-week, single-treatment study in adults with T2D on basal-bolus multiple daily injection (MDI) therapy using basal insulin glargine U-100 along with a rapid-acting insulin analog. Following a 4-week baseline period, 176 participants were newly treated with prandial URLi. Participants used unblinded CGM (Freestyle Libre). Primary endpoint was time in range (TIR) (70-180 mg/dl) during the daytime period at Week 12 compared to baseline with gated secondary endpoints of HbA1c change from baseline and 24-h TIR (70-180 mg/dl). RESULTS: Improved glycemic control was observed at Week 12 versus baseline including mean daytime TIR (change from baseline [Δ] 3.8%; P = 0.007), HbA1c (Δ - 0.44%; P < 0.001), and 24-h TIR (Δ 3.3%; P = 0.016) with no significant difference in time below range (TBR). After 12 weeks, there was a statistically significant decrease in postprandial glucose incremental area under curve, overall, across all meals, within 1 h (P = 0.005) or 2 h (P < 0.001) after the start of a meal. Basal, bolus, and total insulin dose were intensified with increased bolus/total dose ratio at Week 12 (50.7%) versus baseline (44.5%; P < 0.001). There were no severe hypoglycemia events during the treatment period. CONCLUSIONS: In people with T2D, URLi in an MDI regimen was efficacious with improved glycemic control including TIR, HbA1c, and postprandial glucose without increased hypoglycemia/TBR. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04605991.

Assessing Time in Range with Postprandial Glucose-Focused Titration of Ultra Rapid Lispro (URLi) in People with Type 1 Diabetes.

INTRODUCTION: To assess time in range (TIR) (70-180 mg/dL) with postprandial glucose (PPG)-focused titration of ultra rapid lispro (URLi; Lyumjev®) in combination with insulin degludec in people with type 1 diabetes (T1D). METHODS: This phase 2, single-group, open-label, exploratory study was conducted in 31 participants with T1D on multiple daily injection therapy. Participants were treated with insulin degludec and Lispro for an 11-day lead-in and then URLi for a 46-day treatment period consisting of 35-day titration and 11-day endpoint maintenance period. Glucose targets for the titration period were PPG < 140 mg/dL or < 20% increase from premeal, fasting glucose 80-110 mg/dL, and overnight excursion ± 30 mg/dL or less. Participants used the InPen™ bolus calculator and Dexcom G6 continuous glucose monitoring (CGM). RESULTS: Primary endpoint mean TIR (70-180 mg/dL) with URLi during the maintenance period was 70.2%. TIR (70-180 mg/dL) and times below/above range were not significantly different with URLi (maintenance) versus lispro (lead-in). HbA1c decreased from 7.1% at screening to 6.8% at endpoint (least squares mean [LSM] change from baseline, - 0.36%; P < 0.001). Fructosamine and 1,5-anhydroglucitol improved (P < 0.001). Mean hourly glucose using CGM was reduced from 8:00 AM to 4:00 PM with URLi. Overall highest PPG excursion across meals was significantly reduced at URLi endpoint compared with lispro lead-in (mean 56.5 vs 72.4 mg/dL; P < 0.001). Insulin-to-carbohydrate ratio (U/X g) was reduced (more insulin given) at breakfast at URLi endpoint vs lead-in (LSM 9.0 vs 9.7 g; P = 0.002) and numerically decreased at other meals. Total daily insulin dose (TDD) was higher at URLi endpoint compared with lispro lead-in (mean 50.2 vs 47.0 U; P = 0.046) with similar prandial/TDD ratio (mean 52.1% vs 51.2%). There were no severe hypoglycemia events during the study. CONCLUSIONS: URLi in a basal-bolus regimen focusing on PPG targets demonstrated improved overall glycemic control and reduced PPG excursions without increased hypoglycemia in participants with T1D. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrial.gov, NCT04585776.

Efficacy and Safety of Ultra-Rapid Lispro in Younger and Older Patients with Type 2 Diabetes: Randomized Double-Blind PRONTO-T2D Study.

INTRODUCTION: Ultra-rapid lispro (URLi) is a new prandial insulin lispro formulation. In the PRONTO-T2D study, URLi, in a basal-bolus regimen with glargine or degludec, was non-inferior to lispro (Humalog®) for HbA1c reduction and superior for postprandial glucose (PPG) control. We evaluated the efficacy and safety of URLi compared to lispro in younger versus older patients in PRONTO-T2D. METHODS: PRONTO-T2D was a phase 3, 26-week, double-blind, treat-to-target study in people with type 2 diabetes. In this sub-group analysis, we compared URLi to lispro on the change from baseline  in HbA1c and rate of level 2 hypoglycemia (< 54 mg/dl) in patients aged < 65 (N = 406) and ≥ 65 years (N = 267). RESULTS: At baseline, patients < 65 versus ≥ 65 years had mean age of 54.9 versus 69.2 years and duration of diabetes 14.6 versus 19.4 years. Mean HbA1c at screening and randomization was 8.35 and 7.34%, respectively, in patients < 65 years, and 8.21 and 7.23%, respectively, in patients ≥ 65 years. At endpoint, mean HbA1c with URLi versus lispro was 6.92 versus 6.90%, respectively, in patients < 65 years and 6.89 versus 6.79%, respectively, in patients ≥ 65 years. URLi significantly reduced 1- and 2-h PPG excursions with a standardized meal test in both age groups: between-treatment differences at 1-h postmeal for younger and older patients was - 9.8 and - 15.1 mg/dl, respectively; and at 2-h postmeal, - 18.7 and - 15.1 mg/dl, respectively, all p < 0.05. Severe and nocturnal hypoglycemia were similar between groups. The relative rate (URLi/Humalog) of level 2 hypoglycemia was lower in older versus younger patients, with a significant treatment-by-age interaction observed. No differential treatment effects were noted for insulin dose, weight, and fasting and maximum glucose after the meal test. CONCLUSIONS: URLi, in a basal-bolus regimen, resulted in endpoint HbA1c < 7% and significantly lower PPG excursions compared to lispro in both age groups, with reduced level 2 hypoglycemia in older versus younger patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03214380.

Ultra rapid lispro improves postprandial glucose control versus lispro in combination with insulin glargine/degludec in adults with type 2 diabetes: a prospective, randomized, double-blind, phase 3 trial.

Ultra rapid lispro (URLi) is a novel formulation of insulin lispro designed to more closely match the physiological insulin response to a meal, with the aim of improving postprandial glucose (PPG) control. We conducted a multinational, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, treat-to-target, 26-week, phase 3 trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of URLi in adults with type 2 diabetes (T2D). After an 8-week lead-in period during which basal insulin glargine or degludec was optimized, adults with T2D were randomized (2:1) to prandial URLi (n = 395) or lispro (n = 200). The primary endpoint was non-inferiority of URLi versus lispro in glycated hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) change from baseline to week 26. Multiplicity-adjusted analyses were performed to assess the superiority of URLi in 1- and 2-h PPG excursions during a mixed-meal tolerance test (MMTT) and HbA1c change at week 26. URLi showed non-inferiority for HbA1c change at week 26 versus lispro (least-squares mean [LSM] difference, 0.07%; 95% confidence interval: -0.07, 0.21). HbA1c was reduced by 0.56% and 0.63% with URLi and lispro, respectively, with no significant treatment difference (P = 0.321). URLi provided superior PPG excursion control versus lispro at 1 h (LSM difference: -14.6 mg/dL, P < 0.001) and 2 h (LSM difference: -21.8 mg/dL, P < 0.001) as well as other time points (30-240 min) during the MMTT. Incremental area under the glucose curve during the MMTT was also significantly lower with URLi versus lispro. The safety profiles were generally similar between treatment groups. In conclusion, URLi was superior to lispro for PPG control, with non-inferiority in HbA1c improvement, in adults with T2D.

Long-term Efficacy and Safety of Ultra Rapid Lispro in Japanese Patients With Type 1 Diabetes: Subpopulation Analysis of the 52-Week PRONTO-T1D Study.

INTRODUCTION: The PRONTO-T1D study evaluated the efficacy and safety of ultra rapid lispro (URLi) versus lispro in adults with type 1 diabetes mellitus. After 26 weeks of treatment, mealtime and postmeal URLi provided effective and comparable glycemic control in a prespecified subpopulation analysis of Japanese patients from PRONTO-T1D. We present the results of a 52-week study which evaluated the long-term efficacy and safety of URLi in Japanese patients. METHODS: After an 8-week lead-in period to optimize basal insulin treatment, Japanese patients were randomized to one of three treatment groups: the 52-week double-blind mealtime URLi (n = 62) or mealtime lispro (n = 59) group, respectively, or the 52-week open-label postmeal URLi (n = 46) group. RESULTS: At week 52, there were no statistically significant differences in change from baseline in hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) between Japanese patients on URLi and those on lispro; the least-squares mean (LSM) treatment difference was 0.04% (95% confidence interval [CI] - 0.18, 0.25) between mealtime URLi and lispro, and 0.04% (95% CI - 0.19, 0.28) between postmeal URLi and mealtime lispro. No significant between-group differences were observed in the number of patients achieving the HbA1c target of < 7.0% (20.0, 30.5 and 16.3% of those on mealtime URLi, mealtime lispro and postmeal URLi, respectively). Daily average blood glucose levels in the 10-point self-monitored blood glucose profiles at week 52 were similar between treatments. However, compared with lispro, lower blood glucose levels were observed for the mealtime URLi group at the morning 1- and 2-h postmeal time points with LSM differences of - 32.7 mg/dL (- 1.82 mmol/L) (p = 0.005) and - 23.2 mg/dL (- 1.29 mmol/L) (p = 0.029), respectively. There were no significant treatment differences in the incidences of treatment-emergent adverse events, documented hypoglycemia and severe hypoglycemia; however, the rate of documented hypoglycemia was lower in the mealtime URLi arm compared with the lispro arm. CONCLUSIONS: Overall glycemic control and improved postprandial glucose via self-monitoring was maintained in Japanese patients following 52 weeks of treatment with URLi versus lispro, including postmeal URLi administration. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03214367.

Long-Term Efficacy and Safety of Ultra Rapid Lispro (URLi) in Adults with Type 1 Diabetes: The PRONTO-T1D Extension.

INTRODUCTION: The PRONTO-T1D study, which evaluated the efficacy and safety of ultra rapid lispro (URLi) versus lispro in adults with type 1 diabetes (T1D), met the primary endpoint of noninferiority of HbA1c change from baseline compared to lispro at 26 weeks. We present results of an additional 26-week treatment phase evaluating long-term efficacy and safety of URLi. METHODS: In this phase 3, treat-to-target study, subjects were randomized to double-blind mealtime URLi, lispro, or open-label postmeal URLi with insulin degludec or glargine for 26 weeks. Subjects in the double-blind URLi (n = 451) and lispro (n = 442) groups continued for another 26 weeks to assess long-term efficacy and safety. RESULTS: HbA1c increased marginally during the long-term maintenance period (week 26-52) in both groups to 7.47% (URLi) and 7.54% (lispro). At week 52, there were no statistically significant treatment differences in change from baseline HbA1c with a least-squares mean treatment difference (95% confidence interval) of - 0.06% (- 0.16, 0.03). Proportions of patients with HbA1c < 7% at week 52 were similar (URLi, 26.8%; lispro, 24.5%). Self-monitored blood glucose (SMBG) showed that 1-h (9.23 versus 10.14 mmol/L) and 2-h (8.40 versus 9.53 mmol/L) postmeal daily mean glucose was statistically significantly (p < 0.001) lower with URLi than lispro. The rate and incidence of severe, documented, and postprandial hypoglycemia (< 54 mg/dl [3.0 mmol/L]) were similar between treatments, but URLi demonstrated a 31% lower rate in the period more than 4 h after meals, (p = 0.023). Injection site reactions were reported by 3.3% of patients on URLi and 0.9% on lispro. The incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events was similar between treatments. CONCLUSION: Overall glycemic control and improved postprandial glucose via SMBG were maintained after 52 weeks with URLi versus lispro, suggesting that the efficacy of URLi is preserved during long-term treatment in patients with T1D. No long-term safety issues were identified with URLi. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03214367.

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.

Ultra-Rapid Lispro Improves Postprandial Glucose Control and Time in Range in Type 1 Diabetes Compared to Lispro: PRONTO-T1D Continuous Glucose Monitoring Substudy.

Background: This study evaluated glucose control by continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) during treatment with ultra-rapid lispro (URLi) or lispro used in combination with insulin glargine or degludec in adults with type 1 diabetes in a substudy of the PRONTO-T1D study. Methods: Ambulatory glucose profiles were evaluated in 269 patients from PRONTO-T1D assigned to double-blind URLi (n = 97) or lispro (n = 99) given 0-2 min before the start of the meal (mealtime), or open-label URLi (n = 73) given 20 min after the meal (postmeal URLi). Blinded CGM was used for up to 14 days before baseline and the 26-week primary endpoint. The primary objective was to compare mealtime URLi and lispro with respect to incremental area under the serum glucose concentration versus time curve from 0 to 2 h (iAUC0-2h) after breakfast. Results: Mealtime URLi was superior in reducing the iAUC0-2h when compared to lispro for breakfast (least squares mean [LSM] difference -28.1 mg·h/L, P = 0.048) and for all meals combined. iAUC0-3h and iAUC0-4h were also reduced. Postmeal URLi resulted in similar postprandial glucose (PPG) control to mealtime lispro, but less optimal PPG control compared to mealtime URLi. Mealtime URLi increased daytime time in range (71-180 mg/dL [3.9-10.0 mmo/L]) (LSM difference = +43.6 min, P = 0.020) and decreased nighttime time in hypoglycemia (LSM difference ≤70 mg/dL [3.9 mmol/L] = -11.5 min, P = 0.009) compared to mealtime lispro. Conclusions: Results of this CGM substudy support the improved PPG control seen with mealtime URLi in the PRONTO-T1D study and show that mealtime URLi resulted in improved daytime time in target range.

Ultra-Rapid Lispro Efficacy and Safety Compared to Humalog® in Japanese Patients with Type 1 Diabetes: PRONTO-T1D Subpopulation Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: We evaluated the efficacy and safety of ultra-rapid lispro (URLi) in comparison to lispro in a subgroup analysis of Japanese adults with type 1 diabetes mellitus from the phase 3 PRONTO-T1D trial. METHODS: After an 8-week lead-in to optimize basal insulin treatment, patients were randomized to 52-week double-blind mealtime URLi or lispro, or 26-week open-label postmeal URLi. The primary endpoint was change in hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) from baseline (week 0) to week 26 between mealtime URLi and lispro. The multiplicity adjusted objectives were 1- and 2-h postprandial glucose (PPG) excursions after a meal test between mealtime URLi and lispro, and change in HbA1c from baseline to week 26 between postmeal URLi and mealtime lispro. RESULTS: This manuscript presents pre-specified exploratory analyses of 26-week data from Japanese patients randomized to double-blind URLi (n = 62) or lispro (n = 59), or open-label URLi (n = 46). Mean baseline HbA1c levels were 7.52% for mealtime URLi, 7.44% for lispro, and 7.51% for postmeal URLi at randomization. At week 26, the least squares mean (LSM) difference compared to lispro was 0.04% (95% confidence interval [CI] - 0.14 to 0.22) for mealtime URLi, and 0.16% (95% CI - 0.04 to 0.35) for postmeal URLi. In comparison to lispro, mealtime URLi resulted in statistically significantly lower 1- and 2-h PPG excursions during the mixed-meal tolerance test. LSM differences were - 40.5 mg/dL, 95% CI - 59.5 to 21.4 (- 2.25 mmol/L, 95% CI - 3.3 to - 1.2) for 1-h PPG excursions and - 51.7 mg/dL, 95% CI - 81.7 to - 21.8 (- 2.87 mmol/L, 95% CI - 4.5 to - 1.2) for 2-h PPG excursions at week 26. There were no significant treatment differences in rates of severe/overall hypoglycemia, or incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Mealtime and postmeal URLi provide effective and comparable glycemic control in Japanese patients. Mealtime URLi demonstrated more effective PPG control compared to lispro. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03214367.

Ultra-Rapid Lispro Efficacy and Safety Compared to Humalog® in Japanese Patients With Type 2 Diabetes: PRONTO-T2D Subpopulation Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of ultra-rapid lispro (URLi) versus lispro in a subgroup analysis of Japanese adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) from the phase 3 PRONTO-T2D trial. METHODS: After an 8-week lead-in period during which patients transitioned to insulin lispro 3 times a day before main meals in association with basal insulin (glargine or degludec), the patients were randomized to 26 weeks of double-blind URLi or lispro injected immediately prior to meals. The primary endpoint was change in hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) from baseline to week 26 between URLi and lispro. The multiplicity-adjusted objectives were 1- and 2-h postprandial glucose (PPG) excursions after a test meal and change in HbA1c from baseline to week 26 in the URLi and lispro groups. RESULTS: Results were obtained from prespecified exploratory analyses of 26-week data in Japanese patients randomized to receive URLi (n = 47) or lispro (n = 46). Mean baseline HbA1c levels significantly improved during the lead-in period to a baseline value of 7.50% and 7.60% in patients subsequently randomized to the URLi and lispro treatment groups, respectively. At week 26, the least squares mean (LSM) difference in HbAc1 between the URLi and lispro groups was 0.13% (95% confidence interval [CI] - 0.12 to 0.39) (1.4 mmol/mol, 95% CI - 1.3 to 4.2). Although there were no significant differences in PPG excursions at any time-point, numerically smaller PPG excursions were consistently observed from 30 min to 3 h during the mixed-meal tolerance test in patients on URLi compared to those on lispro. LSM differences in PPG excursions at week 26 were - 10.5 mg/dL (95% CI - 32.7 to 11.7) (- 0.58 mmol/L, 95% CI - 1.82 to 0.65) at 1 h and - 14.9 mg/dL (95% CI - 40.3 to 10.5) (- 0.83 mmol/L, 95% CI - 2.24 to 0.58) at 2 h. There were no significant differences between treatments in rates of severe/overall hypoglycemia or incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: URLi administered as prandial insulin in combination with basal insulin provides effective glycemic control when administered immediately before a meal in Japanese patients with T2DM. URLi was well tolerated in this population. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03214380.

Efficacy and safety of ultra rapid lispro in the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus: a randomized controlled clinical trial / 中华内科杂志

Objective:To evaluate and compare the efficacy and safety of ultra-rapid lispro insulin (URLi) and humalog lispro (HL) in the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus.Methods:This was an international multicenter, double-blind, randomized controlled study. From May 2019 to January 2021, a total of 481 patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus, who had been using insulin for at least 90 days and had poor glycemic control, were included. These patients were recruited from 34 research centers in China, including Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine Affiliated Sixth People′s Hospital. They were assigned to either the URLi group (319 patients) or the HL group (162 patients) using stratified blocked randomization. The primary endpoint was the change in hemoglobin A 1c (HbA 1c) relative to baseline after 26 weeks of treatment. Secondary endpoints included the proportion of patients who achieved HbA 1c<7.0% and ≤6.5% after 26 weeks of treatment, 1-h postprandial glucose (1hPG) or 2-h postprandial glucose (2hPG) excursions during a mixed meal tolerance test at week 26, as well as safety parameters. Continuous variables were compared using mixed model repeated measures or analysis of covariance, and categorical variables were compared using logistic regression or Fisher′s exact test. Results:Data based on the Chinese subgroup showed that there were no statistically significant differences between the URLi and HL groups in terms of male percentage [56.1% (179/319) vs. 56.2% (91/162); P=0.990], age [(59.5±8.4) vs. (59.6±9.3) years; P=0.839] and other baseline characteristics. Regarding the change in HbA 1c relative to baseline, the URLi group was non-inferior to the HL group (-0.59%±0.05% vs. -0.66%±0.06%; P=0.312). There were no statistically significant differences between the URLi and HL groups in proportion of patients who achieved HbA 1c<7.0% [47.3% (138/292) vs. 45.2% (70/155); P=0.907] and≤6.5% [27.7% (81/292) vs. 27.7% (43/155); P=0.816]. The excursions in 1hPG [(6.20±0.21) vs. (6.90±0.25) mmol/L; P=0.001] and 2hPG [(8.10±0.27) vs. (9.30±0.31) mmol/L; P<0.001] were lower in the URLi group than the HL group, with statistically significant differences. In terms of safety, there were no statistically significant differences in the percentage of subjects who reported treatment-emergent adverse events between the URLi and HL groups [49.8% (159/319) vs. 50.0% (81/162); P=1.000]. The event rate of nocturnal hypoglycemia was lower in the URLi group than the HL group, with statistically significant differences [(0.53±0.10) vs. (0.89±0.16) events per patient -year; P=0.040]. Conclusions:With good glycemic control, URLi showed non-inferiority for HbA 1c improvement versus HL and was superior to HL for postprandial glucose excursion control. Meanwhile the rate and incidence of nocturnal hypoglycemia were lower in the URLi group than the HL group.