Identifying patients with type 2 diabetes who might benefit from insulin pump therapy: Literature review, clinical opportunities, potential benefits and challenges.

The global prevalence and increasing incidence rates of type 2 diabetes (T2D) have rippling effects on healthcare costs and diminishing quality of life. Despite advances in technology, continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII), or insulin pump therapy, is rarely being recommended by healthcare professionals and is underutilized in T2D management. This review analyses the available literature on CSII use in T2D patients. In addition, it discusses which groups of patients may benefit from CSII, identifies potential challenges associated with CSII use, and suggests future directions for research to expand the applicability of this technology to the broader T2D population.

Real-World Persistence, Adherence, Hypoglycemia, and Health Care Resource Utilization in People With Type 2 Diabetes Who Continued With the Second-Generation Basal Insulin Analog Insulin Glargine 300 Units/mL or Switched to a First-Generation Basal Insulin (Insulin Glargine 100 Units/mL or Detemir 100).

People with type 2 diabetes receiving a second-generation basal insulin (BI) analog may be switched to a first-generation formulation for financial reasons or changes in health insurance. However, because second-generation BI analogs have more even pharmacokinetic profiles, longer durations of action (>24 vs. ≤24 hours), and more stable action profiles than first-generation BI analogs, such a change may result in suboptimal treatment persistence and/or adherence. This study compared treatment persistence, treatment adherence, rates of hypoglycemia, and health care resource utilization outcomes in people with type 2 diabetes who either continued treatment with the second-generation BI Gla-300 or switched to a first-generation BI. The study showed that continuing with Gla-300 was associated with a lower risk of discontinuing therapy, fewer emergency department visits, and lower hypoglycemia event rates than switching to a first-generation BI.

Survey Reveals Patient and Health Care Provider Experiences and Challenges With the Use of High Doses of Basal Insulin.

Type 2 diabetes is a chronic, progressive disease, and its management results in a high emotional burden on patients. Eventually many patients require and can benefit from the use of insulin. This article reports results of a survey of patients and health care providers regarding their experiences of and challenges with the use of basal insulin. Health care providers can play a key role in helping people with type 2 diabetes overcome the challenges associated with the use of basal insulin, including connecting with their emotional needs and understanding the stressors associated with managing diabetes.

New Digital Health Technologies for Insulin Initiation and Optimization for People With Type 2 Diabetes.

OBJECTIVE: The health and economic burden of type 2 diabetes is of global significance. Many people with type 2 diabetes eventually need insulin to help reduce their risk of serious associated complications. However, barriers to the initiation and/or optimization of insulin expose people with diabetes to sustained hyperglycemia. In this review, we investigated how new and future technologies may provide opportunities to help overcome these barriers to the initiation and/or optimization of insulin. METHODS: A focused literature search of PubMed and key scientific congresses was conducted. Software tools and devices developed to support the initiation and/or optimization of insulin were identified by manually filtering >300 publications and conference abstracts. RESULTS: Most software tools have been developed for smartphone platforms. At present, published data suggest that the use of these technologies is associated with equivalent or improved glycemic outcomes compared with standard care, with additional benefits such as reduced time burden and improved knowledge of diabetes among health care providers. However, there remains paucity of good-quality evidence. Most new devices to support insulin therapy help track the dose and timing of insulin. CONCLUSION: New digital health tools may help to reduce barriers to optimal insulin therapy. An integrated solution that connects glucose monitoring, dose recording, and titration advice as well as records comorbidities and lifestyle factors has the potential to reduce the complexity and burden of treatment and may improve adherence to titration and treatment, resulting in better outcomes for people with diabetes.

Efficacy and safety of adding sotagliflozin, a dual sodium-glucose co-transporter (SGLT)1 and SGLT2 inhibitor, to optimized insulin therapy in adults with type 1 diabetes and baseline body mass index ≥ 27 kg/m2.

Sotagliflozin, a dual sodium-glucose co-transporter (SGLT)1/SGLT2 inhibitor, is currently approved in Europe as an adjunct to optimal insulin therapy in adults with type 1 diabetes (T1D) and a body mass index (BMI) ≥ 27 kg/m2 . In this post hoc analysis, efficacy at 24 weeks and safety at 52 weeks from pooled phase 3 clinical trials were evaluated in patients with baseline BMI ≥ 27 kg/m2 . Sotagliflozin 200 mg and 400 mg added to insulin reduced glycated haemoglobin level and increased time in range assessed by continuous glucose monitoring versus placebo and also reduced body weight and systolic blood pressure. Differences in efficacy endpoints between sotagliflozin and placebo tended to be greater among patients with BMI ≥ 27 kg/m2 compared to those with baseline BMI < 27 kg/m2 . Consistent with published results for the entire population, fewer severe hypoglycaemia and documented hypoglycaemia ≤3.1 mmol/L events and a higher incidence of diabetic ketoacidosis occurred with sotagliflozin versus placebo in patients with BMI ≥ 27 kg/m2 . Sotagliflozin as an adjunct to optimized insulin therapy in overweight/obese patients with T1D addressed some unmet needs and may help achieve optimal glycaemic control, mitigating weight gain without increasing hypoglycaemia risk in this high-risk population.

Practical Strategies to Help Reduce Added Sugars Consumption to Support Glycemic and Weight Management Goals.

Overconsumption of added sugars is a key contributor to the growing obesity, prediabetes, and type 2 diabetes pandemics. The nutrition therapy guidance of the American Diabetes Association recognizes that using low- and no-calorie sweeteners (LNCS) to reduce consumption of added sugars can reduce low-nutrient-density sources of calories and carbohydrate to beneficially affect glycemia, weight, and cardiometabolic health. This article provides information for primary care providers, diabetes care and education specialists, and other diabetes clinicians on the safety of LNCS and summarizes research evidence on the role of LNCS in glycemic and weight management. It also provides practical strategies for counseling individuals about how to integrate LNCS into their healthy eating pattern.

Differences between patients with type 1 diabetes with optimal and suboptimal glycaemic control: A real-world study of more than 30 000 patients in a US electronic health record database.

AIMS: To use electronic health record data from real-world clinical practice to assess demographics, clinical characteristics and disease burden of adults with type 1 diabetes (T1D) in the United States. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Retrospective observational study of adults with T1D for ≥24 months at their first visit with a T1D diagnosis code ("index date") between July 2014 and June 2016 in the Optum Humedica database. Demographic characteristics, acute complications (severe hypoglycaemia [SH], diabetic ketoacidosis [DKA]), microvascular complications, cardiovascular (CV) events and health care resource utilization during the 12 months before the index date ("baseline period") were compared between patients with optimal versus suboptimal glycaemic control (glycated haemoglobin [HbA1c] <7.0% vs. ≥7.0% [53 mmol/mol]) at the closest measurement to the index date. RESULTS: Of 31 430 adults with T1D, 79.9% had suboptimal glycaemic control (mean HbA1c 8.8% [73 mmol/mol]). These patients were more likely to be younger, African American, uninsured or on Medicaid, obese, smokers, have uncontrolled hypertension and have depression. Despite worse glycaemic control and increased CV risk factors of uncontrolled hypertension, obesity and smoking, rates of coronary heart disease and stroke were not higher in these patients. Patients with suboptimal glycaemic control also experienced more diabetes complications (including SH, DKA and microvascular disease) and utilized more emergency care, with more emergency department visits and inpatient stays. CONCLUSION: This real-world study of >30 000 adults with T1D showed that individuals with suboptimal versus optimal glycaemic control differed significantly in terms of health care coverage, comorbidities, diabetes-related complications, health care utilization and CV risk factors. However, suboptimal control was not associated with increased risk of CV outcomes.

Patients With Type 2 Diabetes Are Willing to Do More to Overcome Therapeutic Inertia: Results From a Double-Blind Survey.

We performed a survey of 305 patients with type 2 diabetes receiving basal insulin and 240 physicians to measure key contrasts and similarities in patients' preferences and providers' beliefs and perceptions regarding insulin use. Many patients reported being more frustrated with their lack of treatment progress than physicians were aware of. Patients were also more likely to say they would do more than their physicians believed they would to better manage their diabetes. Identifying priorities and setting clear goals and timelines for achieving glycemic control could provide an opportunity to address these differences and reduce patients' frustration.

Sodium-glucose co-transporter inhibitors as adjunctive treatment to insulin in type 1 diabetes: A review of randomized controlled trials.

Many patients with type 1 diabetes (T1D) struggle to achieve glycaemic control and experience significant fluctuations in glucose concentrations, despite insulin treatment. Sodium-glucose co-transporter (SGLT)-2 inhibitors and dual SGLT-1/2 inhibitors increase glucose elimination via the kidneys and reduce hyperglycaemia via insulin-independent mechanisms. This review examines available efficacy and safety data for these agents under investigation as adjunctive therapy for T1D. Across randomized trials of up to 52 weeks, SGLT-2 inhibitors or SGLT-1/2 inhibitors as an adjunct to insulin demonstrated significant reductions in glycated haemoglobin, glucose exposure, and measures of glycaemic variability, as well as increased time in the target glycaemic range, compared with placebo. Non-glycaemic benefits included reductions in body weight and insulin doses, as well as improvements in some cardiovascular risk factors and treatment satisfaction. SGLT-2 inhibitors and SGLT-1/2 inhibitors were associated with similar rates of hypoglycaemia but a higher incidence of genitourinary infections, compared with placebo. Diabetic ketoacidosis occurred more often with SGLT-2 inhibitors and SGLT-1/2 inhibitors vs placebo, although the incidence was generally low. Risk mitigation strategies in light of clinical trial data are also discussed. Positive data from randomized controlled trials of the SGLT-2 inhibitor dapagliflozin have led to the approval of dapagliflozin as an adjunct to insulin in adults with T1D having body mass index ≥27 kg/m2 in whom insulin does not provide adequate glycaemic control in Europe and to approval as an adjunct to insulin for adults with T1D in Japan.

Efficacy and safety of a morning injection of insulin glargine 300 units/mL versus insulin glargine 100 units/mL in adult patients with type 1 diabetes: A multicentre, randomized controlled trial using continuous glucose monitoring.

Video abstract: View a video abstract for this article. AIMS: This multicentre (N = 104), randomized controlled phase 4 study compared the efficacy and safety of insulin glargine 300 units/mL (Gla-300) with insulin glargine 100 units/mL (Gla-100) in patients with type 1 diabetes (T1D). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients were randomized 1:1 to self-perform morning Gla-300 or Gla-100 injections daily for 16 weeks. The primary endpoint was percentage of time blood glucose remained in the target range (70-180 mg/dL) during Week 15/16, measured by blinded continuous glucose monitoring. Secondary endpoints included incidence and rate of nocturnal symptomatic hypoglycaemia (≤70 mg/dL), glycaemic variability parameters and safety assessments. Exploratory analyses were performed in patients with glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) <7.5% at Week 16. RESULTS: Overall, 638 patients with T1D were included (Gla-300, n = 320; Gla-100, n = 318). In the modified intent-to-treat (mITT) population, no differences between Gla-300 and Gla-100 were observed in time in range, in glycaemic variability, or in incidence or rates of nocturnal symptomatic hypoglycaemia. In exploratory analyses of patients with HbA1c <7.5% at Week 16, Gla-300 recipients had greater improvement in time in range over 24 hours, during the day and at night compared with Gla-100 recipients (P < 0.05), with small increases in overall hypoglycaemia. CONCLUSIONS: Time in range and glycaemic variability were similar for Gla-300 and Gla-100 recipients at the end of study in the mITT population of relatively well-controlled patients with T1D. In patients with end-of-study HbA1c <7.5%, exploratory analyses suggested that Gla-300 provided improvements in time in range compared with Gla-100.

A GUIDE TO FOLLOW-ON BIOLOGICS AND BIOSIMILARS WITH A FOCUS ON INSULIN.

OBJECTIVE: Many healthcare providers in the U.S. are not familiar with follow-on biologics and biosimilars nor with their critical distinctions from standard generics. Our aim is to provide a detailed review of both, with a focus on insulins in the U.S. regulatory system. METHODS: Literature has been reviewed to provide information on various aspects of biosimilars and a follow-on biologic of insulin. This will include structure, efficacy, cost, switching, and legal issues. RESULTS: Biologic products are large, complex molecules derived from living sources. Follow-on biologics are copies of the original innovator biologics. It is not possible to copy their structure exactly, leading to possible differences in efficacy and safety. Thus, regulations involving biologics are complex. Follow-on biologics are regulated under two Federal laws until March 23, 2020: the Public Health Service Act (PHS Act) and the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act. Biosimilars are follow-on biologics which have been approved via the PHS Act. They consist of those which are "highly similar" to the reference drug and those which are "expected" to produce the same clinical result as the reference drug (interchangeable biosimilars). Interchangeable biosimilars have been determined by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to be substitutable by the pharmacist "without the intervention" of the prescriber. From the patient perspective, switching to a follow-on biologic may necessitate a change in delivery device, which may create issues for patient adherence and dosing. CONCLUSION: Although they present several challenges in terms of regulation and acceptance, follow-on biologics have the potential to significantly reduce costs for patients requiring insulin therapy. ABBREVIATIONS: BLA = biologics license application EU = European Union FDA = Food and Drug Administration FD&C = Food, Drug, and Cosmetic HCPCS = Healthcare Common Procedure Coding System INN = internatinal nonproprietary name NDA = new drug application PHS = Public Health Service.

The past, present, and future of basal insulins.

Insulin production by the pancreas follows a basic pattern where basal levels of insulin are secreted during fasting periods, with prandial increases in insulin associated with food ingestion. The aim of insulin therapy in patients with diabetes is to match the endogenous pattern of insulin secretion as closely as possible without causing hypoglycaemia. There are several optimal pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties of long-acting basal insulins that can help to achieve this aim, namely, as follows: activity that is flat and as free of peaks as possible, a duration of action of ≥24-h, and as little day-to-day variation as possible. The long-acting basal insulins are a fundamental therapy for patients with type 1 and type 2 diabetes, and those that are currently available have many benefits; however, the development of even longer-acting insulins and improved insulin delivery techniques may lead to better glycemic control for patients in the future. Established long-acting basal insulins available in the United States and Europe include insulin glargine 100 units/mL and insulin detemir, both of which exhibit similar glycemic control to that of the intermediate-acting neutral protamine Hagedorn insulin, but with a reduction in hypoglycaemia. Newer insulin products available include new insulin glargine 300 units/mL (United States and Europe) and the ultra-long-acting insulin degludec (Europe) with basal insulin peglispro currently in development. These new insulins demonstrate different pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic profiles and longer durations of action (>24 h) compared with insulin glargine 100 units/mL, which may lead to potential benefits. The introduction of biosimilar insulins may also broaden access to insulins by reducing treatment costs. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Clinical Outcomes Associated With a Collaborative Pharmacist-Endocrinologist Diabetes Intense Medical Management "Tune Up" Clinic in Complex Patients.

BACKGROUND: No previous studies exist examining the impact of a short-term pharmacist-endocrinologist collaborative practice model on glycemic control in complex patients. OBJECTIVE: Evaluate outcomes associated with a PharmD-Endocrinologist Diabetes Intense Medical Management (DIMM) "tune up" clinic for complex patients. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of 99 patients referred to DIMM clinic versus a comparator group of 56 primary care provider (PCP) patients meeting the same criteria (adult type 2 diabetes patients, glycosylated hemoglobin [A1C] ≥ 8%, follow-up visit within 6 months) in a Veterans Affairs Medical Center. DIMM clinic used a short-term model that coupled personalized clinical care with real-time, patient-specific diabetes education during two to four 60-minute visits over 6 months. PCP patients received usual care. Primary outcome was mean A1C change after 6 months. Secondary measures included fasting blood glucose, lipids, blood pressure, weight, body mass index, and percentage of patients meeting goals. RESULTS: Patients in each group had an average of 8 and were taking 12 to 14 medications daily. Mean A1C (%) improvement in DIMM group was significantly greater at 6 months (-2.4 [SD = 2.1] vs -0.8 [SD = 1.7]; P < 0.001), than PCP group. Percentage meeting A1C goal levels (<7%, <8%, and <9%) was significantly greater at 3 and 6 months compared with baseline in the DIMM group (P < 0.001) versus (only <8%) at 3 and 6 months compared with baseline in PCP group. CONCLUSIONS: The DIMM clinic "tune up" model demonstrates a successful collaborative practice which helped complex diabetes patients achieve glycemic control in a 6-month period.

HOW PATIENTS WITH TYPE 1 DIABETES TRANSLATE CONTINUOUS GLUCOSE MONITORING DATA INTO DIABETES MANAGEMENT DECISIONS.

OBJECTIVE: To understand how patients use continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) data in their diabetes management. METHODS: We surveyed patients who regularly used CGM (>6 days per week), using 70 questions, many scenario-based. The survey had 6 sections: patient characteristics, general CGM use, hypoglycemia prevention and management, hyperglycemia prevention and management, insulin dosing adjustments (both for incidental hyperglycemia not at meals and at mealtimes), and real-time use versus retrospective analysis. RESULTS: The survey was completed by 222 patients with type 1 diabetes. In response to a glucose of 220 mg/dL, the average correction dose adjustment based on rate of change arrows varied dramatically. Specifically, when the CGM device showed 2 arrows up (glucose increasing >3 mg/dL/minute), respondents stated they would increase their correction bolus, on average, by 140% (range, 0 to 600%). Conversely, 2 arrows down (glucose decreasing >3 mg/dL/minute) caused respondents to reduce their dose by 42%, with 24% omitting their dose entirely. Furthermore, 59% of respondents stated they would delay a meal in response to rapidly rising glucose, whereas 60% would wait until after a meal to bolus in response to falling glucose levels. With a glucose value of 120 mg/dL and a falling glucose trend, 70% of respondents would prophylactically consume carbohydrates to avoid hypoglycemia. CONCLUSION: CGM users utilize CGM data to alter multiple aspects of their diabetes care, including insulin dose timing, dose adjustments, and in hypoglycemia prevention. The insulin adjustments are much larger than common recommendations. Additional studies are needed to determine appropriate insulin adjustments based on glucose trend data.

BIOSIMILARS AND NEW INSULIN VERSIONS.

OBJECTIVE: To provide clinicians with an overview of similar biologic products including biosimilars and new insulin versions available in the U.S. and of key issues associated with such products, including differences in manufacturing and regulatory approaches and their impact on clinical use. METHODS: We reviewed the relevant clinical and regulatory literature. RESULTS: Patent protections for many biologics including several insulin preparations have or will expire shortly. This opens the door for new insulin versions to enter the U.S. and global marketplace. The development, manufacturing, and approval process for similar biologic products is more complex than for generic versions of small molecules. Most similar biologic products in the U.S. will be submitted for approval under section 351(k), a newly created biosimilar regulatory pathway. However, some biologics, including new insulin versions, will be submitted via the existing 505(b)(2) regulatory pathway. These regulatory pathways have implications for how such products may be labeled, how they may be dispensed, and how patients may perceive them. The immunogenicity of biologics can affect safety and efficacy and can be altered through subtle changes in manufacturing. With the arrival of new insulin versions, health care providers will need to understand the implications of interchangeability, therapeutic equivalence, substitution, switching, and new delivery devices. CONCLUSION: An understanding of the above topics will be important as physicians, payers, and patients choose between similar versions of a reference listed biologic product.

Addressing the Burden of Multiple Daily Insulin Injections in Type 2 Diabetes with Insulin Pump Technology: A Narrative Review.

The growing prevalence of type 2 diabetes (T2D) remains a leading health concern in the US. Despite new medications and technologies, glycemic control in this population remains suboptimal, which increases the risk of poor outcomes, increased healthcare resource utilization, and associated costs. This article reviews the clinical and economic impacts of suboptimal glycemic control in patients on basal-bolus insulin or multiple daily injections (MDI) and discusses how new technologies, such as tubeless insulin delivery devices, referred to as "patch pumps", have the potential to improve outcomes in patients with T2D.

Prioritizing Patient Experiences in the Management of Diabetes and Its Complications: An Endocrine Society Position Statement.

Diabetes can be an arduous journey both for people with diabetes (PWD) and their caregivers. While the journey of every person with diabetes is unique, common themes emerge in managing this disease. To date, the experiences of PWD have not been fully considered to successfully implement the recommended standards of diabetes care in practice. It is critical for health-care providers (HCPs) to recognize perspectives of PWD to achieve optimal health outcomes. Further, existing tools are available to facilitate patient-centered care but are often underused. This statement summarizes findings from multistakeholder expert roundtable discussions hosted by the Endocrine Society that aimed to identify existing gaps in the management of diabetes and its complications and to identify tools needed to empower HCPs and PWD to address their many challenges. The roundtables included delegates from professional societies, governmental organizations, patient advocacy organizations, and social enterprises committed to making life better for PWD. Each section begins with a clinical scenario that serves as a framework to achieve desired health outcomes and includes a discussion of resources for HCPs to deliver patient-centered care in clinical practice. As diabetes management evolves, achieving this goal will also require the development of new tools to help guide HCPs in supporting PWD, as well as concrete strategies for the efficient uptake of these tools in clinical practice to minimize provider burden. Importantly, coordination among various stakeholders including PWD, HCPs, caregivers, policymakers, and payers is critical at all stages of the patient journey.

GLP-1 agonists in type 1 diabetes.

Despite years of research in the field of type 1 diabetes, patients with the disease remain without a therapeutic agent that can alter the underlying immune response in a clinically beneficial way. Glucagon-like peptide 1 agonist therapies have shown some promising effects in terms of positively affecting overall beta cell health and increasing beta cell mass, primarily in mouse models. The three agents of this class currently available for patients with type 2 diabetes have shown beneficial clinical effects on glucose control in this patient population. The purpose of this article is to review the preclinical and clinical data of these agents to date with a focus on the potential immunological and clinical benefits these drugs may have on patients with type 1 diabetes.

Early Intervention by Family Physicians to Delay Type 1 Diabetes.

KEY TAKEAWAYS: Type 1 diabetes (T1D) is an autoimmune disease mediated by T cells that target and destroy insulin-producing beta cells. Individuals with genetic risk of T1D will progress at variable rates through 3 stages of immune activation and development of islet autoimmunity. Measuring pancreatic islet cell autoantibodies predicts risk for progression that can take weeks to years before the onset of T1D. Screening options available to family physicians can identify persons at risk or in the early stages of T1D, such as first- and second-degree relatives or those with a family history of autoimmune disorders, to ultimately offer proven interventions that may delay or prevent the condition. Screening can reduce emergency room visits, hospitalizations, and intensive care unit admissions for diabetic ketoacidosis, which can be fatal, and can educate and prepare individuals and families for a smoother transition to insulin therapy when necessary. Recent advances in technology and understanding of the immune pathogenesis of T1D has resulted in emerging disease-modifying therapies that are changing how family physicians approach delaying and potentially preventing or reversing the disease.