Oral insulin (ORMD-0801) in type 2 diabetes mellitus: A dose-finding 12-week randomized placebo-controlled study.

AIMS: To assess the safety and efficacy of multiple daily doses of oral insulin (ORMD-0801) in subjects with type 2 diabetes (T2DM) over 12 weeks. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Participants with T2DM on metformin or combination oral therapy with glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) levels ≥ 7.5% (58 mmol/mol) were randomized to receive ORMD-0801 8 mg or 16 mg once (QD) or twice (BID) daily, or 32 mg QD, BID or three times daily (TID) over a 12-week period. RESULTS: A total of 373 subjects were randomized to active treatment or placebo (~60% male, age ~ 56 years, HbA1c 9%-9.8%; 75-84 mmol/mol). Placebo-adjusted HbA1c changes from baseline to Week 12 were observed with ORMD-0801 8 mg BID (-7.15 ± 3.57 mmol/mol [-0.65% ± 0.33%]; P = 0.046). However, a significant site interaction was observed in two sites. After excluding these, HbA1c reduction was observed with 8 mg QD (-0.81 ± 0.37%; -8.89 ± 4.01 mmol/mol; P = 0.028, n = 15), 8 mg BID (-0.82 ± 0.37%; -8.95 ± 4.08 mmol/mol; P = 0.029, n = 17), 32 mg QD (-0.54 ± 0.26%; -5.89 ± 2.78 mmol/mol;P = 0.036, n = 69) and 32 mg BID (-0.53 ± 0.26%; -5.80 ± 2.83 mmol/mol; P = 0.042, n = 68). No effect was observed with 16 mg QD (0.25 ± 0.37%; 2.76 ± 3.99 mmol/mol; P = 0.48, n = 18), 16 mg BID (-0.36 ± 0.40%; -3.97 ± P = 0.36, n = 15) or 32 mg TID (-0.45 ± 0.27%, -4.89 ± 2.90 mmol/mol; P = 0.093, n = 69). Continuous glucose monitor and serum glucose measurements showed similar trends but were not significant. ORMD-0801 was safe, well tolerated and not associated with weight gain or hypoglycaemia. CONCLUSIONS: Oral insulin (ORMD-0801) induced greater reductions in HbA1c when compared to placebo, and was safe and well tolerated in individuals with uncontrolled T2DM. The efficacy and safety findings support continued development of the 8-mg dose at bedtime, which is currently being evaluated in two Phase 3 trials.

Efficacy and safety of 28-day treatment with oral insulin (ORMD-0801) in patients with type 2 diabetes: A randomized, placebo-controlled trial.

AIM: To assess the safety and efficacy of oral insulin (ORMD-0801) in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D). MATERIALS AND METHODS: After a 2-week washout of other medications, adult metformin-treated patients with T2D were randomized to receive placebo or 16 or 24 mg ORMD-0801, once daily, at bedtime, for 28 days. The mean change from baseline weighted mean night-time glucose levels was determined from 2 nights of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) recordings during the placebo run-in and last week of treatment. RESULTS: In total, 188 patients (HbA1c: 7.82% ± 0.88% [placebo] and 8.08% ± 1.11% [pooled ORMD-0801 group]) were enrolled. In the placebo group, mean night-time CGM increased from baseline by 13.7 ± 26.1 mg/dL, whereas the increase was significantly smaller in the pooled ORMD-0801 group (1.7 ± 23.5 mg/dL, P = .0120). Glycaemic control variables (24-hour, fasting and daytime CGM glucose) also displayed smaller increases with ORMD-0801 versus placebo. Change from baseline HbA1c was -0.01% in the pooled ORMD-0801 group versus +0.20% in the placebo group (P = .0149). ORMD-0801 was well tolerated, with similar adverse event and hypoglycaemia rates as placebo. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with T2D, bedtime ORMD-0801 curbed increases in night-time glycaemia, 24-hour glycaemia and HbA1c, without increasing the risk of hypoglycaemia or safety events compared with the control arm.

Oral Insulin Alleviates Liver Fibrosis and Reduces Liver Steatosis in Patients With Metabolic Dysfunction-associated Steatohepatitis and Type 2 Diabetes: Results of Phase II Randomized, Placebo-controlled Feasibility Clinical Trial.

Background and Aims: Metabolic dysfunction-associated steatohepatitis is an advanced form of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease and a leading cause of end-stage liver disease and transplantation. Insulin resistance and inflammation underlie the pathogenesis of the disease. Methods: This double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, multicenter feasibility clinical trial aimed to determine the safety of oral 8 mg insulin in patients with metabolic dysfunction-associated steatohepatitis and type 2 diabetes mellitus. Patients were treated twice daily for 12 weeks with an 8 mg insulin (n = 21) or placebo (n = 11) capsule. Safety was monitored throughout the study. MRI-proton density fat fraction assessed liver fat content, and Fibroscan® measured liver fibrosis and steatosis levels at screening and after 12 weeks of treatment. Results: No severe drug-related adverse events were reported during the study. After 12 weeks of treatment, mean percent reductions in whole-liver (-11.2% vs -6.5%, respectively) and liver segment 3 (-11.7% vs +0.1%, respectively) fat content was higher in the insulin than in the placebo arm. Patients receiving insulin showed a median -1.2 kPa and -21.0 dB/m reduction from baseline fibrosis and steatosis levels, respectively, while placebo-treated patients showed median increases of 0.3 kPa and 13.0 dB/m, respectively. At Week 12, oral insulin was associated with a mean of 0.27% reduction and placebo with a 0.23% increase from baseline hemoglobin A1c levels. Mean percent changes from baseline alanine aminotransferase, and aspartate aminotransferase levels were -10% and -0.8%, respectively, in the oral insulin and 3.0% and 13.4%, in the placebo arm. Conclusion: The results of this feasibility study support the safety and potential therapeutic effect of orally delivered insulin on liver fibrosis, fat accumulation, and inflammatory processes (NIH Clinical Trials No. NCT04618744).

Oral Insulin Delivery in a Physiologic Context: Review.

Insulin remains indispensable to the treatment of diabetes, but its availability in injectable form only has hampered its timely and broader use. The development of an oral insulin remains an ultimate goal to both enhance ease of use, and to provide therapeutic advantages rooted in its direct delivery to the portal vein and liver. By mimicking the physiological path taken by pancreatic insulin, oral insulin is expected to have a distinct effect on the hepatic aspect of carbohydrate metabolism, hepatic insulin resistance, and, at the same time, avoid hyperinsulinemia and minimize the risk of hypoglycemia. With oral insulin approaching late stages of development, the goal of this review is to examine oral insulin in a physiological context and report on recent progress in its development.

Dose-response relationship of oral insulin spray in healthy subjects.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic properties and the dose-ranging effects of an oral insulin spray in comparison with subcutaneous regular insulin. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: In this randomized, five-way, cross-over study, seven healthy volunteers were assessed under euglycemic clamp and received four different doses of oral spray and one dose of subcutaneous regular insulin. RESULTS: The time to maximum insulin concentration was shorter for oral insulin than for subcutaneous insulin (25.9 +/- 9 vs. 145.7 +/- 49.5 min, P < 0.05). Maximum serum insulin levels (C(max)) were comparable between the subcutaneous and 20 puffs of oral insulin (39.1 +/- 19.6 vs. 34.0 +/- 7.4 microU/ml, NS). The Ins-AUC(0-120) (area under the curve from 0 to 120 min for serum insulin) (339.8 +/- 218, 681.3 +/- 407, and 1,586.7 +/- 8 microU/ml, P < 0.05) and C(max) (7.6 +/- 2.8, 16.4 +/- 9.3, and 39.1 +/- 19.6 microU/ml, P < 0.005) proved a dose-response relationship for the three doses of oral insulin (5, 10, and 20 puffs, respectively). Oral insulin had an earlier onset of action (31.7 +/- 12 vs. 77.8 +/- 3 min, P < 0.05), earlier peak (44.2 +/- 10 vs. 159.2 +/- 68 min, P < 0.05), and a shorter duration of action (85.1 +/- 25 vs. 319.2 +/- 45 min, P < 0.05) compared with subcutaneous insulin. The maximum metabolic effect (1.7 +/- 1.0, 3.09 +/- 1.7, and 4.6 +/- 1.5 mg . kg(-1) . min(-1), P < 0.05) and the GIR-AUC(0-120) (amount of glucose infused from 0 to 120 min) (106.7 +/- 74.3, 162.9 +/- 116.1, and 254 +/- 123 mg/kg) increased in a dose-dependent relationship for the three doses. CONCLUSIONS: Oral insulin was absorbed in direct relation to the amount given and had a faster onset and a shorter duration of action compared with subcutaneous regular insulin. A dose-response relationship in the absorption and metabolic effect of the oral insulin was noted.

Dose-response relationship of an oral insulin spray in six patients with type 1 diabetes: a single-center, randomized, single-blind, 5-way crossover study.

OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties and dose-response effects of an oral insulin spray formulation compared with those of subcutaneously injected regular insulin and placebo in patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus. METHODS: This was a single-center, randomized, single-blind, open-label, 5-way crossover study in which patients with type 1 diabetes received 5, 10, and 20 puffs of the oral insulin spray; regular insulin 0.1 U/kg SC; and placebo spray. The pharmacokinetic parameters of interest were the maximum serum insulin concentration (Ins-C(max)); the incremental insulin AUC from 0 to 120 minutes (Ins-AUC(0-120)), from 0 to 240 minutes, and from 0 to 360 minutes; and the time to maximum serum insulin concentration (Ins-T(max)). The pharmacodynamic parameters of interest were the maximum glucose infusion rate (GIR(max)); the incremental glucose AUC from 0 to 120 minutes (GIR-AUC(0-120)), from 0 to 240 minutes, and from 0 to 360 minutes; the time to maximum GIR (GIR-T(max)); the time to early half-maximal GIR (early T50%); and the time to late half-maximal GIR (late T50%). Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic parameters were assessed using the euglycemic clamp technique. RESULTS: The study enrolled 6 white men with type 1 diabetes (mean [SD] age, 37.5 [16.2] years, mean weight, 82.7 [17.0] kg). Ins-T(max) was shorter for 5, 10, and 20 puffs of oral insulin spray than for SC insulin (26.7 [13.7], 29.2 [7.4], 23.3 [5.2], and 142.5 [73.2] min, respectively; P < 0.05). There was no effect of dose on Ins-T(max). The Ins-AUC(0-120) for 5, 10, and 20 puffs of oral insulin spray (304.8 [277.9], 689.2 [353.0], and 1808.8 [1252.6] microU/mL per min, respectively; P < 0.05) and the corresponding Ins-Ca(max) (12.9 [8.7], 26.7 [14.5], and 47.6 [40.1] microU/mL; P < 0.05) suggested a dose-response relationship. Five, 10, and 20 puffs of oral insulin spray had an earlier onset of action than SC insulin (early T50%: 23.3 [15.1], 28.3 [12.3], 31.2 [111.8], and 87.0 [39.6] min, respectively; P < 0.05), an earlier maximal effect (GIR-T(max): 40.0 [23.7], 45.8 [22.7], 44.2 [5.8], and 145.0 [43.7] min; P < 0.05), and a shorter duration of action (late T50%: 56.5 [31.0], 70.2 [12.9], 75.5 [6.0], and 290.8 [84.0] min; P < 0.05). Dose-dependent increases in maximal metabolic effect were observed with 5, 10, and 20 puffs: the GIR(max) was 0.9 (0.5), 2.0 (1.3), and 3.9 (2.5) mg/kg per minute, respectively (P < 0.05), and the GIR-AUC(0-120) was 39.6 (34.9), 76.8 (67.4), and 189.1 (163.0) mg/kg per minute (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: In this study in patients with type 1 diabetes, oral insulin spray had a faster onset and shorter duration of action than subcutaneously injected regular insulin. A dose-response relationship was noted in the metabolic effect and absorption of oral insulin spray.

Comparison of pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties of single-dose oral insulin spray and subcutaneous insulin injection in healthy subjects using the euglycemic clamp technique.

BACKGROUND: Oral insulin spray is a new, noninjectable method of insulin delivery. This system delivers an aerosol of uniform-sized droplets containing regular human insulin at a high velocity into the oropharyngeal cavity for local transmucosal absorption. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to compare the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties of single-dose oral insulin spray and SC insulin injection in healthy subjects. METHODS: Healthy male volunteers aged 21 to 25 years participated in this open-label study conducted at the Diabetes Unit, Hadassah-Hebrew University Hospital, Jerusalem, Israel. Subjects presented at 2 visits separated by 7 to 14 days. At both visits, the euglycemic clamp technique was used to maintain a constant blood glucose level. At one visit, subjects received regular human insulin 0.1 U/kg by SC injection. At the other visit, subjects received 15 puffs (150 U) of oral insulin spray. The pharmacokinetic (insulin absorption) and pharmacodynamic (glucose uptake) properties of the drugs were evaluated using blood analyses over the subsequent 360 minutes. RESULTS: Six volunteers were enrolled (mean [SD] age, 22.8 [1.2] years; mean [SD] body mass index, 23.2 [2.2] kg/m(2)). The mean (SD) baseline-corrected C(max) was significantly higher with oral insulin spray compared with SC insulin (54.0 [20.3] vs 30.8 [6.1] microU/mL; P = 0.028). Mean (SD) T(max) was significantly shorter with oral insulin spray compared with SC insulin (23.3 [5.2] vs 83.3 [42.2] minutes; P = 0.027). The mean (SD) time to maximal metabolic effect (maximum glucose infusion rate [GIR(max)]) (44.2 [8.6] vs 100.0 [35.6] minutes) and late time to half-maximal effect (101.0 [41.0] vs 257.2 [27.8] minutes) were shorter with oral insulin spray compared with SC insulin (both, P = 0.028). The baseline-corrected GIR(max) (6.8 [3.3] vs 6.2 [2.3] mg/kg . min) and glucose consumption (396.7 [178.0] vs 432.1 [226.0] mg/kg) during the 120 minutes after study drug administration were comparable between oral and SC insulin, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In this study in a small, selected population of healthy male subjects under euglycemic conditions, oral insulin spray was associated with a higher C(max), shorter T(max), and faster time to peak glucose uptake compared with SC insulin. The short T(max) and the 120-minute duration of effect of oral insulin spray suggest it may be a promising alternative for fulfilling meal-related insulin requirements in persons with diabetes.

Glucose-reducing effect of the ORMD-0801 oral insulin preparation in patients with uncontrolled type 1 diabetes: a pilot study.

UNLABELLED: The unpredictable behavior of uncontrolled type 1 diabetes often involves frequent swings in blood glucose levels that impact maintenance of a daily routine. An intensified insulin regimen is often unsuccessful, while other therapeutic options, such as amylin analog injections, use of continuous glucose sensors, and islet or pancreas transplantation are of limited clinical use. In efforts to provide patients with a more compliable treatment method, Oramed Pharmaceuticals tested the capacity of its oral insulin capsule (ORMD-0801, 8 mg insulin) in addressing this resistant clinical state. Eight Type I diabetes patients with uncontrolled diabetes (HbA1c: 7.5-10%) were monitored throughout the 15-day study period by means of a blind continuous glucose monitoring device. Baseline patient blood glucose behavior was monitored and recorded over a five-day pretreatment screening period. During the ensuing ten-day treatment phase, patients were asked to conduct themselves as usual and to self-administer an oral insulin capsule three times daily, just prior to meal intake. CGM data sufficient for pharmacodynamics analyses were obtained from 6 of the 8 subjects. Treatment with ORMD-0801 was associated with a significant 24.4% reduction in the frequencies of glucose readings >200 mg/dL (60.1 ± 7.9% pretreatment vs. 45.4 ± 4.9% during ORMD-0801 treatment; p = 0.023) and a significant mean 16.6% decrease in glucose area under the curve (AUC) (66055 ± 5547 mg/dL/24 hours vs. 55060 ± 3068 mg/dL/24 hours, p = 0.023), with a greater decrease during the early evening hours. In conclusion, ORMD-0801 oral insulin capsules in conjunction with subcutaneous insulin injections, well tolerated and effectively reduced glycemia throughout the day. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT00867594.

Novel glucagon-like peptide-1 analog delivered orally reduces postprandial glucose excursions in porcine and canine models.

BACKGROUND: Glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) and its analogs are associated with a gamut of physiological processes, including induction of insulin release, support of normoglycemia, ß-cell function preservation, improved lipid profiles, and increased insulin sensitivity. Thus, GLP-1 harbors significant therapeutic potential for regulating type 2 diabetes mellitus, where its physiological impact is markedly impaired. To date, GLP-1 analogs are only available as injectable dosage forms, and its oral delivery is expected to provide physiological portal/peripheral concentration ratios while fostering patient compliance and adherence. METHODS: Healthy, fasting, enterically cannulated pigs and beagle canines were administered a single dose of the exenatide-based ORMD-0901 formulation 30 min before oral glucose challenges. Blood samples were collected every 15 min for evaluation of ORMD-0901 safety and efficacy in regulating postchallenge glucose excursions. RESULTS: Enterically delivered ORMD-0901 was well tolerated by all animals. ORMD-0901 formulations RG3 and AG2 led to reduced glucose excursions in pigs when delivered prior to a 5 g/kg glucose challenge, where area under the curve (AUC)0-120 values were up to 43% lower than in control sessions. All canines challenged with a glucose load with no prior exposure to exenatide, demonstrated higher AUC0-150 values than in their exenatide-treated sessions. Subcutaneous exenatide delivery amounted to a 51% reduction in mean glucose AUC0-150, while formulations AG4 and AG3 prompted 43% and 29% reductions, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: When delivered enterically, GLP-1 (ORMD-0901) is absorbed from the canine and porcine gastrointestinal tracts and retains its biological activity. Further development of this drug class in an oral dosage form is expected to enhance diabetes control and patient compliance.

Oral insulin: the rationale for this approach and current developments.

Insulin remains the most effective and durable hypoglycemic agent for the treatment of diabetes. The addition of an effective oral insulin dosage form to the antidiabetes armamentarium may have significant benefits in terms of fostering compliance and adherence among patients, as well as physiologic advantages due to the fact that such a dosage form replicates the natural route of insulin secretion and absorption through the portal vein and targets the liver directly. Several companies have developed technological platforms that protect polypeptides and proteins from enzymatic hydrolysis, enable their transport across the epithelial lining, and promote their absorption from the gastrointestinal tract. A review of the potential physiological rationale and advantages, as well as of current pertinent technologies used specifically with insulin, is herewith provided.