Effect of switching from twice-daily basal insulin to once-daily insulin glargine 300 U/mL (Gla-300) in Brazilian people with type 1 diabetes.

BACKGROUND: Low adherence to the number of insulin injections and glycemic variability are among the challenges of insulin therapy in type 1 diabetes (T1D). The TOP1 study investigated the effect of switching from twice-daily (BID) basal insulin to once daily (OD) insulin glargine 300 U/mL (Gla-300) on glycemic control and quality of life. METHODS: In this 28-week, phase 4 trial, people with T1D aged ≥ 18 years, who were treated with BID basal insulin in combination with prandial rapid-acting insulin for at least 1 year, and had HbA1c between 7.5% and 10.0%, were switched to Gla-300 OD as basal insulin. The present study aimed to evaluate the impact of this change on HbA1c, glycemic profile, treatment satisfaction and safety. The change in HbA1c from baseline to Week 24 was the primary endpoint. RESULTS: One hundred and twenty-three people with T1D (mean age 37 ± 11 years; 54.5% female) were studied. The disease duration was 20.0 ± 9.8 years, baseline HbA1c and fasting plasma glucose (FPG) were 8.6 ± 0.7% and 201 ± 80.3 mg/dL, respectively. After switching from BID to OD insulin regimen, no significant change in HbA1c was observed from baseline to Week 24 (p = 0.873). There were significant reductions in fasting self-monitoring blood glucose (SMBG) from baseline to Week 24 (175 ± 42 vs. 156 ± 38 mg/dL; p < 0.0001), and in glycemic profile (8-point SMBG) at several time points. There was a significant decrease in the proportion of patients with at least one hypoglycemic event (p = 0.025), in numbers of hypoglycemic events per patient-years of any type (p = 0.036), symptomatic (p = 0.007), and confirmed ≤ 70 mg/dL events (p = 0.049) from run-in to the last 4 weeks on treatment. There were significant improvements in treatment satisfaction (p < 0.0001), perceived hyperglycemia (p < 0.0001) scores and satisfaction with the number of injections between post-run-in and Week 24, and a significant decrease in fear of hypoglycemia. CONCLUSIONS: Switch from BID basal insulin to OD Gla-300 as part of basal bolus therapy in T1D resulted in similar glycemic control as measured by HbA1c, but provided significant improvements in SMBG, daily glucose profile, a lower incidence of hypoglycemia and increased patient satisfaction. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03406000.

Immunogenicity, Efficacy, and Safety of Biosimilar Insulin Glargine (Gan & Lee Glargine) Compared With Originator Insulin Glargine (Lantus) in Patients With Type 1 Diabetes After 26 Weeks Treatment.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the immunogenicity, safety, and efficacy of Gan & Lee insulin glargine (GL Glargine) with that of the originator insulin glargine (Lantus) in patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM). METHODS: This was a phase 3, multicenter, randomized, open-label, equivalence study. Five hundred seventy-six subjects with T1DM were randomized 1:1 to receive either GL Glargine or Lantus treatment for 26 weeks. The primary end point was the percentage of subjects in each treatment group who developed treatment-induced anti-insulin antibody after baseline and up to visit week 26, which was evaluated using a country-adjusted logistic regression model. The study also compared the changes in glycated hemoglobin, and adverse events including hypoglycemia. RESULTS: The percentage of subjects positive for treatment-induced anti-insulin antibody by Week 26 was 25.8% in the GL Glargine treatment group and 25.3% in the Lantus treatment group, with a 90% confidence interval (-5.4, 6.5) of the difference in proportions that fell completely between the similarity margins (-11.3, 11.3). The least squares mean difference between treatment groups for changes in glycated hemoglobin was -0.08 (90% confidence interval: -0.23, 0.06), and the other immunogenicity and safety profiles were comparable. CONCLUSION: GL Glargine demonstrated similar immunogenicity, efficacy, and safety compared to Lantus over 26 weeks in patients with T1DM.

Evaluating the efficacy and safety of weekly Insulin Icodec vs. Daily Insulin Glargine in type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Introduction: Various insulin therapies for Diabetes Mellitus offer different benefits while having potential risks. We aim to compare Insulin Icodec, a novel Insulin analogue with the ease of once-weekly administration, to the once-daily Insulin Glargine U100 regarding glycemic control and safety profile. Methods: We performed a systematic literature search of electronic databases for peer-reviewed articles from inception until September 1 2023. Results: A total of 2215 type 2 diabetic patients were included, of which 1209 received Insulin Icodec and1048 recieved Insulin Glargine U100. In terms of glycemic control, Insulin Icodec showed a significantly longer time in the target glucose range (MD: 0.304, CI: 0.069, P = 0.000) and a more significant reduction in HbA1c (MD: -0.154, CI: 0.003, P = 0.005) compared to Insulin Glargine U100. Fasting Plasma Glucose did not differ significantly. Insulin Icodec led to a more significant increase in body weight (MD: 0.161 kg, P = 0.029), while Insulin Glargine required a higher insulin dose (MD: 1.920 IU, P = 0.000). Regarding safety, the two groups had no significant differences in hypoglycemic events or adverse outcomes. Conclusion: Once-weekly Insulin Icodec demonstrates superior glycemic control with a reduced HbA1c compared to Once-Daily Insulin Glargine U100 while maintaining similar safety profiles. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40200-024-01431-5.

Insulin Access Enhancement in India: Expert Views on Integrating Interchangeable Biosimilar Insulin Glargine.

Achieving and maintaining optimal glycemic targets is the fundamental goal of the management of diabetes. However, failure of oral antidiabetic drugs (OADs) to sustain the targeted glycemic levels in individuals with progressing disease often requires initiation of insulin therapy. This article consolidates the expert opinions of 377 doctors who participated in 34 advisory board meetings held digitally (n=23) and in person (n=11) across India. The present report underscores the need for readily available alternatives, such as biosimilar insulins, in the Indian healthcare market to make insulin accessible to every patient with diabetes. The introduction of biosimilar insulins in the Indian healthcare market is the key to making insulin accessible to every patient with diabetes. Biosimilars are biologic products that closely resemble reference/originator biologics and demonstrate no clinically meaningful differences in safety and effectiveness. The concept of interchangeability serves as a pivotal differentiator for biosimilars, underlining their reliability and safety, and plays a significant role in their broader acceptance and integration into healthcare systems. The 'interchangeability' designation by the United States Food and Drug Administration (USFDA) elevates the biosimilar concept, promoting faster and broader adoption of insulin biosimilars, especially benefiting patients prone to non-adherence to insulin therapy. Healthcare providers are encouraged to consider the option of initiating or transitioning to biosimilar insulin glargine to address the insulin accessibility challenges.

Clinical Outcomes With Once-Weekly Insulin Icodec Versus Once-Daily Insulin Glargine U100 in Insulin-Naïve and Previously Insulin-Treated Individuals With Type 2 Diabetes: A Meta-Analysis of Randomised Controlled Trials.

AIMS: The once-weekly insulin icodec, a new basal insulin analog, may positively support a reduction in injection frequency and improve adherence to therapy in type 2 diabetes (T2D). This study aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of insulin icodec compared with those of once-daily glargine U100. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was conducted using PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase and the Cochrane Library from inception till September 2023. Data about clinical outcomes in both groups were extracted. Forest plots were generated using the random-effects model by pooling odds ratios (ORs) and mean differences (MDs). RESULTS: Five randomised controlled trials and 2019 individuals with T2DM were included. In the pooled analysis, time in range was significantly higher (MD = 4.35; 95% CI: 1.65 to 7.05; p = 0.002) in the icodec group than in the once-daily glargine group. The HbA1c levels were significantly reduced (MD = -0.13; 95% CI: -0.24 to -0.03; p = 0.02) in the weekly icodec group compared with those in the once-daily glargine group. The weight gain was significantly less in the glargine group than in the weekly icodec group (MD = 0.41; 95% CI: 0.04 to 0.78; p = 0.03); however, in the subgroup analysis, this change became statistically insignificant in both insulin-naïve and previously insulin-treated individuals. The results were comparable across two groups for fasting plasma glucose levels, hypoglycaemia alert (Level 1), clinically significant (Level 2) or severe hypoglycaemia (Level 3), and adverse events. CONCLUSION: Insulin icodec was associated with a reduction in glycated haemoglobin levels and higher time in range, with a similar safety profile as compared to insulin glargine U100. However, further evidence is still needed to reach a definitive conclusion.

Immunogenicity, efficacy, and safety of biosimilar insulin glargine (Gan & Lee glargine) compared with originator insulin glargine (Lantus®) in patients with type 2 diabetes after 26 weeks' treatment: A randomized open label study.

AIM: To evaluate the equivalence of immunogenicity, safety and efficacy of Gan & Lee (GL) Glargine (Basalin®; Gan & Lee Pharmaceutical) with that of the reference product (Lantus®) in adult participants with type 2 diabetes mellitus. METHODS: This was a phase 3, multicenter, open-label, equivalence trial conducted across 57 sites. In total, 567 participants with type 2 diabetes mellitus were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to undergo treatment with either GL Glargine or Lantus® for 26 weeks. The primary endpoint was the proportion of participants in each treatment arm who manifested treatment-induced anti-insulin antibodies (AIA). Secondary endpoints included efficacy and safety metrics, changes in glycated haemoglobin levels, and a comparative assessment of adverse events. Results were analysed using an equivalence test comparing the limits of the 90% confidence interval (CI) for treatment-induced AIA development to the prespecified margins. RESULTS: The percentages of participants positive for treatment-induced glycated haemoglobin by week 26 were similar between the GL Glargine (19.2%) and Lantus® (21.3%) treatment groups, with a treatment difference of -2.1 percentage points and a 90% CI (-7.6%, 3.5%) (predefined similarity margins: -10.7%, 10.7%). The difference in glycated haemoglobin was -0.08% (90% CI, -0.23, 0.06). The overall percentage of participants with any treatment-emergent adverse events was similar between the GL Glargine (80.1%) and Lantus® (81.6%) treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: GL Glargine was similar to Lantus® in terms of immunogenicity, efficacy, and safety, based on the current study.

Basal Insulinotherapy in Patients Living with Diabetes in France: The EF-BI Study.

INTRODUCTION: Second-generation basal insulins like glargine 300 U/mL (Gla-300) have a longer duration of action and less daily fluctuation and interday variability than first-generation ones, such as glargine 100 U/mL (Gla-100). The EF-BI study, a nationwide observational, retrospective study, was designed to compare persistence, acute care complications, and healthcare costs associated with the initiation of such basal insulins (BI) in a real-life setting in France. METHODS: This study was conducted using the French healthcare claims database (SNDS). Adult patients living with type 1 or type 2 diabetes mellitus (T1DM or T2DM) initiating Gla-300 or Gla-100 ± other hypoglycemic medications between January 1, 2016 and December 31, 2020, and without any insulin therapy over the previous 6 months were included. Persistence was defined as remaining on the same insulin therapy until discontinuation defined by a 6 month period without insulin reimbursement. Hospitalized acute complications were identified using ICD-10 codes. Total collective costs were established for patients treated continuously with each basal insulin over 1-3 years. All comparisons were adjusted using a propensity score based on initial patient/treatment characteristics. RESULTS: A total of 235,894 patients with T2DM and 6672 patients with T1DM were included. Patients treated with Gla-300 were 83% (T1DM) and 44% (T2DM) less likely to discontinue their treatment than those treated with Gla-100 after 24 months (p < 0.0001). The annual incidence of acute hospitalized events in patients with T2DM treated with Gla-300 was 12% lower than with Gla-100 (p < 0.0001) but similar in patients with T1DM. Comparison of overall costs showed moderate but statistically significant differences in favor of Gla-300 versus Gla-100 for all patients over the first year, and in T2DM only over a 3-year follow-up. CONCLUSION: Use of Gla-300 resulted in a better persistence, less acute hospitalized events at least in T2DM, and reduced healthcare expenditure. These real-life results confirmed the potential interest of using Gla-300 rather than Gla-100.

The IDEAL (Insulin therapy DE-intensificAtion with iglarLixi) Randomised Controlled Trial-Study Design and Protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Multiple daily injection insulin regimen (MDI) represents the most intensive insulin regimen used in the management of people with type 2 diabetes (PwT2D). Its efficacy regarding glycaemic control is counterbalanced by the increased risk of hypoglycaemia, frequently observed tendency to weight gain and necessity for frequent glucose monitoring. Recent introduction of novel antidiabetic medications with pleiotropic effects reaching far beyond the reduction of glycaemia (HbA1c), such as the glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist (GLP-1 RA), has significantly widened the therapeutic options available for management of T2D. Consequently, there is currently a substantial number of PwT2D for whom the MDI regimen was initiated at a time when no other options were available. Yet, in present times, these individuals could benefit from simplified insulin regimens ideally taking advantage of the beneficial effects of the novel classes of antidiabetic medications. iGlarLixi (Suliqua®) is a once-daily fixed-ratio combination of basal insulin analogue glargine 100 U/ml and a GLP-1 RA lixisenatide. METHODS: Insulin therapy DE-intensificAtion with iglarLixi (IDEAL) is a six-centre, open-label, parallel-group, active comparator, phase IV randomised controlled trial with a 24-week active treatment period examining the efficacy and safety of MDI regimen de-intensification with once-daily administration of iGlarLixi versus MDI regimen continuation in PwT2D on a backgroud therapy with metformin ± sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor. PLANNED OUTCOMES: The primary objective is to compare the effects of MDI therapy de-intensification with iGlarLixi versus MDI regimen continuation regarding glycaemic control (HbA1c). Secondary objectives include detailed evaluation of the effects of MDI regimen de-intensification with iGlarLixi on glycaemic control using standardised continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) metrics and self-monitoring of plasma glucose. Furthermore, body weight and body composition analysis, quality of life and safety profile are evaluated. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier NCT04945070.

Efficacy and safety of once-weekly insulin icodec compared to once-daily insulin g U-100 in patients with type II diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND//OBJECTIVE: Diabetes affects millions of people globally, despite treatment options, adherence and other factors pose obstacles. Once-weekly Insulin Icodec, a novel basal Insulin analog with a week-long half-life, offers potential benefits, enhancing convenience, adherence, and quality of life for improved glycemic control. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of once-weekly Insulin Icodec compared to once-daily Insulin Glargine U-100 in individuals with type II diabetes (T2D). METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was conducted using PubMed, and Cochrane Library databases before September 2023 to identify relevant Randomized control trials (RCTs) with no language restrictions following PRISMA guidelines. The Cochrane risk-of-bias tool was used for quality assessment. All statistical analyses were conducted using RevMan (version 5.4; Copenhagen: The Nordic Cochrane Centre, The Cochrane Collaboration, 2014). RESULT: Four RCTs published from 2020 to 2023 with a cumulative sample size of 1035 were included. The pooled mean difference (MD) revealed a 4.68% longer TIR (%) with Insulin Icodec compared to Insulin Glargine U-100 [{95% CI (0.69, 8.68), p = 0.02}], the estimated mean changes in HbA1c (%) and FPG (mg%) were found to be insignificant between the two groups [MD = - 0.12 {95% CI (- 0.26, 0.01), p = 0.07}] and [MD = - 2.59 {95% CI (- 6.95, 1.78), p = 0.25}], respectively. The overall OR for hypoglycemia was also nonsignificant between the two regimens 1.04 [{95% CI (0.71, 1.52), p = 0.84}]. Other safety parameters were similar between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Switching from daily Insulin Glargine U-100 to weekly Insulin Icodec showed longer TIR (%) as well as similar blood glycemic control and safety profile. Hence, it may be a good alternate option for management of longstanding T2D.

Real-world effectiveness and safety of insulin glargine 100 U/mL plus lixisenatide in adults with type 2 diabetes: An international, multicentre, 12-month, prospective observational study.

AIM: To assess the impact of insulin glargine (100 U/mL) and lixisenatide (iGlarLixi) fixed-ratio combination therapy on the overall management of glycaemia in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D), previously inadequately controlled with oral antidiabetic drugs ± basal insulin or glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs). MATERIALS AND METHODS: This 12-month, international, multicentre, prospective, observational study included patients (age ≥ 18 years) with T2D who had initiated iGlarLixi within 1 month prior to study inclusion. Data were collected at study inclusion, month 3, month 6 and month 12 from patient diaries, self-measured plasma glucose, and questionnaires. The primary endpoint was change in HbA1c from baseline to month 6. RESULTS: Of the 737 eligible participants (mean age: 57.8 [standard deviation: 11.2] years; male: 49%), 685 had baseline and post-baseline HbA1c data available. The least squares mean change in HbA1c from baseline to month 6 was -1.4% (standard error [95% confidence interval (CI)]: 0.05 [-1.5, -1.3]). The absolute change from baseline at month 12 was -1.7% ± 1.9% (95% CI: -1.9, -1.5). There were 72 hypoglycaemia events reported during the study period, with a very low incidence of severe hypoglycaemia (two participants [rate: 0.003 events per patient-year]). CONCLUSIONS: This real-world observational study shows that initiation of iGlarLixi in people with T2D inadequately controlled on oral antidiabetic drugs ± basal insulin or GLP-1 RAs improves glycaemic control with a low incidence of hypoglycaemia.

An exploratory analysis of the cost-effectiveness of insulin glargine 300 units/mL versus insulin glargine 100 units/mL over a lifetime horizon using the BRAVO diabetes model.

BACKGROUND: This analysis assessed the cost-effectiveness of insulin glargine 300 units/mL (Gla-300) versus insulin glargine 100 units/mL (Gla-100) in insulin-naïve adults with type 2 diabetes (T2D) inadequately controlled with oral antidiabetic drugs (OADs). METHODS: Costs and outcomes for Gla-300 versus Gla-100 from a US healthcare payer perspective were assessed using the BRAVO diabetes model. Baseline clinical data were derived from EDITION-3, a 12-month randomized controlled trial comparing Gla-300 with Gla-100 in insulin-naïve adults with inadequately controlled T2D on OADs. Treatment costs were calculated based on doses observed in EDITION-3 and 2020 US net prices, while costs for complications were based on published literature. Lifetime costs ($US) and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were predicted and used to calculate incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) estimates; extensive scenario and sensitivity analyses were conducted. RESULTS: Lifetime medical costs were estimated to be $353,441 and $352,858 for individuals receiving Gla-300 and Gla-100 respectively; insulin costs were $52,613 and $50,818. Gla-300 was associated with a gain of 8.97 QALYs and 21.12 life-years, while Gla-100 was associated with a gain of 8.89 QALYs and 21.07 life-years. This resulted in an ICER of $7522/QALY gained for Gla-300 versus Gla-100. Thus, Gla-300 was cost-effective versus Gla-100 based on a willingness-to-pay threshold of $50,000/QALY. Compared with Gla-100, Gla-300 provided a net monetary benefit of $3290. Scenario and sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of the base case. CONCLUSION: Gla-300 may be a cost-effective treatment option versus Gla-100 over a lifetime horizon for insulin-naïve people in the United States with T2D inadequately controlled on OADs.

Real-World Outcomes of Individualized Targeted Therapy with Insulin Glargine 300 Units/mL in Insulin-Naïve Korean People with Type 2 Diabetes: TOBE Study.

INTRODUCTION: The TOujeo BEyond glucose control (TOBE) study evaluated clinical outcomes with insulin glargine 300 units/mL (Gla-300) in insulin-naïve Korean people with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) in a real-world setting. METHODS: This 24-week, prospective, non-interventional, multicenter, open-label, single-arm, observational study included adults aged ≥ 20 years with T2DM suboptimally controlled with oral hypoglycemic agents and/or glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists who require basal insulin. Eligible participants were assigned to either general target glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c < 7%) or individualized target groups as per physician's discretion considering guidelines and participants' characteristics. The primary endpoint was the proportion of participants achieving the HbA1c target (individualized or general) at 24 weeks. RESULTS: Among 369 participants, 19.5% (72/369) of participants achieved the HbA1c target at week 24; 37.5% (33/88) in the individualized and 13.9% (39/281) in the general target group. In both target groups, similar reductions in fasting plasma glucose and body weight were observed, with low incidence of hypoglycemia, and T2DM duration was significantly shorter in participants who did versus those who did not achieve the target HbA1c (individualized target group: 9.6 ± 8.0 versus 13.1 ± 8.4 years, P = 0.0454; general target group: 10.2 ± 8.6 versus 12.8 ± 7.4 years, P = 0.0378). CONCLUSIONS: This study showed that initiation of insulin therapy with Gla-300 in people with T2DM using an individualized approach is more effective in achieving an HbA1c target. Moreover, earlier initiation of insulin therapy in people with suboptimally controlled T2DM may increase the success rate of glycemic control. A graphical abstract is available with this article.

Despite various efforts in managing diabetes, individuals with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) encounter numerous challenges to achieve good glycemic control. The major cause is failure to initiate insulin therapy in a timely manner, primarily because of the fear of hypoglycemia. Insulin glargine 300 units/mL (Gla-300) has smooth and prolonged activity resulting in stable and sustained glycemic control, thus reducing the risk of hypoglycemia. Studies on efficacy and safety of Gla-300 in various populations have been published globally. However, there are limited real-world studies in Asian populations. This study evaluated effectiveness and safety of Gla-300 in Korean people with T2DM who were not on insulin prior to this study but were taking oral glucose-lowering medications. The participants were assigned to two groups: general glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) target (HbA1c < 7%) and individualized HbA1c target according to the participant's characteristics. Results showed that Gla-300 helped to achieve the glycemic target more effectively using an individualized approach. In both groups, similar reductions in fasting plasma glucose and body weight were observed, with low incidence of hypoglycemia. People who achieve glycemic target had a shorter duration of T2DM than those who did not achieve their glycemic target. This suggests that earlier insulin initiation may be a better approach and may increase the success rate of insulin therapy.

Continuous Glucose Monitoring Profiles and Health Outcomes after Dapagliflozin Plus Saxagliptin vs Insulin Glargine.

CONTEXT: Glycemic variability and hypoglycemia during diabetes treatment may impact therapeutic effectiveness and safety, even when glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) reduction is comparable between therapies. OBJECTIVE: We employed masked continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) during a randomized trial of dapagliflozin plus saxagliptin (DAPA+SAXA) vs insulin glargine (INS) to compare glucose variability and patient-reported outcomes (PROs). DESIGN: 24-week sub-study of a randomized, open-label, two-arm, parallel-group, phase 3b study. SETTING: Multicenter study (112 centers in 11 countries). PATIENTS: 283 adults with type 2 diabetes (T2D) inadequately controlled with metformin ± sulfonylurea. INTERVENTIONS: DAPA+SAXA vs INS. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Changes in CGM profiles, HbA1c, and PROs. RESULTS: Changes from baseline in HbA1c with DAPA+SAXA were similar to those observed with INS, with mean difference [95% CI] between decreases of -0.12% [-0.37 to 0.12%], P = .33. CGM analytics were more favorable for DAPA+SAXA, including greater percent time in range (> 3.9 and ≤ 10 mmol/L; 34.3 ± 1.9 vs 28.5 ± 1.9%, P = .033), lower percent time with nocturnal hypoglycemia (area under the curve ≤ 3.9 mmol/L; 0.6 ± 0.5 vs 2.7 ± 0.5%, P = .007), and smaller mean amplitude of glycemic excursions (-0.7 ± 0.1 vs -0.3 ± 0.1 mmol/L, P = .017). Improvements in CGM were associated with greater satisfaction, better body weight image, less weight interference, and improved mental and emotional well-being. CONCLUSIONS: DAPA+SAXA and INS were equally effective in reducing HbA1c at 24 weeks, but people with T2D treated with DAPA+SAXA achieved greater time in range, greater reductions in glycemic excursions and variability, less time with hypoglycemia, and improved patient-reported health outcomes.

Impact of Participant Characteristics on Clinical Outcomes with iGlarLixi in Type 2 Diabetes: Post Hoc Analysis of SPARTA Japan.

INTRODUCTION: The real-world SPARTA Japan study confirmed the effectiveness and safety of the fixed-ratio combination of insulin glargine 100 U/mL plus lixisenatide (iGlarLixi) once daily over 6 months in Japanese people with type 2 diabetes (T2D). This post hoc analysis examined the impact of participant characteristics on the achievement of age-defined glycaemic targets with iGlarLixi therapy. METHODS: The retrospective, observational SPARTA Japan study included adults with T2D who initiated iGlarLixi. In this analysis, data from insulin-naïve and insulin-experienced participants were separately assessed to compare glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c), body weight and safety outcomes between those who achieved ('achieved' group) and those who did not achieve ('not-achieved' group) age-defined glycaemic targets after 6 months of iGlarLixi. The not-achieved group was further stratified by whether or not their iGlarLixi dose was increased during treatment. RESULTS: In total, 418 participants were included in this analysis (138 insulin naïve and 280 insulin experienced). Among both insulin-naïve and insulin-experienced participants, those in the achieved group were older and had lower baseline HbA1c than those in the not-achieved group. Compared with the not-achieved group, the achieved group showed significantly greater HbA1c reductions from baseline (in both insulin-naïve and insulin-experienced participants) and significantly greater body weight reductions (in insulin-naïve participants), despite some participants in the not-achieved group receiving significantly higher insulin glargine doses than those in the achieved group. In both insulin-naïve and insulin-experienced participants, the incidence of hypoglycaemia and gastrointestinal-related adverse events was similar in the achieved and not-achieved groups. In a multivariate analysis, glycaemic target achievement was significantly more likely in older individuals and those who lost weight during iGlarLixi treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Achievement of age-defined glycaemic targets with iGlarLixi treatment for 6 months was significantly affected by increased age and body weight loss, regardless of prior insulin exposure. TRIAL REGISTRATION: UMIN-CTR Trials Registry, UMIN000044126; registered 10 May 2021.

iGlarLixi is an injectable product used to treat type 2 diabetes that contains a fixed combination of two drugs, insulin glargine (at a concentration of 100 U/mL) and lixisenatide. The SPARTA Japan study investigated the effectiveness of controlling blood glucose levels and the safety of iGlarLixi in Japanese people when taken once daily for over 6 months as part of their routine medical care. The analysis reported in this article looked back at data from SPARTA Japan to assess whether certain characteristics of the people who took part in the study affected how well blood glucose targets were met. People who had previously taken insulin and those who had not were identified, and their results were assessed separately. The people were divided into those who had met their blood glucose level target (with the target defined as the glycated haemoglobin level for each person based on their age) and those who had not met their target. It was found that people who achieved their blood glucose target while receiving iGlarLixi were more likely to be older, to have had a lower glycated haemoglobin level before starting iGlarLixi, and to have lost weight during treatment than those who did not achieve their target, whether or not they had previously been treated with insulin. Side effects of excessively low blood glucose levels or gastrointestinal upset with iGlarLixi treatment occurred in a similar number of people who achieved or did not achieve their blood glucose target.

Exercise and insulin glargine administration in mothers with diabetes during pregnancy ameliorate function of testis in offspring: Consequences on apelin-13 and its receptor.

AIMS: Despite the evidence exhibited that diabetes during gestation (DDG) is linked with reproductive dysfunction in offspring, the underlying cellular mechanisms involved are not precisely defined. This study was designed to assess the impact of voluntary exercise and insulin glargine on DDG-induced metabolic and reproductive disorders in male offspring. MAIN METHODS: Fifty female Wistar rats (three weeks old) received a control diet (n = 10) or high-fat-high-sucrose diet (to induce DDG; n = 40) for six weeks before breeding. From the 7th day of pregnancy onwards, blood glucose over 140 mg/dL was characterized as DDG. Then, the DDG animals were randomly divided into four subgroups with/without voluntary exercise and/or insulin glargine. To evaluate insulin resistance, a glucose tolerance test was performed on the 15th day of pregnancy. After three weeks, male offspring were weaned, and fed a control diet until 12 weeks old. At the end of the experiment, the lipid profile, sex hormones, and apelin-13 in the serum, mRNA expression of apelin receptors (APJ) in the testis and sperm analysis were assessed. KEY FINDINGS: Our results indicated that voluntary exercise and/or insulin glargine administration in mothers with DDG ameliorated lipid profile, and sex hormones alterations, reduced the serum level of apelin-13, as well as increased APJ expression in testis, and quality of sperm in offspring. SIGNIFICANCE: Combined administration of voluntary exercise and insulin glargine during pregnancy by regulating of apelinergic system and inhibiting the metabolic and reproductive complications induced by DDG, can be considered as a suitable therapeutic strategy for improving sub-or in-fertility in the male offspring.

The effect of insulin analogs in people with type 1 diabetes at increased risk of severe hypoglycemia.

Type 1 diabetes is characterized by insulin deficiency, and treatment is to supply insulin mimicking the physiological endogenous insulin secretion. Since its discovery, insulin therapy has evolved, and since the 1990s, an increasing number of insulin analogs with various pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic profiles have become available. Despite the improvement of insulin therapy, hypoglycemia remains the main side effect and is a daily concern for many people with diabetes and their families. A proportion of people with type 1 diabetes are at increased risk of hypoglycemia and experience recurring episodes. When designing insulin trials, this group of people is most often excluded in order to reduce the risk of adverse study outcomes, even though it may be the group that may benefit the most from treatment with new insulins. The results of the phase III trials, therefore, underestimate the clinical impact and pharmacoeconomic effect of the implementation of new insulins in the broader type 1 diabetes population. This paper reviews the four insulin trials that include people at increased risk of hypoglycemia. In general, the studies confirm the results from phase III trials in terms of similar reduction and maintenance of HbA1c, as well as relative rate reductions of hypoglycemia. However, the absolute treatment differences in the reduction of hypoglycemia are even greater in the trials, including people at high risk of hypoglycemia. This emphasizes the importance of including people at high risk of hypoglycemia to assess the full clinical and pharmacoeconomic benefit of new insulins.

The efficacy and safety of beinaglutide alone or in combination with insulin glargine in Chinese patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus who are inadequately controlled with oral antihyperglycemic therapy: A multicenter, open-label, randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: To compare glycemic control in Chinese patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) whose blood glucose levels were inadequately controlled with oral antidiabetic drugs after beinaglutide alone or combined with insulin glargine (IGlar). METHODS: In this 16-week multicenter, randomized clinical trial, 68 participants randomly received beinaglutide or IGlar for 8 weeks, then the two drugs in combination for 8 weeks. The primary outcomes were the proportion of individuals achieving their glycemic target and the change in glucose variability as measured with a continuous glucose monitoring system from baseline to 8 and 16 weeks. RESULTS: Both the beinaglutide and IGlar groups showed increased proportions achieving their glycemic target at 8 weeks, and the combination augmented the proportion reaching the glycated hemoglobin target from 25.42% at 8 weeks to 40.68% at 16 weeks. The beinaglutide group showed a significant reduction in body weight, body mass index, waist circumference, and systolic blood pressure. Beinaglutide elevated high-density lipoprotein cholesterol by 0.08 mmol/L (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.00-0.16), and diminished low-density lipoprotein cholesterol by 0.21 mmol/L (95% CI, 0.05-0.48), whereas IGlar showed no effect. Though IGlar was more efficient in lowering fasting plasma glucose than beinaglutide at comparable efficacies (to -1.57 mmol/L [95% CI, -2.60 to -0.54]), this difference was abolished in patients whose fasting C-peptide was ≥0.9 ng/mL. CONCLUSION: Beinaglutide exhibited a favorable hypoglycemic effect on patients with T2DM, and in combination with IGlar, glucose level was further decreased. Low fasting C-peptide in patients may reduce the glycemic response to beinaglutide therapy. We recommend that C-peptide levels be evaluated when using or switching to the novel glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists beinaglutide. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03829891.

Development and Characterization of Guinea Pig Anti-Insulin Polyclonal Antibody.

Development and characterization of guinea pig anti-insulin polyclonal antibody against a target-specific insulin antigen. In India, an insulin immunogenicity kit for detecting insulin antibodies (neutralizing Nab) is an unmet medical need for diabetic patient's routine diagnosis. Type 1 diabetics rely on insulin injections daily basis for survival; if the body develops anti-insulin antibodies and neutralizes the exogenous recombinant insulin, glucose control is lost, and the patient eventually dies. Antibodies are excellent diagnostic reagents due to the specificity and sensitivity they provide in recognizing specific and unique target antigens. The paper describes the use of insulin as a target antigen and the development of target (insulin) specific antibodies in guinea pigs for use as a positive control for immunogenicity kit validation. Anti-insulin polyclonal antibody was raised against insulin in the Dunkin Hartley guinea pigs host. Anti-insulin antibody titer of all bleeds from four animals was tested using an indirect ELISA assay format. All four animals responded to the target-specific antigen but only one animal (#4) responded with a high-affinity antibody titer. The hyperimmune sera were purified using a protein A column. The purified anti-insulin antibody was characterized through SDS Page and western blot. The specificity, reactivity, and antibody binding efficiency were confirmed through immunoassays. Guinea pig anti-insulin polyclonal antibody developed in this study showed good specificity, reactivity, and efficiency in the immunoassays. This paper describes the development and characterization of anti-insulin antibodies for use as a control in developing a user-friendly insulin immunogenicity kit.

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

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