ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Over the last few decades, new synthetic insulin analogues have been developed. Their measurement is of prime importance in the investigation of hypoglycaemia, but their quantification is hampered by variable cross-reactivity with many insulin assays. For clinical analysis, it has now become essential to know the potential cross-reactivity of analogues of interest. METHODS: In this work, we performed an extensive study of insulin analogue cross-reactivity using numerous human insulin immunoassays. We investigated the cross-reactivity of five analogues (lispro, aspart, glulisine, glargine, detemir) and two glargine metabolites (M1 and M2) with 16 commercial human insulin immunoassays as a function of concentration. RESULTS: The cross-reactivity values for insulin analogues or glargine metabolites ranged from 0% to 264%. Four assays were more specific to human insulin, resulting in negligible cross-reactivity with the analogues. However, none of the 16 assays was completely free of cross-reactivity with analogues or metabolites. The results show that analogue cross-reactivity, which varies to a large degree, is far from negligible, and should not be overlooked in clinical investigations. CONCLUSIONS: This study has established the cross-reactivity of five insulin analogues and two glargine metabolites using 16 immunoassays to facilitate the choice of the immunoassay(s) and to provide sensitive and specific analyses in clinical routine or investigation.
Subject(s)
Artifacts , Immunoassay/methods , Insulin/analogs & derivatives , Insulin/analysis , Cross Reactions , Humans , Insulin/immunology , Insulin, Long-Acting/immunology , Insulin, Long-Acting/metabolism , Insulin, Short-Acting/immunology , Insulin, Short-Acting/metabolismABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Fast-acting insulin analogs have been available since 1996. The absorption rate of these insulins is still too slow to mimic the physiological insulin action in healthy subjects. This study investigates the clinical performance of InsuPatch™, a local skin-heating device, on postprandial glucose excursion. METHODS: Twenty-four type 1 diabetes mellitus subjects on continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion were included in this crossover study [10 male, 14 female, age: 43.5 ± 11.3 years, diabetes duration: 18.3 ± 10.5 years, glycosylated hemoglobin: 7.4 ± 0.8%, body mass index: 25.0 ± 3.0 kg/m(2) (mean ± standard deviation)]. The impact of local skin heating was measured by dividing the two-hour area under the curve by integration time (AUC/t(120)) for blood glucose (BG) above baseline after two standardized breakfast and dinner meal pairs (with and without heating) per subject. For the first breakfast pair, venous insulin concentration was also measured. RESULTS: A significant reduction was found for the AUC/t(120) after breakfast and after dinner meals (42 breakfast meal pairs, AUC/t(120) not heated 66.4 ± 32.8 mg/dl vs heated 56.8 ± 34.0 mg/dl, p = .017; 38 dinner meal pairs, AUC/t(120) not heated 30.8 ± 31.0 mg/dl vs heated 18.4 ± 23.9 mg/dl, p = .0028). The maximum venous insulin concentration with heating was 27% higher than without heating (n = 23). The number of hypoglycemic events on days with heating (n = 9) was similar to the number of days without heating (n = 13). CONCLUSIONS: Local heating of the skin around the infusion site significantly reduced postprandial BG by enhancing insulin absorption. The heating device was well tolerated, and it could facilitate development of closed-loop systems.