Comparative assessment of immunogenicity of recombinant insulin Aspart from BioGenomics and its originator NovoRapid® in adult patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

OBJECTIVES: To assess and compare the immunogenicity of recombinant Insulin Aspart [manufactured by BioGenomics Limited (BGL-ASP)] with its originator NovoRapid® (manufactured by Novo Nordisk) in adult patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: BGL-IA-CTP301 study was a randomized, open label, parallel group, multicenter phase-III clinical study to compare the efficacy and safety of recombinant Insulin Aspart 100 U/mL [manufactured by BioGenomics Limited (BGL-ASP)] with its reference medicinal product (RMP); NovoRapid® [manufactured by Novo Nordisk], in adult patients with Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). The primary objective of the study was to compare the immunogenicity of BGL-ASP and RMP; NovoRapid® in patient serum samples collected from phase-III clinical study. Immunogenicity was studied as the incidence of patients positive for anti-insulin Aspart (AIA) antibodies, developed against BGL-ASP/RMP at baseline, end of 12 week and end of 24 week of the treatment period. The changes in incidence of patients positive for AIA antibodies post-baseline were also studied to assess and compare the treatment-emergent antibody response (TEAR) between the treatment groups (BGL-ASP and RMP). Statistical evaluation was done by Fisher's exact test to compare the overall incidence of patients positive for AIA antibodies and the TEAR positives observed post-baseline in both the treated groups. An in-vitro neutralizing antibody assay (Nab assay) was also performed to study the effect of AIA antibodies in neutralizing the biological activity/metabolic function of the insulin. The neutralizing potential of AIA was studied by its effect on %glucose uptake. We also evaluated the association between AIA antibody levels and its impact on biological activity by studying the correlation between them. RESULTS: Analysis of immunogenicity data suggested that the percentage of patients positive for AIA antibodies until week 24 was similar and comparable in both the treatment groups, BGL-ASP and RMP; NovoRapid®. The changes in incidence of patients positive for AIA post-baseline in terms of TEAR positives were also similar and comparable between the treatment groups. The results of the Nab assay with confirmed positive AIA samples from BGL-ASP- and RMP-treated groups did not have any negative impact on %glucose uptake by the cells in Nab assay, confirming the absence of neutralizing antibodies in both the treatment groups. The correlation studies also showed absence of association between AIA antibody levels and percentage glucose uptake in both BGL-ASP and RMP-NovoRapid® treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: The immunogenicity assessment based on the overall incidence of patients positive for AIA, changes in incidence of patients positive for AIA post-baseline, TEAR rates and absence of neutralizing antibodies, were found to be apparently similar and comparable in both the treatment groups (BGL-ASP and RMP). We conclude from our studies that the immunogenicity of BGL-ASP is similar and comparable to RMP and the observed immunogenicity in terms of anti-insulin Aspart antibody levels had no impact on the biological activity of insulin.

The association between anti-insulin aspart antibodies and the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic characteristics of fast-acting insulin aspart in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes.

BACKGROUND: Fast-acting insulin aspart (faster aspart) is a novel formulation of insulin aspart (IAsp) ensuring ultrafast absorption and effect. AIM: To compare the pharmacokinetics between faster aspart and IAsp, based on free or total IAsp measurement, and investigate the association between anti-IAsp antibodies and faster aspart and IAsp pharmacological properties in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes (T1D). METHODS: In a randomized, two-period crossover trial, 12 children, 16 adolescents, and 15 adults (6-11, 12-17, and 18-64 years) received 0.2 U/kg double-blindsingle-dose subcutaneous faster aspart or IAsp followed by a standardized liquid meal test. RESULTS: Across age groups, the pharmacokinetic profile was left-shifted including greater early exposure for faster aspart vs IAsp irrespective of free or total IAsp assay. Onset of appearance occurred 2.4 to 5.0 minutes (free) or 1.8 to 3.0 minutes (total) earlier for faster aspart vs IAsp (P < .05). Treatment ratios (faster aspart/IAsp) for 0 to 30 minutes IAsp exposure were 1.60 to 2.11 and 1.62 to 1.96, respectively (children, free: P = .062; otherwise P < .05). The ratio of free/total IAsp for overall exposure (AUCIAsp,0-t ) was negatively associated with anti-IAsp antibody level across age. Pooling with a previous similar trial showed no clear association between anti-IAsp antibodies and meal test 1- or 2-hour postprandial glucose increment independent of age and insulin treatment (R2 ≤ .070; P ≥ .17). CONCLUSIONS: In children and adolescents with T1D, faster aspart provides ultrafast pharmacokinetics irrespective of free or total IAsp assay. Elevated anti-IAsp antibodies are associated with higher total IAsp concentration, but do not impact faster aspart and IAsp glucose-lowering effect.

Clinical Pharmacology of Fast-Acting Insulin Aspart Versus Insulin Aspart Measured as Free or Total Insulin Aspart and the Relation to Anti-Insulin Aspart Antibody Levels in Subjects with Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus.

BACKGROUND: Fast-acting insulin aspart (faster aspart) is an ultra-fast-acting formulation of insulin aspart (IAsp). This post hoc analysis investigated the pharmacokinetics of faster aspart versus IAsp, measured as free or total IAsp, and the relationship between anti-IAsp antibodies and the pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics of faster aspart and IAsp. METHODS: Free and total IAsp concentrations and anti-IAsp antibodies were determined in adults with type 1 diabetes mellitus receiving subcutaneous faster aspart and/or IAsp in four single-dose clinical pharmacology trials (n = 175) and a 26-week phase IIIa trial (n = 1040). Pharmacodynamics were assessed by euglycaemic clamp or meal test, respectively. RESULTS: The pharmacokinetic profile was left-shifted and early exposure was greater with faster aspart versus IAsp independent of free or total IAsp assay. The faster aspart-IAsp difference in the time to 50% of maximum IAsp concentration in the early part of the pharmacokinetic profile (tEarly 50 % Cmax) [95% confidence interval (CI)] was - 8.8 [- 10.0 to - 7.5] and - 7.6 [- 8.8 to - 6.4] min for free and total IAsp, respectively. The faster aspart/IAsp ratio for the area under the concentration-time curve (AUC) for IAsp from time zero to 30 min (AUCIAsp,0-30 min) [95% CI] was 1.88 [1.74-2.04] and 1.77 [1.64-1.90] for free and total IAsp. Higher anti-IAsp antibody levels were associated with a lower ratio of free/total IAsp for the total AUC for IAsp (AUCIAsp,0-t). Early glucose-lowering effect (AUC for the glucose infusion rate [GIR] from time zero to 60 min [AUCGIR,0-60 min]) was greater by 25-44% for faster aspart versus IAsp independent of anti-IAsp antibody levels. Total glucose-lowering effect (total AUC for GIR [AUCGIR,0-t]) in a clamp and 1-h postprandial glucose increment in a meal test appeared essentially unaffected by anti-IAsp antibodies. CONCLUSIONS: Faster aspart provides accelerated pharmacokinetics versus IAsp regardless if based on free or total IAsp assay. Higher anti-IAsp antibodies increase total IAsp concentrations but do not influence faster aspart nor IAsp pharmacodynamics. CLINICALTRIALS. GOV IDENTIFIERS: NCT01618188, NCT02003677, NCT01934712, NCT02568280, NCT01831765.