Development and validation of a noncompetitive electrochemiluminescence-based immunoassay (ECLIA) for specific determination of insulin lispro (Humalog®) in human serum to support pharmacokinetic assessments.

Despite the importance of insulin and insulin analogs as therapeutic agents for the treatment of type I and II diabetes mellitus (DM), bioanalysis to support regulatory submissions of analogs remains a challenging endeavor. In particular, quantitation of insulin lispro by immunoanalytical methods has largely been limited to assays that display a high degree of cross-reactivity to native insulin because this analog shares extensive primary sequence homology with endogenous insulin and its efficacious circulating concentrations are low. We report herein development of the first noncompetitive electrochemiluminescence-based immunoassay (ECLIA) for specific determination of insulin lispro in serum or plasma. The new sandwich ECLIA permits accurate assessment of insulin lispro pharmacokinetics without interference from endogenous insulin. Integral to the development of this specific immunoassay was establishment of a proprietary process for affinity production of an oligoclonal monospecific guinea pig antiserum to the unique subtle structural modification in insulin lispro. We specifically optimized the ECLIA to provide reliable performance for supporting pharmacokinetic assessments in the pharmacologically relevant concentration range from 50.0 to 5,000 pM with robust performance up to 100,000 pM upon dilution. We concluded the new noncompetitive ECLIA represents a useful and convenient immunoassay for accurate quantitation of insulin lispro during pharmacokinetic assessments.

Environmental effects of ambient temperature and relative humidity on insulin pharmacodynamics in adults with type 1 diabetes mellitus.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to explore the effects of ambient temperature and relative humidity on insulin pharmacodynamics in adults with type 1 diabetes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A three-way, cross-over, randomised study was performed in adults with type 1 diabetes mellitus (n = 10). The pharmacodynamics profile of a single dose of short-acting insulin (insulin lispro) was investigated, using a controlled environmental chamber, under three environmental conditions: (a) temperature: 15°C and humidity: 10%; (b) temperature: 30°C and humidity: 10%; and (c) temperature: 30°C and humidity: 60%. A euglycaemic glucose clamp technique ensured constant blood glucose of 100 mg/dL (5.5 mmol/L). The following pharmacodynamic endpoints were calculated: maximum glucose infusion rate (GIRmax ), time to GIRmax (tGIRmax ), total area under the curve (AUC) for GIR from 0-6 hours (AUCGIR.0-6h ), and partial AUCs (AUCGIR.0-1h , AUCGIR.0-2h and AUCGIR.2-6h ). RESULTS: Higher temperature (30°C) under 10% fixed humidity conditions resulted in greater GIRmax (P = 0.04) and a later tGIR.max (P = 0.049) compared to lower temperature (15°C). Humidity did not affect any pharmacodynamic parameter. When the combined effects of temperature and humidity were explored, tGIR.max (P = 0.008) occurred earlier, with a lower late insulin pharmacodynamic effect (AUCGIR.2-6h ; P = 0.017) at a temperature of 15°C and humidity of 10% compared to a temperature of 30°C and humidity of 60%. CONCLUSIONS: High ambient temperature resulted in a greater insulin peak effect compared to low ambient temperature, with the contribution of high relative humidity apparent only at high ambient temperature. This suggests that patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus who are entering higher environmental temperatures, with or without high humidity, could experience more hypoglycaemic events.

Adsorption effects of the doping relevant peptides Insulin Lispro, Synachten, TB-500 and GHRP 5.

The tendency of peptides to adsorb to surfaces can raise a concern in variety of analytical fields where the qualitative/quantitative measurement of low concentration analytes (ng/mL-pg/mL) is required. To demonstrate the importance of using the optimal glassware/plasticware, four doping relevant model peptides (GHRP 5, TB-500, Insulin Lispro, Synachten) were chosen and their recovery from various surfaces were evaluated. Our experiments showed that choosing expensive consumables with low-bind characteristics is not beneficial in all cases. A careful selection of the consumables based on the evaluation of the physico/chemical features of the peptide is recommended.

Similar pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of rapid-acting insulin lispro products SAR342434 and US- and EU-approved Humalog in subjects with type 1 diabetes.

AIM: To compare the pharmacokinetics (PK) and pharmacodynamics (PD) of 3 rapid-acting insulin lispro products: SAR342434 solution, United States (US)-approved Humalog and European Union (EU)-approved Humalog. METHODS: In a single-centre, randomized, double-blind, 3-treatment, 3-period, 6-sequence, crossover, euglycaemic clamp study (NCT02273258), adult male subjects with type 1 diabetes were randomized to receive 0.3 U/kg of SAR342434 solution, US-approved and EU-approved Humalog under fasted conditions. PK and PD (glucose infusion rate [GIR]) were assessed up to 12 hours. RESULTS: Of the 30 subjects randomized, 28 completed all 3 treatment periods. Mean concentration and GIR vs time profiles were similar for all 3 products. Exposure (INS-Cmax , INS-AUClast and INS-AUC) and activity (GIRmax and GIR-AUC0-12h ) of SAR342434, US-approved and EU-approved Humalog were similar in all comparisons (point estimates of treatment ratios, 0.95-1.03 for PK parameters and 1.00-1.07 for PD parameters), with 90% confidence intervals for the ratios of geometric least squares means within the pre-specified bioequivalence limit (0.80-1.25) and no significant differences in time-related parameters. Within-subject variability of exposure and activity was low across the 3 clamps, indicating high day-to-day reproducibility in clamp performance, irrespective of the individual product. Adverse events were similar for all 3 products. No safety concerns were noted in vital signs or in laboratory and electrocardiogram data. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study demonstrate similarity in insulin lispro exposure profiles and PD activity of SAR342434 solution to both US- and EU-approved Humalog, and between both US- and EU-approved Humalog, supporting the use of SAR342434 solution for injection as a follow-on product.

An assessment of the central disposition of intranasally administered insulin lispro in the cerebrospinal fluid of healthy volunteers and beagle dogs.

Intranasally administered regular insulin and insulin aspart have shown cognitive benefit for patients with Alzheimer's disease (AD). To support development of intranasally administered insulin analogs for AD, the central disposition of intranasal insulin lispro in the cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) of healthy volunteers was investigated. Healthy volunteers (N = 8) received two sequential doses of intranasal insulin lispro (48 or 80 IU followed by 160 IU) by Aero Pump in an open-label, single-period study with serial CSF and serum sampling over 5 hours after each dose. CSF insulin lispro was also measured in beagle dogs (N = 6/dose group) that received either 24 IU/kg (equivalent local nasal (IU/cm2) dose to the human 160 IU dose) or 192 IU/kg intranasally, using the same device. Insulin lispro was measured in the CSF and serum using a validated enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay method, and pharmacokinetic parameters were calculated by standard noncompartmental methods. Intranasal administration of insulin lispro was well tolerated. Insulin lispro concentrations in the CSF of humans at all dose levels were below the limit of quantification. Serum insulin lispro concentrations were quantifiable only up to 1-2 hours in the majority of subjects. In contrast to insulin lispro in the CSF of humans, insulin lispro was detectable in the CSF at both dose levels in dogs, and serum concentrations of insulin lispro were generally higher in dogs than in healthy volunteers. The absence of insulin lispro in CSF from healthy volunteers and the lack of robust exposure-response analyses will hinder the development of intranasally administered insulin lispro for AD.

Cross-reactivity of insulin analogues with three insulin assays.

BACKGROUND: Immunometric assays have recently shown higher specificity in the detection of human insulin than radioimmunoassays with almost no cross-reaction with proinsulin or C peptide. The introduction of the new insulin analogues on the market, however, has raised the need to define their cross-reactivity in these assays. Several studies have been published in this regard with different results. METHODS: The analogues studied were insulins lispro, aspart, glargine, detemir, and glulisine. Insulin concentrations were measured in Immulite(®) 2000 and Advia Centaur(®) XP (Siemens Healthcare Diagnostics), and Elecsys(®) Modular Analytics E170 (Roche). All samples were processed 15 times in the same analytical run following a random sequence. Those samples which showed statistically and clinically significant changes in insulin concentration were reprocessed using increasing concentrations of analogue, and this was done twice, using two different serum pools, one with a low concentration of insulin and one with a high concentration of insulin. RESULTS: In the Elecsys(®) E170 analyser, glargine showed statistical changes (comparison of mean concentrations with p < 0.05) and clinically significant changes in measured insulin (percentage difference 986.2% > reference change value: 59.8%), and the interference increased with increasing concentrations of analogue; the differences were not significant in the case of the other analogues. In the Advia Centaur(®) and Immulite(®) 2000 only the results for glulisine did not present significance (percentage difference 44.7% < reference change value 103.5%). Increasing concentrations of aspart, glargine, and lispro showed increased interference in Immulite(®) 2000. CONCLUSIONS: In the Elecsys(®) E170 assay, relevant cross-reactivity was only detected with insulin glargine, whereas in the other analysers all analogues except glulisine showed significant interference.

Improved pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic profiles of insulin analogues using InsuPatch, a local heating device.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies have shown that heating the insulin injection site may accelerate insulin absorption. We investigated the pharmacological profile of insulin administered with InsuPatch, a local skin-heating device. METHODS: In this randomized, crossover study carried out in 56 subjects with type 1 diabetes treated with insulin pump [mean age 32 ± 13.5 years; 23 women; HbA1c :7.8 ± 0.9% (62 ± 10 mmol/mol) (mean+/-standard deviation)]. Euglycemic glucose clamps were performed after administration of 0.15 units/kg of short-acting insulin analogues. Each subject underwent three clamp procedures: two with the InsuPatch device (day 1 and day 3) and one without the device (day 1 control). The primary endpoints were the following: (1) the change in the area under the curve (AUC) of insulin during the first 60 min post-insulin bolus on day 1 with the InsuPatch device versus day 1 control and (2) parameters to assess the safety of using the device. RESULTS: The area under the curve of insulin during the initial 60 min (insulin AUC(0-60)) after insulin bolus was increased by 29.7 ± 7% on day 1 InsuPatch versus day 1 control (p < 0.01). Maximal post-insulin bolus concentration was 57 mU/L on day 1 InsuPatch versus 47.6 mU/L on day 1 control (p < 0.01). On day 3 InsuPatch, insulin AUC(0-60) was increased by 27.9 ± 72% versus day 1 InsuPatch (p < 0.01). Maximal insulin concentration was 70.4 mU/L versus 57 mU/L, respectively (p = 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The use of the heating device upon administration of short-acting insulin analogues in pump-treated type 1 diabetic patients was found to enhance insulin absorption. This heating device may therefore serve to achieve better meal insulin coverage.

Single-dose pharmacokinetics and glucodynamics of the novel, long-acting basal insulin LY2605541 in healthy subjects.

LY2605541 is a novel basal insulin analog with a prolonged duration of action. Two Phase I studies assessed LY2605541 pharmacokinetics (PK), glucodynamics (GD), and tolerability in healthy subjects. In Study 1, 33 subjects received single subcutaneous (SC) doses of LY2605541 (0.01-2.22 U/kg) and insulin glargine (0.5-0.8 U/kg) followed by euglycemic clamp for up to 24-36 hours. In Study 2, absolute bioavailability of SC LY2605541 was assessed in 8 subjects by comparing dose normalized area under concentration versus time curve of SC against IV administration. Time-to-maximum plasma concentration (medians) and geometric means for half-life (t½ ) and apparent clearance, respectively, ranged from 18.0 to 42.0 hours, 24.4-45.5 hours, and 1.8-2.8 L/h for SC LY2605541, versus 10.0-12.0 hours, 12.2-14.9 hours, and 51.4-65.2 L/h for SC insulin glargine. LY2605541 glucose infusion rate (GIR) profiles were sustained for ≥36 hours versus glargine GIR profiles, which waned at 24 hours. After IV administration, LY2605541's geometric mean t½ was 2.3 hours. LY2605541 intra-subject variability (CV%) was <18% for PK and <32% for GD parameters. The most common adverse events were related to study procedures and were mild-moderate in severity. These results established a well-tolerated baseline dose for LY2605541 with a relatively flat PK profile and low intra-subject variability.

Patch pump versus conventional pump: postprandial glycemic excursions and the influence of wear time.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The aim of this study was to compare blood glucose and plasma insulin profiles after bolus insulin infusion by a patch pump (PP) versus a conventional pump (CP), directly after placement and after Day 3 of use. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Twenty patients with type 1 diabetes came in for two blocks of visits: one block of two visits while wearing the OmniPod® (Insulet Corp., Bedford, MA) insulin pump (PP) and one block of two visits while wearing the Medtronic Diabetes (Northridge, CA) Paradigm® pump (CP). Patients administered an identical mealtime insulin bolus of at least 6 IU. RESULTS: For PP, maximum glucose levels were 28.7% lower on Day 3 (P=0.020), when maximum insulin levels were 30.3% higher (P=0.002). For CP, maximum glucose levels were 26.5% lower on Day 3 (P=0.015), when maximum insulin levels were 46.4% higher (P=0.003). Glucose levels (mean [interquartile range]) were significantly lower on Day 3 for PP (168.2 [145.8] mg/dL vs. 139.4 [77.8] mg/dL; P=0.013), but not significantly so for CP (159.0 [66.1] mg/dL vs. 139.5 [57.9] mg/dL; P=0.084). Mean insulin levels were significantly higher on Day 3 for CP (195 [120] pmol/L vs. 230 [90] pmol/L; P=0.01), but not significantly so for PP (178 [106] pmol/L vs. 194 [120] pmol/L; P=0.099). There were no significant differences between the two catheter lengths. CONCLUSIONS: Postprandial glycemic excursions were lower on Day 3 of catheter wear time, but there were no differences between PPs and CPs. These findings support the proposal that catheter wear time plays an important role in insulin absorption.

Faster pharmacokinetics and increased patient acceptance of intradermal insulin delivery using a single hollow microneedle in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes.

OBJECTIVE: In an effort to improve compliance with insulin therapy and to accelerate insulin pharmacokinetics, we tested the hypothesis that intradermal insulin delivery using a hollow microneedle causes less pain and leads to faster onset and offset of insulin pharmacokinetics in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes (T1DM) compared with a subcutaneous, insulin pump catheter. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: In this repeated measures study, 16 children and adolescents with T1DM received Lispro insulin by microneedle and subcutaneous administration on separate days. Subjects rated the pain of insertion and infusion using a visual analog scale. Blood specimens were collected over 4 h to determine insulin and glucose concentrations. RESULTS: Microneedle insertion pain was significantly lower compared with insertion of the subcutaneous catheter (p = 0.005). Insulin onset time was 22 min faster (p = 0.0004) and offset time was 34 min faster (p = 0.017) after hollow microneedle delivery compared with subcutaneous delivery. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, intradermal insulin delivery using a single, hollow microneedle device resulted in less insertion pain and faster insulin onset and offset in children and adolescents with T1DM. A reduction in pain might improve compliance with insulin delivery. The faster onset and offset times of insulin action may enable closed-loop insulin therapy.

A 12-wk follow-up study to evaluate the effects of mixing insulin lispro and insulin glargine in young individuals with type 1 diabetes.

OBJECTIVE: This study was performed to compare in real-life conditions the serum profile of insulin lispro (IL) after a subcutaneous (SC) injection, separate and mixed with insulin glargine (IG), using a sensitive radioimmunoassay for the specific determination of serum IL, and to evaluate the 12-wk effect of the mixture on glycemic control in young individuals with type 1 diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: The IL serum profiles were evaluated in 10 individuals with type 1 diabetes [age 21.9 ± 3.8 yr; diabetes duration 13.4 ± 4.9 yr; body mass index 25.1 ± 3.2 kg/m2; hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) 8.3 ± 0.8%] during a mixed meal test (MMT) using IL and IG as separate (baseline) and mixed injection. The glycemic variability by continuous glucose monitoring system (CGMS) and the long-term diabetes control with HbA1c were also evaluated at baseline and after 12 wk mixing the two insulins. RESULTS: The mixture of IL with IG decreased IL maximum serum concentration (Cmax(IL) ) (29.4 ± 5.1 µU/mL vs. 13.7 ± 4.2 µU/mL; p = 0.03) without changing the time to reach the Cmax (Tmax(IL) ), the IL area under the curve (AUC(IL) (0-240) ), and the glucose dynamics during the MMT. The glucose variability and the HbA1c were equivalent to baseline after 12 wk mixing both insulins. CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that mixing IL with IG immediately before the SC injection decreases IL serum peak concentration without affecting the glycemic profile after 12 wk in this group with type 1 diabetes mellitus.

Improved postprandial glycemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes from subcutaneous injection of insulin lispro with hyaluronidase.

BACKGROUND: Coinjection of hyaluronidase has been shown to accelerate insulin absorption in healthy volunteers and patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus. This study was undertaken to compare the postprandial glycemic response of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) administered insulin lispro with and without recombinant human hyaluronidase (rHuPH20) and regular human insulin (RHI) with rHuPH20. METHODS: This double-blind three-way crossover study compared the insulin pharmacokinetics and glucodynamic response to a standardized liquid meal (80 g of carbohydrate) in 21 patients with T2DM who received subcutaneous injections of individually optimized doses of lispro±rHuPH20 and RHI+rHuPH20. The optimum dose (targeting postprandial glucose [PPG] of 70-140 mg/dL) of each preparation was selected by the investigator following a fixed-dose escalation procedure in three dose-finding meals. RESULTS: Co-injection of lispro+rHuPH20 accelerated pharmacokinetics relative to lispro alone (time to peak insulin concentration, 43 vs. 74 min; P=0.0045) with increased exposure in the first hour (184% of control; P<0.0001) and reduced exposure after 2 h (67% of control; P=0.0001). These accelerated pharmacokinetics improved both total hyperglycemic excursions (area under the curve for 0-4 h >140 mg/dL, 56% of control; P=0.048) and hypoglycemic excursions (area under the curve for 0-8 h <70 mg/dL, 34% of control; P=0.033), allowing over three times as many patients to reach the American Diabetes Association's target of peak PPG <180 mg/dL without requiring glucose treatment for hypoglycemia. The mean optimum dose of lispro was reduced 8% from 0.275 U/kg without rHuPH20 to 0.254 U/kg with rHuPH20 (P=0.04). RHI+rHuPH20 had responses and optimum doses comparable to insulin lispro alone. All insulin preparations were well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: Lispro+rHuPH20 provided superior control of glycemic excursion compared with lispro alone, with lower insulin requirements and reduced hypoglycemic excursions.

Massive insulin overdose managed by monitoring daily insulin levels.

We present a case of a significant insulin overdose that was managed by monitoring daily plasma insulin levels. A 39-year-old male with poorly controlled diabetes mellitus presented to the Emergency Department via emergency medical services after an attempted suicide by insulin overdose. In the attempted suicide, he injected 800 U of insulin lispro and 3800 U of insulin glargine subcutaneously over several parts of his abdomen. The patient was conscious upon arrival to the emergency department. His vital parameters were within normal range. The abdominal examination, in particular, was nonfocal and showed no evidence of hematomas. He was awake, alert, conversant, tearful, and without any focal deficits. An infusion of 10% dextrose was begun at 100 mL/h with hourly blood glucose (BG) checks. The patient was transferred to the intensive care unit where his BG began to decrease and fluctuate between 50 and 80 mg/dL, and the rate of 10% dextrose was increased to 200 mL/h where it was maintained for the next 48 hours. The initial plasma insulin level was found to be 3712.6 uU/mL (reference range 2.6-31.1 uU/mL). At 10 hours, this had decreased to 1582.1 uU/ml. On five occasions, supplemental dextrose was needed when the BG was <70 mg/dL. Thirty-four hours after admission, the plasma insulin level was 724.8 uU/mL. Fifty-eight hours after admission, the plasma insulin level was 321.2 uU/mL, and the 10% dextrose infusion was changed to 5% dextrose solution at 200 mL/h. The plasma insulin levels continued to fall daily to 112.7 uU/mL at 80 hours and to 30.4 uU/mL at 108 hours. He was transferred to an inpatient psychiatric facility 109 hours after initial presentation. Monitoring daily plasma insulin levels and adjusting treatment on a day-to-day basis in terms of basal glucose infusions provides fewer opportunities for episodic hypoglycemia. Furthermore, it was easier to predict daily glucose requirements and eventual medical clearance based on the plasma levels.