Search

Aims/hypothesis: This study compared the frequency of hypoglycaemia, time to hypoglycaemia and recovery from hypoglycaemia after double or triple doses of once-weekly insulin icodec vs once-daily insulin glargine U100. Furthermore, the symptomatic and counterregulatory responses to hypoglycaemia were compared between icodec and glargine U100 treatment., Methods: In a randomised, single-centre (Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Endocrinology and Diabetology, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria), open-label, two-period crossover trial, individuals with type 2 diabetes (age 18-72 years, BMI 18.5-37.9 kg/m 2 , HbA 1c ≤75 mmol/mol [≤9.0%]) treated with basal insulin with or without oral glucose-lowering drugs received once-weekly icodec (for 6 weeks) and once-daily glargine U100 (for 11 days). Total weekly doses were equimolar based on individual titration of daily glargine U100 during the run-in period (target fasting plasma glucose [PG]: 4.4-7.2 mmol/l). Randomisation was carried out by assigning a randomisation number to each participant in ascending order, which encoded to one of two treatment sequences via a randomisation list prepared prior to the start of the trial. At steady state, double and triple doses of icodec and glargine U100 were administered followed by hypoglycaemia induction: first, euglycaemia was maintained at 5.5 mmol/l by variable i.v. infusion of glucose; glucose infusion was then terminated, allowing PG to decrease to no less than 2.5 mmol/l (target PG nadir ). The PG nadir was maintained for 15 min. Euglycaemia was restored by constant i.v. glucose (5.5 mg kg -1 min -1 ). Hypoglycaemic symptoms score (HSS), counterregulatory hormones, vital signs and cognitive function were assessed at predefined PG levels towards the PG nadir ., Results: Hypoglycaemia induction was initiated in 43 and 42 participants after double dose of icodec and glargine U100, respectively, and in 38 and 40 participants after triple doses, respectively. Clinically significant hypoglycaemia, defined as PG nadir <3.0 mmol/l, occurred in comparable proportions of individuals treated with icodec vs glargine U100 after double (17 [39.5%] vs 15 [35.7%]; p=0.63) and triple (20 [52.6%] vs 28 [70.0%]; p=0.14) doses. No statistically significant treatment differences were observed in the time to decline from PG values of 5.5 mmol/l to 3.0 mmol/l (2.9-4.5 h after double dose and 2.2-2.4 h after triple dose of the insulin products). The proportion of participants with PG nadir ≤2.5 mmol/l was comparable between treatments after double dose (2 [4.7%] for icodec vs 3 [7.1%] for glargine U100; p=0.63) but higher for glargine U100 after triple dose (1 [2.6%] vs 10 [25.0%]; p=0.03). Recovery from hypoglycaemia by constant i.v. glucose infusion took <30 min for all treatments. Analyses of the physiological response to hypoglycaemia only included data from participants with PG nadir <3.0 mmol/l and/or the presence of hypoglycaemic symptoms; in total 20 (46.5%) and 19 (45.2%) individuals were included after a double dose of icodec and glargine U100, respectively, and 20 (52.6%) and 29 (72.5%) individuals were included after a triple dose of icodec and glargine U100, respectively. All counterregulatory hormones (glucagon, adrenaline [epinephrine], noradrenaline [norepinephrine], cortisol and growth hormone) increased during hypoglycaemia induction with both insulin products at both doses. Following triple doses, the hormone response was greater with icodec vs glargine U100 for adrenaline at PG 3.0 mmol/l (treatment ratio 2.54 [95% CI 1.69, 3.82]; p<0.001), and cortisol at PG 3.0   mmol/l (treatment ratio 1.64 [95% CI 1.13, 2.38]; p=0.01) and PG nadir (treatment ratio 1.80 [95% CI 1.09, 2.97]; p=0.02). There were no statistically significant treatment differences in the HSS, vital signs and cognitive function., Conclusions/interpretation: Double or triple doses of once-weekly icodec lead to a similar risk of hypoglycaemia compared with double or triple doses of once-daily glargine U100. During hypoglycaemia, comparable symptomatic and moderately greater endocrine responses are elicited by icodec vs glargine U100., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03945656., Funding: This study was funded by Novo Nordisk A/S., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Introduction: Insulin icodec is a novel, long-acting insulin analog designed to cover basal insulin requirements with once-weekly subcutaneous administration. Here we describe the molecular engineering and the biological and pharmacological properties of insulin icodec., Research Design and Methods: A number of in vitro assays measuring receptor binding, intracellular signaling as well as cellular metabolic and mitogenic responses were used to characterize the biological properties of insulin icodec. To evaluate the pharmacological properties of insulin icodec in individuals with type 2 diabetes, a randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, active-controlled, multiple-dose, dose escalation trial was conducted., Results: The long half-life of insulin icodec was achieved by introducing modifications to the insulin molecule aiming to obtain a safe, albumin-bound circulating depot of insulin icodec, providing protracted insulin action and clearance. Addition of a C20 fatty diacid-containing side chain imparts strong, reversible albumin binding, while three amino acid substitutions (A14E, B16H and B25H) provide molecular stability and contribute to attenuating insulin receptor (IR) binding and clearance, further prolonging the half-life. In vitro cell-based studies showed that insulin icodec activates the same dose-dependent IR-mediated signaling and metabolic responses as native human insulin (HI). The affinity of insulin icodec for the insulin-like growth factor-1 receptor was proportionately lower than its binding to the IR, and the in vitro mitogenic effect of insulin icodec in various human cells was low relative to HI. The clinical pharmacology trial in people with type 2 diabetes showed that insulin icodec was well tolerated and has pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic properties that are suited for once-weekly dosing, with a mean half-life of 196 hours and close to even distribution of glucose-lowering effect over the entire dosing interval of 1 week., Conclusions: The molecular modifications introduced into insulin icodec provide a novel basal insulin with biological and pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic properties suitable for once-weekly dosing., Trial Registration Number: NCT02964104., Competing Interests: Competing interests: All authors are current or past employees of Novo Nordisk A/S, Denmark., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Objective: To investigate physiological responses to cardiopulmonary exercise (CPX) testing in adults with type 1 diabetes compared with age-, sex-, and BMI-matched control participants without type 1 diabetes., Research Design and Methods: We compared results from CPX tests on a cycle ergometer in individuals with type 1 diabetes and control participants without type 1 diabetes. Parameters were peak and threshold variables of VO 2 , heart rate, and power output. Differences between groups were investigated through restricted maximum likelihood modeling and post hoc tests. Differences between groups were explained by stepwise linear regressions ( P < 0.05)., Results: Among 303 individuals with type 1 diabetes (age 33 [interquartile range 22; 43] years, 93 females, BMI 23.6 [22; 26] kg/m 2 , HbA 1c 6.9% [6.2; 7.7%] [52 (44; 61) mmol/mol]), VO 2peak (32.55 [26.49; 38.72] vs. 42.67 ± 10.44 mL/kg/min), peak heart rate (179 [170; 187] vs. 184 [175; 191] beats/min), and peak power (216 [171; 253] vs. 245 [200; 300] W) were lower compared with 308 control participants without type 1 diabetes (all P < 0.001). Individuals with type 1 diabetes displayed an impaired degree and direction of the heart rate-to-performance curve compared with control participants without type 1 diabetes (0.07 [-0.75; 1.09] vs. 0.66 [-0.28; 1.45]; P < 0.001). None of the exercise physiological responses were associated with HbA 1c in individuals with type 1 diabetes., Conclusions: Individuals with type 1 diabetes show altered responses to CPX testing, which cannot be explained by HbA 1c . Intriguingly, the participants in our cohort were people with recent-onset type 1 diabetes; heart rate dynamics were altered during CPX testing., (© 2020 by the American Diabetes Association.)

Introduction: Fast-acting insulin aspart (faster aspart) is insulin aspart (IAsp) in a new formulation with two added excipients (niacinamide and L-arginine) in order to obtain accelerated absorption after subcutaneous dosing. The present study compared the pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic characteristics of faster aspart vs IAsp in Japanese patients with type 1 diabetes., Materials and Methods: In a randomized, double-blind, cross-over design, 43 participants were given faster aspart and IAsp (0.2 U/kg single dose) at two separate dosing visits. Frequent pharmacokinetic blood sampling was carried out, and pharmacodynamics were assessed using an automated euglycemic clamp lasting for a maximum of 12 h after dosing (target 5.5 mmol/L)., Results: Faster aspart showed onset of appearance approximately twice-as-fast vs IAsp (least squares means: 3.0 vs 7.1 min; estimated treatment difference -4.1 min, 95% confidence interval [CI]: -5.0, -3.2; P < 0.001) and onset of action occurring approximately 5 min earlier (20.2 vs 25.5 min; estimated treatment difference -5.3 min, 95% CI: -8.4, -2.2; P = 0.001). Within the first 30 min post-dose, both exposure (area under the curve [AUC] IA sp,0-30 min ) and glucose-lowering effect (AUC GIR ,0-30 min ) were approximately twofold greater for faster aspart vs IAsp (P < 0.001 and P = 0.002, respectively). Bioavailability of faster aspart was similar to IAsp (AUC IA sp,0-t ; estimated treatment ratio 0.99, 90% CI: 0.96-1.02), whereas the total glucose-lowering effect (AUC GIR ,0-t ) was slightly lower for faster aspart vs IAsp (estimated treatment ratio 0.93, 95% CI: 0.87-0.99, P = 0.020)., Conclusions: Faster aspart showed faster onset, higher early exposure and a greater early glucose-lowering effect relative to IAsp in Japanese patients with type 1 diabetes, in accordance with previous findings in Caucasian type 1 diabetes patients., (© 2017 The Authors. Journal of Diabetes Investigation published by Asian Association for the Study of Diabetes (AASD) and John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd.)

Aims/introduction: Insulin degludec/insulin aspart (IDegAsp) is a soluble co-formulation of long-acting insulin degludec (IDeg) and rapid-acting insulin aspart (IAsp). The present study investigated the pharmacodynamic properties of IDegAsp in Japanese patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus., Materials and Methods: In this randomized, double-blind, two-period, cross-over trial, 21 Japanese patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus received single doses of 0.5 U/kg IDegAsp and biphasic insulin aspart 30 in a randomized sequence (13-21 days washout between treatments). The pharmacodynamic response was evaluated in a 26-h euglycemic glucose clamp (target 5.5 mmol/L). Single-dose IDegAsp glucose infusion rate (GIR) profiles were extrapolated to steady state using modeling., Results: The IDegAsp single-dose GIR profile showed a clear distinction between the effects of the bolus (IAsp) and basal (IDeg) components in IDegAsp. When simulated to steady state, the GIR profile of IDegAsp was shifted upwards compared with the single-dose profile, and showed a rapid onset of action and a distinct peak from the IAsp component followed by a separate and sustained basal action from the long-acting IDeg component. For biphasic insulin aspart 30, the initial shape of the GIR profile was similar to IDegAsp, but GIR continuously decreased from maximum and reached zero 18-20 h post-dosing. The characteristics of the GIR profile for IDegAsp were retained when simulated to steady state in a twice-daily dosing regimen., Discussion: In Japanese patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus, the pharmacodynamic profile of IDegAsp is characterized by distinct prandial and basal effects from the IAsp and IDeg components, consistent with what has been reported previously in Caucasian patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus., (© 2015 The Authors. Journal of Diabetes Investigation published by Asian Association for the Study of Diabetes (AASD) and John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd.)

Introduction: The present study aimed to evaluate the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties of insulin degludec (IDeg) in Japanese patients with type 1 diabetes., Materials and Methods: This was a randomized, single-center, double-blind, two-period, crossover, multiple-dose trial. Patients were randomized into two treatment sequences, and received IDeg or insulin detemir for 6 days and a washout period (7-21 days) before switching treatment. Blood samples for pharmacokinetic measurements were obtained before each dose and up to 120 h after the last dose of each treatment period. Pharmacodynamic measurements were obtained using a 26-h euglycemic clamp procedure after the last dose of each treatment period., Results: A total of 22 patients were randomized (14 men, 8 women; mean glycosylated hemoglobin at baseline of 7.5% [based on Japanese Diabetes Society value]). At steady state, total glucose-lowering effect (area under the glucose infusion rate [GIR] curve during one dosing interval [τ, 0-24 h] at steady state [AUCGIR ,τ, SS]) was 1,446 mg/kg and total exposure (geometric mean) of IDeg (AUCID eg,τ, SS) was 81,270 pmol h/L. Both the glucose-lowering effect and the exposure of IDeg were evenly distributed over the dosing interval, with AUC for the first 12-h intervals being approximately 50% of the total (geometric mean; AUCGIR ,0-12h, SS/AUCGIR ,τ, SS = 48%; AUCID eg,0-12h, SS/AUCID eg,τ, SS = 53%)., Conclusions: IDeg has a flat, consistent and ultra-long glucose-lowering effect that is evenly distributed across a 24-h interval and an ultra-long duration of action in Japanese patients with type 1 diabetes. These data support once-daily dosing of IDeg in all patients. Overall, the pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic end-points and safety observations are consistent with those previously reported in Caucasian patients.

Introduction/aim: Insulin degludec/insulin aspart (IDegAsp) is a soluble co-formulation of long-acting and short-acting insulin analogs. The primary objective of this study was to investigate the pharmacodynamic response of once-daily IDegAsp dosing in patients with type 1 diabetes. Pharmacokinetic response, as well as safety and tolerability, were assessed as secondary objectives., Methodology: This was a single-center, open-label, single-arm study. Twenty-two subjects received once-daily insulin degludec (IDeg) (0.42 U/kg) for five consecutive days [with separate bolus insulin aspart (IAsp) as needed for safety and glycemic control], to achieve clinical steady state of the basal component. On Day 6, they received a single injection of IDegAsp (0.6 U/kg, comprising 0.42 U/kg IDeg and 0.18 U/kg IAsp). Pharmacodynamic response was assessed using a 30-h euglycemic glucose clamp, with blood glucose stabilized at a target of 5.5 mmol/L., Results: The glucose infusion rate profile showed a rapid onset of action and a distinct peak due to IAsp, followed by a separate, flat and stable basal glucose-lowering effect due to the IDeg component. Modeling data suggested that the pharmacodynamic profile of IDegAsp was retained with twice-daily dosing (allowing for coverage of two main meals daily). IDegAsp was well tolerated and no safety issues were identified in this trial., Conclusions: In conclusion, the IAsp component of IDegAsp has a fast onset of appearance and a peak covering the prandial phase, while the IDeg component has a flat and an evenly distributed pharmacokinetic profile over 24 h. IDegAsp is the first co-formulation of a basal insulin analog with an ultra-long duration of action and a mealtime insulin analog in a single soluble injection. These properties translate into clinically relevant benefits, including improved glycemic control and reduction in hypoglycemia.

Aims/hypothesis: Insulin degludec (Des(B30)LysB29(γ-Glu Nε-hexadecandioyl) human insulin; IDeg) is a new basal insulin with an ultra-long flat action profile. The acute physiological responses to hypoglycaemia with IDeg and insulin glargine (A21Gly,B31Arg,B32Arg human insulin; IGlar) were compared., Methods: Twenty-eight adult type 1 diabetic patients with normal hypoglycaemia awareness (age = 41 ± 12 years, HbA1c = 7.8 ± 0.6% [62.8 ± 7 mmol/mol]) were randomised to once-daily IDeg or IGlar for 5 days in a two-period crossover design. Participants and research staff were blinded to group assignment. Patients were assigned the lowest available randomisation number from a set of blinded randomisation codes provided by the trial sponsor. Hypoglycaemia was induced by administering three times the usual daily insulin dose at midnight on day 5. Plasma glucose (PG) was stabilised by glucose clamp (5.5 mmol/l) for 7-9 h post dosing. Next morning, PG was allowed to decrease stepwise from 5.5 to 3.5 mmol/l (maintained for 30 min) to 2.5 mmol/l (for 15 min). PG was then increased to 3.9 mmol/l (for 120 min), before being returned to baseline. Hypoglycaemic symptom score (HSS), hypoglycaemic awareness, cognitive function, counter-regulatory hormones and vital signs were assessed during each glucose plateau. The primary analysis was to compare IDeg vs IGlar with respect to HSS at nadir PG concentration (2.5 mmol/l)., Results: The full analysis set for treatment comparisons comprised data from all 28 exposed patients. Rates of PG decline and PG at nadir were similar for IDeg and IGlar. No treatment differences in HSS (estimated difference: 0.17 [95% CI -1.71, 2.05]; p > 0.05), cognitive function or awareness were observed at any time. Growth hormone and cortisol responses during hypoglycaemia were greater with IDeg than IGlar (AUC treatment ratio [IDeg/IGlar]: 2.44 [1.30, 4.60], p < 0.01; and 1.23 [1.01, 1.50]; p < 0.05), and adrenaline (epinephrine) responses trended higher (1.40 [0.96, 2.04], p = 0.07). The rates of recovery from hypoglycaemia were similar., Conclusions/interpretation: IDeg and IGlar elicit comparable symptomatic and cognitive responses to induced hypoglycaemia. IDeg may elicit a moderately greater endocrine response, but times to PG recovery were similar for the two insulins., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01002768., Funding: Novo Nordisk.

Objective: Insulin detemir is a soluble basal insulin analog with a unique mechanism of protracted action designed to reduce the variability associated with conventional basal insulins. This trial compared the glycemic control, risk of hypoglycemia, and effect on body weight of insulin detemir and NPH insulin in patients with type 1 diabetes treated with rapid-acting insulin aspart at meals., Research Design and Methods: This study was a 6-month multinational open parallel-group comparison conducted at 46 centers in five countries and included 448 patients with type 1 diabetes randomized 2:1 to insulin detemir or NPH insulin, respectively., Results: After 6 months, comparable HbA(1c) levels were found between the two treatment groups. Fasting plasma glucose tended to be lower in patients treated with insulin detemir, but this difference was not statistically significant (-0.76 mmol/l, P = 0.097). Within-subject variation in self-measured fasting blood glucose was lower with insulin detemir than with NPH insulin (SD 3.37 vs. 3.78 mmol/l, P < 0.001). Risk of hypoglycemia was 22% lower with insulin detemir than with NPH insulin (P < 0.05) and 34% lower for nocturnal (2300-0600) hypoglycemia (P < 0.005). Nightly plasma glucose profiles were smoother and more stable with insulin detemir (P = 0.05). Body weight was significantly lower with insulin detemir at the end of the trial (P < 0.001)., Conclusions: Treatment with insulin detemir resulted in more predictable glycemic control, with smoother plasma glucose profiles than NPH insulin and a significant reduction in the risk of hypoglycemia. The reduction in body weight with insulin detemir is a potential additional advantage. Regimens optimized for insulin detemir may be able to improve glycemic control beyond that possible with NPH insulin.