DOCSLIB.ORG

Mixing Insulin Glargine with Rapid-Acting Insulin: a Review of the Literature Dana G

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Mixing Insulin Glargine with Rapid-Acting Insulin: a Review of the Literature Dana G Feature Article / Mixing Glargine and Rapid-Acting Insulin Mixing Insulin Glargine With Rapid-Acting Insulin: A Review of the Literature Dana G. Carroll, PharmD, BCPS, CDE, and Lisa Meade, PharmD, CDE Abstract Purpose. To review the literature Two of the clinical outcomes examining the mixing of insulin studies did not report significant glargine with rapid-acting insulin differences in A1C levels or prepran- (RAI). dial, postprandial, or nocturnal Methods. A literature search blood glucose levels from mixing was conducted via PubMed and glargine and RAI. One of the clinical Medline (from 1948 to August 2012) outcome studies reported improved using the search terms “diabetes,” blood glucose control (A1C and fast- “insulin glargine,” “short acting ing blood glucose) with RAI mixed insulin,” “rapid acting insulin,” and with glargine compared to RAI “mixing.” Literature was limited to mixed with NPH insulin. There were no significant differences in hypogly- English-language articles reporting cemia in any of the clinical outcome on human studies. Studies with data trials at any time measured. describing mixing glargine with any Conclusion. Initial small clinical short-acting insulin or RAI were trials indicate that there are no sig- included. Four studies met nificant changes in clinical outcomes inclusion criteria. (blood glucose levels, A1C levels, and Results. Of the four studies hypoglycemia) when mixing glargine assessing mixing glargine, one was with RAI. Additional studies with a pharmacokinetic study. The other larger patient populations and longer three assessed clinical outcomes in trial durations are needed before “real-world” settings. All of these mixing glargine with RAI can be studies were conducted in pediatric recommended on a routine basis in patients with type 1 diabetes. clinical practice. Type 1 diabetes accounts for about FDA warns against mixing glargine 5–10% of patients with diabetes; with other insulins because of its pH however, 75% of patients diagnosed and solubility.2 Therefore, basal-bolus with type 1 diabetes are < 18 years of therapy with glargine increases the age.1 The benefits of intense insulin number of daily injections compared therapy to lower A1C and prevent to regimens using intermediate-acting diabetes-related complications are NPH insulin. However, glargine well documented. offers less hypoglycemia than NPH Insulin glargine, the first once- because it is relatively peakless.3 daily basal insulin approved by the Glargine is, however, more expensive U.S. Food and Drug Administration than NPH. (FDA), is used in regimens to treat The treatment of diabetes in chil- patients with type 1 or type 2 dia- dren presents a number of challenges, betes.2 The clear, colorless solution including pain at injection sites, of glargine is buffered to a pH of 4 frequent injections, injection-related Address correspondence to Dana G. and is completely soluble at this level. anxiety (pain or needle phobia), Carroll, PharmD, BCPS, CDE, 850 After injection, a microprecipitate fear of hypoglycemia, and concerns 5th Avenue East, Tuscaloosa, AL forms at the injection site that delays about weight gain. The insulin regi- 35401. and prolongs glargine’s action. The men must be acceptable to patients 112 Diabetes Spectrum Volume 26, Number 2, 2013 Feature Article / Carroll and Meade and their family, while achieving was significantly reduced in the the authors cautioned that titration glycemic control and minimizing mixing group (separate 7.1 ± 1 vs. of the evening dose of glargine may hypoglycemia. In patients 8–21 years mixed 3.9 ± 1 mg/kg/minute, P = be required to prevent hypoglycemia. of age, compliance decreases with 0.04). With regard to pharmaco- This study was conducted under frequency of injections.4 Some clini- kinetics, the peak concentration of real-life conditions, and there was no cians try to minimize the number of lispro was significantly less and the difference in pain or reported reac- injections by mixing glargine with time to peak action was significantly tions with the mixed regimen. The a rapid-acting insulin (RAI) despite delayed in the mixing group (Table study did document cloudiness when FDA warnings against this practice. 1). Mixing the two insulins flattens glargine was mixed with lispro or This review examines the data on and delays the lispro peak. These aspart, which is consistent with data mixing glargine with an RAI. results might lead to poorer control on file with the manufacturer regard- of postmeal glucose levels. ing glargine mixing.2 Limitations of Methodology One limitation of this study is this study include a lack of discussion A literature search was conducted via the use of a fixed 1:2 ratio of lispro about the actual insulin doses and PubMed and Medline (articles pub- to glargine. The insulin lispro dose the short study duration (10 days for lished from 1948 to January 2012) could be increased to overcome the each study group). using the search terms “diabetes,” delay and diminished action peak. Fiallo-Scharer et al.7 conducted “insulin glargine,” “short-acting The delay of action with the lispro a 24-week prospective, case-control insulin,” “rapid-acting insulin,” and can be > 5 hours. Clinically, there study in 110 pediatric patients (70 “mixing.” The search was limited to could be an increased risk of noc- male; mean age 13.4 ± 3.8 years in articles published in English describ- turnal hypoglycemia if lispro and the mixed group and 12.9 ± 4.0 years ing human studies. Studies with data glargine were dosed at supper. in the nonmixed group) with type describing mixing glargine with any The results in this study are con- 1 diabetes. This trial compared the short-acting insulin or RAI were sistent with the results observed in efficacy and safety of administering included. Four studies met these previous animal studies when mixing glargine mixed with either lispro or inclusion criteria. regular insulin with glargine (delayed aspart to that of glargine adminis- Literature Review onset of action and a delayed time to tered separately from an RAI. The 5 Four trials have been published maximum effect). patients mixing insulin (n = 55) were 6 regarding the mixing of insulin Kaplan et al. conducted a 30-day matched with controls (n = 55) based glargine and an RAI.5–8 Cengiz crossover study in 14 pediatric on age, sex, duration of diabetes, and et al.5 conducted a glucose clamp patients (6 male; mean age 13.5 use of identical types of insulin but study in 11 adolescents (six males ± 0.5 years) with type 1 diabetes. who were not mixing before admin- and five females, mean age 15.1 ± This trial compared the efficacy of istration. Patients were allowed to 3 years) with type 1 diabetes. This mixing glargine with either lispro or continue the doses and frequency of trial compared the pharmacody- aspart insulin and administering the insulin administration they had been namic and pharmacokinetic effects doses twice daily compared to once using at the time of enrollment for of administering glargine mixed daily. Continuous glucose monitor- both glargine and their RAI. Data with insulin lispro to administer- ing (CGM) was used to assess each were collected for 6 months before ing glargine separately. Patients had regimen. Patients used glargine at and 6 months after enrollment. The diabetes for at least 1 year and were baseline once daily with three to four primary outcome was change in A1C. on continuous subcutaneous insulin injections of an RAI. Patients were There was no significant differ- infusion for at least 3 months. The randomized to one of two groups ence between the two groups in A1C participants were admitted to the with a crossover design: 1) separate at 6 months (mixing 8.54 ± 1.14 vs. hospital the night before the study injections (glargine before breakfast nonmixing 8.61 ± 1.14%, P = 1.0). and randomized to receive 0.2 units/ and before supper and RAI with each There also were no significant differ- kg of lispro and 0.4 units/kg of meal, and 2) mixed (pre-breakfast ences in the incidence of nonsevere glargine, either mixed or not mixed. and pre-supper glargine mixed with hypoglycemia, severe hypoglycemia, The insulins were mixed at room an RAI and an RAI dose at lunch). or diabetic ketoacidosis at 3 or 6 temperature immediately before the Each patient underwent three studies months (Table 1). However, it should injection. The insulin pump was over a 4- to 6-week period. Patients be noted that four patients in the suspended before the dose was given. continued each regimen for 10 days, mixing group chose to discontinue Two clamp studies were performed, and CGM was performed during the mixing because of an increased fre- with patients receiving the opposite final 3 days of each regimen. quency of hypo- and hyperglycemic treatment regimen during the second There was no significant differ- episodes. The strengths of this trial study, which was within 4 weeks of ence in hypoglycemia, preprandial included a well-matched controlled the first clamp study. glucose, or postprandial glucose lev- group and a 6-month follow-up Both the pharmacodynamic els between baseline, separate, and period. Limitations included the and pharmacokinetic profiles were mixed groups (Table 1). However, study design, lack of blinding, lack altered with the mixing of glargine the mixed group experienced lower of standardized insulin dosing and and lispro. The peak effect of lispro nocturnal blood glucose levels, and frequency, and the fact that 15% of Diabetes Spectrum Volume 26, Number 2, 2013 113
Load more

Recommended publications
  • LANTUS® (Insulin Glargine [Rdna Origin] Injection)
    Rev. March 2007 Rx Only LANTUS® (insulin glargine [rDNA origin] injection) LANTUS® must NOT be diluted or mixed with any other insulin or solution. DESCRIPTION LANTUS® (insulin glargine [rDNA origin] injection) is a sterile solution of insulin glargine for use as an injection. Insulin glargine is a recombinant human insulin analog that is a long-acting (up to 24-hour duration of action), parenteral blood-glucose-lowering agent. (See CLINICAL PHARMACOLOGY). LANTUS is produced by recombinant DNA technology utilizing a non- pathogenic laboratory strain of Escherichia coli (K12) as the production organism. Insulin glargine differs from human insulin in that the amino acid asparagine at position A21 is replaced by glycine and two arginines are added to the C-terminus of the B-chain. Chemically, it is 21A- B B Gly-30 a-L-Arg-30 b-L-Arg-human insulin and has the empirical formula C267H404N72O78S6 and a molecular weight of 6063. It has the following structural formula: LANTUS consists of insulin glargine dissolved in a clear aqueous fluid. Each milliliter of LANTUS (insulin glargine injection) contains 100 IU (3.6378 mg) insulin glargine. Inactive ingredients for the 10 mL vial are 30 mcg zinc, 2.7 mg m-cresol, 20 mg glycerol 85%, 20 mcg polysorbate 20, and water for injection. Inactive ingredients for the 3 mL cartridge are 30 mcg zinc, 2.7 mg m-cresol, 20 mg glycerol 85%, and water for injection. The pH is adjusted by addition of aqueous solutions of hydrochloric acid and sodium hydroxide. LANTUS has a pH of approximately 4. CLINICAL PHARMACOLOGY Mechanism of Action: The primary activity of insulin, including insulin glargine, is regulation of glucose metabolism.
    [Show full text]
  • Combining a Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonist with Basal Insulin: the Why and How
    Combining a Glucagon-like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonist with Basal Insulin: The Why and How Case Study Mary is a 61 year-old female diagnosed with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) 8 years ago. She was initially managed with the combination of lifestyle modification and metformin. Since that time she was treated with a sulfonylurea, but it was discontinued due to symptomatic hypoglycemia. She was also treated with pioglitazone, but significant fluid retention led to it discontinuation. A year-and-a- half ago, basal insulin was added to her lifestyle and metformin management. She now administers 52 units (0.62 units/kg) once daily at bedtime. Since starting basal insulin, she has experienced 3 episodes of mild hypoglycemia. Since her diagnosis, Mary’s HbA1c has never been <7.0%; her current HbA1c is 7.9%. Over the past month, her fasting plasma glucose (FPG) has ranged from 103 mg/dL to 136 mg/dL and her postprandial glucose (PPG) from 164 mg/dL to 213 mg/dL. She has gained 2.6 kg since starting basal insulin and her body mass index is now 31 kg/m2. Her blood pressure is 134/82 mmHg. She experiences occasional tingling in her feet. Eye examination reveals grade 1 retinopathy. Current medications are: metformin 1000mg twice daily, basal insulin 52 units once daily at bedtime, and hydrochlorothiazide 25 mg once daily. Her family physician notes that Mary’s FPG is reasonably well-controlled, yet her HbA1c and PPG remain elevated. He is also concerned about her episodes of hypoglycemia and weight gain and the evidence indicating microvascular damage.
    [Show full text]
  • A Critical Appraisal of the Role of Insulin Analogues in the Management of Diabetes Mellitus Ralph Oiknine, Marla Bernbaum and Arshag D
    Drugs 2005; 65 (3): 325-340 REVIEW ARTICLE 0012-6667/05/0003-0325/$39.95/0 2005 Adis Data Information BV. All rights reserved. A Critical Appraisal of the Role of Insulin Analogues in the Management of Diabetes Mellitus Ralph Oiknine, Marla Bernbaum and Arshag D. Mooradian Division of Endocrinology, Department of Internal Medicine, Diabetes, and Metabolism, St Louis University School of Medicine, St Louis, Missouri, USA Contents Abstract ....................................................................................325 1. Physiology of Insulin Secretion .............................................................326 2. Conventional Insulin Preparations ..........................................................327 3. Insulin Analogues ........................................................................328 3.1 Rapid-Acting Insulin Analogues .......................................................328 3.1.1 Insulin Lispro ...................................................................328 3.1.2 Insulin Aspart ..................................................................329 3.1.3 Insulin Glulisine .................................................................329 3.1.4 Clinical Utility of Rapid-Acting Insulin Analogues ...................................330 3.2 Premixed Insulins and Insulin Analogues ................................................331 3.3 Basal Insulin Analogues ...............................................................331 3.3.1 Insulin Glargine ................................................................331
    [Show full text]
  • Performance of the Insulin-Only Ilet Bionic Pancreas and The
    e118 Diabetes Care Volume 44, June 2021 Performance of the Insulin-Only Luz E. Castellanos,1 Courtney A. Balliro,1 Jordan S. Sherwood,1 Rabab Jafri,1 iLet Bionic Pancreas and the Mallory A. Hillard,1 Evelyn Greaux,1 Rajendranath Selagamsetty,2 Hui Zheng,3 Bihormonal iLet Using Firas H. El-Khatib,2 Edward R. Damiano,2,4 and Dasiglucagon in Adults With Type Steven J. Russell1 1 Diabetes in a Home-Use Setting Diabetes Care 2021;44:e118–e120 | https://doi.org/10.2337/dc20-1086 Reductions in blood glucose levels in with insulin lispro (Eli Lilly) or aspart (Table 1). The mean CGM glucose and people with diabetes are often achieved (Novo Nordisk), the bihormonal iLet for time in range (70–180 mg/dL) were 149 at the expense of increased hypoglyce- 7dayswithdasiglucagon(4mg/mL) ±13mg/dLand72±8%,respectively,in mia. A novel approach is to automati- and insulin lispro or aspart, or both, us- the insulin-only period, and 139 ± 11 cally deliver microdose glucagon when ing the same glucose target (110 mg/ mg/dL and 79 ± 9%, respectively, in the automation of insulin delivery alone is dL), in random order. There were no re- bihormonal period. The mean daily car- not sufficient to prevent hypoglycemia. strictions on diet or exercise. The prima- bohydrates consumed to prevent or The approach requires a bihormonal de- ry outcomes were prespecified iLet treat hypoglycemia were 16 ± 13 g and vice and a stable form of glucagon or operational thresholds. The key second- 18 ± 21 g in the insulin-only and bihor- glucagon analog.
    [Show full text]
  • TRULICITY, INN-Dulaglutide
    ANNEX I SUMMARY OF PRODUCT CHARACTERISTICS 1 1. NAME OF THE MEDICINAL PRODUCT Trulicity 0.75 mg solution for injection in pre-filled pen Trulicity 1.5 mg solution for injection in pre-filled pen Trulicity 3 mg solution for injection in pre-filled pen Trulicity 4.5 mg solution for injection in pre-filled pen 2. QUALITATIVE AND QUANTITATIVE COMPOSITION Trulicity 0.75 mg solution for injection in pre-filled pen Each pre-filled pen contains 0.75 mg of dulaglutide* in 0.5 ml solution. Trulicity 1.5 mg solution for injection in pre-filled pen Each pre-filled pen contains 1.5 mg of dulaglutide* in 0.5 ml solution. Trulicity 3 mg solution for injection in pre-filled pen Each pre-filled pen contains 3 mg of dulaglutide* in 0.5 ml solution. Trulicity 4.5 mg solution for injection in pre-filled pen Each pre-filled pen contains 4.5 mg of dulaglutide* in 0.5 ml solution. *produced in CHO cells by recombinant DNA technology. For the full list of excipients, see section 6.1. 3. PHARMACEUTICAL FORM Solution for injection. Clear, colourless solution. 4. CLINICAL PARTICULARS 4.1 Therapeutic indications Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Trulicity is indicated for the treatment of adults with insufficiently controlled type 2 diabetes mellitus as an adjunct to diet and exercise • as monotherapy when metformin is considered inappropriate due to intolerance or contraindications • in addition to other medicinal products for the treatment of diabetes. For study results with respect to combinations, effects on glycaemic control and cardiovascular events, and the populations studied, see sections 4.4, 4.5 and 5.1.
    [Show full text]
  • Effects of Exenatide on Cardiac Function, Perfusion, and Energetics
    Chen et al. Cardiovasc Diabetol (2017) 16:67 DOI 10.1186/s12933-017-0549-z Cardiovascular Diabetology ORIGINAL INVESTIGATION Open Access Efects of exenatide on cardiac function, perfusion, and energetics in type 2 diabetic patients with cardiomyopathy: a randomized controlled trial against insulin glargine Weena J. Y. Chen1*, Michaela Diamant1^, Karin de Boer2, Hendrik J. Harms3, Lourens F. H. J. Robbers2, Albert C. van Rossum2, Mark H. H. Kramer1, Adriaan A. Lammertsma3 and Paul Knaapen2 Abstract Background: Multiple bloodglucose-lowering agents have been linked to cardiovascular events. Preliminary studies showed improvement in left ventricular (LV) function during glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist administration. Underlying mechanisms, however, are unclear. The purpose of this study was to investigate myocardial perfusion and oxidative metabolism in type 2 diabetic (T2DM) patients with LV systolic dysfunction as compared to healthy controls. Furthermore, efects of 26-weeks of exenatide versus insulin glargine administration on cardiac function, perfusion and oxidative metabolism in T2DM patients with LV dysfunction were explored. Methods and results: Twenty-six T2DM patients with LV systolic dysfunction (cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) derived LV ejection fraction (LVEF) of 47 13%) and 10 controls (LVEF of 59 4%, P < 0.01 as compared to patients) were analyzed. Both myocardial perfusion± during adenosine-induced hyperemia± (P < 0.01), and coronary fow reserve 15 (P < 0.01), measured by ­[ O]H2O positron emission tomography (PET), were impaired in T2DM patients as compared to healthy controls. Myocardial oxygen consumption and myocardial efciency, measured using ­[11C]acetate PET and CMR derived stroke volume, were not diferent between the groups.
    [Show full text]
  • OZEMPIC (Semaglutide) Injection, for Subcutaneous Use Initial U.S
    HIGHLIGHTS OF PRESCRIBING INFORMATION ∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙CONTRAINDICATIONS∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙ These highlights do not include all the information needed to use Personal or family history of medullary thyroid carcinoma or in patients OZEMPIC® safely and effectively. See full prescribing information with Multiple Endocrine Neoplasia syndrome type 2 (4). for OZEMPIC. Known hypersensitivity to OZEMPIC or any of the product components (4). OZEMPIC (semaglutide) injection, for subcutaneous use Initial U.S. Approval: 2017 ∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙WARNINGS AND PRECAUTIONS∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙ Pancreatitis: Has been reported in clinical trials. Discontinue promptly if WARNING: RISK OF THYROID C-CELL TUMORS pancreatitis is suspected. Do not restart if pancreatitis is confirmed (5.2). See full prescribing information for complete boxed warning. Diabetic Retinopathy Complications: Has been reported in a clinical trial. Patients with a history of diabetic retinopathy should be monitored (5.3). In rodents, semaglutide causes thyroid C-cell tumors. It is Never share an OZEMPIC pen between patients, even if the needle is unknown whether OZEMPIC causes thyroid C-cell tumors, changed (5.4). including medullary thyroid carcinoma (MTC), in humans as Hypoglycemia: When OZEMPIC is used with an insulin secretagogue or the human relevance of semaglutide-induced rodent thyroid C- insulin, consider lowering the dose of the secretagogue or insulin to reduce cell tumors has not been determined (5.1, 13.1). the risk of hypoglycemia (5.5). OZEMPIC is contraindicated in patients with a personal or Acute Kidney Injury: Monitor renal function in patients with renal family history of MTC or in patients with Multiple Endocrine impairment reporting severe adverse gastrointestinal reactions (5.6). Neoplasia syndrome type 2 (MEN 2).
    [Show full text]
  • Type 2 Diabetes Adult Outpatient Insulin Guidelines
    Diabetes Coalition of California TYPE 2 DIABETES ADULT OUTPATIENT INSULIN GUIDELINES GENERAL RECOMMENDATIONS Start insulin if A1C and glucose levels are above goal despite optimal use of other diabetes 6,7,8 medications. (Consider insulin as initial therapy if A1C very high, such as > 10.0%) 6,7,8 Start with BASAL INSULIN for most patients 1,6 Consider the following goals ADA A1C Goals: A1C < 7.0 for most patients A1C > 7.0 (consider 7.0-7.9) for higher risk patients 1. History of severe hypoglycemia 2. Multiple co-morbid conditions 3. Long standing diabetes 4. Limited life expectancy 5. Advanced complications or 6. Difficult to control despite use of insulin ADA Glucose Goals*: Fasting and premeal glucose < 130 Peak post-meal glucose (1-2 hours after meal) < 180 Difference between premeal and post-meal glucose < 50 *for higher risk patients individualize glucose goals in order to avoid hypoglycemia BASAL INSULIN Intermediate-acting: NPH Note: NPH insulin has elevated risk of hypoglycemia so use with extra caution6,8,15,17,25,32 Long-acting: Glargine (Lantus®) Detemir (Levemir®) 6,7,8 Basal insulin is best starting insulin choice for most patients (if fasting glucose above goal). 6,7 8 Start one of the intermediate-acting or long-acting insulins listed above. Start insulin at night. When starting basal insulin: Continue secretagogues. Continue metformin. 7,8,20,29 Note: if NPH causes nocturnal hypoglycemia, consider switching NPH to long-acting insulin. 17,25,32 STARTING DOSE: Start dose: 10 units6,7,8,11,12,13,14,16,19,20,21,22,25 Consider using a lower starting dose (such as 0.1 units/kg/day32) especially if 17,19 patient is thin or has a fasting glucose only minimally above goal.
    [Show full text]
  • Predictors and Consequences of Severe Hypoglycemia in Adults with Diabetes – Systematic Review of the Evidence Evidence-Based Synthesis Program APPENDIX E
    Predictors and Consequences of Severe Hypoglycemia in Adults with Diabetes – Systematic Review of the Evidence Evidence-based Synthesis Program APPENDIX E. EVIDENCE TABLES Table 1. Characteristics of Included Studies Author Study Design Intervention/ Date Data Sources Control Definition of Severe Inclusion/Exclusion Criteria Patient Characteristics Study Quality Country Length of Hypoglycemia Funding Source Follow-up Target HbA1c Abraira 199530 RCT Inclusion criteria: N=153 Intensive group: Impaired consciousness Allocation Men ages 40-69, with non-insulin Age: 60.2 years stepped regimen of requiring the help Concealment: Yes United States 27 months dependent diabetes who were being % male: 100 insulin goal of HbA1c of another person, (VA Cooperative treated with insulin or judged clinically to Race/ethnicity: =5.1+/-1% or coma, or seizure; Blinding: Yes Study) require insulin because of failure of other White=49.5 confirmed low blood therapy Black=24 Standard group: one or glucose concentration Intention-to-Treat Government Exclusion criteria: Other=3 two injections of insulin/ or rapid response to Analysis (ITT): No Serious illness or predicted poor BMI: 31.0 day treatments expected to compliance, diagnosed >15 years prior Duration of diabetes: 7.8 years Goal was to avoid raise the level of blood Withdrawals/dropouts History of MI: 13.7% diabetic symptoms, glucose also required adequately described: History of CHF: 2.0% excessive glycosuria, or Yes History of CVA: 6.5% overt hypoglycemia Current smoker: 15% ACCORD 2008;3 RCT Inclusion
    [Show full text]
  • Safety of Insulin Lispro and a Biosimilar Insulin Lispro When
    DSTXXX10.1177/1932296817753644Journal of Diabetes Science and TechnologyThrasher et al 753644research-article2018 Original Article Journal of Diabetes Science and Technology 2018, Vol. 12(3) 680 –686 Safety of Insulin Lispro and a Biosimilar © 2018 Diabetes Technology Society Insulin Lispro When Administered Reprints and permissions: sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav Through an Insulin Pump DOI:https://doi.org/10.1177/1932296817753644 10.1177/1932296817753644 journals.sagepub.com/home/dst James Thrasher, MD1, Howard Surks, MD2, Irene Nowotny, PhD3, Suzanne Pierre, MSc4, Baerbel Rotthaeuser, PhD3, Karin Wernicke-Panten, MD3, and Satish Garg, MD5 Abstract Background: SAR342434 (U100; SAR-Lis; insulin lispro) is a biosimilar/follow-on to insulin lispro (U100; Ly-Lis). Similar pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics between the two products has been demonstrated in a hyperinsulinemic euglycemic clamp study. The current study evaluated the safety of SAR-Lis and Ly-Lis when administered by continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII; insulin pumps). Methods: This was a randomized, open-label, 2 × 4-week, two-arm crossover study in 27 patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus (NCT02603510). The main outcome was the incidence of infusion set occlusions (ISOs), defined as failure to correct hyperglycemia (plasma glucose ≥≥ 300 mg/dl) by 50 mg/dl within 60 minutes by insulin bolus via the pump. Secondary outcomes included intervals between infusion set changes, treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) including infusion site, hypersensitivity reactions and hypoglycemic events, and safety. Results: The number of patients reporting at least one ISO was small: 6/25 patients on SAR-Lis reported 14 ISOs and 4/27 on Ly-Lis reported nine ISOs. The estimated difference in ISO risk for SAR-Lis versus Ly-Lis was 7.9% (95% CI, –1.90 to 17.73).
    [Show full text]
  • Insulin Glargine (HOE901) First Responsibilities: Understanding the Data and Ensuring Safety
    EDITORIAL Insulin Glargine (HOE901) First responsibilities: understanding the data and ensuring safety n this issue, Heinemann et al. (1) and Rat- decline in activity through the duration of other journals. They leave the reader with ner et al. (2) provide the results of stud- the 30-h study. The authors conclude that a sense of promise, but without the firm Iies of insulin glargine (formerly known as insulin glargine provides a flatter metabolic conviction that insulin glargine is clearly HOE901), the most recent addition to the profile than NPH insulin. Theoretically, this superior to other long-acting forms of growing family of insulin analogs and for- could prove to be advantageous in accom- insulin. The pharmacodynamic study sug- mulations. The authors report insulin modating the basal insulin requirements of gests that the peakless profile of action glargine’s pharmacodynamic characteristics patients with diabetes. should provide an advantage that can be (1) and data concerning its safety and effi- Ratner et al. (2) report initial results for used to produce clinically meaningful cacy when administered to subjects with the U.S. Study Group of Insulin Glargine in improvements in glycemic control. The type 1 diabetes who were treated with reg- Type 1 Diabetes. In their article, they clinical trial’s demonstration of a reduction ular insulin (2). Insulin glargine is produced describe the results of a large randomized in hypoglycemia and in fasting plasma glu- by recombinant DNA technology with 2 prospective 28-week trial of insulin cose levels appears to provide an opportu- modifications of the native human insulin glargine versus NPH insulin.
    [Show full text]
  • Complaint for Declaratory 19 and Injunctive Relief Biotechnology Innovation 20 Organization
    Case 2:17-cv-02315 Document 1 Filed 09/01/17 Page 1 of 44 1 Pat Lundvall Nevada Bar No. 3761 2 MCDONALD CARANO LLP 2300 West Sahara Avenue, Suite 1200 3 Las Vegas, NV 89102 Telephone: (702) 873-4100 4 [email protected] 5 Robert N. Weiner Pending Admission Pro Hac Vice 6 Jeffrey L. Handwerker Pending Admission Pro Hac Vice 7 R. Stanton Jones Pending Admission Pro Hac Vice 8 ARNOLD & PORTER KAYE SCHOLER LLP 601 Massachusetts Avenue, NW 9 Washington, DC 20001 Telephone: (202) 942-5000 10 [email protected] [email protected] 11 [email protected] 12 Attorneys for Plaintiffs Pharmaceutical 13 Research and Manufacturers of America and Biotechnology Innovation Organization 14 15 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 16 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 17 PHARMACEUTICAL RESEARCH AND Case No.: 18 MANUFACTURERS OF AMERICA, and COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY 19 AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF BIOTECHNOLOGY INNOVATION 20 ORGANIZATION, 21 Plaintiffs, 22 vs. 23 BRIAN SANDOVAL, in his official capacity 24 as Governor of the State of Nevada, and 25 RICHARD WHITLEY, in his official capacity as Director of the Nevada Department for 26 Health and Human Services, 27 Defendants. 28 Case 2:17-cv-02315 Document 1 Filed 09/01/17 Page 2 of 44 1 Plaintiffs Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (“PhRMA”) and 2 Biotechnology Innovation Organization (“BIO”) (together, “Plaintiffs”), on behalf of themselves 3 and their members, for their Complaint against Brian Sandoval, in his official capacity as Governor 4 of the State of Nevada (the “State”), and Richard Whitley, in his official capacity as Director of the 5 Nevada Department of Health and Human Services (together, “Defendants”), allege as follows: 6 INTRODUCTION 7 1.
    [Show full text]