BACKGROUND:Insulin degludec (IDeg) has significantly lower day-to-day and within-day variability compared to insulin glargine (IGlar) 100U/mL (U100) and 300U/mL (U300). Here, we report post hoc assessments to confirm the robustness of these observations while accounting for potential experimental confounders. METHODS: Two euglycemic clamp studies in type 1 diabetes patients, comparing IDeg to IGlar-U100 (Study A, parallel design, 54 patients; Study B, crossover, 22 patients) and one study comparing IDeg to IGlar-U300 (Study C, crossover, 57 patients), all dosed at 0.4U/kg, were evaluated. Pharmacodynamic parameters were assessed at steady state from glucose infusion rate (GIR) profiles following three 24-hour euglycemic clamps in Studies A (162 clamps) and C (342 clamps), and one 42-hour clamp in Study B (44 clamps). RESULTS: Pooled data (Studies A and B) showed that IDeg had an even distribution of glucose-lowering effect over the 24-hour dosing interval that was consistent with Study C. IGlar-U100 showed a constant decrease in glucose-lowering effect over 24 hours while IGlar-U300 had a lower effect in the middle of the dosing interval (6-18 hours). Relative within-day variability of IDeg was 40% and 37% lower than IGlar-U100 and -U300, respectively. Exclusion of profiles with low response in Study C (19/342 clamps) did not impact the difference in the distribution of glucose-lowering effect or within-day variability. Day-to-day variability was significantly lower with IDeg compared to IGlar-U100 and -U300 based on smoothed and unsmoothed GIR data. CONCLUSIONS: Significantly lower relative within-day and day-to-day variability was confirmed irrespective of experimental considerations for IDeg compared to IGlar-U100 and IGlar-U300.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Insulin degludec (IDeg) has significantly lower day-to-day and within-day variability compared to insulin glargine (IGlar) 100U/mL (U100) and 300U/mL (U300). Here, we report post hoc assessments to confirm the robustness of these observations while accounting for potential experimental confounders. METHODS: Two euglycemic clamp studies in type 1 diabetespatients, comparing IDeg to IGlar-U100 (Study A, parallel design, 54 patients; Study B, crossover, 22 patients) and one study comparing IDeg to IGlar-U300 (Study C, crossover, 57 patients), all dosed at 0.4U/kg, were evaluated. Pharmacodynamic parameters were assessed at steady state from glucose infusion rate (GIR) profiles following three 24-hour euglycemic clamps in Studies A (162 clamps) and C (342 clamps), and one 42-hour clamp in Study B (44 clamps). RESULTS: Pooled data (Studies A and B) showed that IDeg had an even distribution of glucose-lowering effect over the 24-hour dosing interval that was consistent with Study C. IGlar-U100 showed a constant decrease in glucose-lowering effect over 24 hours while IGlar-U300 had a lower effect in the middle of the dosing interval (6-18 hours). Relative within-day variability of IDeg was 40% and 37% lower than IGlar-U100 and -U300, respectively. Exclusion of profiles with low response in Study C (19/342 clamps) did not impact the difference in the distribution of glucose-lowering effect or within-day variability. Day-to-day variability was significantly lower with IDeg compared to IGlar-U100 and -U300 based on smoothed and unsmoothed GIR data. CONCLUSIONS: Significantly lower relative within-day and day-to-day variability was confirmed irrespective of experimental considerations for IDeg compared to IGlar-U100 and IGlar-U300.
Authors: Reinhard H A Becker; Raphael Dahmen; Karin Bergmann; Anne Lehmann; Thomas Jax; Tim Heise Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2014-08-22 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: Richard F Pollock; William J Valentine; Steven P Marso; Jens Gundgaard; Nino Hallén; Lars L Hansen; Deniz Tutkunkardas; John B Buse Journal: Diabetes Ther Date: 2018-04-30 Impact factor: 2.945
Authors: Stewart Harris; Martin J Abrahamson; Antonio Ceriello; Guillaume Charpentier; Marc Evans; Roger Lehmann; Andreas Liebl; Sultan Linjawi; Richard I G Holt; Nóra Hosszúfalusi; Guy Rutten; Tina Vilsbøll Journal: Drugs Date: 2020-02 Impact factor: 9.546