Skip to main content
Erschienen in: Clinical Drug Investigation 7/2013

01.07.2013 | Original Research Article

A Comparison of the Steady-State Pharmacokinetic and Pharmacodynamic Profiles of 100 and 200 U/mL Formulations of Ultra-Long-Acting Insulin Degludec

verfasst von: Stefan Korsatko, Sigrid Deller, Gerd Koehler, Julia K. Mader, Katharina Neubauer, Charlotte L. Adrian, Henrik Thomsen, Hanne Haahr, Thomas R. Pieber

Erschienen in: Clinical Drug Investigation | Ausgabe 7/2013

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Background and Objective

Insulin degludec (IDeg) is a new-generation basal insulin that forms soluble multi-hexamers upon subcutaneous injection, resulting in a depot from which IDeg monomers are slowly and continuously absorbed to provide an ultra-long action profile. This double-blind, crossover, randomized study compared the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties between IDeg 100 U/mL (U100) and IDeg 200 U/mL (U200) under steady-state (SS) conditions in subjects with type 1 diabetes mellitus.

Methods

Participants (n = 33 adults) underwent 8-day treatment periods with 0.4 U/kg IDeg U100 and IDeg U200 given once daily with insulin aspart at mealtimes. On day 8, a 26-h euglycaemic glucose clamp (5.5 mmol/L) was performed.

Results

The concentration–time profiles of IDeg U100 and IDeg U200 were similar, and a post-hoc analysis showed bioequivalence between these formulations, as the 90 % confidence intervals (CIs) of the U200/U100 ratios for area under the steady-state serum IDeg concentration-time curve during a dosing interval (τ; 0–24 h) (AUCτ,SS,IDeg) (0.99 [0.91–1.07]) and maximum steady-state IDeg concentration during a dosing interval (τ) (C max,SS,IDeg) (0.93 [0.84–1.02]) were within the interval 0.80–1.25. Comparable glucose infusion rates (GIR) were observed for IDeg U100 and IDeg U200 (AUCτ,SS,GIR [mg/kg]: 2,255 vs. 2,123) and the mean ratio (95 % CI) of IDeg U200/U100 for the primary endpoint (AUCτ,SS,GIR) was 0.94 [0.86–1.03]. For both formulations, the glucose-lowering effect of IDeg was evenly distributed between the first and second 12 h post-dosing (U100: AUC12,SS,GIR/AUC24,SS,GIR = 48 %; U200: AUC12,SS,GIR/AUC24,SS,GIR = 46 %). Both formulations were well tolerated, and no safety events of significance were identified.

Conclusion

IDeg U100 and U200 formulations are bioequivalent and have similar pharmacodynamic profiles at SS, implying that they can be used interchangeably in clinical practice.
Literatur
1.
Zurück zum Zitat Heller S, Koenen C, Bode B. Comparison of insulin detemir and insulin glargine in a basal-bolus regimen, with insulin aspart as the mealtime insulin, in patients with type 1 diabetes: a 52-week, multinational, randomized, open-label, parallel-group, treat-to-target noninferiority trial. Clin Ther. 2009;31:2086–97.PubMedCrossRef Heller S, Koenen C, Bode B. Comparison of insulin detemir and insulin glargine in a basal-bolus regimen, with insulin aspart as the mealtime insulin, in patients with type 1 diabetes: a 52-week, multinational, randomized, open-label, parallel-group, treat-to-target noninferiority trial. Clin Ther. 2009;31:2086–97.PubMedCrossRef
2.
Zurück zum Zitat Hamann A, Matthaei S, Rosak C, Silvestre L. A randomized clinical trial comparing breakfast, dinner, or bedtime administration of insulin glargine in patients with type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2003;26:1738–44.PubMedCrossRef Hamann A, Matthaei S, Rosak C, Silvestre L. A randomized clinical trial comparing breakfast, dinner, or bedtime administration of insulin glargine in patients with type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2003;26:1738–44.PubMedCrossRef
3.
Zurück zum Zitat Albright ES, Desmond R, Bell DSH. Efficacy of conversion from bedtime NPH insulin injection to once- or twice-daily injections of insulin glargine in type 1 diabetic patients using basal/bolus therapy. Diabetes Care. 2004;27:632–3.PubMedCrossRef Albright ES, Desmond R, Bell DSH. Efficacy of conversion from bedtime NPH insulin injection to once- or twice-daily injections of insulin glargine in type 1 diabetic patients using basal/bolus therapy. Diabetes Care. 2004;27:632–3.PubMedCrossRef
4.
Zurück zum Zitat Kampmann U, Hoeyem P, Mengel A, et al. Insulin dose-response studies in severely insulin-resistant type 2 diabetes: evidence for effectiveness of very high insulin doses. Diabetes Obes Metab. 2011;13:511–6.PubMedCrossRef Kampmann U, Hoeyem P, Mengel A, et al. Insulin dose-response studies in severely insulin-resistant type 2 diabetes: evidence for effectiveness of very high insulin doses. Diabetes Obes Metab. 2011;13:511–6.PubMedCrossRef
5.
Zurück zum Zitat Jonassen I, Havelund S, Hoeg-Jensen T, et al. Design of the novel protraction mechanism of insulin degludec, an ultra-long-acting basal insulin. Pharm Res. 2012;29:2104–14.PubMedCrossRef Jonassen I, Havelund S, Hoeg-Jensen T, et al. Design of the novel protraction mechanism of insulin degludec, an ultra-long-acting basal insulin. Pharm Res. 2012;29:2104–14.PubMedCrossRef
6.
Zurück zum Zitat Heise T, Hermanski L, Nosek L, et al. Insulin degludec: four times lower pharmacodynamic variability than insulin glargine under steady-state conditions in type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Obes Metab. 2012;14:859–64.PubMedCrossRef Heise T, Hermanski L, Nosek L, et al. Insulin degludec: four times lower pharmacodynamic variability than insulin glargine under steady-state conditions in type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Obes Metab. 2012;14:859–64.PubMedCrossRef
7.
Zurück zum Zitat Heise T, Nosek L, Bøttcher SG, Hastrup H, Haahr H. Ultra-long-acting insulin degludec has a flat and stable glucose-lowering effect in type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Obes Metab. 2012;14:944–50.PubMedCrossRef Heise T, Nosek L, Bøttcher SG, Hastrup H, Haahr H. Ultra-long-acting insulin degludec has a flat and stable glucose-lowering effect in type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Obes Metab. 2012;14:944–50.PubMedCrossRef
8.
Zurück zum Zitat Ratner RE, Gough SC, Mathieu C, et al. Hypoglycaemia risk with insulin degludec compared with insulin glargine in type 2 and type 1 diabetes: a pre-planned meta-analysis of phase 3 trials. Diabetes Obes Metab. 2013;15:175–84.PubMedCrossRef Ratner RE, Gough SC, Mathieu C, et al. Hypoglycaemia risk with insulin degludec compared with insulin glargine in type 2 and type 1 diabetes: a pre-planned meta-analysis of phase 3 trials. Diabetes Obes Metab. 2013;15:175–84.PubMedCrossRef
9.
Zurück zum Zitat Mathieu C, Hollander P, Miranda-Palma B, Cooper J, Franek E, Russell-Jones D, Larsen J, Tamer SC, Bain SC, NN1250-3770 (BEGIN: Flex T1) Trial Investigators. Efficacy and safety of insulin degludec in a flexible dosing regimen vs insulin glargine in patients with type 1 diabetes (BEGIN: Flex T1): a 26-week randomized, treat-to-target trial with a 26-week extension. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2013;98:1154–62.PubMedCrossRef Mathieu C, Hollander P, Miranda-Palma B, Cooper J, Franek E, Russell-Jones D, Larsen J, Tamer SC, Bain SC, NN1250-3770 (BEGIN: Flex T1) Trial Investigators. Efficacy and safety of insulin degludec in a flexible dosing regimen vs insulin glargine in patients with type 1 diabetes (BEGIN: Flex T1): a 26-week randomized, treat-to-target trial with a 26-week extension. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2013;98:1154–62.PubMedCrossRef
10.
Zurück zum Zitat Meneghini L, Atkin SL, Gough SC, Raz I, Blonde L, Shestakova M, Bain S, Johansen T, Begtrup K, Birkeland KI, NN1250-3668 (BEGIN FLEX) Trial Investigators. The efficacy and safety of insulin degludec given in variable once-daily dosing intervals compared with insulin glargine and insulin degludec dosed at the same time daily: a 26-week, randomized, open-label, parallel-group, treat-to-target trial in individuals with type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2013;36:858–64.PubMedCrossRef Meneghini L, Atkin SL, Gough SC, Raz I, Blonde L, Shestakova M, Bain S, Johansen T, Begtrup K, Birkeland KI, NN1250-3668 (BEGIN FLEX) Trial Investigators. The efficacy and safety of insulin degludec given in variable once-daily dosing intervals compared with insulin glargine and insulin degludec dosed at the same time daily: a 26-week, randomized, open-label, parallel-group, treat-to-target trial in individuals with type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2013;36:858–64.PubMedCrossRef
11.
Zurück zum Zitat International Conference on Harmonisation. ICH harmonised tripartite guideline: guideline for good clinical practice E6 (R1), Step 4. 10 June 1996. International Conference on Harmonisation. ICH harmonised tripartite guideline: guideline for good clinical practice E6 (R1), Step 4. 10 June 1996.
12.
Zurück zum Zitat World Medical Association. World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki: ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects. Last amended by the 59th WMA General Assembly, Seoul, 2008. World Medical Association. World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki: ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects. Last amended by the 59th WMA General Assembly, Seoul, 2008.
13.
Zurück zum Zitat ADA—American Diabetes Association. Defining and reporting hypoglycemia in diabetes: a report from the American Diabetes Association Workgroup on Hypoglycemia. Diabetes Care. 2005; 28(5):1245–49. ADA—American Diabetes Association. Defining and reporting hypoglycemia in diabetes: a report from the American Diabetes Association Workgroup on Hypoglycemia. Diabetes Care. 2005; 28(5):1245–49.
15.
Zurück zum Zitat Rodbard H, Handelsman Y, Gough S, et al. Reduced risk of hypoglycemia with insulin degludec vs insulin glargine in patients with type 2 diabetes requiring high doses of basal insulin: meta-analysis of five randomized trials. American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists 21st Annual Scientific Meeting and Clinical Congress 2012 [Abstract 241]. Rodbard H, Handelsman Y, Gough S, et al. Reduced risk of hypoglycemia with insulin degludec vs insulin glargine in patients with type 2 diabetes requiring high doses of basal insulin: meta-analysis of five randomized trials. American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists 21st Annual Scientific Meeting and Clinical Congress 2012 [Abstract 241].
16.
Zurück zum Zitat Bergenstal R, Bhargava A, Jain R, et al. Improved patient-reported outcomes with insulin degludec 200 U/mL (IDeg U200) versus insulin glargine in insulin-naïve people with type 2 diabetes. American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists 21st Annual Scientific Meeting and Clinical Congress 2012 [Abstract 69]. Bergenstal R, Bhargava A, Jain R, et al. Improved patient-reported outcomes with insulin degludec 200 U/mL (IDeg U200) versus insulin glargine in insulin-naïve people with type 2 diabetes. American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists 21st Annual Scientific Meeting and Clinical Congress 2012 [Abstract 69].
17.
Zurück zum Zitat Bergenstal R, Bhargava A, Jain R, et al. 200 U/mL insulin degludec improves glycemic control similar to insulin glargine with a low risk of hypoglycemia in insulin-naïve people with type 2 diabetes. American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists 21st Annual Scientific Meeting and Clinical Congress 2012 [Abstract 26]. Bergenstal R, Bhargava A, Jain R, et al. 200 U/mL insulin degludec improves glycemic control similar to insulin glargine with a low risk of hypoglycemia in insulin-naïve people with type 2 diabetes. American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists 21st Annual Scientific Meeting and Clinical Congress 2012 [Abstract 26].
18.
Zurück zum Zitat Zinman B, Philis-Tsimikas A, Cariou B, et al. Insulin degludec versus insulin glargine in insulin-naive patients with type 2 diabetes: a 1-year, randomized, treat-to-target trial (BEGIN Once Long). Diabetes Care. 2012;35:2464–71.PubMedCrossRef Zinman B, Philis-Tsimikas A, Cariou B, et al. Insulin degludec versus insulin glargine in insulin-naive patients with type 2 diabetes: a 1-year, randomized, treat-to-target trial (BEGIN Once Long). Diabetes Care. 2012;35:2464–71.PubMedCrossRef
Metadaten
Titel
A Comparison of the Steady-State Pharmacokinetic and Pharmacodynamic Profiles of 100 and 200 U/mL Formulations of Ultra-Long-Acting Insulin Degludec
verfasst von
Stefan Korsatko
Sigrid Deller
Gerd Koehler
Julia K. Mader
Katharina Neubauer
Charlotte L. Adrian
Henrik Thomsen
Hanne Haahr
Thomas R. Pieber
Publikationsdatum
01.07.2013
Verlag
Springer International Publishing AG
Erschienen in
Clinical Drug Investigation / Ausgabe 7/2013
Print ISSN: 1173-2563
Elektronische ISSN: 1179-1918
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s40261-013-0096-7

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 7/2013

Clinical Drug Investigation 7/2013 Zur Ausgabe