Human Neutral Protamine Hagedorn Insulin Research Articles

Breast Cancer Incidence in Diabetes Mellitus Patients on Insulin Glargine Compared with Human Neutral Protamine Hagedorn Insulin Treatment

Breast Cancer Incidence in Diabetes Mellitus Patients on Insulin Glargine Compared with Human Neutral Protamine Hagedorn Insulin Treatment

Association of Initiation of Basal Insulin Analogs vs Neutral Protamine Hagedorn Insulin With Hypoglycemia-Related Emergency Department Visits or Hospital Admissions and With Glycemic Control in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes

In clinical trials of patients with type 2 diabetes, long-acting insulin analogs modestly reduced the risk of nocturnal hypoglycemia compared with human neutral protamine Hagedorn (NPH) insulin, but cost 2 to 10 times more. Outcomes in clinical practice may differ from trial results. To compare the rates of hypoglycemia-related emergency department (ED) visits or hospital admissions associated with initiation of long-acting insulin analogs vs human NPH insulin in patients with type 2 diabetes. A retrospective observational study using data from Kaiser Permanente of Northern California from January 1, 2006, through September 30, 2015. Patients with type 2 diabetes who initiated a long-acting insulin analog or NPH insulin were included and censored at death, loss of health plan coverage, change in insulin treatment, or study end on September 30, 2015. Initiation of basal insulin analogs (glargine or detemir) vs NPH insulin. The primary outcome was the time to a hypoglycemia-related ED visit or hospital admission and the secondary outcome was the change in hemoglobin A1c level within 1 year of insulin initiation. There were 25 489 patients with type 2 diabetes who initiated basal insulin therapy (mean age, 60.2 [SD, 11.8] years; 51.9% white; 46.8% female). During a mean follow-up of 1.7 years, there were 39 hypoglycemia-related ED visits or hospital admissions among 1928 patients who initiated insulin analogs (11.9 events [95% CI, 8.1 to 15.6] per 1000 person-years) compared with 354 hypoglycemia-related ED visits or hospital admissions among 23 561 patients who initiated NPH insulin (8.8 events [95% CI, 7.9 to 9.8] per 1000 person-years) (between-group difference, 3.1 events [95% CI, -1.5 to 7.7] per 1000 person-years; P = .07). Among 4428 patients matched by propensity score, the adjusted hazard ratio was 1.16 (95% CI, 0.71 to 1.78) for hypoglycemia-related ED visits or hospital admissions associated with insulin analog use. Within 1 year of insulin initiation, hemoglobin A1c level decreased from 9.4% (95% CI, 9.3% to 9.5%) to 8.2% (95% CI, 8.1% to 8.2%) after initiation of insulin analogs and from 9.4% (95% CI, 9.3% to 9.5%) to 7.9% (95% CI, 7.9% to 8.0%) after initiation of NPH insulin (adjusted difference-in-differences for glycemic control, -0.22% [95% CI, -0.09% to -0.37%]). Among patients with type 2 diabetes, initiation of a basal insulin analog compared with NPH insulin was not associated with a reduced risk of hypoglycemia-related ED visits or hospital admissions or with improved glycemic control. These findings suggest that the use of basal insulin analogs in usual practice settings may not be associated with clinical advantages for these outcomes.

Evaluation of insulin-like growth factor-1, total thyroxine, feline pancreas-specific lipase and urinary corticoid-to-creatinine ratio in cats with diabetes mellitus in Switzerland and the Netherlands.

Objectives The aim of the study was to evaluate circulating insulin-like growth factor-1 (IGF-1), feline pancreas-specific lipase (fPLI) and total thyroxine (TT4) concentrations and urinary corticoid-to-creatinine ratio (UCCR) as indicators for the prevalence of acromegaly, pancreatitis, hyperthyroidism and hypercortisolism in cats with diabetes mellitus. Methods Blood and urine samples were collected from diabetic cats treated in primary care clinics in Switzerland and the Netherlands. Standardised questionnaires and physical examination forms provided clinical information from owners and veterinarians. Laboratory testing included serum biochemistry profile analysis and measurement of circulating fructosamine, IGF-1, fPLI, and TT4 concentrations and UCCR. CT of the pituitary gland was performed using a multidetector computed tomography scanner. Results Blood samples were available from 215 cats and urine samples were collected at home from 117 cats. Age ranged from 2-18 years (median 12 years) and body weight from 2.7-12.3 kg (median 5.5 kg). Sixty-five percent of the cats were castrated male and 35% were female (33% spayed); 82% were domestic shorthair cats. Eighty percent of cats received a porcine insulin zinc suspension, 19.5% insulin glargine and 0.5% a human neutral protamine hagedorn insulin. Thirty-six of 202 (17.8%) cats had IGF-1 concentrations >1000 ng/ml. Serum fPLI, and TT4 concentrations and UCCR were increased in 86/196 (43.9%), 9/201 (4.5%) and 18/117 cats (15.3%), respectively. Prevalence did not differ between countries. Conclusions Hyperthyroidism is rare, whereas increased fPLI concentration, possibly reflecting pancreatitis, is common in diabetic cats. The high UCCR may reflect activation of the hypothalamus-pituitary-adrenal axis, which also occurs in diabetic humans. The percentage of cats with increased IGF-1 was high but lower than reported in recent studies.

Multi Insulin Sensitization with Tolerante to New Therapeutic Option: Degludec

Introduction: Insulin has been used for the treatment of diabetes mellitus (DM) since 1920. At first, the animal insulins were available for human use having frequent allergic reactions due to the differences in amino acid sequences with human insulin. Currently, with the use of human insulin, the prevalence of these reactions is around 2% and less than a third of these events were associated with insulin itself. These cases are associated with their additives or preservatives. The most commonly hypersensitivity reaction found is type I. In these cases, the use of a rapid-acting insulin is the best therapeutic alternative. We report the case of a multi-sensibilizated patient to insulin presenting tolerance to the ultralong-acting: Degludec insulin. Case report: Female patient, 74, referring use of NPH (Neutral Protamine Hagedorn) human insulin for 5 years, with papule at the site of application of the insulin minutes after application. She visited the Allergy and Immunology Clinic of the State Public Servant Hospital of Sao Paulo referring anaphylaxis few minutes after application of human insulin (NPH). Also reported extensive local reaction due the use of detemir, and local reaction to lispro insulin. We conducted immediate skin test reading with insulins: Regular, Lispro, NPH, Detemir and Degludeca at a concentration of 1:1; addition of the additive (Protamine 10 mg/ml) and latex. Presented positive test for all insulins, except Degludeca and presented negative test for protamine and latex. Conclusion: we found no common additive to all insulins, which is not present in degludeca insulin (Tresiba ®), enhancing insulin allergy hypothesis. Patient currently tolerates the use of long-acting insulin (Degludeca) and has adequate control of their blood sugar. In this case the patient had no insulin reaction prolonged action and this may be a new therapeutic option to be tested in patients with allergic reactions to insulin.

How Basal Insulin Analogs Have Changed Diabetes Care

How Basal Insulin Analogs Have Changed Diabetes Care

Response to Swinnen et al.

Response to Swinnen et al.

Long‐acting insulin analogues vs. NPH human insulin in type 1 diabetes. A meta‐analysis

Basal insulin in type 1 diabetes can be provided using either NPH (Neutral Protamine Hagedorn) human insulin or long-acting insulin analogues, which are supposed to warrant a better metabolic control with reduced hypoglycaemic risk. Aim of this meta-analysis is the assessment of differences with respect to HbA1c (Glycated hemoglobin), incidence of hypoglycaemia, and weight gain, between NPH human insulin and each long-acting analogue. Of 285 randomized controlled trials with a duration > 12 weeks comparing long-acting insulin analogues (detemir or glargine) with NPH insulin in type 1 diabetic patients identified through Medline search and searches on www.clinicaltrials.gov, 20 met eligibility criteria (enrolling 3693 and 2485 in the long-acting analogues and NPH group respectively). Data on HbA1c and body mass index at endpoint, and incidence of any, nocturnal and severe hypoglycaemia, were extracted and meta-analysed. Long-acting analogues had a small, but significant effect on HbA1c [-0.07 (-0.13; -0.01)%; p = 0.026], in comparison with NPH human insulin. When analysing the effect of long-acting analogues on body weight, detemir was associated with a significantly smaller weight gain than human insulin [by 0.26 (0.06;0.47) kg/m2; p = 0.012]. Long-acting analogues were associated with a reduced risk for nocturnal and severe hypoglycaemia [OR (Odd Ratio, 95% Confidence Intervals) 0.69 (0.55; 0.86), and OR 0.73 (0.60; 0.89) respectively; all p < 0.01]. The switch from NPH to long-acting analogues as basal insulin replacement in type 1 diabetic patients had a small effect on HbA1c, and also reduced the risk of nocturnal and severe hypoglycaemia.

Nocturnal Glucose Metabolism after Bedtime Injection of Insulin Glargine or Neutral Protamine Hagedorn Insulin in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes

Insulin glargine is a long-acting human insulin analog often administered at bedtime to patients with type 2 diabetes. It reduces fasting blood glucose levels more efficiently and with less nocturnal hypoglycemic events compared with human neutral protamine Hagedorn (NPH) insulin. Therefore, bedtime injections of insulin glargine and NPH insulin were compared overnight and in the morning. In 10 type 2 diabetic patients, euglycemic clamps were performed, including [6,6'](2)H(2) glucose, to study the rate of disappearance (Rd) and endogenous production (EGP) of glucose during the night. On separate days at bedtime (2200 h), patients received a sc injection of insulin glargine, NPH insulin, or saline in a randomized, double-blind fashion. Similar doses of both insulins had different metabolic profiles. NPH insulin had a greater effect on both Rd and EGP in the night compared with insulin glargine. By contrast, in the morning, insulin glargine was more effective, increasing Rd by 5.8 micromol/kg(-1).min(-1) (95% confidence interval 4.7-6.9) and reducing EGP -5.7 (-5.0 to -6.4) compared with NPH insulin. Nearly 80% of the glucose lowering effect in the morning was due to insulin glargine's reduction of EGP. Its injection was associated with one-third lower morning glucagon levels compared with NPH insulin (P = 0.021). Nocturnal variations of EGP and Rd explain the reduced incidence of hypoglycemia and lower fasting glucose levels reported for insulin glargine compared with human NPH insulin.

Negative Binomial Meta-Regression Analysis of Combined Glycosylated Hemoglobin and Hypoglycemia Outcomes Across Eleven Phase III and IV Studies of Insulin Glargine Compared with Neutral Protamine Hagedorn Insulin in Type 1 and Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus

Objectives: This analysis first modeled the interaction between hypoglycemia and glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA 2c) in clinical trials that compared insulin glargine (glargine) with human neutral protamine Hagedorn insulin (NPH) in patients with type 1 or type 2 diabetes mellitus. The model was then used to compare rates of hypoglycemia associated with use of these insulins. Methods: Patient-level data from all randomized Phase III/IV clinical trials sponsored by the manufacturer of glargine that compared glargine and NPH and were available in May 2004 were included in the model. In addition, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and BIOSIS were searched for comparative randomized controlled trials of glargine and NPH using the terms insulin glargine, HOE 901, neutral protamine Hagedorn insulin, and NPH insulin. Studies were excluded from the analysis if patient-level data were not available. Unadjusted rates of symptomatic, confirmed, and severe hypoglycemia were compared with those derived from negative binomial regression analysis, which stratified the results by HbA 1c at end point (with last observation carried forward), treatment, and duration of diabetes. In addition, the analysis was stratified by Phase III studies (which focused on determining tolerability and efficacy before regulatory approval) and Phase IV studies (which compared the clinical efficacy of the 2 insulins). The first month of the study was not included in the analysis because of continual adjustment of the insulin dose and maintenance of previous NPH in some studies. Results: Eleven sponsored randomized trials were included in the model (total of 5074 patients). Four other sponsored trials were not included because the databases were not finalized, and 3 investigator-initiated trials were not included because patient-level data were unavailable. Rates of hypoglycemia had a curvilinear relationship with HbAlc, increasing at lower end-point HbAlc values. In combined analyses of the studies of type 1 and type 2 diabetes, unadjusted rates of hypoglycemia were lower for glargine than NPH: 6.1% lower for all symptomatic hypoglycemia, 21.6% lower for confirmed hypoglycemia, and 23.9% lower for severe hypoglycemia (all, P < 0.05). When modeled using the negative binomial distribution with end-point HbA 1c as a covariate, the corresponding results were 9.1% ( P < 0.05), 26.6% ( P < 0.001), and 30.0% ( P = 0.08), respectively. When only Phase IV trials were analyzed, the relative reductions with glargine were 16.2% ( P < 0.01), 40.8% ( P < 0.01), and 46.8% ( P < 0.05). The results of the separate analyses of studies of type 1 and type 2 diabetes were comparable. Conclusions: Based on the results of this analysis, calculated unadjusted hypoglycemia event rates appear to underestimate the differences between glargine and NPH. In most of the present analyses, unadjusted rates were significantly lower with glargine than NPH. Adjustment for end-point HbAI~ resulted in greater relative reductions in the risk of hypoglycemia for glargine compared with NPH. The adjusted risk reduction with glargine was highest in the Phase IV studies.

Combination of Oral Antidiabetic Agents with Basal Insulin Versus Premixed Insulin Alone in Randomized Elderly Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus

To compare initiation of insulin therapy by adding once-daily insulin glargine to oral antidiabetic agents (OADs) with switching patients to premixed 30% regular, 70% human neutral protamine hagedorn insulin (70/30) without OADs. A 24-week, multicenter, open, randomized (1:1), parallel study. Three hundred sixty-four poorly controlled patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus were treated with once-daily morning insulin glargine with continued OADs (glimepiride+metformin) (glargine+OAD) or twice-daily 70/30 alone. Insulin dosage in each group was titrated to target fasting blood glucose (FBG) of 100 mg/dL or less (<or=5.6 mmol/L) using a weekly titration algorithm. This planned subgroup analysis of the original study was based on 130 insulin-naive patients aged 65 and older with FBG of 120 mg/dL or greater (>or=6.7 mmol/L) and hemoglobin (Hb)A(1c) levels between 7.5% and 10.5% on OADs (glargine+OAD, n=67; 70/30, n=63). HbA(1c), FBG, hypoglycemia, insulin dose, and adverse events were recorded. HbA(1c) decreased from baseline to endpoint for both glargine+OAD (from 8.8% to 7.0%) and 70/30 (from 8.9% to 7.4%); adjusted mean HbA(1c) decrease for glargine+OAD and 70/30 was -1.9% and -1.4%, respectively (P=.003). More patients reached HbA(1c) of 7.0% or less without confirmed nocturnal hypoglycemia with glargine+OAD (n=37, 55.2%) than with 70/30 (n=19, 30.2%) (P=.006). FBG decreased significantly more with glargine+OAD (-57 mg/dL (-3.2 mmol/L)) than with 70/30 (-40 mg/dL (-2.2 mmol/L)) (P=.002). Patients treated with glargine+OAD experienced fewer episodes of any hypoglycemia (3.68/patient-year) than did those treated with 70/30 (9.09/patient-year) (P=.008). In elderly patients, addition of once-daily morning glargine+OAD is a simple regimen to initiate insulin therapy, restoring glycemic control more effectively and with less hypoglycemia than twice-daily 70/30 alone.

Clinical pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of insulin lispro mixtures.

Rapid-acting insulin analogues such as insulin lispro and insulin aspart produce a more physiological profile of insulin activity than does conventional regular human insulin because of their unique pharmacokinetics. These insulin analogues are absorbed rapidly from the subcutaneous injection site, resulting in a better matching of the appearance of insulin in the circulation with nutrient absorption from the intestine. In addition, they are shorter-acting than regular human insulin, thus decreasing the risk of late postprandial hypoglycaemia due to inappropriate hyperinsulinaemia. Because self-prepared mixtures of these rapid-acting insulin analogues with longer-acting insulins such as neutral protamine Hagedorn (NPH) insulin have been shown to be clinically useful, and because manufactured fixed-ratio mixtures of regular human insulin and NPH already represent a large proportion of insulin use, manufactured fixed-ratio mixtures of insulin lispro and a sustained-release insulin known as NPL have been developed (insulin lispro mixtures). NPL is a protamine-based insulin lispro formulation with pharmacokinetics and glucodynamics comparable to those of human NPH insulin. NPL was developed for use within insulin lispro mixtures because an exchange between soluble insulin lispro and protamine-bound human insulin within human NPH precludes prolonged storage of mixtures of these insulins. An insulin lispro mixture consisting of 25% insulin lispro and 75% NPL is now commercially available. This preparation is intended primarily as an alternative to human insulin 30/70, which is commonly used within a twice-daily injection regimen. A mixture containing 50% insulin lispro and 50% NPL is also available. The rapid activity of insulin lispro is maintained within insulin lispro mixtures, allowing injection just prior to a meal, a convenience that is not available with commercial mixtures of regular human insulin and human NPH insulin, which should be injected 30 to 45 minutes prior to meals. As with insulin lispro itself, the rapid action of insulin lispro within the insulin lispro mixtures also results in a smaller increase in blood glucose levels after meals than with comparable human insulin mixtures. In addition, data from two studies have shown that when Mix25 is injected prior to the evening meal the incidence of nocturnal hypoglycaemia is decreased in comparison with the same dose of human insulin 30/70. The combined rapid and prolonged insulin activity provided by insulin lispro mixtures has been defined both in healthy subjects without diabetes and in patients with diabetes.

Insulin glargine

Background: In diabetes mellitus, the clinical goal of intensive glycemic control (lowering blood glucose concentrations to normal or near-normal levels) has been hindered by the lack of insulin regimens that duplicate the basal-bolus secretion of insulin by the healthy pancreas. In particular, intensive therapy has been associated with a risk of hypoglycemia. Objective: This article reviews the pharmacology, pharmacokinetics, dosing guidelines, adverse effects, and potential drug interactions of insulin glargine, a new long-acting recombinant human insulin analogue. Results of clinical trials of its efficacy and tolerability as a basal insulin in the treatment of type 1 and type 2 diabetes are summarized. Methods: Primary research and review articles on insulin glargine were identified through a search of MEDLINE from 1966 to July 2001. Abstracts were identified through a search of the Institute for Scientific Information Web of Science from 1995 to July 2001 and proceedings of American Diabetes Association scientific meetings. Additional information was obtained from the product information for insulin glargine. All identified articles and abstracts were evaluated for relevance, and all relevant information was included in the review. Priority was given to data from the primary medical literature. Results: Insulin glargine has a slower onset of action than human neutral protamine Hagedorn (NPH) insulin, a longer duration of action (up to 24 hours), and no pronounced peak. It has similar tolerability and produces similar glycemic control to once- or twice-daily human NPH insulin, with a similar glucose-lowering effect on a molar basis. A decreased incidence of hypoglycemia, particularly at night, has been reported with insulin glargine compared with human NPH insulin. Insulin glargine appears to be comparable to human NPH insulin in terms of toxicity, adverse effects, immunogenicity, and potential for drug interactions. Results of clinical trials of insulin glargine in both type 1 and type 2 diabetes support its use in combination with a short-acting insulin, insulin lispro, or oral antidiabetic medications. Although insulin glargine cannot be mixed with other insulin preparations, it has the potential convenience of providing basal insulin with once-daily bedtime dosing. Conclusions: Based on the as yet small amount of data from full clinical study reports in peer-reviewed publications, insulin glargine appears to be a well-tolerated and effective basal insulin preparation for patients with type 1 or type 2 diabetes (including pediatric patients). Its delayed onset of action and prolonged, flat time—action profile mimic the action of endogenous basal insulin (or an insulin pump), decreasing the risk of hypoglycemic episodes. Insulin glargine may be a useful new option for meeting overnight insulin requirements, although most patients will require a rapid-acting insulin such as insulin lispro with or before meals for optimal management of blood glucose levels.

Immunologic analysis of anaphylaxis to protamine component in neutral protamine Hagedorn human insulin

We report the clinical and immunologic analysis of two patients with diabetes who had anaphylaxis to neutral protamine Hagedorn (NPH) human insulin in the absence of allergy to regular insulin. A 36-year-old woman without a recent history of local insulin reactions or interruption of insulin therapy experienced anaphylaxis within 15 minutes of her usual morning dose of subcutaneously administered NPH human insulin. A 62-year-old man with a history of generalized reactions to NPH human insulin and of anaphylaxis to intravenously administered protamine had generalized urticaria after injection of NPH human insulin. Both patients subsequently tolerated Lente human insulin. Skin test results in both patients were negative to regular and Lente insulin preparations but positive to NPH insulin and to protamine at concentrations tested. In vitro assays demonstrated that both patients had markedly elevated serum levels of IgE and IgG to protamine, but not to regular human insulin, and that their IgE antibodies to protamine recognized protamine antigenic determinants in NPH human insulin. We conclude that the anaphylactic reactions to NPH insulin in our patients were mediated by IgE to protamine, which should be a pathogenetic consideration in the evaluation of immediate-type reactions to protamine-containing insulins.