Subcutaneous Insulin Lispro Research Articles

1014-P: Evaluation of Diabetic Ketoacidosis Management with a Subcutaneous Insulin Lispro PowerPlan

Diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) has traditionally been treated with a continuous intravenous insulin infusion, often requiring management in an intensive care unit (ICU) or step-down unit. There has been growing evidence supporting the use of subcutaneous rapid-acting insulin analogs to treat mild-to-moderate DKA (alert patient able to tolerate oral fluid intake, pH >7.0, bicarbonate ≥10), helping to decrease costs and ICU-bed utilization. We sought to establish the efficacy and safety of a subcutaneous insulin lispro protocol developed at UPMC for the treatment of mild-to-moderate DKA. A retrospective chart review was performed on patients across 15 institutions in the UPMC network from February-October 2022 who had the adult DKA PowerPlan subcutaneous insulin lispro subphase ordered. Of 111 cases analyzed, 47 cases were included that properly used the PowerPlan to treat mild-to-moderate DKA. DKA resolution using the PowerPlan was reached in 45/47 (95.7%) cases. The two unsuccessful cases involved delayed recognition of DKA in the emergency department and premature transition to a prandial insulin regimen before DKA resolution. Hypoglycemia (defined as glucose <70) occurred in 9/47 (19.1%) encounters. Only 1/47 (2.1%) encounters involved hypoglycemia directly attributable to the subcutaneous insulin lispro PowerPlan. The remaining cases of hypoglycemia were attributed to not reducing insulin doses when glucoses were <250, giving insulin doses sooner than 2 hours before the prior dose, not starting dextrose-containing fluids when glucoses were <250, and higher co-administered basal insulin doses (>0.3 units/kg). Overall, these results suggest that a subcutaneous insulin analog can be safely and effectively used to treat mild-to-moderate DKA in non-ICU settings. Disclosure J.Quaytman: None. E.Karslioglu-french: Research Support; Abbott. A.Donihi: None.

Comparison of Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics of Inhaled Technosphere Insulin and Subcutaneous Insulin Lispro in the Treatment of Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus.

BackgroundThis study was performed to satisfy a US Food and Drug Administration post-marketing requirement to compare the dose responses for Technosphere® Insulin (TI; MannKind Corporation, Westlake Village, CA, USA) and subcutaneous insulin lispro (LIS) across a wide range of doses.ObjectivesThis single-center, open-label, randomized, cross-over study defined the pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic curves for inhaled TI vs subcutaneous LIS in persons with type 1 diabetes mellitus.MethodsEach volunteer received six treatments while undergoing euglycemic clamps: three doses of TI (10, 30 and 120 U) and LIS (8, 30, and 90 U). Primary endpoint was area under the glucose infusion rate vs time curve from start of treatment administration to end of clamp. Key secondary endpoints included readouts of insulin exposure and timing of pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic profiles.ResultsInsulin exposure was more than dose proportional, increasing with dose1.08 for LIS and dose1.35 for TI. Time to reach 10% of the maximum glucose infusion rate was 7 to 15 min for TI vs 21 to 38 min for LIS. End of effect was dose dependent for both treatments, ranging from 2 to 6 h (TI) and 5 to 10 h (LIS). Glucose infusion rate exhibited saturation for both treatments. Technosphere Insulin produced a lesser total effect per unit insulin than LIS due to its faster absorption and correspondingly shorter duration of exposure. The difference was large enough to require significantly different doses to achieve the same total effect.ConclusionsTechnosphere Insulin has a considerably faster onset and shorter duration of action than LIS. Consequently, the overall effect of TI is smaller than that of LIS and unit-for-unit dose conversion is not appropriate.Clinical Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02470637; 12 June, 2015Supplementary InformationThe online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40262-021-01084-0.

Subcutaneous Rapid-acting Insulin Analogs for Diabetic Ketoacidosis.

Diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA), characterized by hyperglycemia, metabolic acidosis, and ketosis, is a serious complication of diabetes mellitus. Treatment focuses on fluid restoration, correction of hyperglycemia, and inhibition of ketogenesis. Insulin is considered a fundamental component of DKA treatment as it promotes the peripheral tissues' utilization of glucose in peripheral tissues by reducing hepatic gluconeogenesis and suppressing ketogenesis.1.

MON-690 Euglycemic Diabetic Ketoacidosis Associated with SGLT-2 Inhibitors- an Under-recognized Diagnosis

BackgroundSodium glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT-2i) are a promising class of oral anti-hyperglycemic agents with mounting evidence of reduced cardiovascular risk and renal failure, in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Recent increase in their use has led to identification of hitherto unknown side effects of these drugs. Euglycemic Diabetic Ketoacidosis (eDKA), found to be associated with SGLT-2i use, is a life-threatening condition and commonly goes unrecognized due to absence of the cardinal sign of hyperglycemia.Clinical CaseWe describe a 47 year old male with history of coronary artery disease and recently diagnosed type 2 diabetes mellitus who presented to our hospital with one week history of nausea, lethargy, progressive fatigue, and shortness of breath. He was diagnosed with type 2 diabetes three weeks prior, with HBA1c of 12%.His regimen included basal insulin and recent transition to empagliflozin due to severe GI intolerance with metformin use.On arrival he was noted to be tachycardic with a heart rate of 113/min, afebrile and normotensive. Physical exam was mostly unremarkable except for dry oral mucous membranes. Serum chemistry was consistent with high anion gap metabolic acidosis with bicarbonate of 6.9 mmol/L (21-32 mmol/L), anion gap of 29 mmol/L (10-20 mmol/L), mildly elevated blood glucose of 132 mg/dl (74-106 mg/dl), acute kidney injury with creatinine of 1.47 mg/dl (0.7- 1.3 mg/dl), and a beta hydroxybutyrate level of 82.7 mg/dl (0.20- 5.63 mg/dl). Urine analysis showed ketonuria. This was consistent with a clinical and biochemical diagnosis of eDKA. He was treated with IV D5%NS-20mEq/L KCL and an insulin drip. Upon resolution of his acidosis and normalization of the anion gap he was switched to subcutaneous Insulin Glargine and Lispro. Empagliflozin was held as it was thought to be contributing to the diagnosis of eDKA.ConclusionOur case yet again illustrates the importance of recognition of EDKA to aid prompt management, especially with the rising popularity of SGLT-2 inhibitors. It is also important to educate patients about this condition, mostly notable in the first two months of starting the medication, to recognize the concerning symptoms and precipitating factors like dehydration, improper insulin dosing, low calorie diet, alcohol, infection, surgery. An acceptable alternative to SGLT-2i can be glucagon like peptide receptor (GLP- 1) agonists, also associated with good cardiovascular outcomes.

MON-131 A Case Report of Neonatal Diabetes Successfully Treated with Oral Glyburide before Genetic Testing

Background: A very rare disease, neonatal diabetes has historically been treated with subcutaneous insulin. A recent study showed efficacy of oral glyburide on a specific subset of newborns diagnosed with neonatal diabetes, and that it is safe to try even before genetic test results are available. Clinical Case: 1 day old male born at 41 weeks and 1 day was found to by hyperglycemic to the 300s. At that time, it was thought to be reactive hyperglycemia as he was in respiratory distress, had a pneumothorax, and his mother was GBS positive. He was started on an insulin drip, which was titrated to his blood glucose levels. At this time, serum insulin and C-peptide levels were found to be undetectable, confirming a diagnosis of neonatal diabetes (Insulin <1.0, n 2.0-19.6, C-peptide <0.10, n 0.8-3.85). Genetic testing was sent on genes commonly responsible for neonatal diabetes. On day of life 12 (DOL 12), he was started on diluted subcutaneous insulin Lispro. He was exquisitely sensitive to small amounts of insulin and was often hypoglycemic after even 0.1 units of diluted insulin (0.01u of commercial insulin Lispro). On DOL 14, as genetic testing results were still pending, he was started on oral glyburide. The drug was administered twice daily, but he remained hyperglycemic requiring advancement of the target dose to 0.5mg/kg/day. On DOL 22, Insulin and C-peptide levels were drawn after subcutaneous insulin had been discontinued for 48 hours. While not yet within normal limits, both values increased to detectable levels, demonstrating objective response the the glyburide therapy (Insulin 1.1, n 2.0-19.6, C-peptide 0.32, n 0.8-3.85). Ultimately, this dose of glyburide was too high for him, and he was discharged home on DOL 26 with 0.036mg/kg/day that will be titrated up as an outpatient as he continues to grow. Since discharge, his blood glucose levels have ranged between 100-200, with no values below 85. Interestingly, his first genetic testing results came back negative for all the mutations in the panel, including the most common mutations in neonatal diabetes that respond to sulfonylurea therapy, ABCC8 and KCNJ11. He is in the process of being enrolled in the a Neonatal Diabetes Registry where they will test for other genes implicated in neonatal diabetes. Conclusion: This is a case of neonatal diabetes with an unknown gene mutation showing efficacy of oral glyburide therapy.

A randomized controlled trial-based algorithm for insulin-pump therapy in hyperglycemic patients early after kidney transplantation.

Treating hyperglycemia in previously non-diabetic individuals with exogenous insulin immediately after kidney transplantation reduced the odds of developing Posttransplantation Diabetes Mellitus (PTDM) in our previous proof-of-concept clinical trial. We hypothesized that insulin-pump therapy with maximal insulin dosage during the afternoon would improve glycemic control compared to basal insulin and standard-of-care. In a multi-center, randomized, controlled trial testing insulin isophane for PTDM prevention, we added a third study arm applying continuous subcutaneous insulin lispro infusion (CSII) treatment. CSII was initiated in 24 patients aged 55±12 years, without diabetes history, receiving tacrolimus. The mean daily insulin lispro dose was 9.2±5.2 IU. 2.3±1.1% of the total insulin dose were administered between 00:00 and 6:00, 19.5±11.6% between 6:00 and 12:00, 62.3±15.6% between 12:00 and 18:00 and 15.9±9.1% between 18:00 and 24:00. Additional bolus injections were necessary in five patients. Mild hypoglycemia (52–60 mg/dL) occurred in two patients. During the first post-operative week glucose control in CSII patients was overall superior compared to standard-of-care as well as once-daily insulin isophane for fasting and post-supper glucose. We present an algorithm for CSII treatment in kidney transplant recipients, demonstrating similar safety and superior short-term efficacy compared to standard-of-care and once-daily insulin isophane.

Subcutaneous rapid-acting insulin analogues for diabetic ketoacidosis.

Diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) is an acute, life-threatening complication of uncontrolled diabetes that mainly occurs in individuals with autoimmune type 1 diabetes, but it is not uncommon in some people with type 2 diabetes. The treatment of DKA is traditionally accomplished by the administration of intravenous infusion of regular insulin that is initiated in the emergency department and continued in an intensive care unit or a high-dependency unit environment. It is unclear whether people with DKA should be treated with other treatment modalities such as subcutaneous rapid-acting insulin analogues. To assess the effects of subcutaneous rapid-acting insulin analogues for the treatment of diabetic ketoacidosis. We identified eligible trials by searching MEDLINE, PubMed, EMBASE, LILACS, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Library. We searched the trials registers WHO ICTRP Search Portal and ClinicalTrials.gov. The date of last search for all databases was 27 October 2015. We also examined reference lists of included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and systematic reviews, and contacted trial authors. We included trials if they were RCTs comparing subcutaneous rapid-acting insulin analogues versus standard intravenous infusion in participants with DKA of any age or sex with type 1 or type 2 diabetes, and in pregnant women. Two review authors independently extracted data, assessed studies for risk of bias, and evaluated overall study quality utilising the GRADE instrument. We assessed the statistical heterogeneity of included studies by visually inspecting forest plots and quantifying the diversity using the I² statistic. We synthesised data using random-effects model meta-analysis or descriptive analysis, as appropriate. Five trials randomised 201 participants (110 participants to subcutaneous rapid-acting insulin analogues and 91 to intravenous regular insulin). The criteria for DKA were consistent with the American Diabetes Association criteria for mild or moderate DKA. The underlying cause of DKA was mostly poor compliance with diabetes therapy. Most trials did not report on type of diabetes. Younger diabetic participants and children were underrepresented in our included trials (one trial only). Four trials evaluated the effects of the rapid-acting insulin analogue lispro, and one the effects of the rapid-acting insulin analogue aspart. The mean follow-up period as measured by mean hospital stay ranged between two and seven days. Overall, risk of bias of the evaluated trials was unclear in many domains and high for performance bias for the outcome measure time to resolution of DKA.No deaths were reported in the included trials (186 participants; 3 trials; moderate- (insulin lispro) to low-quality evidence (insulin aspart)). There was very low-quality evidence to evaluate the effects of subcutaneous insulin lispro versus intravenous regular insulin on the time to resolution of DKA: mean difference (MD) 0.2 h (95% CI -1.7 to 2.1); P = 0.81; 90 participants; 2 trials. In one trial involving children with DKA, the time to reach a glucose level of 250 mg/dL was similar between insulin lispro and intravenous regular insulin. There was very low-quality evidence to evaluate the effects of subcutaneous insulin aspart versus intravenous regular insulin on the time to resolution of DKA: MD -1 h (95% CI -3.2 to 1.2); P = 0.36; 30 participants; 1 trial. There was low-quality evidence to evaluate the effects of subcutaneous rapid-acting insulin analogues versus intravenous regular insulin on hypoglycaemic episodes: 6 of 80 insulin lispro-treated participants compared with 9 of 76 regular insulin-treated participants reported hypoglycaemic events; risk ratio (RR) 0.59 (95% CI 0.23 to 1.52); P = 0.28; 156 participants; 4 trials. For insulin aspart compared with regular insulin, RR for hypoglycaemic episodes was 1.00 (95% CI 0.07 to 14.55); P = 1.0; 30 participants; 1 trial; low-quality evidence. Socioeconomic effects as measured by length of mean hospital stay for insulin lispro compared with regular insulin showed a MD of -0.4 days (95% CI -1 to 0.2); P = 0.22; 90 participants; 2 trials; low-quality evidence and for insulin aspart compared with regular insulin 1.1 days (95% CI -3.3 to 1.1); P = 0.32; low-quality evidence. Data on morbidity were limited, but no specific events were reported for the comparison of insulin lispro with regular insulin. No trial reported on adverse events other than hypoglycaemic episodes, and no trial investigated patient satisfaction. Our review, which provided mainly data on adults, suggests on the basis of mostly low- to very low-quality evidence that there are neither advantages nor disadvantages when comparing the effects of subcutaneous rapid-acting insulin analogues versus intravenous regular insulin for treating mild or moderate DKA.

Hyperglycemic Emergencies in Adults

Hyperglycemic Emergencies in Adults

Microneedle-Based Intradermal Versus Subcutaneous Administration of Regular Human Insulin or Insulin Lispro: Pharmacokinetics and Postprandial Glycemic Excursions in Patients with Type 1 Diabetes

This study assessed pharmacokinetics (PK) and pharmacodynamic postprandial glycemia (PPG) in patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) after a standardized liquid meal following insulin lispro (IL) or regular human insulin (RHI) given by microneedle-based intradermal (ID) versus subcutaneous (SC) delivery. In this randomized, open-label, five-way crossover study, 29 T1DM patients received IL and RHI (0.125 U/kg) at 2 min and 17 min premeal, respectively, by both the SC and ID routes and also received RHI by the ID route at 2 min premeal. Blood glucose was stabilized at 120 mg/dL prior to a standardized 82-g carbohydrate liquid meal. ID delivery used a 34-gauge 1.5-mm steel microneedle, and SC delivery used a 31-gauge 8-mm syringe needle. The 90-min PPG (blood glucose area under the curve for 0-1.5 h) for ID RHI was 14% lower than SC RHI at -17 min (P < 0.0001) and 11% lower than ID RHI at -2 min (P = 0.0006). PPG did not differ between ID RHI and SC IL, both at -2 min (P = 0.8345). ID IL PPG was lower than SC, both at -2 min, but not significantly (P = 0.10). Both ID IL and ID RHI PK data showed significantly faster uptake and time to maximum concentration, higher maximum concentration, and shorter systemic circulating duration versus SC dosing. ID IL and RHI delivery was generally well tolerated. PPG with RHI administered ID via microneedle was improved versus SC delivery when dosed 17 min premeal. ID RHI provided similar control of PPG as SC IL immediately premeal. Further studies of ID insulin delivery via steel microneedles are warranted.

Managing diabetic ketoacidosis in non-intensive care unit setting: Role of insulin analogs

Aim:To compare the efficacy and safety of rapid acting insulin analog lispro given subcutaneously with that of standard low-dose intravenous regular insulin infusion protocolin patients with mild to moderate diabetic ketoacidosis.Materials and Methods:In this prospective, randomized and open trial, 50 consecutive patients of mild to moderate diabetic ketoacidosis were randomly assigned to two groups. The patients in group 1 were treated with intravenous regular insulin infusion and admitted in intensive care unit. The patients in group 2 were treated with subcutaneous insulin lispro 2 hourly and managed in the emergency medical ward. Response to therapy was assessed by duration of treatment and amount of insulin administered until resolution of hyperglycemia and ketoacidosis, total length of hospital stay, and number of hypoglycemic events in the two study groups.Results:The baseline clinical and biochemical parameters were similar between the two groups. There were no differences in the mean duration of treatment and amount of insulin required for correction of hyperglycemia and ketoacidosis. There was no mortality and no difference in the length of hospital stay between the two groups. The length of stay and amount of insulin required for correction of hyperglycemia was greater in patients who had infection as the precipitating cause than those with poor compliance. The hypoglycemic events were higher in the regular insulin group (2 vs1) than in the lispro group.Conclusion:Patients with uncomplicated diabetic ketoacidosis can be managed in the medical wards with appropriate supervision and careful monitoring. Rapid acting insulin analog lispro is a safe and effective alternative to intravenous regular insulin for this subset of patients.

Glycemic Control and Perinatal Outcomes of Pregnancies Complicated by Type 1 Diabetes: Influence of Continuous Subcutaneous Insulin Infusion and Lispro Insulin

This study compared glycemic control and maternal and fetal outcomes in pregnant women with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) treated with multiple daily injections (MDI) or continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) using regular (RI) or lispro (LP) insulin. Three hundred fifteen consecutive singleton pregnancies of T1DM women using the same insulin program since before pregnancy (196 MDI with NPH + RI, 16 MDI with NPH + LP, 44 CSII with RI, 59 CSII with LP) were studied. Variables of glycemic control assessed included glycated hemoglobin, mean blood glucose (MBG), and insulin doses in each trimester, diabetic ketoacidosis, and hypoglycemic comas. Variables of pregnancy outcome included miscarriage, preterm birth, large or small for gestational age (LGA or SGA, respectively) newborns, and perinatal mortality. Multiple linear regression and logistic regression analysis were used. Groups differed in baseline and glycemic control but not in maternal or fetal outcomes. In multivariate analysis, LP was associated with higher second trimester MBG and lower rate of hypoglycemic coma, CSII with higher third trimester MBG, and CSII + LP with lower insulin requirements and lower rate of hypoglycemic coma. As to pregnancy outcomes, LP was associated with lower risk of preterm birth and higher risk of SGA, CSII with lower risk of SGA and higher risk of LGA and perinatal mortality, and CSII + LP with higher risk of miscarriage. Pregnant women with T1DM using LP and/or CSII had different characteristics. LP with or without CSII was independently associated with fewer hypoglycemic comas, whereas impact of LP/CSII on the fetus had a favorable or an unfavorable influence depending on the specific outcome.

AIR Inhaled Insulin Versus Subcutaneous Insulin

This study evaluated pharmacokinetic and glucodynamic responses to AIR inhaled insulin relative to subcutaneous insulin lispro, safety, pulmonary function, and effects of salbutamol coadministration. Healthy, mildly asthmatic, and moderately asthmatic subjects (n = 13/group, aged 19-58 years, nonsmoking, and nondiabetic) completed this phase I, open-label, randomized, crossover euglycemic clamp study. Subjects received 12 units equivalent AIR insulin or 12 units subcutaneous insulin lispro or salbutamol plus AIR insulin (moderate asthma group only) before the clamp. AIR insulin exposure was reduced 34 and 41% (both P < 0.01) in asthmatic subjects (area under the curve(0-t'), 24.0 and 21.1 nmol x min x l(-1) in mild and moderate asthma subjects, respectively) compared with healthy subjects (35.2 nmol x min x l(-1)), respectively. Glucodynamic (G) effects were similar in healthy and mildly asthmatic subjects (G(tot) = 38.7 and 23.4 g, respectively; P = 0.16) and were reduced in moderately asthmatic subjects (G(tot) = 10.7 g). Salbutamol pretreatment (moderately asthmatic subjects) improved bioavailability. AIR insulin had no discernable effect on pulmonary function. AIR insulin adverse events (cough, headache, and dizziness) were mild to moderate in intensity and have been previously reported or are typical of studies involving glucose clamp procedures. This study suggests that pulmonary disease severity and asthma treatment status influence the metabolic effect of AIR insulin in individuals with asthma but do not affect AIR insulin pulmonary safety or tolerability. In view of the potential interactions between diabetes treatment and pulmonary status, it is prudent to await the results of ongoing clinical trials in diabetic patients with comorbid lung disease before considering the use of inhaled insulin in such patients.

Effects of smoking cessation, acute re‐exposure and nicotine replacement in smokers on AIR® inhaled insulin pharmacokinetics and glucodynamics

* Only one other study (Becker et al.) has reported on the influence of smoking cessation and smoking resumption on inhaled insulin pharmacokinetics and glucodynamics, concluding that the rapid changes associated with smoking resumption carry the risk for hypoglycaemia and thus should not be used by active smokers. * This is the first euglycaemic clamp study on the impact of smoking cessation, acute smoking re-exposure and nicotine replacement on AIR((R)) inhaled insulin pharmacokinetics and glucodynamics. * We demonstrate clinically and statistically significant shifts in glucodynamic response to acute re-exposure to a single cigarette, leading us to conclude that active smokers should be advised against inhaled insulin therapy until smoking abstinence is stable. * Additionally, these results are also the first to demonstrate an apparent independent effect of nicotine replacement therapy on insulin exposure and glucodynamic response. To explore the effects of smoking cessation and acute smoking re-exposure on the pharmacokinetic (PK) and glucodynamic (GD) profiles of AIR inhaled insulin (AIR Insulin) with or without nicotine replacement therapy (NRT). Nondiabetic smokers (n = 24) with normal pulmonary function completed a two-phase (four-period), open-label, randomized euglycaemic clamp study. During the initial study phase, subjects underwent glucose clamps following AIR Insulin dosing, shortly after smoking, 8-12 h after smoking, or following subcutaneous insulin lispro shortly after smoking. AIR Insulin PK and GD were again assessed during and after a 4-week smoking-cessation period with or without NRT. In the last study period, subjects smoked one cigarette shortly before final AIR Insulin dosing and glucose clamp, to study the effect of acute smoking re-exposure on inhaled insulin PK and GD. Compared with the preceding active smoking phase, the administration of AIR Insulin in nondiabetic subjects undergoing a 4-week period of smoking abstinence resulted in a decrease in PK and GD of approximately 25% (P = 0.008 for both), an effect which was greater in subjects using NRT. Following rechallenge with a single cigarette (without NRT), GD response to AIR Insulin increased significantly (P = 0.006) towards precessation levels, relative to smoking abstinence. In subjects using NRT, however, the increase in GD was less pronounced. Smoking, smoking cessation and acute re-exposure with a single cigarette are associated with clinically significant alterations in AIR Insulin pharmacokinetics and glucodynamics. AIR Insulin should not be used by smokers or those at risk for recidivism.

AIR Inhaled Insulin in Subjects With Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease

In this open-label, randomized, crossover study, pharmacokinetic and glucodynamic responses were compared in healthy subjects versus subjects with moderate chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), following administration of 12 units equivalent AIR inhaled insulin versus 12 units subcutaneous insulin lispro. Three nonsmoking groups (n = 15 each)--healthy subjects (baseline mean +/- SD age 38 +/- 13 years, forced expiratory volume in 1 s [FEV1] 4.06 +/- 1.04 l), subjects with chronic bronchitis (aged 53 +/- 9 years, FEV1 2.14 +/- 0.60 l), and subjects with pulmonary emphysema (aged 58 +/- 6 years, FEV1 1.67 +/- 0.61 l)--were randomly assigned to one of three treatment sequences. Three euglycemic glucose clamp procedures were performed. In subjects with chronic bronchitis and emphysema, AIR inhaled insulin administration resulted in reduced insulin exposure (area under the serum insulin concentration curve from time zero until time of return to baseline [AUC(0-t')]) (55.7%, P = 0.13 and 78.5%, P < 0.001, respectively) and reduced total insulin effect (total glucose infusion rate) (60.4%, P < 0.01 and 67.1%, P < 0.01, respectively) relative to healthy subjects. Subcutaneous insulin lispro administration resulted in similar responses across study groups for insulin exposure and metabolic effect. Intrasubject pharmacokinetic and glucodynamic variability ranged from 17 to 52% across groups. No significant differences were shown for pre- and postclamp pulmonary function tests. During clamps, FEV1 and forced vital capacity declined modestly in both COPD groups, with no difference between AIR insulin and subcutaneous insulin lispro. Short-term exposure to AIR inhaled insulin was well tolerated by COPD subjects, showing similar time-exposure and time-action profiles, but with reduced insulin absorption and metabolic effect compared with healthy subjects. Further clinical evaluation is warranted in patients with comorbid diabetes and COPD.

Efficacy of short term continuous subcutaneous insulin lispro versus continuous intravenous regular insulin in poorly controlled, hospitalized, type 2 diabetic patients

Intravenous insulin infusion (IVII) is rapidly effective in improving glycaemia in uncontrolled hospitalized diabetic patients. This significantly improves their morbidity and mortality. Intravenous insulin infusion may lead to IV infusion complications and is a heavy burden for caregivers. The aim of our work was to compare the efficacy of IV regular insulin versus lispro Continuous Subcutaneous Insulin Infusion (CSII), in improving glycaemia in patients hospitalized for uncontrolled type 2 diabetes, the efficacy being assessed on the average blood glucose level observed. The study was designed as a prospective randomized study. Thirty-three type 2 diabetic patients, hospitalized for uncontrolled diabetes by their usual practitioner were included. After acceptation, patients were randomly assigned to lispro CSII (group 1, n=20) or IVII regular insulin (group 2, n=13) for 5 days. Ten capillary blood glucose/day were performed. Pre-meal blood glucose targets were 4.4-6.6 mmol/l. Mann Whitney, Wilcoxon and Fischer exact tests were used. BG levels decreased significantly (-3.4+/-0.55 mmol/l in group 1 and -3.60+/-0.55 mmol/l in group 2, P<0.01) during the first 12 hours. Mean daily blood glucose at day 5 was statistically improved in both groups compared to day 1 (P<0.05 Wilcoxon) and comparable between the 2 groups. No severe hypoglycaemia was reported. No catheter complications occurred in group 1, 7 occurred in group 2. CSII and IVII infusion were comparable in rapidly improving hyperglycaemia in uncontrolled type 2 diabetic patients. CSII, being more convenient, could be preferred in medical and surgical settings.

Subcutaneous lispro and intravenous regular insulin treatments are equally effective and safe for the treatment of mild and moderate diabetic ketoacidosis in adult patients

In this prospective, randomised, open trial, we wanted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of hourly subcutaneous (SC) insulin lispro administration in the treatment of diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) in comparison with intravenous (IV) regular insulin treatment. Twenty patients were enrolled in the study. The patients were randomly assigned into two groups. Following a bolus injection of 0.15 U/kg IV regular insulin, group L received half of this dose as hourly SC insulin lispro while group R was treated conventionally with IV regular insulin infusion. At the end of treatment period, time that needed for normalisation of serum glucose, beta-hydroxybutyrate, blood pH and urine ketone levels were not different in groups L and R. There was no mortality or serious side effects in both groups. In this study, we revealed that treatment of mild and moderate DKA with SC insulin lispro is equally effective and safe in comparison with IV regular insulin.

Dose Response of Inhaled Dry-Powder Insulin and Dose Equivalence to Subcutaneous Insulin Lispro

To determine the pharmacokinetic (PK) and glucodynamic (GD) dose response of human insulin inhalation powder (HIIP) delivered via AIR particle technology and dose equivalence to subcutaneous (SC) insulin lispro. Twenty healthy, nonsmoking, male or female subjects (aged 29.6 +/- 6.9 years, BMI 23.2 +/- 2.3 kg/m2, means +/- SD) with normal forced vital capacity and forced expiratory volume were enrolled in an open-label, randomized, seven-period, euglycemic glucose clamp, cross-over trial. Each subject received up to four single doses of HIIP (2.6, 3.6, 5.2, or 7.8 mg) and three doses of SC lispro (6, 12, or 18 units) from 5 to 18 days apart. HIIP demonstrated a similar rapid onset but an extended time exposure and a prolonged duration of effect (late t(50%) 412 vs. 236 min, P < 0.001) compared with SC lispro. The HIIP versus SC lispro doses of 2.6 mg vs. 6 units, 5.2 mg vs. 12 units, and 7.8 mg vs. 18 units achieved similar PK area under the serum immunoreactive insulin (IRI) concentration-versus-time curve from time zero until the serum IRI concentrations returned to the predose baseline value [AUC(0-t')] and GD (G(tot)) responses. The median insulin (t(max)) was not different between HIIP and SC lispro (45 min for both), although the median time of return to baseline for PK was apparently longer for HIIP compared with SC lispro (480 vs. 360 min). Relative bioavailability and relative biopotency of HIIP were consistent across doses (8 and 9%). While the time-action profile was longer for HIIP than for SC lispro, both treatments showed rapid initial absorption and similar overall PK exposure and GD effect. HIIP was as well tolerated as SC lispro, thereby offering a promising alternative to injectable insulin therapy.

Efficacy of subcutaneous insulin lispro versus continuous intravenous regular insulin for the treatment of patients with diabetic ketoacidosis

To compare the efficacy and safety of subcutaneous insulin lispro with that of a standard low-dose intravenous infusion protocol of regular insulin in patients with uncomplicated diabetic ketoacidosis. In this prospective, randomized open trial, 20 patients treated with subcutaneous insulin lispro were managed in regular medicine wards (n=10) or an intermediate care unit (n=10), while 20 patients treated with the intravenous protocol were managed in the intensive care unit. Patients treated with subcutaneous lispro received an initial injection of 0.3 unit/kg followed by 0.1 unit/kg/h until correction of hyperglycemia (blood glucose levels <250 mg/dL), followed by 0.05 to 0.1 unit/kg/h until resolution of diabetic ketoacidosis (pH > or =7.3, bicarbonate > or =18 mEq/L). Patients treated with intravenous regular insulin received an initial bolus of 0.1 unit/kg, followed by an infusion of 0.1 unit/kg/h until correction of hyperglycemia, then 0.05 to 0.1 unit/kg/h until resolution of diabetic ketoacidosis. Mean (+/- SD) admission biochemical parameters in patients treated with subcutaneous lispro (glucose: 674 +/- 154 mg/dL; bicarbonate: 9.2 +/- 4 mEq/L; pH: 7.17 +/- 0.10) were similar to values in patients treated with intravenous insulin (glucose: 611 +/- 264 mg/dL; bicarbonate: 10.6 +/- 4 mEq/L; pH: 7.19 +/- 0.08). The duration of treatment until correction of hyperglycemia (7 +/- 3 hours vs. 7 +/- 2 hours) and resolution of ketoacidosis (10 +/- 3 hours vs. 11 +/- 4 hours) in patients treated with subcutaneous lispro was not different than in patients treated with intravenous regular insulin. There were no deaths in either group, and there were no differences in the length of hospital stay, amount of insulin until resolution of diabetic ketoacidosis, or in the rate of hypoglycemia between treatment groups. Treatment of diabetic ketoacidosis in the intensive care unit was associated with 39% higher hospitalization charges than was treatment with subcutaneous lispro in a non-intensive care setting ($14,429 +/- $5243 vs. $8801 +/- $5549, P <0.01). Treatment of adult patients who have uncomplicated diabetic ketoacidosis with subcutaneous lispro every hour in a non-intensive care setting may be safe and more cost-effective than treatment with intravenous regular insulin in the intensive care unit.

Allergy to insulin in a woman with gestational diabetes mellitus: transient efficiency of continuous subcutaneous insulin lispro infusion

We report the case of a 31-year-old pregnant woman. She required insulin for the treatment of gestational diabetes from 27 weeks of amenorrhoea to delivery. An allergy to insulin was suspected because she presented with local symptoms at insulin injection sites and a decrease in efficiency of insulin. This diagnostic was confirmed by skin-prick tests. A treatment with subcutaneous continuous lispro insulin analogue infusion was initiated with an oral antihistaminic drug without local reaction. Seven weeks after the initiation of insulin pump, local reactions reappeared. The insulin analogue lispro is not always an alternative in insulin allergy. However, in the case we report, the lack of allergy during a few weeks allowed the birth of a normal infant.

Strict glycemic control in diabetic dogs with closed-loop intraperitoneal insulin infusion algorithm designed for an artificial endocrine pancreas.

The ultimate goal of the development of an artificial endocrine pancreas is to achieve long-term strict glycemic regulation. To establish the physiological insulin delivery route of the artificial endocrine pancreas, intraperitoneal insulin infusion may be important. For this purpose, we tried to develop a closed-loop intraperitoneal insulin infusion algorithm by analyzing the pharmacokinetics of intraperitoneal regular insulin absorption using a mathematical model. The parameters for this algorithm were calculated to simulate the plasma insulin profile after intraperitoneal insulin injection as closely as possible. To evaluate the appropriateness of this algorithm, we tried glycemic control after an oral glucose load of 2 g/kg or a meal load of 80 kcal/kg in diabetic dogs by applying the algorithm. With the use of the subcutaneous insulin lispro infusion algorithm, which we have previously reported, alloxan-induced diabetic dogs exhibited postprandial hyperglycemia and delayed hyperinsulinemia, followed by hypoglycemia after an oral glucose load of 2 g/kg. However, by using the intraperitoneal insulin infusion algorithm, excellent glycemic control (postprandial blood glucose levels of 9.1 +/- 0.8 mmol/l at 70 min and 3.8 +/- 0.3 mmol/l at 240 min, respectively) could be achieved without any associated delayed hyperinsulinemia or hypoglycemia. Glycemic excursion after a meal load of 80 kcal/kg was also controlled from 3.9 to 10.1 mmol/l. Our results confirm that the intraperitoneal insulin infusion algorithm in vivo is feasible and that this algorithm can be superior to the subcutaneous insulin lispro infusion algorithm in the regulation of blood glucose.