Ultra Rapid Lispro Research Articles

Multicenter Evaluation of Ultra-Rapid Lispro Insulin with Control-IQ Technology in Adults, Adolescents, and Children with Type 1 Diabetes.

Objective: To evaluate the safety and explore the efficacy of use of ultra-rapid lispro (URLi, Lyumjev) insulin in the Tandem t:slim X2 insulin pump with Control-IQ 1.5 technology in children, teenagers, and adults living with type 1 diabetes (T1D). Methods: At 14 U.S. diabetes centers, youth and adults with T1D completed a 16-day lead-in period using lispro in a t:slim X2 insulin pump with Control-IQ 1.5 technology, followed by a 13-week period in which URLi insulin was used in the pump. Results: The trial included 179 individuals with T1D (age 6-75 years). With URLi, 1.7% (3 participants) had a severe hypoglycemia event over 13 weeks attributed to override boluses or a missed meal. No diabetic ketoacidosis events occurred. Two participants stopped URLi use because of infusion-site discomfort, and one stopped after developing a rash. Mean time 70-180 mg/dL increased from 65% ± 15% with lispro to 67% ± 13% with URLi (P = 0.004). Mean insulin treatment satisfaction questionnaire score improved from 75 ± 13 at screening to 80 ± 11 after 13 weeks of URLi use (mean difference = 6; 95% confidence interval 4-8; P < 0.001), with the greatest improvement reported for confidence avoiding symptoms of high blood sugar. Mean treatment-related impact measure-diabetes score improved from 74 ± 12 to 80 ± 12 (P < 0.001), and mean TRIM-Diabetes Device (score improved from 82 ± 11 to 86 ± 12 (P < 0.001). Conclusions: URLi use in the Tandem t:slim X2 insulin pump with Control-IQ 1.5 technology was safe for adult and pediatric participants with T1D, with quality-of-life benefits of URLi use perceived by the study participants. Clinicaltrials.gov registration: NCT05403502.

Ultra rapid lispro improves postprandial glucose control versus lispro in combination with basal insulin: a study based on CGM in type 2 diabetes in China.

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of URLi (ultra rapid lispro insulin) compared to insulin lispro as bolus insulin with basal insulin using CGM in the individuals with type 2 diabetes(T2D) in China. This was a double-blind, randomized, parallel, prospective, phase 3 study. Subjects with uncontrolled T2D were recruited and randomized 1:2 into the insulin lispro and URLi groups. Subjects received a consistent basal insulin regimen during the study and self-administered insulin lispro or URLi before each meal throughout the treatment period. Subjects underwent a 3-day continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) at the baseline and endpoint respectively, and then CGM data were analyzed. The primary endpoint was to compare the difference in postprandial glucose (PPG) control using CGM between the two groups. A total of 57 subjects with T2D completed the study. Our CGM data showed that postprandial glucose excursions after breakfast (BPPGE) in the URLi group was lower than that in the insulin lispro group (1.59 ± 1.57 mmol/L vs 2.51 ± 1.73 mmol/L, p = 0.046). 1-hour PPG was observed to decrease more in the URLi group than that in the insulin lispro group (-1.37 ± 3.28 mmol/L vs 0.24 ± 2.58 mmol/L, p = 0.047). 2-hour PPG was observed to decrease more in the URLi group than that in the insulin lispro group (-1.12 ± 4.00 mmol/L vs 1.22 ± 2.90 mmol/L, p = 0.021). The mean HbA1c level decreased by 1.1% in the URLi group and 0.99% in the insulin lispro group, with no treatment difference (p = 0.642). In the CGM profile, TBR was not significantly different between the two groups (p = 0.743). The weight gain also did not differ between the two groups (p = 0.303). URLi can control breakfast PPG better than insulin lispro in adults with T2D in China, while it is non-inferior in improving HbA1c. The incidence of hypoglycemic and weight gain were similar between the two groups.

Are New Ultra-Rapid-Acting Insulins Associated with Improved Glycemic Control and Reduced Hypoglycemia in Comparison to Conventional Rapid-Acting Insulins for Individuals with Type 1 and Type 2 Diabetes? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Introduction: This study aimed to compare efficacy and safety of ultra-rapid-acting insulin analogs (URAIs; faster aspart [FAsp], ultra-rapid lispro [URLi], and technosphere insulin [TI]) with rapid-acting insulin analogs (RAI) in individuals with type 1 (T1D) or type 2 diabetes (T2D). Methods: Searching for randomized control trial comparing the effects of URAI versus RAI that lasted at least 12 weeks, we initially selected 15 studies for analysis. Three studies involving TI were excluded due to a high degree of heterogeneity. The final meta-analysis included only 12 studies with either FAsp or URLi. Results: Mealtime URAI significantly reduced overall early 1 h postprandial glycemia in individuals with T1D (-20.230 mg/dL [95% confidence interval, 95% CI -24.040 to -16.421]; P < 0.001; I2 = 33.42%) and those with T2D (-9.138 mg/dL [95% CI -12.612 to -5.663]; P < 0.001; I2 = 0%). However, the significant reduction in 2 h postprandial glucose remained only in individuals with T1D (-17.620 mg/dL [95% CI -26.047 to -9.193]; P < 0.001; I2 = 65.88%). These benefits were lost when URAI was administered postmeal. At 24-26 weeks, there was no significant difference in HbA1c between groups, but at 52 weeks, a slight reduction in HbA1c with mealtime URAI was observed (-0.080% [95% CI -0.147 to -0.013]; P = 0.019; I2 = 0%). No difference in weight or the rate of severe or confirmed hypoglycemia was observed. Only individuals with T1D showed a small, but significant increase in early 1-h hypoglycemia with URAI (1.468 [95% CI 1.235 to 1.747]; P < 0.001; I2 = 0%). Conclusion: Mealtime URAI improves 1 and 2 h postprandial glycemic control compared to RAI without increasing hypoglycemia or weight gain.

Prandial Insulins: A Person-Centered Choice.

Postprandial hyperglycemia, or elevated blood glucose after meals, is associated with the development and progression of various diabetes-related complications. Prandial insulins are designed to replicate the natural insulin release after meals and are highly effective in managing post-meal glucose spikes. Currently, different types of prandial insulins are available such as human regular insulin, rapid-acting analogs, ultra-rapid-acting analogs, and inhaled insulins. Knowledge about diverse landscape of prandial insulin will optimize glycemic management. Human regular insulin, identical to insulin produced by the human pancreas, has a slower onset and extended duration, potentially leading to post-meal hyperglycemia and later hypoglycemia. In contrast, rapid-acting analogs, such as lispro, aspart, and glulisine, are new insulin types with amino acid modifications that enhance their subcutaneous absorption, resulting in a faster onset and shorter action duration. Ultra-rapid analogs, like faster aspart and ultra-rapid lispro, offer even shorter onset of action, providing better meal-time flexibility. The Technosphere insulin offers an inhaled route for prandial insulin delivery. The prandial insulins can be incorporated into basal-bolus, basal plus, or prandial-only regimens or delivered through insulin pumps. Human regular insulin, aspart, lispro, and faster aspart are recommended for management of hyperglycemia during pregnancy. Ongoing research is focused on refining prandial insulin replacement and exploring newer delivery methods. The article provides a comprehensive overview of various prandial insulin options and their clinical applications in the management of diabetes.

Efficacy and Safety of Ultra-rapid Lispro Insulin in Managing Type-1 and Type-2 Diabetes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Mechanistically, subcutaneous ultra-rapid lispro (URLi) is faster than lispro. Whether this translates into a better post-prandial glucose (PPG) and glycemic control in type-1 diabetes (T1DM) and type-2 diabetes (T2DM) is unclear. Hence, we undertook this meta-analysis. Databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving patients with T1DM/T2DM receiving URLi in intervention-arm, and placebo/prandial insulin as control. The primary outcome was a change in PPG. Secondary outcomes were alterations in glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c), fasting plasma glucose (FPG), time in range (TIR), and adverse events. Data from six RCTs (3687 patients) were analyzed. Lispro was the control arm in all RCTs. T1DM patients receiving mealtime URLi had lower HbA1c [mean difference (MD) -0.07%; 95% confidence interval (CI): -0.12 to - 0.01; P = 0.02; I2 = 42%] and 1-h PPG [MD - 1.18 mmol/L; 95% CI: -1.91 to - 0.44; P = 0.002; I2 = 100%]. T1DM patients receiving post-meal URLi had comparable HbA1c [MD 0.07%; 95% CI: -0.01 to 0.15; P = 0.07; I2 = 55%] and 1-h PPG [MD 0.22 mmol/L; 95% CI: -0.80 to 1.24; P = 0.67; I2 = 100%). T1DM patients on pumps receiving URLi had comparable TIR [MD 1.70; 95% CI: -0.29 to 3.69; P = 0.09; I2 = 98%], lower time in blood glucose <3 mmol/L with increased infusion-set reactions. T2DM patients receiving mealtime URLi had lower 1-h PPG [MD - 0.66 mmol/L; 95% CI: -0.69 to - 0.63; P < 0.00001; I2 = 0%(LH), 2-h-PPG [MD - 0.96 mmol/L; 95% CI: -1.00 to - 0.92; P < 0.00001; I2 = 0%], higher FPG [MD 0.18 mmol/L; 95% CI: 0.11-0.24; P < 0.00001; I2 = 20%], and higher HbA1c [MD 0.07%; 95% CI: -0.06 to 0.08; P < 0.00001; I2 = 0%]. Pre-meal URLi is better than lispro with regard to PPG control. Post-meal URLi is as good as lispro for PPG control. Post-meal URLi is inferior to pre-meal URLi for PPG control.

Ultra-rapid lispro improved postprandial glucose control compared to insulin lispro in predominantly Chinese patients with type 1 diabetes: A prospective, randomized, double-blind phase 3 study.

To investigate the efficacy and safety of ultra-rapid lispro (URLi) versus insulin lispro in predominantly Chinese patients with type 1 diabetes (T1D) in a prospective, randomized, double-blind, treat-to-target, phase 3 study. Following a lead-in period, during which insulin glargine U-100 or insulin degludec U-100 was optimized, patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to URLi (n = 176) or insulin lispro (n = 178). The primary objective was to test the noninferiority of URLi to insulin lispro in glycaemic control (noninferiority margin = 0.4% for glycated haemoglobin [HbA1c] change from baseline to week 26), with testing for the superiority of URLi to insulin lispro with regard to 1- and 2-hour postprandial glucose (PPG) excursions during a mixed-meal tolerance test and HbA1c change at week 26 as the multiplicity-adjusted objectives. From baseline to week 26, HbA1c decreased by 0.21% and 0.28% with URLi and insulin lispro, respectively, with a least squares mean treatment difference of 0.07% (95% confidence interval -0.11 to 0.24; P = 0.467). URLi demonstrated smaller 1- and 2-hour PPG excursions at week 26 with least squares mean treatment differences of -1.0 mmol/L (-17.8 mg/dL)and -1.4 mmol/L (-25.5 mg/dL), respectively (p < 0.005 for both) versus insulin lispro. The safety profiles of URLi and insulin lispro were similar. In this study, URLi administered in a basal-bolus regimen demonstrated superiority to insulin lispro in controlling PPG excursions, with noninferiority of HbA1c control in predominantly Chinese patients with T1D.

Ultra rapid lispro (Lyumjev®) shortens time to recovery from hyperglycaemia compared to Humalog® in individuals with type 1 diabetes on continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion.

To compare the time tohyperglycaemia recovery after ultra rapid lispro (URLi; Lyumjev®) versus Humalog in a randomized, double-blind crossover study. Thirty-two adults with type 1 diabetes on continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion participated in two periods: each period included hyperglycaemia induced by a missed mealtime bolus (day 1) and by suspension of basal insulin delivery (day 2). When hyperglycaemia [plasma glucose (PG) >240 mg/dl] occurred, a correction bolus of URLi or Humalog was given and time to hyperglycaemia recovery (PG = 140 mg/dl), pharmacokinetics and glucodynamics were compared. Following a missed mealtime bolus, URLi significantly reduced maximum PG (-13 mg/dl; p = .02), and produced numerically more rapid decline in PG (23 mg/dl/h; p = .07), and faster recovery from hyperglycaemia (-23 min; p = .1) versus Humalog, although differences were not significant. Following basal suspension, URLi significantly reduced maximum PG (-6 mg/dl; p = .02), and produced faster PG decline (24 mg/dl/h; p < .001) and faster recovery from hyperglycaemia (-16 min; p < .01) vs. Humalog. Following a correction bolus of URLi, accelerated insulin lispro absorption was observed versus Humalog: early 50% tmax was reduced by 6 or 12 min, and AUC0-15min was increased 2.5- or 4.3-fold after correction boluses by subcutaneous infusion (day 1) or injection (day 2), respectively (all p < .001). During episodes of hyperglycaemia commonly experienced in people with type 1 diabetes, URLi provided a faster recovery versus Humalog from a missed mealtime bolus or during basal insulin suspension. URLi shows significant acceleration of insulin absorption versus Humalog when boluses are administered by subcutaneous infusion or injection.

Assessing Time in Range with Postprandial Glucose-Focused Titration of Ultra Rapid Lispro (URLi) in People with Type1 Diabetes.

To assess time in range (TIR) (70-180mg/dL) with postprandial glucose (PPG)-focused titration of ultra rapid lispro (URLi; Lyumjev®) in combination with insulin degludec in people with type1 diabetes (T1D). This phase2, single-group, open-label, exploratory study was conducted in 31 participants with T1D on multiple daily injection therapy. Participants were treated with insulin degludec and Lispro for an 11-day lead-in and then URLi for a 46-day treatment period consisting of 35-day titration and 11-day endpoint maintenance period. Glucose targets for the titration period were PPG < 140mg/dL or < 20% increase from premeal, fasting glucose 80-110mg/dL, and overnight excursion ± 30mg/dL or less. Participants used the InPen™ bolus calculator and Dexcom G6 continuous glucose monitoring (CGM). Primary endpoint mean TIR (70-180mg/dL) with URLi during the maintenance period was 70.2%. TIR (70-180mg/dL) and times below/above range were not significantly different with URLi (maintenance) versus lispro (lead-in). HbA1c decreased from 7.1% at screening to 6.8% at endpoint (least squares mean [LSM] change from baseline, - 0.36%; P < 0.001). Fructosamine and 1,5-anhydroglucitol improved (P < 0.001). Mean hourly glucose using CGM was reduced from 8:00AM to 4:00PM with URLi. Overall highest PPG excursion across meals was significantly reduced at URLi endpoint compared with lispro lead-in (mean 56.5 vs 72.4mg/dL; P < 0.001). Insulin-to-carbohydrate ratio (U/Xg) was reduced (more insulin given) at breakfast at URLi endpoint vs lead-in (LSM 9.0 vs 9.7g; P = 0.002) and numerically decreased at other meals. Total daily insulin dose (TDD) was higher at URLi endpoint compared with lispro lead-in (mean 50.2 vs 47.0U; P = 0.046) with similar prandial/TDD ratio (mean 52.1% vs 51.2%). There were no severe hypoglycemia events during the study. URLi in a basal-bolus regimen focusing on PPG targets demonstrated improved overall glycemic control and reduced PPG excursions without increased hypoglycemia in participants with T1D. ClinicalTrial.gov, NCT04585776.

105-LB: Safety and Performance of an Advanced Hybrid Closed-Loop (AHCL) Algorithm with Ultra-rapid Lispro (URLi) and Lispro

Tuning a multi-model predictive control AHCL algorithm to the PK/PD properties of URLi may result in improved performance vs Lispro with no increased safety concerns. This was a randomized, double-blind, inpatient, 2-period crossover study in 22 adults with T1D on insulin pumps. Each URLi and Lispro treatment period had a 4-day inpatient visit with insulin doses calculated using the tuned AHCL algorithm. To challenge the algorithm, tests included unannounced exercise, 1 hr delayed bolus, underbolus, and overbolus. Participants (59% male) had mean ±SD age 43.4±13.77 years, T1D duration 25.9±9.61 yrs, and HbA1c 7.6±0.47%. Mean time in range (TIR; 70-180 mg/dL) during the overall inpatient period: URLi 79.4%; Lispro 78.7 % (p=0.80) with a trend towards decreased time &amp;lt;70 mg/dl (1.5 vs 2.4, p=0.08) for URLi. URLi had a significant difference in Level 1 hypoglycemia (30 vs 55 events, p = 0.01) but not Level 2 (4 vs 9 events, p=0.3). TIRs were similar including during meal/challenge periods (Table) with a trend towards greater TIR during the postprandial period and reduced time &amp;lt;70 mg/dl during exercise for URLi. There was greater TIR during overbolus with Lispro. No severe hypoglycemia events occurred. Results suggest reduced hypoglycemia with URLi vs Lispro with comparable glycemic control. The AHCL algorithm showed promising glycemic performance in a supervised setting when used with URLi or Lispro. Disclosure R. Pollom: None. E. Dassau: Employee; Eli Lilly and Company, Stock/Shareholder; Eli Lilly and Company. M. Katz: Employee; Eli Lilly and Company, Stock/Shareholder; Eli Lilly and Company. L. Nosek: None. H. Coester: None. E. Zijlstra: Other Relationship; Eli Lilly and Company, Speaker's Bureau; Gan &amp; Lee Pharmaceuticals, Novo Nordisk A/S. A. Ghosh: None. A. Haidar: Consultant; Eli Lilly and Company, Other Relationship; Bigfoot Biomedical, Inc., Research Support; Adocia, Dexcom, Inc., Tandem Diabetes Care, Inc. R. Jones: Employee; Eli Lilly and Company, Stock/Shareholder; Eli Lilly and Company. J. Leohr: None. S. E. Gleissner: None.

Increased Time in Range with Ultra Rapid Lispro Treatment in Participants with Type 2 Diabetes: PRONTO-Time in Range.

To evaluate time in range metrics and HbA1c in people with type 2 diabetes (T2D) treated with ultra rapid lispro (URLi) using continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) for the first time in this population. This was a Phase 3b, 12-week, single-treatment study in adults with T2D on basal-bolus multiple daily injection (MDI) therapy using basal insulin glargine U-100 along with a rapid-acting insulin analog. Following a 4-week baseline period, 176 participants were newly treated with prandial URLi. Participants used unblinded CGM (Freestyle Libre). Primary endpoint was time in range (TIR) (70-180mg/dl) during the daytime period at Week 12 compared to baseline with gated secondary endpoints of HbA1c change from baseline and 24-h TIR (70-180mg/dl). Improved glycemic control was observed at Week 12 versus baseline including mean daytime TIR (change from baseline [Δ] 3.8%; P = 0.007), HbA1c (Δ - 0.44%; P < 0.001), and 24-h TIR (Δ 3.3%; P = 0.016) with no significant difference in time below range (TBR). After 12weeks, there was a statistically significant decrease in postprandial glucose incremental area under curve, overall, across all meals, within 1h (P = 0.005) or 2h (P < 0.001) after the start of a meal. Basal, bolus, and total insulin dose were intensified with increased bolus/total dose ratio at Week 12 (50.7%) versus baseline (44.5%; P < 0.001). There were no severe hypoglycemia events during the treatment period. In people with T2D, URLi in an MDI regimen was efficacious with improved glycemic control including TIR, HbA1c, and postprandial glucose without increased hypoglycemia/TBR. CLINICALTRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04605991.

Adjusting Therapy Profiles When Switching to Ultra-Rapid Lispro in an Advanced Hybrid Closed-Loop System: An in Silico Study.

It has been shown that insulin acceleration by itself might not be sufficient to see clear improvements in glycemic metrics, and insulin therapy may need to be adjusted to fully leverage the extra safety margin provided by faster pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic (PD) profiles. The objective of this work is to explore how to perform such adjustments on a commercially available automated insulin delivery (AID) system. Ultra-rapid lispro (URLi) is modeled within the UVA/Padova simulation platform using data from previously published clamp studies. The Control-IQ AID algorithm is selected as it leverages carbohydrate-to-insulin ratio (CR in g/U), correction factor (CF in mg/dL/U), and basal rate (BR in U/h) daily profiles that are fully customizable. An experiment roadmap is proposed to understand how to safely modify these profiles when switching from lispro to URLi. Simulations show that a 7% decrease in CR (approximately an 8% increase in prandial insulin) and a 7.5% increase in BR lead to cumulative improvements in glucose control with URLi. Comparing with baseline metrics using lispro, a clinically significant increase in time in the range of 70 to 180 mg/dL (overall: 70.2%-75.2%, P < .001; 6 am-12 am: 62.4%-68.5%, P < .001) and a reduction in time below 70 mg/dL (overall: 1.8%-1.2%, P < .001; 6 am-12 am: 1.8%-1.3%, P < .001) were observed. Properly adjusting therapy parameters allows to fully leverage glucose control benefits provided by faster insulin analogues, opening opportunities to take another step forward into a next generation of more effective AID solutions.

An Investigation Into Local Infusion Site Pain After Infusion of Ultra Rapid Lispro Excipients Across Sites and Depths.

This phase 1, randomized, one-day, five-period crossover study in adults with type 1 diabetes on continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion investigated local infusion site pain following infusion of the excipients of ultra rapid lispro (URLi; without insulin) across infusion sites and depths. Forty participants (mean age, 40.5 years; body mass index [BMI], 27.5) were randomized to one of five infusion site sequences consisting of the arm, thigh, buttock (6 mm cannula depth), and abdomen (6 and 9 mm depth). Basal infusion of sodium citrate and treprostinil in diluent with magnesium chloride was initiated (10 μL/h) and at three, six, and nine hours after basal initiation, 15 unit-equivalent boluses (150 μL) were given. Participants rated their pain on a 0 to 100 mm validated visual analog scale (VAS) at 5 minutes pre-bolus and 1 and 15 minutes post-bolus. At one minute post-bolus, increased VAS scores were occasionally reported. Most one minute post-bolus scores were ≤10 mm (little to no discomfort) while 7 of 577 were >45 mm (generally considered clinically meaningful pain). Painful infusions were reported more frequently for the arm, and mean VAS scores were higher for the arm compared with the thigh and abdomen. The VAS score distributions were similar between cannula depths. By 15 minutes post-bolus, VAS scores returned to pre-bolus levels. Local infusion site discomfort after infusion of URLi excipients was reported by a small subset of participants; it was transient, tolerable, and dependent on infusion site but not infusion depth. Given differences within individuals, patients may consider using a different infusion site if they experience discomfort. NCT05067270.

Ultra rapid lispro improves postprandial glucose control versus lispro in combination with insulin glargine/degludec in adults with type 2 diabetes: a prospective, randomized, double-blind, phase 3 trial

Ultra rapid lispro (URLi) is a novel formulation of insulin lispro designed to more closely match the physiological insulin response to a meal, with the aim of improving postprandial glucose (PPG) control. We conducted a multinational, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, treat-to-target, 26-week, phase 3 trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of URLi in adults with type 2 diabetes (T2D). After an 8-week lead-in period during which basal insulin glargine or degludec was optimized, adults with T2D were randomized (2:1) to prandial URLi (n = 395) or lispro (n = 200). The primary endpoint was non-inferiority of URLi versus lispro in glycated hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) change from baseline to week 26. Multiplicity-adjusted analyses were performed to assess the superiority of URLi in 1- and 2-h PPG excursions during a mixed-meal tolerance test (MMTT) and HbA1c change at week 26. URLi showed non-inferiority for HbA1c change at week 26 versus lispro (least-squares mean [LSM] difference, 0.07%; 95% confidence interval: −0.07, 0.21). HbA1c was reduced by 0.56% and 0.63% with URLi and lispro, respectively, with no significant treatment difference (P = 0.321). URLi provided superior PPG excursion control versus lispro at 1 h (LSM difference: −14.6 mg/dL, P < 0.001) and 2 h (LSM difference: −21.8 mg/dL, P < 0.001) as well as other time points (30–240 min) during the MMTT. Incremental area under the glucose curve during the MMTT was also significantly lower with URLi versus lispro. The safety profiles were generally similar between treatment groups. In conclusion, URLi was superior to lispro for PPG control, with non-inferiority in HbA1c improvement, in adults with T2D.

Efficacy and Safety of Ultra-Rapid Lispro in Younger and Older Patients with Type 2 Diabetes: Randomized Double-Blind PRONTO-T2D Study.

IntroductionUltra-rapid lispro (URLi) is a new prandial insulin lispro formulation. In the PRONTO-T2D study, URLi, in a basal-bolus regimen with glargine or degludec, was non-inferior to lispro (Humalog®) for HbA1c reduction and superior for postprandial glucose (PPG) control. We evaluated the efficacy and safety of URLi compared to lispro in younger versus older patients in PRONTO-T2D.MethodsPRONTO-T2D was a phase 3, 26-week, double-blind, treat-to-target study in people with type 2 diabetes. In this sub-group analysis, we compared URLi to lispro on the change from baseline in HbA1c and rate of level 2 hypoglycemia (< 54 mg/dl) in patients aged < 65 (N = 406) and ≥ 65 years (N = 267).ResultsAt baseline, patients < 65 versus ≥ 65 years had mean age of 54.9 versus 69.2 years and duration of diabetes 14.6 versus 19.4 years. Mean HbA1c at screening and randomization was 8.35 and 7.34%, respectively, in patients < 65 years, and 8.21 and 7.23%, respectively, in patients ≥ 65 years. At endpoint, mean HbA1c with URLi versus lispro was 6.92 versus 6.90%, respectively, in patients < 65 years and 6.89 versus 6.79%, respectively, in patients ≥ 65 years. URLi significantly reduced 1- and 2-h PPG excursions with a standardized meal test in both age groups: between-treatment differences at 1-h postmeal for younger and older patients was – 9.8 and – 15.1 mg/dl, respectively; and at 2-h postmeal, – 18.7 and – 15.1 mg/dl, respectively, all p < 0.05. Severe and nocturnal hypoglycemia were similar between groups. The relative rate (URLi/Humalog) of level 2 hypoglycemia was lower in older versus younger patients, with a significant treatment-by-age interaction observed. No differential treatment effects were noted for insulin dose, weight, and fasting and maximum glucose after the meal test.ConclusionsURLi, in a basal-bolus regimen, resulted in endpoint HbA1c < 7% and significantly lower PPG excursions compared to lispro in both age groups, with reduced level 2 hypoglycemia in older versus younger patients.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03214380.Supplementary InformationThe online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s13300-022-01290-4.

What is the value of faster acting prandial insulin? Focus on ultra rapid lispro.

Rapid‐acting insulins (RAIs) have been instrumental in the management of diabetes because of their improved postprandial glucose (PPG) control compared with regular human insulin. However, their absorption rate and time action following subcutaneous administration still falls short of the normal physiological response to meal consumption, increasing the risk of early postmeal hyperglycaemia and late postmeal hypoglycaemia. Increased demand for faster acting insulins, which can quickly control PPG excursions without increasing the risk of late hypoglycaemia, led to the development of ultra‐rapid–acting insulins, including ultra‐rapid lispro (URLi). URLi is a novel formulation of insulin lispro with accelerated absorption driven by two excipients: treprostinil, which increases local vasodilation, and citrate, which increases local vascular permeability. Clinical pharmacology studies consistently showed an earlier onset and shorter duration of action with URLi compared with Lispro. In a head‐to‐head study with Faster aspart, Aspart and Lispro, URLi was absorbed faster, provided earlier insulin action, and more closely matched physiological glucose response than the other insulins tested. URLi's unique pharmacokinetic properties increase its potential for improved PPG control beyond that achieved with RAIs. Indeed, in pivotal phase 3 trials, URLi was superior to Lispro for PPG control both at 1 and 2 hours after a meal in type 1 and type 2 diabetes with multiple daily injections, and in type 1 diabetes with continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion. This was achieved without increasing the risk of hypoglycaemia. In this review, we focus on the clinical and pharmacological evidence for URLi in the treatment of diabetes and discuss the potential benefits and considerations with URLi compared with RAIs.

38-OR: Glycemic Control with Ultrarapid Lispro (URLi) vs. Lispro in Children and Adolescents with T1D: PRONTO-Peds

This phase 3, treat-to-target study evaluated efficacy and safety of URLi vs. lispro in 716 pediatric patients (pts) with type 1 diabetes (T1D) . After 4-week lead-in to optimize basal insulin, pts were randomized to double-blind URLi (n=280) or lispro (n=298) injected 0-2 min prior to meals, or open-label URLi (n=138) injected up to 20 min after meals (URLi+20) . Pts remained on prestudy basal insulin (degludec, detemir, or glargine) . Primary endpoint was HbA1c change from baseline after 26 weeks. Noninferiority was shown in HbA1c change with URLi vs. lispro: estimated treatment difference (ETD) -0.02% (95% CI -0.17, 0.13) and with URLi+20 vs. lispro: ETD -0.02% (95% CI -0.20, 0.17) . Postprandial glucose (PPG) measured by self-monitored blood glucose (SMBG) was lower with URLi vs. lispro 1 h after breakfast (p&amp;lt;0.001) and dinner (p=0.006) . URLi significantly reduced 1 h postmeal glucose daily mean vs. lispro (p=0.001) . Total daily insulin dose was similar between treatments. There were no significant differences among treatments in rate or incidence of severe, nocturnal or documented hypoglycemia (&amp;lt;54 mg/dL) . With URLi vs. lispro, rate of postdose hypoglycemia (&amp;lt;54 mg/dL) was higher at ≤2 h (p=0.034) . Incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events was similar between groups. More pts reported an injection site reaction related event with URLi (7.9%) and URLi+20 (2.9%) vs. lispro (2.7%) . All injection site reactions were mild or moderate in severity. Two URLi patients discontinued the study due to injection site reactions. In children and adolescents with T1D, URLi demonstrated similar overall glycemic control and greater PPG lowering with an acceptable safety and tolerability profile compared with lispro. URLi dosed at the start of meals or up to 20 min after the start of meals showed noninferiority for HbA1c change from baseline vs. lispro. URLi dosed at the beginning of meals showed lower PPG at 1 h after breakfast and dinner and lower 1 h postmeal glucose daily mean vs. lispro. Disclosure R. Wadwa: Advisory Panel; Dompé. Consultant; Beta Bionics, Inc. Research Support; Dexcom, Inc., Eli Lilly and Company, Tandem Diabetes Care, Inc. Other Relationship; Tandem Diabetes Care, Inc. L.M. Laffel: Advisory Panel; Medtronic, Roche Diabetes Care. Consultant; Boehringer Ingelheim International GmbH, Dexcom, Inc., Dompé, Insulet Corporation, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Lilly Diabetes, Novo Nordisk, Provention Bio, Inc. D.R. Franco: Advisory Panel; Abbott Diabetes, Medtronic, Novo Nordisk, Sanofi. Research Support; Eli Lilly and Company. Speaker's Bureau; Abbott Diabetes, AstraZeneca, Medtronic, Roche Diabetes Care, Sanofi. M.A. Dellva: Employee; Eli Lilly and Company. Stock/Shareholder; Eli Lilly and Company. R.K. Pollom: Employee; Eli Lilly and Company. Funding Eli Lilly and Company

811-P: Efficacy and Safety of Ultrarapid Lispro (URLi) vs. Humalog (Lispro) in Chinese Pediatric Patients with Type 1 Diabetes (T1D) : A Subpopulation Analysis of PRONTO-Peds Study

URLi is a novel formulation of insulin lispro developed to better mimic the physiological glucose response postmeal. This analysis was to evaluate URLi vs. lispro in Chinese subpopulation from a phase 3 global study (PRONTO-Peds) in pediatric patients with T1D. Chinese patients were randomized to double-blind mealtime URLi (n=7) , lispro (n=11) , or open-label URLi dosed up to 20 minutes postmeal (URLi+20; n=4) . The primary endpoint was the difference between URLi and lispro in HbA1c change from baseline to Week 26, with the difference between URLi+20 and lispro in HbA1c change being also assessed. The mixed-effect model repeated measure model was used for analyzing the primary endpoint. Same trend in the treatment difference in HbA1c change from baseline to Week 26 was observed in Chinese patients as the overall population (URLi minus lispro: -0.09% vs. -0.02%; URLi+20 minus lispro: -0.31% vs. -0.02%) , with HbA1c increases in URLi, lispro, and URLi+20 groups by 1.06%, 1.15%, and 0.85%, respectively. In Chinese patients, the premeal to 1-hour postmeal daily mean glucose excursion was numerically lower with URLi (-31.1 mg/dL) than with lispro (15.3 mg/dL) or with URLi+20 (39.2 mg/dL) at Week 26. No clinically meaningful treatment differences were observed at baseline and Week 26 for basal, bolus, and total insulin dose. No death, serious adverse events including severe hypoglycemia, discontinuations due to adverse events, and treatment-emergent injection site reactions occurred. At Weeks 0 to 26, the rate of all documented hypoglycemia and documented hypoglycemia at ≤4 h and &amp;gt;4 h postdose for blood glucose ≤70 mg/dL showed numerically greater decrease from baseline with URLi and URLi+20 than with lispro. Overall, mealtime and postmeal URLi vs. lispro demonstrated same trend in the glycemic control as assessed by HbA1c in Chinese pediatric patients with T1D as the overall population and a similar safety profile. Disclosure W.Gu: None. Y.Yang: Employee; Eli Lilly and Company. Y.Yuan: None. F.Luo: None. Funding Eli Lilly and Company

108-LB: Ultrarapid Lispro (URLi) Improved Postprandial Glucose (PPG) Excursion vs. Humalog (HL) in Predominantly Chinese Adult Patients with Type 2 Diabetes (T2D)

URLi is a novel formulation of insulin lispro developed to better match physiological insulin response to a meal that demonstrates faster absorption and onset of action than HL. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of URLi vs. HL in predominantly Chinese adult patients with T2D. It was a Phase 3, randomized, double-blind study, in which patients with T2D randomly received URLi (395 patients) or HL (200 patients) plus glargine or degludec for 26 weeks. The primary endpoint was the treatment difference in the change in HbA1c from baseline to Week 26 (noninferiority margin 0.4%) . The treatment differences in the 1- and 2-hour PPG excursions at Week 26 were assessed as the multiplicity-adjusted endpoints. URLi achieved noninferiority to HL on change in HbA1c with least squares mean difference (95% confidence interval) of 0.07% (-0.07, 0.21) . URLi was superior to HL in controlling 1-hour (4.8 mmol/L vs. 5.6 mmol/L, P &amp;lt;0.001) and 2-hour PPG excursions (6.2 mmol/L vs. 7.4 mmol/L, P &amp;lt;0.001) at Week 26. A greater decrease in daily mean 1- and 2-hour PPG excursions with URLi than HL from baseline to Week 26 was observed in the 10-point self-monitored blood glucose profile. Increase in the dose of bolus insulin from baseline to Week 26 was slightly higher with URLi than HL (0.21 U/kg/day vs. 0.18 U/kg/day, P=0.045) . During the 26-week treatment period, both groups showed similar and low rate and incidence of severe hypoglycemia and documented symptomatic hypoglycemia. The incidences of serious adverse events and treatment-emergent adverse events were comparable between both groups. URLi vs. HL in a basal-bolus regimen demonstrated noninferior glycemic control as assessed by HbA1c and superior control on PPG excursions in predominantly Chinese adult patients with T2D with a similar safety profile. Disclosure J. Zhou: n/a. S. Chen: None. J. Cheng: Employee; Eli Lilly and Company. L. Shen: Employee; Eli Lilly and Company. J. Zhu: Employee; Eli Lilly and Company. Y. Lou: None. Y. Bao: None. W. Jia: None. Funding Eli Lilly and Company

109-LB: An Investigation into Local Infusion Site Pain after Infusion of URLi Excipients across Sites and Depths

A Phase 1, randomized, 1-day 5-period crossover study in adults with type 1 diabetes on CSII investigated whether pain is dependent on the site and/or depth of infusion of ultra rapid lispro (URLi) excipients. Forty participants (mean age 40.5 years; BMI 27.5) were randomized to 1 of 5 infusion site sequences consisting of the abdomen, arm, thigh, and buttock (6 mm cannula depth) , and abdomen (9 mm depth) . Basal infusion of sodium citrate, treprostinil, and magnesium chloride in diluent was initiated (1 U/h) and 15 unit-equivalent boluses were given at 3, 6, and 9 h after basal initiation. Participants rated local infusion site pain perception by the 0-100 mm validated visual analog scale (VAS) at 5 min before bolus and 1 and 15 min post bolus. An increased VAS score was occasionally reported at 1 min post bolus, more frequently for the arm. Most scores were ≤10 mm (little to no discomfort) while 7 of 577 were &amp;gt;45 mm (generally considered clinically meaningful pain) . VAS score distributions were similar between cannula depths (Figure) . After 15 min, scores were similar to pre bolus. No participants discontinued the study. Local infusion site discomfort after infusion of URLi excipients was reported by a subset of participants; it was transient, tolerable, and dependent on infusion site. Given differences among sites within individuals, patients may consider changing infusion site if they experience discomfort. Disclosure D. A. Ignaut: None. T. Fukuda: Employee; Eli Lilly and Company. B. Ramanjineyulu: None. M. Ermer: None. M. S. Stoffel: None. E. Zijlstra: Speaker’s Bureau; Gan &amp; Lee Pharmaceuticals, Novo Nordisk. D. Paavola: Employee; Eli Lilly and Company, Stock/Shareholder; Eli Lilly and Company. Funding Eli Lilly and Company

Evaluation of the Pharmacokinetic Profile of Ultra Rapid Lispro Administered Subcutaneously at Different Injection Sites

Ultra rapid lispro (URLi) is a novel insulin lispro formulation developed to more closely match physiological insulin secretion and improve postprandial glucose control. This study compared the pharmacokinetic profile and glucodynamic response of URLi when administered subcutaneously into the abdomen, upper arm, or thigh. An intravenous (IV) bolus administration was included to determine the absolute bioavailability at each injection site. In this Phase I, randomized, open-label, 4-period, crossover study, healthy subjects received a single dose of 15 U URLi subcutaneously into the abdomen, upper arm, or thigh, or by intravenous injection. Serum insulin lispro concentrations and glucodynamic response during a 10-hour euglycemic clamp procedure were assessed after URLi administration. Total insulin lispro exposure was similar for the abdomen, upper arm, and thigh, and absolute bioavailability was ∼65% at each subcutaneous (SC) injection site. Total and peak insulin action were similar across these SC injection sites. The onset of appearance was <1 minute, and the time to early half-maximal drug concentration occurred at ∼10 minutes across these three SC injection sites. Onset of insulin action occurred at ∼22 minutes, and the early insulin action (for the first hour) was also similar across these SC injection sites. URLi was well tolerated after single SC injections and IV bolus administration. The pharmacokinetic and glucodynamic profiles of URLi were similar after a single SC dose into the abdomen, upper arm, or thigh. The rate of insulin lispro absorption and early insulin action were maintained regardless of the SC injection site. The current study supports SC injection of URLi into the abdomen, upper arm, and thigh. gov identifier: NCT03232983.