Background: During severe hypoglycemic episodes, people with diabetes depend on others to help with treatment. We compared needle-free nasal glucagon and commercially available injectable glucagon for ease of use by caregivers of people with diabetes and by others in treating simulated episodes of severe hypoglycemia.Methods: Sixteen instructed caregivers and 15 noninstructed acquaintances administered nasal and injectable glucagon to manikins, simulating unconscious people with diabetes during severe hypoglycemia episodes.Results: With nasal glucagon, 15 caregivers (94%) and 14 acquaintances (93%) administered a full dose (mean time 0.27 and 0.44 min, respectively). One caregiver and one acquaintance did not administer nasal glucagon because they did not fully depress the plunger on the device. Two caregivers deliberately administered both insulin and nasal glucagon, believing that insulin would also help the patient. With injectable glucagon, eight caregivers (50%) injected glucagon (mean time 1.89 min), but only two (13%) administered the full dose. Three acquaintances (20%) injected a partial dose of injectable glucagon (mean time 2.40 min); none gave a full dose. Errors included injecting diluent only, bending the needle, and injecting with an empty syringe. Two caregivers and one acquaintance injected insulin because they confused insulin with injectable glucagon.Conclusions: More than 90% of participants delivered full doses of nasal glucagon, while 13% and 0% of caregivers and acquaintances delivered full doses of injectable glucagon, indicating that nasal glucagon is easier for nonmedically trained people to administer. Thus, nasal glucagon has the potential to substantially improve treatment for patients experiencing a life-threatening episode of severe hypoglycemia.

In the present multicentre, open‐label, prospective, phase III study, we evaluated the real‐world effectiveness and ease of use of nasal glucagon (NG) in the treatment of moderate/severe hypoglycaemic events (HEs) in adults with type 1 diabetes (T1D). Patients and caregivers were taught how to use NG (3 mg) to treat moderate/severe HEs, record the time taken to awaken or return to normal status, and measure blood glucose (BG) levels over time. Questionnaires were used to collect information about adverse events and ease of use of NG. In the efficacy analysis population, 69 patients experienced 157 HEs. In 95.7% patients, HEs resolved within 30 minutes of NG administration. In all the 12 severe HEs, patients awakened or returned to normal status within 15 minutes of NG administration without additional external medical help. Most caregivers reported that NG was easy to use. Most adverse events were local and of low to moderate severity. In this study, a single, 3‐mg dose of NG demonstrated real‐life effectiveness in treating moderate and severe HEs in adults with T1D. NG was well tolerated and easy to use.

TPI ASM8 attenuated a broad range of inflammatory and physiological changes after AIC, suggesting that CCR3, IL-3, and GM-CSF also are important targets for the management of asthma.

AimsNasal glucagon (NG) is a nasally‐administered glucagon powder, absorbed through the nasal mucosa, designed for treatment of severe hypoglycaemia. This study evaluated the safety, pharmacokinetics (PK) and pharmacodynamics (PD) of NG in otherwise healthy participants with common colds and after recovery from cold symptoms, with and without concomitant nasal decongestant.Materials and MethodsThis was a single‐centre, open‐label study. Cohort 1 participants (N = 18) received 2 doses of NG: one while experiencing nasal congestion and another after recovery from cold symptoms. Cohort 2 participants (N = 18), who also had colds with nasal congestion, received a single dose of NG 2 hours after treatment with the decongestant oxymetazoline. Total symptoms score and other safety measures were assessed before and after NG administration.ResultsNG was well tolerated, without serious adverse events. Common adverse events (transient lacrimation, nasal discomfort, rhinorrhea and nausea) were more frequent in both Cohorts 1 and 2 during nasal congestion. Glucagon levels peaked 18 minutes post‐dose and glucose levels peaked 30 to 42 minutes post‐dose in all groups. Nasal congestion, with or without concomitant nasal decongestant, did not significantly affect PK of NG. Although glucose AUECs0‐t was different between Cohort 1 with nasal congestion and Cohort 2, glucose concentrations at 30 minutes appeared similar in all groups.ConclusionsThere were no clinically relevant differences in safety or PK/PD of NG associated with nasal congestion or concomitant administration of nasal decongestant, suggesting that NG can be used to treat severe hypoglycaemia in individuals experiencing nasal congestion.

BackgroundGlucagon nasal powder (GNP), a novel intranasal formulation of glucagon being developed to treat insulin-induced severe hypoglycemia, contains synthetic glucagon (10 % w/w), beta-cyclodextrin, and dodecylphosphocholine. The safety of this formulation was evaluated in four studies in animal models.MethodsThe first study evaluated 28-day sub-chronic toxicology in rats treated intranasally with 1 and 2 mg of GNP/day (0.1 and 0.2 mg glucagon/rat/day). The second study evaluated 28-day sub-chronic toxicology in dogs administered 20 and 40 mg of formulation/dog/day (2 and 4 mg glucagon/dog/day) intranasally. A pulmonary insufflation study assessed acute toxicology following intra-tracheal administration of 0.5 mg of GNP (0.05 mg glucagon) to rats. Local tolerance to 30 mg of GNP (equivalent to 3 mg glucagon, the final dose for humans) was tested through direct administration into the eyes of rabbits.ResultsThere were no test article-related adverse effects on body weight and/or food consumption, ophthalmology, electrocardiography, hematology, coagulation parameters, clinical chemistry, urinalysis, or organ weights, and no macroscopic findings at necropsy in any study. In rats, direct intra-tracheal insufflation at a dose of 0.5 mg of GNP/rat (0.05 mg glucagon/rat) did not result in adverse clinical, macroscopic, or microscopic effects. In dogs, the only adverse findings following sub-chronic use were transient (<30 s) salivation and sneezing immediately post-treatment and mild to moderate reversible histological changes to the nasal mucosa. Daily dosing over 28 days in rats resulted in mild to moderate, unilateral or bilateral erosion/ulceration of the olfactory epithelium, frequently with minimal to mild, acute to sub-acute inflammation of the lamina propria at the dorsal turbinates of the nasal cavity in 2/10 males and 3/10 females in the high-dose group (0.2 mg glucagon/day). These lesions resolved completely over 14 days. Histological examination of tissues from both sub-chronic studies in dogs and rats revealed no microscopic findings. In rabbits, clinical observations noted in the GNP-treated eye and/or surrounding areas included ≥1 of the following: clear discharge, red conjunctiva, partial closure, and swelling of the peri-orbital area, which correlated with erythema and edema noted during ocular observations and grading.DiscussionThe studies reported here revealed no safety concerns associated with GNP in animal models. Studies published earlier have highlighted the local safety profile of intranasally administered cyclodextrins (a component of GNP). The choline group, the phosphate group, and the saturated 12-carbon aliphatic chain that are present in the dodecylphosphocholine excipient used in GNP are all present in the phospholipids and lecithins seen ubiquitously in mammalian cell membranes and are unlikely to pose safety concerns; this notion is supported by several studies conducted by the authors that revealed no safety concerns. Taken together, these results suggest that intranasal delivery o...