IDeg U100 and U200 formulations are bioequivalent and have similar pharmacodynamic profiles at SS, implying that they can be used interchangeably in clinical practice.

Liraglutide did not compromise hypoglycaemic responses in type 1 diabetes after 4 weeks' treatment.

Serum IDeg concentrations reached steady state within 2-3 days of once-daily subcutaneous administration in all subjects with T1DM or T2DM, including elderly and African American and Hispanic/Latino subjects. At steady state, serum IDeg concentrations were unchanged from day to day.

BackgroundManagement of diabetes in elderly subjects is complex and careful management of glucose levels is of particular importance in this population because of an increased risk of diabetes-related complications and hypoglycaemia.ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to evaluate the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties of insulin degludec (IDeg), a basal insulin with an ultra-long duration of action, in elderly subjects with type 1 diabetes compared with younger adults.MethodsThis trial was a randomised, double-blind, two-period, crossover trial conducted in a single centre and included both inpatient and outpatient periods. Subjects were men and women aged 18–35 years inclusive (younger adult group) or ≥65 years (elderly group) with type 1 diabetes who received IDeg (0.4 U/kg) via subcutaneous injection in the thigh once-daily for six days. Following 6-day dosing, a 26-hour euglycaemic glucose clamp procedure was conducted to evaluate the steady-state pharmacodynamic effects of IDeg. Blood samples were taken for pharmacokinetic analysis up to 120 h post-dose. Pharmacokinetic endpoints included the total exposure of IDeg, ie the area under the IDeg serum concentration curve during one dosing interval at steady state (AUCIDeg,τ,SS) (τ = 0–24 h, equal to one dosing interval) and the maximum IDeg serum concentration at steady state (Cmax,IDeg,SS). Pharmacodynamic endpoints included the total glucose-lowering effect of IDeg, ie the area under the glucose infusion rate (GIR) curve at steady state (AUCGIR,τ,SS), and the maximum GIR at steady state (GIRmax,IDeg,SS).ResultsTotal exposure (AUCIDeg,τ,SS) and maximum concentration (Cmax,IDeg,SS) of IDeg were comparable between elderly subjects and younger adults. Estimated mean age group ratios (elderly/younger adult) for AUCIDeg,τ,SS and Cmax,IDeg,SS and corresponding two-sided 95 % confidence intervals (CIs) were 1.04 (95 % CI 0.73–1.47) and 1.02 (95 % CI 0.74–1.39), respectively. Mean AUCIDeg,0–12h,SS/AUCIDeg,τ,SS was 53 % in both younger adult and elderly subjects, showing that in both age groups IDeg exposure was evenly distributed across the first and second 12 h of the 24-hour dosing interval. No statistically significant differences were observed between younger adult and elderly subjects with regard to AUCGIR,τ,SS (the primary endpoint of this study) and GIRmax,IDeg,SS. Estimated mean age group ratios (elderly/younger adult) for AUCGIR,τ,SS and GIRmax,IDeg,SS and corresponding two-sided 95 % CIs were 0.78 (95 % CI 0.47–1.31) and 0.80 (95 % CI 0.54–1.17), respectively. Duration of action was beyond the clamp duration of 26 h in all subjects. ConclusionsThe exposure of IDeg at steady state during once-daily dosing was similar in younger adult and elderly subjects. The glucose-lowering effect of IDeg was numerically lower in elderly subjects compared with younger adults, but no significant differences were observed between age groups. The ultra-long pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties of IDeg observed in younger adults were preserved in elderly su...

OBJECTIVEWe investigated the impact of two different injection strategies on the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of insulin aspart in vivo in an open-label, two-period crossover study and verified changes in the surface-to-volume ratio ex vivo.RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODSBefore the clinical trial, insulin aspart was injected ex vivo into explanted human abdominal skin flaps. The surface-to-volume ratio of the subcutaneous insulin depot was assessed by microfocus computed tomography that compared 1 bolus of 18 IU with 9 dispersed boluses of 2 IU. These two injection strategies were then tested in vivo, in 12 C-peptide–negative type 1 diabetic patients in a euglycemic glucose clamp (glucose target 5.5 ± 1.1 mmol/L) for 8 h after the first insulin administration.RESULTSThe ex vivo experiment showed a 1.8-fold higher mean surface-to-volume ratio for the dispersed injection strategy. The maximum glucose infusion rates (GIR) were similar for the two strategies (10 ± 4 vs. 9 ± 4; P = 0.5); however, times to reach maximum GIR and 50% and 10% of the maximum GIR were significantly reduced by using the 9 × 2 IU strategy (68 ± 33 vs. 127 ± 93 min; P = 0.01; 38 ± 9 vs. 49 ± 16 min; P < 0.01; 23 ± 6 vs. 30 ± 10 min; P < 0.05). For 9 × 2 IU, the area under the GIR curve was greater during the first 60 min (219 ± 89 vs. 137 ± 75; P < 0.01) and halved until maximum GIR (242 ± 183 vs. 501 ± 396; P < 0.01); however, it was similar across the whole study period (1,361 ± 469 vs. 1,565 ± 527; P = 0.08).CONCLUSIONSA dispersed insulin injection strategy enhanced the effect of a fast-acting insulin analog. The increased surface-to-volume ratio of the subcutaneous insulin depot can facilitate insulin absorption into the vascular system.