The clinical benefits of insulin glargine 300 U/ml (Gla-300) have been confirmed in randomized clinical trials (EDITION and BRIGHT) and real-world studies (ATOS, Toujeo-1, and ORION) in different regions of the world. However, safety data for the Indian population are lacking. The current post-marketing surveillance study evaluated the safety and efficacy of Gla-300 in people with type 2 diabetes (T2D) from India.

SAFEGUARD was a multicenter, phase 4, single-arm, open-label, 24-week study conducted at 15 centers across India between August 10, 2021 and December 26, 2022. The study included insulin-naïve participants (aged ≥ 18 years) with T2D uncontrolled (HbA1c ≥ 7.5% and ≤ 10%) on oral anti-hyperglycemic drugs. The primary endpoint was the percentage of participants with treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), including serious adverse events (SAEs) and hypoglycemic episodes.

Of the 220 participants included, 218 (36.8% female) were eligible for efficacy analysis. The mean ± standard deviation age was 54.0 ± 9.6 years, the baseline HbA1c was 8.8 ± 0.9%, and the duration of T2D was 9.3 ± 7.0 years. Among the 220 participants who took at least one dose of Gla-300, 24.5% (n = 54) reported 64 TEAEs, which included one (0.5%) SAE. The most reported event was infections (10.9%). In total, 29.5% of participants (n = 65) reported a level 1 hypoglycemic event, and 27.7% of participants (n = 18) reported the main symptom of sweating. Glycemic control improved with reductions in mean HbA1c levels (- 1.14 ± 1.2%), fasting plasma glucose (- 37.0 ± 59.3 mg/dl), and fasting self-monitored blood glucose (- 52.0 ± 44.1 mg/dl) from baseline to week 24.

Gla-300 was well tolerated with improved glycemic control and a low hypoglycemia risk in insulin-naïve people with T2D living in India.

Clinical Trials Registry-India (CTRI number): CTRI/2021/07/035244. WHO identifier number: U1111-1255-5143. NCT number: NCT04980027.

Background: The association between falls or fall-related fractures and hypoglycemia in people with type 2 diabetes is well established. Insulin treatment is associated with an increased risk of hypoglycemia, which is compounded in people of older age, but the risk is lower with longer-acting vs intermediate- or long-acting basal insulin analogs. Objective: To examine healthcare resource utilization and costs related to falls/fractures in people with type 2 diabetes treated with the longer-acting basal insulin Gla-300 (insulin glargine 300 U/mL) vs long-acting basal insulins (insulin glargine 100 U/mL or insulin detemir)/neutral protamine Hagedorn (NPH). Methods: This retrospective study of Optum's de-identified Clinformatics® Data Mart Database compared data for people aged 50 years or older with at least 1 prescription claim for basal insulin (excluding insulin degludec) between April 1, 2015, and April 30, 2021, who initiated Gla-300 insulin (basal insulin-naive) or transitioned to Gla-300 from a different basal insulin (basal insulin-switch). Cohorts were propensity score-matched. The primary outcome was fall/fracture-related hospitalization and emergency department visit events (per 100 person-years of follow-up [P100PYFU]). The association between fall/fracture events and hypoglycemia and costs were secondary outcomes. Outcomes were compared using 95% confidence intervals of rate and other ratios; no statistical inference was performed. Results: Fall/fracture-related hospitalization (2.88 vs 3.33 P100PYFU) and emergency department visit events (5.28 vs 5.95 P100PYFU) were numerically lower in people who initiated basal insulin with Gla-300 vs long-acting basal insulins/NPH, and in those who switched to Gla-300 vs long-acting basal insulins/NPH (2.54 vs 3.38 and 4.48 vs 5.21 P100PYFU, respectively). People with vs without hypoglycemia experienced more falls/fractures, regardless of whether initiating basal insulin or switching basal insulin treatment. Costs tended to be lower for people who switched to Gla-300; however, low event rates caused variability. Conclusions: The results of this study suggest that there is a positive correlation between fall/fracture events and hypoglycemia in people with type 2 diabetes and also, that fall/fracture-related healthcare resource utilization was numerically lower in people who initiated basal insulin with Gla-300 vs long-acting basal insulins/NPH, and in those who switched to Gla-300 vs long-acting basal insulins/NPH.

To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of insulin glargine 300 U/mL (Gla-300) initiation according to diabetes duration (DD).

We analysed patient-level data from 2381 insulin-naïve individuals with type 2 diabetes (T2D), of whom 2349 (98.7%) were treated with Gla-300 for 24 weeks. Of the 2381 participants, 1048 (44.0%) had a DD of less than 8 years and 1333 (56.0%) had a DD of 8 years or longer. We further analysed the subgroups of participants having a DD of less than 4 years (N = 450), 4-8 years (N = 598), 8-12 years (N = 627) and 12 years or longer (N = 706).

Mean ± standard deviation age was 60.2 ± 9.0 years in participants with a DD less than 8 years and 64.2 ± 8.8 years in those with a DD of 8 years or longer. At 24 weeks of Gla-300 therapy, HbA1c improved with a least-squares (LS) mean change from baseline of -1.88% (95% confidence interval [CI], -1.95 to -1.80) and -1.71% (95% CI, -1.77 to -1.65), respectively, resulting in a LS mean difference between groups of 0.17% (95% CI, 0.07 to 0.26; P = .0005). In the subgroup analysis, LS mean HbA1c reduction from baseline to week 24 was highest in participants with a DD of less than 4 years and lowest in participants with a DD of 12 years or longer. Overall, incidences of symptomatic and severe hypoglycaemia were low, irrespective of DD, without body weight changes.

Gla-300 was effective and safe in insulin-naïve individuals with T2D, regardless of DD. Improvement in HbA1c was greater when Gla-300 was initiated in participants with a DD of less than 4 years, although the difference between the groups was modest.

The impacts of insulin degludec U100 (Deg-100) and insulin glargine U300 (Gla-300) on glycemic variability (GV) in patients with type 1 diabetes, as well as the impact of major nutrient components on GV in these patients, remain unclear. This was an observational, cross-sectional, retrospective study. Type 1 diabetes mellitus patients treated with either Deg-100 or Gla-300 as basal insulin were enrolled. After the participants underwent continuous glucose monitoring, GV indices and major nutrient components were analyzed. Forty patients with type 1 diabetes were enrolled, and 20 participants used Deg-100, and 20 used Gla-300. There was no significant difference in major nutrient components between the two groups. Better GV indices of standard deviation, coefficient of variation, mean amplitude of glycemic excursion, AUCn, M-value, CONGA1, CONGA2, and CONGA4 were noted in the Gla-300 group versus Deg-100 group. Compared with patients who received once-daily injection in the morning (QD), Deg-100 administration once daily at bedtime (HS) yielded a higher low blood glucose index during both day and nocturnal periods, indicating a higher risk of hypoglycemic events. By contrast, there were significantly lower levels of CONGA1, CONGA2, and CONGA4 during insulin Gla-300 QD administration than during HS administration, indicating a lower GV of a short interval. In this real-world study involving type 1 diabetes patients, Gla-300 appears to offer more stable glucose variability than Deg-100. Administering once-daily injections could lower the risk of hypoglycemia in the Deg-100 group and minimize GV in the Gla-300 group compared to bedtime injections.

To evaluate treatment advancement with insulin glargine 300 U/mL (Gla-300), with or without prior glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1 RA) therapy in type 2 diabetes (T2D).

Efficacy and safety outcomes of insulin-naïve patients intensifying with Gla-300, with/without prior GLP-1 RA therapy, were evaluated in three analyses (N = 3562): a pooled analysis of seven interventional studies, a subanalysis comparing participants who stopped GLP-1 RA therapy and initiated Gla-300 with those who received add-on Gla-300, and an expanded analysis including two observational studies.

Glycaemic outcomes, including HbA1c improvement and fasting plasma glucose, were similar between groups with/without prior GLP-1 RA use. HbA1c least squares mean change from baseline was - 1.7 % and - 1.6 % with and without prior GLP-1 RA, respectively. Glycaemic outcomes were similar between participants who stopped GLP-1 RA therapy when initiating Gla-300 and those who received add-on Gla-300, although more participants receiving add-on Gla-300 achieved HbA1c targets. The expanded analysis yielded similar results. Incidence of hypoglycaemia was low with no clinically relevant weight changes in all analyses.

Treatment advancement with Gla-300 in patients with T2D, with/without prior GLP-1 RA therapy, improved glycaemic outcomes with no relevant impact on weight, while maintaining a low hypoglycaemia risk.

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of insulin glargine 300 U/mL (Gla-300) in people with suboptimally controlled type 2 diabetes (T2D) in China.

INITIATION (NCT05002933) was a prospective, interventional, multicentre, single-arm, phase IV study conducted in China. Individuals with suboptimally controlled T2D who were insulin naïve or switching from another basal insulin (insulin experienced) were included. The primary endpoint was the change in HbA1c from baseline to week 24. Safety assessments included hypoglycaemia and adverse events (AEs).

In total, 568 participants were enrolled and 562 initiated Gla-300 treatment (189 in the insulin-naïve subgroup; 373 in the insulin-experienced subgroup). At week 24, the mean ± standard error (SE) change in HbA1c from baseline was -0.91% ± 0.05% (-9.9 ± 0.5 mmol/mol; P < .0001). Significant HbA1c reductions were also observed in the insulin-naïve (mean ± SE change: -1.38% ± 0.09% [-15.1 ± 1.0 mmol/mol]) and insulin-experienced (-0.68% ± 0.05% [-7.4 ± 0.5 mmol/mol]) subgroups (both P < .0001). During the 24-week treatment period, the incidence of confirmed hypoglycaemia (plasma glucose ≤ 3.9 mmol/L) was 39.7% for all hypoglycaemia and 13.3% for nocturnal hypoglycaemia; the incidence of severe hypoglycaemia was low (0.5%). Overall, treatment-emergent AEs (TEAEs) were reported in 126 participants (22.4%), with no serious treatment-related TEAEs.

Gla-300 was effective in improving glycaemic control and had a relatively low risk of hypoglycaemia in people with suboptimally controlled T2D who were insulin naïve or switching from another basal insulin in China.

Insulin replacement therapy is indispensable in the treatment of type 1 and advanced type 2 diabetes. However, insulin's clinical application is challenging due to its narrow therapeutic index. To mitigate acute and chronic risks of glucose excursions, glucose-responsive insulin (GRI) has long been pursued for clinical application. By integrating GRI with glucose-sensitive elements, GRI is capable of releasing or activating insulin in response to plasma or interstitial glucose levels without external monitoring, thereby improving glycemic control and reducing hypoglycemic risk. In this Perspective, we first introduce the history of GRI development and then review major glucose-responsive components that can be leveraged to control insulin delivery. Subsequently, we highlight the recent advances in GRI delivery carriers and insulin analogs. Finally, we provide a look to the future and the challenges of clinical application of GRI.

To perform a participant-level post hoc meta-analysis of Phase 3a trials in type 2 diabetes (T2D) to characterize the hypoglycaemia safety and glycaemic efficacy of once-weekly insulin icodec (icodec).

All ONWARDS 1-5 randomized participants were pooled as overall T2D, insulin-naive, an insulin-experienced subgroups, and by once-daily trial comparator (degludec or glargine U100). The main outcomes included incidence and rates of clinically significant and severe hypoglycaemia. Additional endpoints included change in glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) from baseline and HbA1c target achievement without clinically significant or severe hypoglycaemia.

The meta-analysis comprised 3765 participants (1882 icodec vs. 1883 comparators). In the overall T2D pool, clinically significant hypoglycaemia incidence was similar in the icodec group versus the comparator group (17.9% vs. 16.2%, odds ratio [OR] 1.14, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.94, 1.38); however, rates were low but significantly higher in the icodec group (1.15 vs. 1.00 episodes/participant-year of exposure, estimated rate ratio 1.51 [95% CI 1.24, 1.85]). Fewer severe hypoglycaemic episodes occurred with icodec than with comparators (8 vs. 18). A greater reduction in HbA1c occurred with icodec versus comparators, irrespective of subgroup (estimated treatment difference range [-0.10 to -0.29%]; all p < 0.05). Across subgroups, except for the insulin-experienced subgroup, the odds of achieving HbA1c <53 mmol/mol (7.0%) without clinically significant or severe hypoglycaemia were greater with icodec than with comparators (OR range 1.30-1.55; all p < 0.05).

Icodec was associated with a similar incidence but higher rates of clinically significant hypoglycaemia (equating to one additional hypoglycaemic episode every 6 years) and fewer severe hypoglycaemic episodes versus comparators. Our findings also confirmed the greater efficacy of icodec that was demonstrated in the ONWARDS trial programme.

This study aimed to evaluate glycemic outcomes in subphenotypes of type 2 diabetes (T2D) with HbA1c > 7.0%, previously on basal insulin (pre-BI) alone (≥ 42 U/day) or on basal-bolus therapy (pre-BB), and who were switched to either basal insulin glargine 300 U/mL (IGlar-300) or 100 U/mL (IGlar-100), with or without pre-prandial insulin.

Participants from EDITION 2 (pre-BI, n = 785), and EDITION 1 (pre-BB, n = 792) trials were assigned retrospectively to subphenotypes of T2D: severe insulin deficient diabetes (SIDD), mild age-related diabetes (MARD), mild obesity diabetes (MOD), and severe insulin resistant diabetes (SIRD). Key efficacy and safety parameters were analyzed at baseline, and after 26 weeks, for IGlar-300 and IGlar-100 pooled groups according to subphenotypes. Outcomes were also compared with insulin-naïve subphenotypes on oral antihyperglycemic drugs (OADs) from the EDITION 3 trial (pre-OAD, n = 858).

Pre-BI and pre-BB treated subphenotypes with SIDD had a higher mean HbA1c (8.9% and 9.1%) at baseline compared to those of MARD (7.7% and 7.8%) and MOD (8.1% and 8.2%) and after 26 weeks remained above target HbA1c (7.7% and 8.0%) despite mean glargine doses of 0.7 to 1.0 U/kg/day and pre-prandial insulin use in the pre-BB SIDD subgroup. Pre-BB treated individuals with MARD and MOD achieved lower HbA1c levels (6.9% and 7.2%) than the pre-BI groups (7.3% and 7.5%) despite similar mean FPG levels (123-130 mg/dL). Only 19-22% of participants with SIDD achieved HbA1c < 7.0% compared to 33-51% with MARD and MOD, respectively. Pre-BI and pre-BB treated subphenotypes experienced more hypoglycemia than pre-OAD treated subphenotypes.

Individuals with T2D assigned post hoc to the SIDD subphenotype achieved suboptimal glycemic control with glargine regimens including basal-bolus therapy, alerting clinicians to improve further diabetes treatment, particularly post-prandial glycemic control, in individuals with SIDD.

The objective of this review was to comprehensively present and summarize trends in reported rates of hypoglycemia with one or two times per day basal insulin analogs in individuals with type 2 diabetes to help address and contextualize the emerging theoretical concern of increased hypoglycemic risk with once-weekly basal insulins.Hypoglycemia data were extracted from treat-to-target randomized clinical trials conducted during 2000-2022. Published articles were identified on PubMed or within the US Food and Drug Administration submission documents. Overall, 57 articles were identified: 44 assessed hypoglycemic outcomes in participants receiving basal-only therapy (33 in insulin-naive participants; 11 in insulin-experienced participants), 4 in a mixed population (insulin-naive and insulin-experienced participants) and 9 in participants receiving basal-bolus therapy. For the analysis, emphasis was placed on level 2 (blood glucose <3.0 mmol/L (<54 mg/dL)) and level 3 (or severe) hypoglycemia.Overall, event rates for level 2 or level 3 hypoglycemia across most studies ranged from 0.06 to 7.10 events/person-year of exposure (PYE) for participants receiving a basal-only insulin regimen; the rate for basal-bolus regimens ranged from 2.4 to 13.6 events/PYE. Rates were generally lower with second-generation basal insulins (insulin degludec or insulin glargine U300) than with neutral protamine Hagedorn insulin or first-generation basal insulins (insulin detemir or insulin glargine U100). Subgroup categorization by sulfonylurea usage, end-of-treatment insulin dose or glycated hemoglobin reduction did not show consistent trends on overall hypoglycemia rates. Hypoglycemia rates reported so far for once-weekly basal insulins are consistent with or lower than those reported for daily-administered basal insulin analogs.

Despite the availability of various antihyperglycaemic therapies and comprehensive guidelines, glycaemic control in diabetes management has not improved significantly during the last decade in the real-world clinical setting. Treatment inertia arising from a complex interplay among patient-, clinician- and healthcare-system-related factors is the prime reason for this suboptimal glycaemic control. Also, the key factor leading to inadequate glycaemic levels remains limited communication between healthcare professionals (HCPs) and people with type 2 diabetes (PwT2D). Early insulin administration has several advantages including reduced glucotoxicity, high efficacy and preserved β-cell mass/function, leading to lowering the risk of diabetes complications. The current publication is based on consensus of experts from the South-Eastern European region and Israel who reviewed the existing evidence and guidelines for the treatment of PwT2D. Herein, the experts emphasised the timely use of insulin, preferably second-generation basal insulin (BI) analogues and intensification using basal-plus therapy, as the most-potent glucose-lowering treatment choice in the real-world clinical setting. Despite an increase in the use of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs), the experts urged timely insulin initiation for inadequate glycaemic control in PwT2D. Furthermore, the combination of BI and GLP-1 RA addressing both fasting plasma glucose and post-prandial excursions as a free- or fixed-ratio combination was identified to reduce treatment complexity and burden. To minimise discontinuation and improve adherence, the experts reiterated quality, regular interactions and discussions between HCPs and PwT2D/carers for their involvement in the diabetes management decision-making process. Clinicians and HCPs should consider the opinions of the experts in accordance with the most recent recommendations for diabetes management.

This analysis assessed the cost-effectiveness of insulin glargine 300 units/mL (Gla-300) versus insulin glargine 100 units/mL (Gla-100) in insulin-naïve adults with type 2 diabetes (T2D) inadequately controlled with oral antidiabetic drugs (OADs).

Costs and outcomes for Gla-300 versus Gla-100 from a US healthcare payer perspective were assessed using the BRAVO diabetes model. Baseline clinical data were derived from EDITION-3, a 12-month randomized controlled trial comparing Gla-300 with Gla-100 in insulin-naïve adults with inadequately controlled T2D on OADs. Treatment costs were calculated based on doses observed in EDITION-3 and 2020 US net prices, while costs for complications were based on published literature. Lifetime costs ($US) and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were predicted and used to calculate incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) estimates; extensive scenario and sensitivity analyses were conducted.

Lifetime medical costs were estimated to be $353,441 and $352,858 for individuals receiving Gla-300 and Gla-100 respectively; insulin costs were $52,613 and $50,818. Gla-300 was associated with a gain of 8.97 QALYs and 21.12 life-years, while Gla-100 was associated with a gain of 8.89 QALYs and 21.07 life-years. This resulted in an ICER of $7522/QALY gained for Gla-300 versus Gla-100. Thus, Gla-300 was cost-effective versus Gla-100 based on a willingness-to-pay threshold of $50,000/QALY. Compared with Gla-100, Gla-300 provided a net monetary benefit of $3290. Scenario and sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of the base case.

Gla-300 may be a cost-effective treatment option versus Gla-100 over a lifetime horizon for insulin-naïve people in the United States with T2D inadequately controlled on OADs.

The effectiveness and safety of long-acting insulin glargine U300 (Gla-300), in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) requiring insulin, has not been reported in the Gulf region.

Insulin-naïve patients with T2DM, uncontrolled on OADs, and prescribed Gla-300 were followed up in a 12-month prospective observational study. Gla-300 was titrated to glycemic targets. The primary endpoint (achieving glycemic targets) was evaluated at month 6 of treatment. The need for treatment intensification, safety, and patient-reported outcomes (PRO) were also reported.

The study included 412 patients (61.7% men; age 52.2 ± 11.1 years and T2DM duration 10.7 ± 6.8 years). Almost 50% were on more than 3 OADs, mostly biguanides, sulfonylureas, and dipeptidyl-peptidase-4 inhibitors. Baseline HbA1c level was 9.2% ± 1.1% and targets were set at 6.9% ± 0.4%. Baseline fasting plasma glucose was 11.5 ± 3.8 mmol/l. Fifty-seven patients (13.8%) achieved glycemic targets at month 6, hindered by baseline HbA1c ≥ 10%, frequent co-morbidities, older age, suburban/rural residence, and full-time employment. Levels of HbA1c dropped progressively by 0.96% ± 0.07% (month 3), 1.29% ± 0.08% (month 6), and 1.76% ± 0.06% (month 12). Gla-300 dose was 17.0 ± 9.0 IU/day at baseline, 24.6 ± 9.6 IU/day at month 3, 28.5 ± 9.9 IU/day at month 6, and 30.7 ± 10.7 IU/day at month 12. Three patients experienced non-severe hypoglycemia and a slight decrease in body weight and PROs improved.

In the Gulf, Gla-300 in patients with T2DM uncontrolled on OADs improved glycemic control, with low rates of hypoglycemia and improved PROs. Gla-300 dose up-titration from baseline to month 6 did not, however, result in a vast proportion of patients achieving their pre-determined HbA1c targets.

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03703869.

To compare responses to basal insulin glargine 300 U/ml (IGlar-300) and 100 U/ml (IGlar-100) in newly defined subphenotypes of type 2 diabetes.

Insulin-naive participants (n = 858) from the EDITION 3 trial were assigned to subphenotypes 'Mild Age-Related Diabetes (MARD)', 'Mild Obesity Diabetes (MOD)', 'Severe Insulin Resistant Diabetes (SIRD)' and 'Severe Insulin Deficient Diabetes (SIDD)'. Key variables were analysed at baseline and 26 weeks.

Participants were comprised of MOD 56.1% (n = 481), SIDD 22.1% (n = 190), MARD 18.2% (n = 156) and SIRD 3.0% (n = 26). After 26 weeks a similar decrease in glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) and fasting plasma glucose (FPG) of 16-19 mmol/mol and 1.4-1.7 mmol/L, respectively, occurred in MARD and MOD with both insulins. SIDD had the most elevated HbA1c and FPG (80-83 mmol/mol/11.1-11.4 mmol/L) and reduction in both HbA1c and FPG was greater with IGlar-100 than with IGlar-300 (-18 vs. -15 mmol/mol and -1.6 vs. -1.3 mmol/L, respectively; each p = .03). In SIDD, despite receiving the highest basal insulin doses, HbA1c decline (57-60 mmol/mol/7.3-7.6%) was suboptimal at week 26. In MOD and SIDD lower incidences with IGlar-300 were found for level 1 nocturnal hypoglycaemia [odds ratio (OR) 0.59, 95% confidence intervals (CI) 0.36-0.97; OR 0.49, 95% CI 0.24-0.99]. In addition, fewer level 2 hypoglycaemia episodes occurred at any time with IGlar-300 in SIDD (OR 0.31, 95% CI 0.13-0.77).

Both insulins produce comparable outcomes in type 2 diabetes subphenotypes, but in SIDD, add-on treatment to basal insulin is required to achieve glycaemic targets.

This non-interventional observational study aimed to describe the clinical outcomes of patients with T2DM treated with Gla-300 during the period of Ramadan.

Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) patients who decide to fast during the holy month of Ramadan face several challenges in achieving glycemic control without increasing the risk of hypoglycemia. Insulin glargine-300 (Gla-300) has well-established safety and efficacy in improving glycemic control in multiple randomized clinical trials (RCTs). However, limited evidence is available regarding its safety and effectiveness during fasting.

The objective of this study was to assess the safety and clinical outcomes of insulin glargine-300 (Gla-300) in T2DM patients before, during, and after Ramadan.

We conducted a prospective, observational, non-comparative, multicenter study on patients with T2DM currently treated with Gla-300 who planned to fast and continue on Gla-300 during Ramadan in four countries (Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, and Turkey). The study outcomes included the change in glycemic parameters and incidence of hypoglycemia before, during, and after Ramadan.

One hundred and forty T2DM patients were included. Nearly 61% of the included patients had a duration of diabetes of <10 years. The mean Gla-300 daily doses during the pre-Ramadan, Ramadan, and post-Ramadan periods were 22.2 ±7.4, 20.4 ±7.5, and 22.5 ±4.7 IU, respectively. The mean change values from pre-Ramadan to Ramadan and post-Ramadan were -1.7 ±6.9 IU and 0.5 ±4.7 IU, respectively, among the included patients. The mean HbA1c decreased during the study period initiating from 7.9% ±1.4% pre-Ramadan to 6.9% ±0.4% post-Ramadan. The overall HBA1c target value was 6.9% ±0.4%, while the HbA1c target was achieved by 29 patients (21.9%). The mean fasting blood glucose (FPG) showed a reduction from baseline value in the post-Ramadan period by -0.9 ±2.3 mmol/L. Five patients (3.57%) had symptomatic documented hypoglycemia during Ramadan, and none was considered to have severe hypoglycemia.

Our study showed that insulin Gla-300 maintained the glycemic control of T2DM patients who decided to fast during the holy month of Ramadan without increasing the risk of hypoglycemia. Regular self-monitoring of blood glucose levels during Ramadan is highly recommended to avoid possible complications.

To evaluate the benefit and safety of a switch in the basal insulin protocol to glargine 300 U/ml (Gla-300) on inpatients' overall dysglycemic events. Efficacy and safety data on insulin Gla-300 in the inpatient setting are limited.

Retrospective observational study conducted on 7455 patients admitted to acute care (n = 5414) or geriatric and social healthcare (n = 2041) units of the Regional Hospital of Amposta (Spain) between January 2017 and December 2020 who received basal insulin during hospitalization. Hypo- and hyperglycaemic events were indirectly assessed through hospital pharmacy usage of intravenous glucose and vials of rapid-acting intravenous insulin for 27 months after the switch, and the impact on overall dysglycemic events was analysed.

After protocol implementation, patients were mostly treated with Gla-300 (83.06 % in acute care; and 83.44 % in geriatric and social healthcare), and presented a significant decrease in the use of intravenous insulin (-60.80 %, P = 0.005) and glucose (-62.13 %, P < 0.001), which translated into a significantly reduced overall dysglycemic events (-62.25 %, P < 0.001), with a good safety and tolerability profile.

Overall inpatient dysglycemic events were improved upon the introduction of the new insulin protocol, which calls for the use of Gla-300 as one of the choices of basal insulin for inpatient care.

Insulin icodec is an investigational once-weekly basal insulin analogue for diabetes management.

We conducted a 78-week randomized, open-label, treat-to-target phase 3a trial (including a 52-week main phase and a 26-week extension phase, plus a 5-week follow-up period) involving adults with type 2 diabetes (glycated hemoglobin level, 7 to 11%) who had not previously received insulin. Participants were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive once-weekly insulin icodec or once-daily insulin glargine U100. The primary end point was the change in the glycated hemoglobin level from baseline to week 52; the confirmatory secondary end point was the percentage of time spent in the glycemic range of 70 to 180 mg per deciliter (3.9 to 10.0 mmol per liter) in weeks 48 to 52. Hypoglycemic episodes (from baseline to weeks 52 and 83) were recorded.

Each group included 492 participants. Baseline characteristics were similar in the two groups. The mean reduction in the glycated hemoglobin level at 52 weeks was greater with icodec than with glargine U100 (from 8.50% to 6.93% with icodec [mean change, -1.55 percentage points] and from 8.44% to 7.12% with glargine U100 [mean change, -1.35 percentage points]); the estimated between-group difference (-0.19 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.36 to -0.03) confirmed the noninferiority (P<0.001) and superiority (P = 0.02) of icodec. The percentage of time spent in the glycemic range of 70 to 180 mg per deciliter was significantly higher with icodec than with glargine U100 (71.9% vs. 66.9%; estimated between-group difference, 4.27 percentage points [95% CI, 1.92 to 6.62]; P<0.001), which confirmed superiority. Rates of combined clinically significant or severe hypoglycemia were 0.30 events per person-year of exposure with icodec and 0.16 events per person-year of exposure with glargine U100 at week 52 (estimated rate ratio, 1.64; 95% CI, 0.98 to 2.75) and 0.30 and 0.16 events per person-year of exposure, respectively, at week 83 (estimated rate ratio, 1.63; 95% CI, 1.02 to 2.61). No new safety signals were identified, and incidences of adverse events were similar in the two groups.

Glycemic control was significantly better with once-weekly insulin icodec than with once-daily insulin glargine U100. (Funded by Novo Nordisk; ONWARDS 1 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04460885.).

Type 1 diabetes (T1D) is a chronic autoimmune disease characterized by the destruction of pancreatic β-cells, leading to insulin deficiency. Insulin replacement therapy is the current standard of care for T1D, but it has significant limitations. However, stem cell-based replacement therapy has the potential to restore β-cell function and achieve glycaemic control eradicating the necessity for drugs or injecting insulin externally. While significant progress has been made in preclinical studies, the clinical translation of stem cell therapy for T1D is still in its early stages. In continuation, further research is essentially required to determine the safety and efficacy of stem cell therapies and to develop strategies to prevent immune rejection of stem cell-derived β-cells. The current review highlights the current state of cellular therapies for T1D including, different types of stem cell therapies, gene therapy, immunotherapy, artificial pancreas, and cell encapsulation being investigated, and their potential for clinical translation.

Second-generation basal insulin analogues have been shown to reduce hypoglycemia in several trials and observational studies of select populations; however, it remains unclear whether these results persist in real-world settings. Using self-reported hypoglycemia events, we assessed whether second-generation basal insulin analogues reduce rates of hypoglycemia events (non-severe/severe; overall/daytime/nocturnal) compared to earlier intermediate/basal insulin analogues among people with insulin-treated type 1 or 2 diabetes.

We used prospectively collected data from the Investigating Novel Predictions of Hypoglycemia Occurrence Using Real-World Models (iNPHORM) panel survey. This US-wide, 1-year internet-based survey assessed hypoglycemia experiences and related sociodemographic and clinical characteristics of people with diabetes (February 2020-March 2021). We estimated population-average rate ratios for hypoglycemia comparing second-generation to earlier intermediate/basal insulin analogues using negative binomial regression, adjusting for confounders. Within-person variability of repeated observations was addressed with generalized estimating equations.

Among iNPHORM participants with complete data, N = 413 used an intermediate/basal insulin analogue for ≥ 1 month during follow-up. After adjusting for baseline and time-updated confounders, average second-generation basal insulin analogue users experienced a 19% (95% CI 3-32%, p = 0.02) lower rate of overall non-severe hypoglycemia and 43% (95% CI 26-56%, p < 0.001) a lower rate of nocturnal non-severe hypoglycemia compared to earlier intermediate/basal insulin users. Overall severe hypoglycemia rates were similar among second-generation and earlier intermediate/basal insulin users (p = 0.35); however, the rate of severe nocturnal hypoglycemia was reduced by 44% (95% CI 10-65%, p = 0.02) among second-generation insulin users compared to earlier intermediate/basal insulin users.

Our real-world results suggest second-generation basal insulin analogues reduce rates of hypoglycemia, especially nocturnal non-severe and severe events. Whenever possible and feasible, clinicians should prioritize prescribing these agents over first-generation basal or intermediate insulin in people with type 1 and 2 diabetes.

To investigate the effectiveness, safety, optimal starting dose, optimal maintenance dose range, and target fasting plasma glucose of five basal insulins in insulin-naïve patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library were searched from January 2000 to February 2022. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed and the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE) approach was adopted. The registration ID is CRD42022319078 in PROSPERO.

Among 11 163 citations retrieved, 35 publications met the planned criteria. From meta-analyses and network meta-analyses, we found that when injecting basal insulin regimens at bedtime, the optimal choice in order of most to least effective might be glargine U-300 or degludec U-100, glargine U-100 or detemir, followed by neutral protamine hagedorn (NPH). Injecting glargine U-100 in the morning may be more effective (ie, more patients archiving glycated hemoglobin < 7.0%) and lead to fewer hypoglycemic events than injecting it at bedtime. The optimal starting dose for the initiation of any basal insulins can be 0.10-0.20 U/kg/day. There is no eligible evidence to investigate the optimal maintenance dose for basal insulins.

The five basal insulins are effective for the target population. Glargine U-300, degludec U-100, glargine U-100, and detemir lead to fewer hypoglycemic events than NPH without compromising glycemic control.

People with type 2 diabetes receiving a second-generation basal insulin (BI) analog may be switched to a first-generation formulation for financial reasons or changes in health insurance. However, because second-generation BI analogs have more even pharmacokinetic profiles, longer durations of action (>24 vs. ≤24 hours), and more stable action profiles than first-generation BI analogs, such a change may result in suboptimal treatment persistence and/or adherence. This study compared treatment persistence, treatment adherence, rates of hypoglycemia, and health care resource utilization outcomes in people with type 2 diabetes who either continued treatment with the second-generation BI Gla-300 or switched to a first-generation BI. The study showed that continuing with Gla-300 was associated with a lower risk of discontinuing therapy, fewer emergency department visits, and lower hypoglycemia event rates than switching to a first-generation BI.

To compare the clinical efficacy and safety of glargine-U100 (Lantus/Gla-100) with glargine-U300 (Toujeo/Gla-300) in adult patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) and type 1 diabetes (T1D).

A literature search on Gla-300/Gla-100 in diabetes management was conducted using the MEDLINE/Embase/Cochrane databases from inception to 10 January 2021. Eligible studies considered for inclusion were parallel-design, randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The Cochrane risk-of-bias tool was used to evaluate the quality of the included studies. The random-effects model was applied for interpretation of the results.

Of 5348 records screened, 592 were assessed for eligibility and 15 RCTs were considered for data extraction and meta-analysis (T2D [N = 10; n = 7082]; T1D [N = 5; n = 2222]). In patients with T1D, all safety parameters were comparable between Gla-100 and Gla-300. In T2D, statistically significant differences were observed in favour of Gla-300 over Gla-100 for nocturnal and total hypoglycaemia. For efficacy parameters, a statistically and clinically significant difference favouring Gla-100 in basal insulin dose requirement was observed for both T2D and T1D. Change in HbA1c showed a statistically but not clinically significant reduction with Gla-100 compared with Gla-300 in T1D. Statistically significant but clinically less relevant differences favoured Gla-300 for control of body weight in T1D and T2D and Gla-100 for fasting blood glucose in T2D.

Gla-100 and Gla-300 had comparable efficacy and safety profiles in both T1D and T2D populations. Gla-300 showed a lower risk of nocturnal and total hypoglycaemia, significant in insulin-experienced/exposed patients with T2D. Patients on Gla-300 required significantly more units of insulin daily than the Gla-100 group to achieve equivalent efficacy.

The American Diabetes Association (ADA) "Standards of Care in Diabetes" includes the ADA's current clinical practice recommendations and is intended to provide the components of diabetes care, general treatment goals and guidelines, and tools to evaluate quality of care. Members of the ADA Professional Practice Committee, a multidisciplinary expert committee, are responsible for updating the Standards of Care annually, or more frequently as warranted. For a detailed description of ADA standards, statements, and reports, as well as the evidence-grading system for ADA's clinical practice recommendations and a full list of Professional Practice Committee members, please refer to Introduction and Methodology. Readers who wish to comment on the Standards of Care are invited to do so at professional.diabetes.org/SOC.

This study aimed to evaluate the value and affordability of insulin glargine 300 U/mL (Gla-300) in a budget impact model from a United States (U.S.) payer perspective by leveraging recent real-world evidence (RWE) studies and incorporating the recent insulin price caps where applicable.

An economic model for a hypothetical one million U.S. health-plan population was developed to assess the budgetary impact of therapeutic interchanges in either direction between the two long- and longer-acting basal insulins (BIs) for patients with type 2 diabetes over a three-year model horizon. The utilization of long-acting BIs, longer-acting BIs, biosimilar BIs, and insulin degludec (IDeg-100) were informed by IQVIA data and internal forecasting at Sanofi. The DELIVER-2 and DELIVER-naïve studies provided healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) parameters. In the model base case, 24% of patients switched from long-acting BIs to insulin glargine biosimilars, IDeg-100, and other longer-acting BIs (Gla-300) by projected year 3.

The base case total costs were $10,145 per patient per year (PPPY) in year 3 for the cumulative population. When all patients switched to Gla-300, the total costs in year 3 were $8,799, reflecting a net savings of -$660 PPPY compared to the budget increase of $686 PPPY in the base case. However, the longer-acting to long-acting BIs reversal scenario demonstrated a budgetary decrease of $676 PPPY over the model horizon. The reduction in incremental PPPY cost of $93 was observed using net drug costs rather than wholesale acquisition costs (WAC).

The market shares for years 1-3 were based on expectations supported by the clinicians' expert opinions and were not obtained from real-world data.

The economic value of increased utilization of Gla-300 was driven by the reduction in HCRU, costs and market shares assumptions. Budgetary reductions were achieved by switching patients from long-acting BIs to Gla-300.

To evaluate the real-world effectiveness and safety of insulin glargine 300 U/ml (Gla-300) in achieving glycaemic goals in insulin-naïve people with type 2 diabetes (T2D) in Mexico, Colombia and Peru (Latin America region) in the A Toujeo Observational Study (ATOS).

ATOS was a multicentre, prospective, 12-month observational study, which included 4422 insulin-naïve adults (age ≥ 18 years) with T2D uncontrolled (HbA1c > 7% and ≤11%) on at least one oral antidiabetic drug (OAD) who initiated Gla-300 treatment as per routine practice. The primary endpoint was the percentage of participants achieving their predefined individualized HbA1c goal at month 6. Key secondary endpoints included change from baseline in HbA1c, fasting plasma glucose (FPG), fasting self-monitored blood glucose (SMBG), body weight and incidence of hypoglycaemia.

In this subgroup analysis, a total of 314 participants with T2D received Gla-300. At baseline, mean ± SD age was 56.0 ± 11.6 years, duration of diabetes was 9.7 ± 6.6 years and 65.9% of participants were on at least two OADs. The individualized HbA1c target was achieved by 25.8% of participants (95% confidence interval [CI]: 20.3-31.9) at month 6 and by 35.3% (95% CI: 28.5-42.5) at month 12. Gla-300 treatment improved glycaemic control with meaningful reductions in mean HbA1c, FPG and fasting SMBG. The incidence of hypoglycaemia reported was low and body weight remained stable.

In a real-world setting in the Latin America region, the initiation of Gla-300 in people with T2D uncontrolled on OADs resulted in improved glycaemic control with a low incidence of hypoglycaemia and no change in body weight.

Type 2 diabetes (T2D) is a widely prevalent disease with substantial economic and social impact for which multiple conventional and novel pharmacotherapies are currently available; however, the landscape of T2D treatment is constantly changing as new therapies emerge and the understanding of currently available agents deepens. This review aims to provide an updated summary of the pharmacotherapeutic approach to T2D. Each class of agents is presented by mechanism of action, details of administration, side effect profile, cost, and use in certain populations including heart failure, non-alcoholic fatty liver disease, obesity, chronic kidney disease, and older individuals. We also review targets of novel therapeutic T2D agent development. Finally, we outline an up-to-date treatment approach that starts with identification of an individualized goal for glycemic control then selection, initiation, and further intensification of a personalized therapeutic plan for T2D.

This study assessed comparative effectiveness of glargine 300 U/mL (Gla-300) versus degludec 100 U/mL (Deg-100) in insulin-naïve patients with T2D.

This is a retrospective, multicenter, non-inferiority study based on electronic medical records. All patients initiating Gla-300 or Deg-100 were 1:1 propensity score-matched (PSM). Linear mixed models were used to assess the changes in continuous endpoints. Incidence rates (IR) of hypoglycemia were compared using Poisson's regression models.

Nineteen centers provided data on 357 patients in each PSM cohort. HbA1c after 6 months (primary endpoint) decreased by - 1.70% (95%CI - 1.90; - 1.50) in Gla-300 group and - 169% (95%CI - 1.89; - 1.49) in Deg-100 group, confirming non-inferiority of Gla-300 versus Deg-100. Fasting blood glucose (BG) decreased by ~60 mg/dl in both groups; body weight remained unchanged. In both groups, the mean starting dose was 12U (0.15U/kg) and it was slightly titrated to 16U (0.20U/kg). IR (episodes per patient-months) of BG ≤70 mg/dl was 0.13 in Gla-300 group and 0.14 in Deg-100 group (p=0.87). IR of BG <54 mg/dL was 0.02 in both groups (p=0.49). No severe hypoglycemia occurred.

Initiating Gla-300 or Deg-100 was associated with similar improvements in glycemic control, no weight gain and low hypoglycemia rates, without severe episodes during 6 months of treatment.

Insulin remains a mainstay of treating hyperglycemia in an acute setting. Insulin glargine 300 units/mL (Toujeo, iGlar300) has a different pharmacokinetic profile than 100 units/mL basal insulins, such as insulin detemir (iDet100) and iGlar100. While conversion from iGlar300 to iGlar100 requires a 20% dose decrease, there is currently no recommended interchange from iGlar300 to iDet100.

Compare the incidence of hypoglycemia in patients who received a 1:1 unit interchange from home iGlar300 or iGlar100 to iDet100 while admitted.

A retrospective study was conducted to evaluate adults within a multi-site network admitted between May and December 2019. Patients were included if they received at least one dose of iDet100 following interchange from home iGlar300 or iGlar100. The primary endpoint was the incidence of hypoglycemic events following a 1:1 interchange of iGlar300 vs. iGlar100 to inpatient iDet100. Secondary outcomes include overall hypoglycemic events, time to hypoglycemia, and doses given before hypoglycemia.

Of 615 patients, 394 received a 1:1 unit interchange to iDet100 (52 from iGlar300 and 342 from iGlar100). Incidence of hypoglycemic events was significantly higher in those with a 1:1 interchange from iGlar300 versus iGlar100 (36.5% vs. 18.7%, p = 0.007). Significant differences were observed in overall hypoglycemic events, time to hypoglycemia, and number of doses given before hypoglycemic event.

A 1:1 unit interchange from iGlar300 to iDet100 led to a higher incidence of hypoglycemic events compared to those interchanged from iGlar100. Dose reduction should be considered when transitioning from home iGlar300 to iDet100 in the inpatient setting.

Despite increases in the availability and effectiveness of other therapies, insulin remains an essential treatment for approximately 30 million people with type 2 diabetes worldwide. The development of biosimilars has created the potential for significant health care cost savings and may lead to greater access to basal insulin for vast populations. In this review, we discuss evidence demonstrating equipoise between basal insulin biosimilars and the patented analogs they may replace.

This systematic review aims to present the current evidence base with respect to the initiation and intensification of insulin therapy with glargine 100 U/mL (Gla-100) compared to other insulins in people with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM).

A systematic literature search of PubMed (MEDLINE), EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of controlled clinical trials databases was performed to identify studies published up to September 30, 2020 that compared the effects of Gla-100 to that of other insulin regimens in people with T2DM. Relevant information pertaining to the predefined outcomes of interest was extracted. Glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) change and response rates along with overall hypoglycemia incidence were the primary efficacy and safety outcomes of interest.

Seventy-nine studies (63 interventional and 16 non-interventional) in which Gla-100 was either initiated in previously insulin-naïve patients (n = 57) or used in an intensified regimen (n = 22) were identified and evaluated. In insulin-naïve patients, most studies demonstrated that Gla-100 was significantly better compared with premixed insulins and similar compared with neutral protamine Hagedorn (NPH) insulin, second-generation basal insulins, co-formulations, and other first-generation basal insulins in terms of the primary efficacy parameters. Overall hypoglycemia risk with Gla-100 was significantly lower compared with NPH, premixed, coformulation, and other first-generation basal insulins and significantly higher compared with second-generation basal insulins. In studies with intensified regimens, efficacy outcomes with Gla-100 were significantly better compared with insulin detemir (IDet); similar compared with NPH, second-generation basal insulins, co-formulations; and with premixed insulins. In these studies, overall hypoglycemia risk with Gla-100 was significantly lower compared with IDet and comparable to NPH, premixed insulins, co-formulations, and second-generation basal insulins. In addition, most intensification studies also revealed a significantly lower risk of nocturnal hypoglycemia with Gla-100-based regimens versus NPH and premixed insulins and a significantly greater risk compared to second-generation basal insulins.

The evidence presented in this review suggests that Gla-100 is an effective option for both insulin initiation and intensification strategies used in the management of T2DM.

Newly-defined subgroups of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) have been reported from real-world cohorts but not in detail from randomised clinical trials (RCTs).

T2DM participants, uncontrolled on different pre-study therapies (n = 12.738; 82 % Caucasian; 44 % with diabetes duration > 10 years) from 14 RCTs, were assigned to new subgroups according to age at onset of diabetes, HbA1c, BMI, and fasting C-peptide using the nearest centroid approach. Subgroup distribution, characteristics and influencing factors were analysed.

In both, pooled and single RCTs, "mild-obesity related diabetes" predominated (45 %) with mean BMI of 35 kg/m². "Severe insulin-resistant diabetes" was found least often (4.6 %) and prevalence of "mild age-related diabetes" (23.9 %) was mainly influenced by age at onset of diabetes and age cut-offs. Subgroup characteristics were widely comparable to those from real-world cohorts, but all subgroups showed higher frequencies of diabetes-related complications which were associated with longer diabetes duration. A high proportion of "severe insulin-deficient diabetes" (25.4 %) was identified with poor pre-study glycaemic control.

Classification of RCT participants into newly-defined diabetes subgroups revealed the existence of a heterogeneous population of T2DM. For future RCTs, subgroup-based randomisation of T2DM will better define the target population and relevance of the outcomes by avoiding clinical heterogeneity.

BACKGROUND: People with type 2 diabetes (T2D) who change their basal insulin (BI) may have variable persistence with therapy. Compared with first-generation (long-acting) BI analogs (insulin glargine 100U/mL [Gla-100]; insulin detemir [IDet]), second-generation (longer-acting) BI analogs (insulin glargine 300U/mL [Gla-300]; insulin degludec) have similar glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) attainment and lowered hypoglycemia risk, which could impact treatment persistence. OBJECTIVE: To compare persistence, adherence, health care resource utilization (HRU), and costs for individuals switching from neutral protamine Hagedorn insulin or a first-generation BI analog with either the second-generation BI, Gla-300, or an alternative first-generation BI analog (Gla-100 or IDet). METHODS: We used Optum Clinformatics claims data from adults (aged ≥ 18 years) with T2D who had received BI (neutral protamine Hagedorn, Gla-100, IDet) in the 6-month baseline period, and switched to either Gla-300 or an alternative first-generation BI (Gla-100 or IDet; treatment switch = index date) between April 1, 2015, and August 31, 2019. Participants were followed for 12 months, until plan disenrollment, or until death, whichever occurred first. Cohorts were propensity score matched (PSM) on baseline characteristics. The primary outcome was the proportion who were persistent with therapy at 12 months. Secondary outcomes were adherence (proportion of days covered); change in HbA1c; and all-cause, diabetes-related, and hypoglycemia-related HRU and costs. RESULTS: PSM generated 3,077 participants/group (mean age: 68 years, 52% female). Cohorts were well balanced except for hospitalization, which was adjusted in models as a covariate. During the 12-month follow-up period, participants who received Gla-300 vs first-generation BI had greater persistence with (45.5% vs 42.1%; adjusted P = 0.0001), and adherence to (42.8% vs 38.2%; adjusted P = 0.0006), BI therapy and a statistically larger reduction in HbA1c at 12 months (-0.65% vs -0.45%; adjusted P = 0.0040). The proportion of participants achieving HbA1c less than 8% (47.2% vs 40.9%; P < 0.0001), but not less than 7% (21.2% vs 20.8%), was significantly higher for Gla-300 vs first-generation BI. All-cause (45.3 vs 65.9 per 100 patient-years [P100PY]) and diabetes-related (21.5 vs 29.1 P100PY), but not hypoglycemia-related, hospitalizations (1.0 vs 1.5 P100PY) were significantly (P < 0.0001) lower for Gla-300 vs first-generation BI. Similarly, all-cause (111.9 vs 148.8 P100PY), diabetes-related (54.8 vs 74.2 P100PY), and hypoglycemia-related (2.9 vs 5.7 P100PY) emergency department (ED) visits were significantly lower for Gla-300 (all P < 0.0001). Costs for all-cause hospitalizations and hypoglycemia-related ED visits were significantly lower for Gla-300 vs first-generation BI. Although pharmacy costs were significantly higher for Gla-300 vs first-generation BI, all-cause total health care costs were not significantly different: $41,255 vs $45,316 per person per year, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In this claims-based analysis of people with T2D receiving BI, switching to Gla-300 was associated with significantly better persistence, adherence, and HbA1c reduction compared with switching to an alternative first-generation BI analog. All-cause HRU was significantly lower; despite significantly higher pharmacy costs, total health care costs were similar. DISCLOSURES: This study was funded by Sanofi US. Medical writing support was provided by Helen Jones, PhD, CMPP, of Evidence Scientific Solutions and funded by Sanofi US. Dr Wright is on the speakers' bureau and sits on the advisory boards for Abbot Diabetes, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, and Sanofi; sits on the advisory board for Medtronic; and is a consultant for Abbot Diabetes, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Eli Lilly. Dr Malone is on advisory boards for Novartis and Avalere and consults for Pear Therapeutics, Sarepta, and Strategic Therapeutics. Dr Trujillo sits on advisory boards for Novo Nordisk and Sanofi. Drs Gill, Zhou, and Preblick and Mr Li are employees and stockholders of Sanofi. Mr Huse is an employee of Evidera and a contractor for Sanofi. Dr Reid is a speaker and consultant for Novo Nordisk and Sanofi-Aventis and is a consultant for AstraZeneca and Intarcia.

The clinical benefits of insulin glargine 300 U/mL (Gla-300) have been confirmed in randomised clinical trials (EDITION programme and BRIGHT) and real-world studies in the USA and Western Europe. ATOS evaluated the real-world effectiveness and safety of Gla-300 in wider geographic regions (Asia, the Middle East, North Africa, Latin America and Eastern Europe).

This prospective observational, international study enrolled adults (≥ 18 years) with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) uncontrolled [haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) > 7% to ≤ 11%] on one or more oral anti-hyperglycaemic drugs (OADs) who had been advised by their treating physician to add Gla-300 to their existing treatment. The primary endpoint was achievement of a pre-defined individualised HbA1c target at month 6.

Of the 4550 participants included, 4422 (51.8% female) were eligible for assessment. The mean ± standard deviation (SD) age was 57.2 ± 10.8 years, duration of diabetes was 10.2 ± 6.2 years and baseline HbA1c was 9.28 ± 1.0%. The proportion of participants reaching their individualised glycaemic target was 25.2% [95% confidence interval (CI) 23.8-26.6%] at month 6 and 44.5% (95% CI 42.9-46.1%) at month 12. At months 6 and 12, reductions were observed in HbA1c (-1.50% and -1.87%) and fasting plasma glucose (-3.42 and -3.94 mmol/L). Hypoglycaemia incidence was low, and body weight change was minimal. Adverse events were reported in 283 (6.4%) participants, with 57 (1.3%) experiencing serious adverse events.

In a real-world setting, initiation of Gla-300 in people with T2DM uncontrolled on OADs resulted in improved glycaemic control and low rates of hypoglycaemia with minimal weight change.

Clinicaltrials.gov number NCT03703869.

Appropriate service delivery, access to high quality of cares and optimal management of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) can decrease the risk of micro and macro vascular complications and mortality. Therefore, monitoring the quality of diabetes care, including keeping glycemic levels at an optimal level, is crucial. The aim of this study was to evaluate processes and outcome-related quality of care indicators, in T2DM using retrospective patient-level data from 2013 to 2017 in 15 Tertiary Diabetes Care Centers in Iran.

A retrospective observational study was conducted among 1985 T2DM patients at public, semipublic and private diabetes centers. Annual tests for HbA1c, serum lipid (LDL), and screening for nephropathy were used to evaluate process-related indicators; and intermediate biomedical markers including HbA1c, blood pressure (BP), and LDL cholesterol, were used to assess outcome-related indicators.

Data were extracted from 15 diabetes centers in five provinces in Iran. 62.7% of the patients were female, and the mean duration of diabetes in the patients was 14.7 years. Evaluation of process-related indicators showed that only 9% of patients took the HbA1c test. The percentage of the patients without annual low-density lipoprotein (LDL) test decreased from 13% in 2013 to 7% in 2017. The results of achieving to all indicators concurrently (ABC care) showed that less than 2% of the patients met the criteria of optimal process-related quality indicators. The mean percentage of the patients with HbA1c under 7%, blood pressure (BP) less than 130/80 mmHg, and LDL less than 100 mg^/dl in the selected provinces were 32.4, 55, and 71 respectively. However, the average of total achievement in ABC goals was 14.2%.

Our findings showed that the management of T2DM in all selected provinces was far from the optimal control in both processes and outcome-related indicators and therefore needs serious consideration and improvement.

Type 2 diabetes (T2D) is a progressive disease, with many individuals eventually requiring basal insulin therapy to maintain glycaemic control. However, there exists considerable therapeutic inertia to the prompt initiation and optimal titration of basal insulin therapy due to barriers that include fear of injections, hypoglycaemia, weight gain, and burdensome regimens. Hypoglycaemia is thought to be a major barrier to optimal glycaemic control and is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Newer second-generation basal insulin analogues provide comparable glycaemic control with lower risk of hypoglycaemia compared with first-generation basal insulin analogues. The present review article discusses clinical evidence for one such second-generation basal insulin analogue, insulin glargine 300 U/mL (Gla-300), in the context of hypothetical case studies that are representative of individuals who may attend routine clinical practice. These case studies discuss individualised treatment needs for people with T2D who are insulin-naïve or pre-treated. Clinical characteristics such as older age, frequent nocturnal hypoglycaemia, and renal impairment, which are known risk factors for hypoglycaemia, are also considered.

The health and economic burden of type 2 diabetes (T2D) is of global significance. Many people with T2D eventually need insulin to help reduce their risk of serious associated complications. However, barriers in initiating and/or optimizing insulin expose people with diabetes to sustained hyperglycemia. In this review, we investigate how new and future technologies may provide opportunities to help overcome barriers to insulin initiation and/or optimization.

A focused literature search of PubMed and key scientific congresses was conducted. Software tools and devices developed to support insulin initiation and/or optimization were identified by manually filtering over 300 publications and conference abstracts.

Most software tools have been developed for a smartphone platform. At present, published data suggest that use of these technologies is associated with equivalent or improved glycemic outcomes compared with standard care with additional benefits such as reduced healthcare provider (HCP) time burden and improved diabetes knowledge. However, there remains a paucity of good quality evidence. Most new devices to support insulin therapy help track the dose and timing of insulin use.

New digital health tools may help to reduce barriers to optimal insulin therapy. An integrated solution that connects glucose monitoring, dose recording, titration advice, and records comorbidities and lifestyle factors has the potential to reduce the complexity and burden of treatment and may improve titration and treatment adherence, resulting in better outcomes for people with diabetes.