When oral agents fail: practical barriers to starting insulin

Korytkowski, Mary T.

doi:10.1038/sj.ijo.0802173

Cited by 381 publications

(282 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

266

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…More specifically, concerns about hypoglycemia risk and weight gain (8,9) often delay insulin initiation for many years, and gastrointestinal adverse events (GI AEs) such as nausea and vomiting make GLP-1 RA intolerable for some patients, prompting low adherence and frequent drug discontinuation (10).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Benefits of LixiLan, a Titratable Fixed-Ratio Combination of Insulin Glargine Plus Lixisenatide, Versus Insulin Glargine and Lixisenatide Monocomponents in Type 2 Diabetes Inadequately Controlled on Oral Agents: The LixiLan-O Randomized Trial

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

OBJECTIVETo evaluate efficacy and safety of LixiLan (iGlarLixi), a novel titratable fixed-ratio combination of insulin glargine (iGlar) and lixisenatide (Lixi), compared with both components, iGlar and Lixi, given separately in type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled on metformin with or without a second oral glucose-lowering drug. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODSAfter a 4-week run-in to optimize metformin and stop other oral antidiabetic drugs, participants (N = 1,170, mean diabetes duration ∼8.8 years, BMI ∼31.7 kg/m 2 ) were randomly assigned to open-label once-daily iGlarLixi or iGlar, both titrated to fasting plasma glucose <100 mg/dL (<5.6 mmol/L) up to a maximum insulin dose of 60 units/day, or to once-daily Lixi (20 mg/day) while continuing with metformin. The primary outcome was HbA 1c change at 30 weeks. RESULTSGreater reductions in HbA 1c from baseline (8.1% [65 mmol/mol]) were achieved with iGlarLixi compared with iGlar and Lixi (21.6%, 21.3%, 20.9%, respectively), reaching mean final HbA 1c levels of 6.5% (48 mmol/mol) for iGlarLixi versus 6.8% (51 mmol/mol) and 7.3% (56 mmol/mol) for iGlar and Lixi, respectively (both P < 0.0001). More subjects reached target HbA 1c <7% with iGlarLixi (74%) versus iGlar (59%) or Lixi (33%) (P < 0.0001 for all). Mean body weight decreased with iGlarLixi (20.3 kg) and Lixi (22.3 kg) and increased with iGlar (+1.1 kg, difference 1.4 kg, P < 0.0001). Documented symptomatic hypoglycemia (£70 mg/dL) was similar with iGlarLixi and iGlar (1.4 and 1.2 events/patient-year) and lower with Lixi (0.3 events/ patient-year). iGlarLixi improved postprandial glycemic control versus iGlar and demonstrated considerably fewer nausea (9.6%) and vomiting (3.2%) events than Lixi (24% and 6.4%, respectively). CONCLUSIONSiGlarLixi complemented iGlar and Lixi effects to achieve meaningful HbA 1c reductions, close to near normoglycemia without increases in either hypoglycemia or weight, compared with iGlar, and had low gastrointestinal adverse effects compared with Lixi.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Benefits of LixiLan, a Titratable Fixed-Ratio Combination of Insulin Glargine Plus Lixisenatide, Versus Insulin Glargine and Lixisenatide Monocomponents in Type 2 Diabetes Inadequately Controlled on Oral Agents: The LixiLan-O Randomized Trial

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…[6][7][8][9] Recent work has focused on documenting delays in initiating insulin or intensifying oral therapy, 8,9 and exploring patient and physician barriers to insulin initiation. [10][11][12] Very little is known about patterns of treatment intensification among individual patients once insulin is initiated. Limited data from studies conducted in the United Kingdom and by Kaiser Permanente Northwest suggest that 75-90 % of patients are persistent with insulin, dose increases are far more common than changes in medications, and glycemic control remains suboptimal.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Trends in Insulin Initiation and Treatment Intensification Among Patients with Type 2 Diabetes

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BACKGROUND: Many patients with type 2 diabetes eventually require insulin, yet little is known about the patterns and quality of pharmacologic care received following insulin initiation. Guidelines from the American Diabetes Association and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes recommend that insulin secretagogues such as sulfonylureas be discontinued at the time of insulin initiation to reduce the risk of hypoglycemia, and that treatment be intensified if HbA1c levels remain above-target 3 months after insulin initiation. OBJECTIVE: To describe pharmacologic treatment patterns over time among adults initiating insulin and/or intensifying insulin treatment. DESIGN: Observational study. SUBJECTS: A large commercially insured population of adult patients without recorded type 1 diabetes who initiated insulin. MAIN MEASURES: We evaluated changes in noninsulin antidiabetic medication use during the 120 days immediately following insulin initiation, rates of increase in insulin dose and/or dosing frequency during the 270 days following an insulin initiation treatment period of 90 days, and rates of insulin discontinuation. KEY RESULTS: Seven thousand, nine hundred and thirty-two patients initiated insulin during [2003][2004][2005][2006][2007][2008], with the majority (61 %) initiating basal insulin only. Metformin (55 %), sulfonylureas (39 %), and thiazolidinediones (30 %) were commonly used prior to insulin initiation. Metformin was continued by 64 % of patients following mixed or mealtime insulin initiation; the continuation rate was nearly as high for sulfonylureas (58 %). Insulin dose and/or dosing frequency increased among 22.9 % of patients. Insulin was discontinued by 27 % of patients. CONCLUSIONS: We found evidence of substantial departures from guideline-recommended pharmacotherapy. Insulin secretagogues were frequently coprescribed with insulin. The majority of patients had no evidence of treatment intensification following

show abstract

“…However, there are barriers to initiating insulin [2,3], including fear of hypoglycemia, fear of multiple injections, and weight gain. The new generation of insulin analogs enables many of these barriers to be overcome but the best method of initiating insulin remains a subject of debate.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Insulin glargine-based therapy improves glycemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes sub-optimally controlled on premixed insulin therapies

Davies¹,

Sinnassamy²,

Storms³

et al. 2008

Diabetes Research and Clinical Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

When oral agents fail: practical barriers to starting insulin

Cited by 381 publications

References 19 publications

Benefits of LixiLan, a Titratable Fixed-Ratio Combination of Insulin Glargine Plus Lixisenatide, Versus Insulin Glargine and Lixisenatide Monocomponents in Type 2 Diabetes Inadequately Controlled on Oral Agents: The LixiLan-O Randomized Trial

Benefits of LixiLan, a Titratable Fixed-Ratio Combination of Insulin Glargine Plus Lixisenatide, Versus Insulin Glargine and Lixisenatide Monocomponents in Type 2 Diabetes Inadequately Controlled on Oral Agents: The LixiLan-O Randomized Trial

Trends in Insulin Initiation and Treatment Intensification Among Patients with Type 2 Diabetes

Insulin glargine-based therapy improves glycemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes sub-optimally controlled on premixed insulin therapies

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About