Dataset Information

InRange: Comparison of the Second-Generation Basal Insulin Analogues Glargine 300 U/mL and Degludec 100 U/mL in Persons with Type 1 Diabetes Using Continuous Glucose Monitoring-Study Design.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Suboptimal glycaemic control among people with type 1 diabetes (T1D) is known to lead to long-term micro- and macrovascular complications and, unfortunately, it is still prevalent even in the most affluent societies. Although glycated haemoglobin monitoring is considered to be the gold standard for assessing glycaemic control, such monitoring is unable to reliably measure acute glycaemic excursions. Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) has been shown to improve glucose control and reduce the incidence of hypoglycaemia, and also allow a more complete assessment of overall glycaemic control and hyper- and hypoglycaemic excursions. The use of CGM has led to time-in-range, which is the time that a patient is within the glycaemic range of 70 to 180 mg/dL, to be adopted as a treatment target. To date, only limited data comparing the second-generation insulins glargine 300 U/mL (Gla-300) and degludec 100 U/mL (IDeg-100) in people with T1D are available, and there is no CGM literature on comparisons of the use of CGM results to assess primary, secondary and tertiary endpoints. The aim of the InRange study was to address this unmet need.

Methods

InRange is a multicentre, randomised, active-controlled, parallel-group, 12-week, open-label, phase 4, comparative study. Adults with T1D will be randomised to receive once-daily Gla-300 or IDeg-100 by subcutaneous injection in the morning. Following an 8-week titration period, CGM data will be collected over 20 consecutive days.

Planned outcomes

The primary objective is to demonstrate that Gla-300 is noninferior to IDeg-100 in terms of glycaemic control [time-in-range ≥ 70 to ≤ 180 mg/dL (≥ 3.9 to ≤ 10 mmol/L)] and variability, as assessed using CGM, in adults with T1D. The results are expected to help confirm the utility of CGM in clinical practice in this population and provide insight into its application as an outcome measure in clinical practice.

Trial registration

NCT04075513.

SUBMITTER: Battelino T

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7136362 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionFollowing pivotal trials, real-world evidence is important to assess the impact of new drugs in everyday clinical practice. The RESTORE-1 study aimed to compare effectiveness and safety of the second-generation basal insulins (2BI), i.e., insulin glargine 300 U/ml (Gla-300) vs. degludec 100 U/ml (IDeg-100), in type 1 diabetes (T1D).MethodsRetrospective, non-inferiority, multicenter study, based on electronic medical records. All patients switching to Gla-300 or IDeg-100 from first-generation basal insulins (1BI) were 1:1 propensity score matched (PSM). Changes during 6 months in HbA1c (primary endpoint), fasting plasma glucose (FPG), body weight, and insulin doses were assessed using linear mixed models for repeated measures. Incidence rates (IR) of hypoglycemic events were assessed.ResultsOverall, 19 centers provided data on 585 patients in each PSM cohort. For both groups, statistically significant reductions in HbA1c from baseline to 6 months were documented: - 0.20%; (95% CI - 0.32; - 0.08) in the Gla-300 group and - 0.14%; (95% CI - 0.24; - 0.04) in the IDeg-100 group. The non-inferiority of Gla-300 vs. IDeg-100 was confirmed (non-inferiority margin of 0.30%; upper 95% CI at 6 months, 0.09%). No statistically significant between-group differences emerged in FPG and body weight. Dose changes of basal and short-acting insulin were small in both groups, but higher in the Gla-300 group than in the Deg-100 group (p < 0.006). Incidence rates (IR) of hypoglycemia (blood glucose ≤ 70 mg/dl and < 54 mg/dl) during the 6-month follow-up by treatment were slightly lower in the Gla-300 group than in the Deg-100 group [IR ratios 0.82 (95% CI 0.55; 1.22) and 0.83; (95% CI 0.38; 1.83), respectively]. Hypoglycemic events (blood glucose < 54 mg/dl) decreased at 6 months in both groups (p = 0.01 for Gla-300 and p < 0.001 for IDeg-100). There were no severe hypoglycemic events for Gla-300 and seven events for IDeg-100 (p = 0.02).ConclusionsSwitching from 1BI to 2BI in adults with T1D was associated with similar improvements in glycemic control and overall significant decrease in hypoglycemia, with no severe events with Gla-300. Effectiveness of both insulins was limited by under-titration.

Project description:IntroductionNew insulin glargine 300 U mL(-1) (Gla-300) is a basal insulin that shows more stable and prolonged pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic profiles than insulin glargine 100 U mL(-1) (Gla-100). This study used continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) to compare 24-h glucose profiles in a Japanese population using Gla-300 versus Gla-100.MethodsThis was an exploratory 8.4-week, single-center, 2-sequence, 2-period, open-label crossover study. Japanese adults with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) treated with basal-bolus insulin, with glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) 6.5-10.0% and median fasting self-monitored plasma glucose concentration ≤13 mmol L(-1), were randomized to Gla-300 followed by Gla-100 (subgroup 1) or vice versa (subgroup 2), with no washout period. CGM was performed on the last 3 days of the screening period and each treatment period. Primary endpoint was comparison of 24-h glucose variability (area under the curve [AUC]mean_24 h) on the second day of each CGM measurement with Gla-300 versus Gla-100. Baseline and end of treatment period values for HbA1c, fasting plasma glucose (FPG) and daily basal/mealtime insulin doses were recorded. Hypoglycemia and adverse events (AEs) were recorded.ResultsTwenty participants were randomized (10 to subgroup 1 and 10 to subgroup 2). Participants showed comparable glucose variability over 24 h (AUCmean_24 h during treatment with Gla-300 or Gla-100 (treatment ratio 0.96; 90% confidence interval 0.79, 1.16). HbA1c and FPG were generally stable across both treatment periods. There was a trend towards fewer participants experiencing ≥1 hypoglycemia event at any time (24 h) and at night (00:00-05:59 h) with Gla-300 versus Gla-100. Treatment-emergent AEs, reported by 9/20 (45%) and 4/20 (20%) participants during Gla-300 and Gla-100 treatment, respectively, were unrelated to study medication.ConclusionsIn this cohort of Japanese people with T1DM, no between-treatment difference was observed in glucose variability with Gla-300 versus Gla-100, as measured by CGM. There was a trend for less hypoglycemia with Gla-300, particularly at night, versus Gla-100. Both treatments were well tolerated.FundingSanofi, Tokyo, Japan.Clinical trial registrationNCT01676233, ClinicalTrials.gov.