Dataset Information

Bioequivalence of Ultra Rapid Lispro (URLi) U100 and U200 Formulations in Healthy Subjects.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Ultra rapid lispro (URLi) is a novel insulin lispro formulation that was developed to more closely match physiological insulin secretion. The aims of this study were to demonstrate the bioequivalence (BE) of a concentrated formulation (U200) of URLi to the U100 formulation of URLi after subcutaneous (SC) administration and to evaluate the glucodynamics (GD) of these formulations.

Methods

This phase 1, randomized, two-sequence, four-period, double-blind, replicate crossover study was conducted in 68 healthy subjects. At each dosing visit, subjects received a 15-U SC dose of either U100 URLi or U200 URLi followed by a 10-h euglycemic clamp procedure. Serum insulin lispro and blood glucose concentrations were measured, and the glucose infusion rate was continuously adjusted during the clamp to maintain the target blood glucose.

Results

Bioequivalence of U200 URLi relative to U100 URLi was demonstrated. The 90% confidence intervals (CIs) of the ratios of geometric least squares (LS) means for the maximum insulin concentration and total exposure were within the BE limits of 0.80-1.25. Additionally, the 90% CIs for the ratios of geometric LS means for maximum glucose infusion rate and total glucose infused were within the BE limits. The early 50% t_max occurred at approximately the same time for the U100 and U200 URLi formulations, and the insulin exposure within the first 15 min was similar for both formulations. The tolerability of the two URLi formulations was comparable.

Conclusions

This study demonstrated that the U100 and U200 URLi formulations are bioequivalent. The accelerated insulin absorption observed for the U100 formulation was maintained with the U200 URLi formulation. Further, the GD were similar for both formulations, supporting the ability of individuals to transfer from U100 to U200 URLi in a 1:1 unit conversion.

Trial registration

NCT03616977.

SUBMITTER: Linnebjerg H

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7376802 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionThe PRONTO-T1D study, which evaluated the efficacy and safety of ultra rapid lispro (URLi) versus lispro in adults with type 1 diabetes (T1D), met the primary endpoint of noninferiority of HbA1c change from baseline compared to lispro at 26 weeks. We present results of an additional 26-week treatment phase evaluating long-term efficacy and safety of URLi.MethodsIn this phase 3, treat-to-target study, subjects were randomized to double-blind mealtime URLi, lispro, or open-label postmeal URLi with insulin degludec or glargine for 26 weeks. Subjects in the double-blind URLi (n = 451) and lispro (n = 442) groups continued for another 26 weeks to assess long-term efficacy and safety.ResultsHbA1c increased marginally during the long-term maintenance period (week 26-52) in both groups to 7.47% (URLi) and 7.54% (lispro). At week 52, there were no statistically significant treatment differences in change from baseline HbA1c with a least-squares mean treatment difference (95% confidence interval) of - 0.06% (- 0.16, 0.03). Proportions of patients with HbA1c < 7% at week 52 were similar (URLi, 26.8%; lispro, 24.5%). Self-monitored blood glucose (SMBG) showed that 1-h (9.23 versus 10.14 mmol/L) and 2-h (8.40 versus 9.53 mmol/L) postmeal daily mean glucose was statistically significantly (p < 0.001) lower with URLi than lispro. The rate and incidence of severe, documented, and postprandial hypoglycemia (< 54 mg/dl [3.0 mmol/L]) were similar between treatments, but URLi demonstrated a 31% lower rate in the period more than 4 h after meals, (p = 0.023). Injection site reactions were reported by 3.3% of patients on URLi and 0.9% on lispro. The incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events was similar between treatments.ConclusionOverall glycemic control and improved postprandial glucose via SMBG were maintained after 52 weeks with URLi versus lispro, suggesting that the efficacy of URLi is preserved during long-term treatment in patients with T1D. No long-term safety issues were identified with URLi.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03214367.

Project description:IntroductionTo assess time in range (TIR) (70-180 mg/dL) with postprandial glucose (PPG)-focused titration of ultra rapid lispro (URLi; Lyumjev®) in combination with insulin degludec in people with type 1 diabetes (T1D).MethodsThis phase 2, single-group, open-label, exploratory study was conducted in 31 participants with T1D on multiple daily injection therapy. Participants were treated with insulin degludec and Lispro for an 11-day lead-in and then URLi for a 46-day treatment period consisting of 35-day titration and 11-day endpoint maintenance period. Glucose targets for the titration period were PPG < 140 mg/dL or < 20% increase from premeal, fasting glucose 80-110 mg/dL, and overnight excursion ± 30 mg/dL or less. Participants used the InPen™ bolus calculator and Dexcom G6 continuous glucose monitoring (CGM).ResultsPrimary endpoint mean TIR (70-180 mg/dL) with URLi during the maintenance period was 70.2%. TIR (70-180 mg/dL) and times below/above range were not significantly different with URLi (maintenance) versus lispro (lead-in). HbA1c decreased from 7.1% at screening to 6.8% at endpoint (least squares mean [LSM] change from baseline, - 0.36%; P < 0.001). Fructosamine and 1,5-anhydroglucitol improved (P < 0.001). Mean hourly glucose using CGM was reduced from 8:00 AM to 4:00 PM with URLi. Overall highest PPG excursion across meals was significantly reduced at URLi endpoint compared with lispro lead-in (mean 56.5 vs 72.4 mg/dL; P < 0.001). Insulin-to-carbohydrate ratio (U/X g) was reduced (more insulin given) at breakfast at URLi endpoint vs lead-in (LSM 9.0 vs 9.7 g; P = 0.002) and numerically decreased at other meals. Total daily insulin dose (TDD) was higher at URLi endpoint compared with lispro lead-in (mean 50.2 vs 47.0 U; P = 0.046) with similar prandial/TDD ratio (mean 52.1% vs 51.2%). There were no severe hypoglycemia events during the study.ConclusionsURLi in a basal-bolus regimen focusing on PPG targets demonstrated improved overall glycemic control and reduced PPG excursions without increased hypoglycemia in participants with T1D.Trial registrationClinicalTrial.gov, NCT04585776.

Project description:Background and objectiveA novel tiotropium bromide monodose capsule dry powder inhaler (DPI) formulation and device have been developed. The formulation was based on a spray-dried matrix that enhances the aerosolizaton properties, allowing a less active tiotropium metered dose (13 µg/capsule) while maintaining the same delivered dose (10 µg/actuation). This study describes the pharmacokinetic bioequivalence to the reference product.MethodsThis randomized, two-stage, crossover, semi-replicate (three-way) study was performed in healthy volunteers. In each study period, subjects received a single dose of two capsules (20 μg delivered dose) of the study medication, separated by a 14-day washout period: tiotropium 10 μg delivered dose (Laboratorios Liconsa, Spain) and Spiriva HandiHaler(®) (Boehringer Ingelheim Pharma GmbH & Co KG, Germany). Blood samples were obtained up to 48 h post-dose to evaluate the comparative bioavailability. Tiotropium was measured in plasma by means of dual stage liquid-liquid extraction followed by the two-dimensional ultra-high performance liquid chromatography sensitive sub-pg/mL bioanalytical method. The main pharmacokinetic parameters were maximum plasma concentration (C max), area under the concentration-time curve (AUC) from time zero hours to the last observed concentration at time t (AUC t ), and AUC from time zero hours to 30 min (AUC0.5). Bioequivalence was accepted if the 90.20 % confidence interval (CI) for the ratio test/reference of the primary pharmacokinetic parameters lay within the acceptance range of 80-125 %. Safety assessment was a secondary endpoint.ResultsA total of 30 subjects were randomized and bioequivalence was demonstrated for all primary pharmacokinetic parameters: C max (CI 87.26-106.60 %), AUC t (CI 101.33-111.64 %), and AUC0.5 (CI 97.95-113.49 %). Both study treatments were well tolerated (four non-serious adverse events [AEs] were reported in four subjects: one AE before any product administration, two AEs after test product administration; and one AE after reference product administration).ConclusionsBoth products containing tiotropium 10 µg delivered-dose DPI were bioequivalent and showed good tolerability and a similar safety profile.