Cargando…
The continuing quest for better subcutaneously administered prandial insulins: a review of recent developments and potential clinical implications
The class of rapid‐acting insulin analogues were introduced more than 20 years ago to control postprandial plasma glucose (PPG) excursions better than unmodified regular human insulin. Insulins, lispro, aspart and glulisine all achieved an earlier onset of action, greater peak effect and shorter dur...
Autores principales: | , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Blackwell Publishing Ltd
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7187182/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31930670 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/dom.13963 |
Sumario: | The class of rapid‐acting insulin analogues were introduced more than 20 years ago to control postprandial plasma glucose (PPG) excursions better than unmodified regular human insulin. Insulins, lispro, aspart and glulisine all achieved an earlier onset of action, greater peak effect and shorter duration of action resulting in lower PPG levels and a reduced risk of late postprandial hypoglycaemia. However, the subcutaneous absorption rate of these analogues still fails to match the physiological profile of insulin in the systemic circulation following a meal. Recent reformulations of aspart and lispro have generated a second generation of more rapid‐acting insulin analogue candidates, including fast‐acting aspart (faster aspart), ultra‐rapid lispro and BioChaperone Lispro. These modifications have the potential to mimic physiological prandial insulin secretion better with an even earlier onset of action with improved PPG control, shorter duration of effect and reduced risk of hypoglycaemia. Recent phase 3 trials in type 1 and type 2 diabetes show that faster aspart and ultra‐rapid lispro compared with conventional aspart and lispro, achieved fewer PPG excursions with a small increase in post‐meal hypoglycaemia but similar or marginally superior glycated haemoglobin levels, and suggest the need for parallel optimization of basal insulin replacement. Phase 1 trials for BioChaperone Lispro are equally encouraging with phase 3 trials yet to be initiated. Comparative analysis of the clinical and pharmacological evidence for these new prandial insulin candidates in the treatment of type 1 and type 2 diabetes is the main focus of this review. |
---|