Pharmacoeconomic analysis of ryzodeg®, a combination of soluble ultra-long-acting human insulin analogue (insulin degludec) and ultra-short insulin analogue (insulin aspart), use in therapy of type 2 diabetes

2015 ◽  
Vol 3 (4) ◽  
pp. 61-66
Author(s):  
A.Yu. Kulikov ◽  
I.V. Novikov
Keyword(s):  
Type 2 Diabetes ◽  
Human Insulin ◽  
Insulin Aspart ◽  
Insulin Analogue ◽  
Pharmacoeconomic Analysis ◽  
Insulin Degludec ◽  
Analogue Insulin ◽  
Long Acting

scholarly journals The Clinical Role of Insulin Degludec/Insulin Aspart in Type 2 Diabetes: An Empirical Perspective from Experience in Australia

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (4) ◽  
pp. 1091
Author(s):  
Sarah J. Glastras ◽  
Neale Cohen ◽  
Thomas Dover ◽  
Gary Kilov ◽  
Richard J. MacIsaac ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Type 2 Diabetes ◽  
Insulin Aspart ◽  
Basal Insulin ◽  
Insulin Degludec ◽  
Dose Titration ◽  
Treatment Intensification ◽  
Clinical Role ◽  
Acting Insulin ◽  
Long Acting

Treatment intensification in people with type 2 diabetes following failure of basal insulin commonly involves the addition of a rapid-acting insulin analogue (basal plus one or more prandial doses; multiple daily injections) or by a switch to premixed insulin. Insulin degludec/insulin aspart (IDegAsp), comprising rapid-acting insulin aspart and ultra-long-acting insulin degludec in solution, enables both fasting and post-prandial glucose control, with some advantages over other treatment intensification options. These include straightforward dose titration, flexibility in dose timing, low injection burden, simplicity of switching and a lower risk of hypoglycaemia. In Australia, where insulin degludec on its own is not available, IDegAsp enables patients to still benefit from its ultra-long-acting properties. This review aims to provide guidance on where and how to use IDegAsp. Specifically, guidance is included on the initiation of IDegAsp in insulin-naïve patients, treatment intensification from basal insulin, switching from premixed or basal-bolus insulin to IDegAsp, up-titration from once- to twice-daily IDegAsp and the use of IDegAsp in special populations or situations.

scholarly journals A nationwide cohort study for comparative vascular safety of long-acting insulin analogue versus intermediate-acting human insulin in type 2 diabetes

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Chun-Ting Yang ◽  
Kuan-Ying Li ◽  
Chen-Yi Yang ◽  
Huang-Tz Ou ◽  
Shihchen Kuo
Keyword(s):  
Type 2 Diabetes ◽  
Human Insulin ◽  
Lower Risk ◽  
Insulin Analogue ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
Research Database ◽  
Usual Practice ◽  
Acting Insulin ◽  
Long Acting

AbstractLittle is known about the comparative vascular safety of basal insulins (intermediate-acting human insulin [IAHI] or long-acting insulin analogue [LAIA]) in type 2 diabetes (T2D). This study sought to examine the vascular and hypoglycemic effects associated with IAHI versus LAIA in real-world patients with T2D. We utilized Taiwan’s National Health Insurance Research Database to identify T2D patients who stably used IAHI (N = 11,521) or LAIA (N = 37,651) in the period 2004–2012. A rigorous three-step matching algorithm that considered the initiation date of basal insulin, previous exposure of antidiabetic treatments, comorbidities, diabetes severity and complications, and concomitant medications was applied to achieve the between-group comparability. Study outcomes, including cardiovascular diseases (CVDs), microvascular diseases (MVDs), and hypoglycemia, were assessed up to the end of 2013. Compared with LAIA, the use of IAHI was associated with greater risks of composite CVDs (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR]: 1.79; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.20–2.67) and hospitalized hypoglycemia (aHR: 1.82; 95% CI 1.51–2.20), but a lower risk of composite MVDs (aHR: 0.88; 95% CI 0.84–0.91). Subgroup and sensitivity analyses showed a consistent trend of results with that in the primary analyses. In summary, although the use of IAHI versus LAIA among T2D patients in usual practice may be associated with a lower risk of MVDs, strategies should be optimized for minimizing the risks of hypoglycemia and CVDs in this population.

scholarly journals Comparison of a soluble co-formulation of insulin degludec/insulin aspart vs biphasic insulin aspart 30 in type 2 diabetes: a randomised trial

2012 ◽  
Vol 167 (2) ◽  
pp. 287-294 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leo Niskanen ◽  
Lawrence A Leiter ◽  
Edward Franek ◽  
Jianping Weng ◽  
Taner Damci ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Type 2 Diabetes ◽  
Insulin Aspart ◽  
Randomised Trial ◽  
Insulin Degludec ◽  
Treat To Target ◽  
Target Trial ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Biphasic Insulin ◽  
Biphasic Insulin Aspart 30

ObjectiveInsulin degludec/insulin aspart (IDegAsp) is a soluble co-formulation of insulin degludec (70%) and insulin aspart (IAsp: 30%). Here, we compare the efficacy and safety of IDegAsp, an alternative IDegAsp formulation (AF: containing 45% IAsp), and biphasic IAsp 30 (BIAsp 30).DesignSixteen-week, open-label, randomised, treat-to-target trial.MethodsInsulin-naive subjects with type 2 diabetes (18–75 years) and a HbA1c of 7–11% were randomised to twice-daily IDegAsp (n=61), AF (n=59) or BIAsp 30 (n=62), all in combination with metformin. Insulin was administered pre-breakfast and dinner (main evening meal) and titrated to pre-breakfast and pre-dinner plasma glucose (PG) targets of 4.0–6.0 mmol/l.ResultsMean HbA1c after 16 weeks was comparable for IDegAsp, AF and BIAsp 30 (6.7, 6.6 and 6.7% respectively). With IDegAsp, 67% of subjects achieved HbA1c <7.0% without confirmed hypoglycaemia in the last 4 weeks of treatment compared with 53% (AF) and 40% (BIAsp 30). Mean fasting PG was significantly lower for IDegAsp vs BIAsp 30 (treatment difference (TD): −0.99 mmol/l (95% confidence interval: −1.68; 0.29)) and AF vs BIAsp 30 (TD: −0.88 mmol/l (−1.58; −0.18)). A significant, 58% lower rate of confirmed hypoglycaemia was found for IDegAsp vs BIAsp 30 (rate ratio (RR): 0.42 (0.23; 0.75)); rates were similar for AF vs BIAsp 30 (RR: 0.92 (0.54; 1.57)). IDegAsp and AF had numerically lower rates of nocturnal confirmed hypoglycaemia vs BIAsp 30 (RR: 0.33 (0.09; 1.14) and 0.66 (0.22; 1.93) respectively).ConclusionsIDegAsp provided comparable overall glycaemic control to BIAsp 30 with a significantly lower rate of hypoglycaemia.

scholarly journals Insulin Degludec, a Novel Ultra-Long-Acting Basal Insulin versus Insulin Glargine for the Management of Type 2 Diabetes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2019 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 835-852 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wenchuan Zhou ◽  
Jinxin Tao ◽  
Xiaodong Zhou ◽  
Hongxia Chen
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Type 2 Diabetes ◽  
Insulin Glargine ◽  
Basal Insulin ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Insulin Degludec ◽  
Long Acting

Insulin degludec, an ultra-long-acting basal insulin, once a day or three times a week versus insulin glargine once a day in patients with type 2 diabetes: a 16-week, randomised, open-label, phase 2 trial

The Lancet ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 377 (9769) ◽  
pp. 924-931 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bernard Zinman ◽  
Greg Fulcher ◽  
Paturi V Rao ◽  
Nihal Thomas ◽  
Lars A Endahl ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Type 2 Diabetes ◽  
Insulin Glargine ◽  
Basal Insulin ◽  
Insulin Degludec ◽  
Phase 2 ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Phase 2 Trial ◽  
Open Label Phase ◽  
Long Acting
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document