ライフサイエンスコーパス: glargine

1 fsitora or once-daily insulin glargine U100 (glargine).

2 vents, 79 for degludec/liraglutide vs 18 for glargine).

3 the assigned drug (233 given exenatide, 223 glargine).

4 lead to differentiation between insulin and glargine.

5 th lower risks of hypoglycaemia than insulin glargine.

6 group receiving inhaled insulin plus insulin glargine.

7 tments needed was 2 with efsitora and 8 with glargine.

8 (0.05) with 15 mg, versus -1.44% (0.03) with glargine.

9 of action greater than that of Actrapid and Glargine.

10 rash, pruritus, and urticaria) with insulin glargine.

11 icipants randomly assigned to tirzepatide or glargine.

12 confirmed the noninferiority of efsitora to glargine.

13 randomly assigned (1:1) to receive icodec or glargine.

14 than among those who received basal insulin glargine.

15 s reported in 44 (12%) patients with insulin glargine.

16 iptin, saxagliptin, sitagliptin, and insulin glargine.

17 0 mg semaglutide, and five (1%) with insulin glargine.

18 semaglutide, and 26 (7%) assigned to insulin glargine.

19 60 to 1.0 mg semaglutide, and 360 to insulin glargine.

20 milar to subcutaneously administered insulin glargine.

21 .5 mg, dulaglutide 0.75 mg, or daily bedtime glargine.

22 treatment) was lower with efsitora than with glargine (0.50 events per participant-year of exposure w

23 mia was three times higher in patients given glargine (0.9 events per patient per year) than in those

24 -1.45; two trials), and neutral with insulin glargine (0.90, 0.77-1.05; one trial).

25 in HbA(1c) with inhaled insulin plus insulin glargine (-0.68%, SE 0.077, 95% CI -0.83 to -0.53) was s

26 stimated treatment difference versus insulin glargine -0.38% (95% CI -0.52 to -0.24) with 0.5 mg sema

27 up (estimated treatment difference [degludec-glargine] 0.08%, 95% CI -0.05 to 0.21), confirming non-i

28 ride (in 2.2% of the participants) than with glargine (1.3%), liraglutide (1.0%), or sitagliptin (0.7

29 h weight loss compared with weight gain with glargine (-1.4 kg for degludec/liraglutide vs 1.8 kg for

30 [-18.89 to -15.87]) than in those receiving glargine (-1.41% [-1.55 to -1.27], -15.41 mmol/mol [-16.

31 ion was greater with degludec/liraglutide vs glargine (-1.81% for the degludec/liraglutide group vs -

32 exposure; estimated rate ratio [degludec to glargine] 1.07 [0.89 to 1.28]; p=0.48).

33 c plus liraglutide (IDegLira) versus insulin glargine 100 units/mL (IGlar U100) in patients with type

34 -week tirzepatide (5 mg, 10 mg, or 15 mg) or glargine (100 U/mL), titrated to reach fasting blood glu

35 ng assistance) were lower with degludec than glargine (11.1 vs 13.6 episodes per patient-year of expo

36 74.9 [6.7] years; 53% female), 407 018 used glargine, 141 588 used detemir, and 26 402 used NPH insu

37 2.4%); liraglutide, 152 (12.0%); and insulin glargine, 150 (11.9%) (P = .56).

38 ts not on sulfonylureas (tirzepatide 1-3% vs glargine 16%).

39 hospitalizations for hypoglycemia (5194 for glargine, 1693 for detemir, and 460 for NPH insulin, wit

40 re) was lower with tirzepatide (6-9%) versus glargine (19%), particularly in participants not on sulf

41 -1.90) mL/min/1.73 m2 per year; and insulin glargine, -2.02 (95% CI, -2.19 to -1.84) mL/min/1.73 m2

42 ents with uncontrolled diabetes treated with glargine (20-50 U) and metformin (>/=1500 mg/d) with gly

43 f differences across groups); the rates with glargine (26.5 per 100 participant-years) and liraglutid

44 caemia was 25% lower with degludec than with glargine (4.41 vs 5.86 episodes per patient-year of expo

45 stimated treatment difference versus insulin glargine -4.62 kg (95% CI -5.27 to -3.96) with 0.5 mg se

46 etformin only, placebo metformin and insulin glargine, active metformin only, or active metformin and

47 igned to insulin degludec and 157 to insulin glargine; all were analysed in their respective treatmen

48 of 7.1% to 10.5% who were receiving insulin glargine alone or in combination with metformin or piogl

49 hough it reduced new-onset diabetes, insulin glargine also increased hypoglycemia and modestly increa

50 211 patients on inhaled insulin plus insulin glargine and 237 on biaspart insulin were included in pe

51 107 patients on inhaled insulin plus insulin glargine and 85 on biaspart insulin discontinued the tri

52 e and triple doses of the synthetic insulins glargine and degludec currently used in patient therapy

53 Initiation of glargine and detemir use was associated with a reduced r

54 However, glargine and liraglutide were significantly, albeit mode

55 nts with uncontrolled type 2 diabetes taking glargine and metformin, treatment with degludec/liraglut

56 2 x 2 factorial trial of open-label insulin glargine and placebo-controlled metformin in 500 adults

57 er improvement in glycaemic control than did glargine and represents a new treatment option for patie

58 he results of the comparison between insulin glargine and standard care are reported here.

59 ascular outcomes were similar in the insulin-glargine and standard-care groups: 2.94 and 2.85 per 100

60 re allocated to inhaled insulin plus insulin glargine, and 343 to biaspart insulin; 107 patients on i

61 0 mg (n=328, 16%), or 15 mg (n=338, 17%), or glargine, and were included in the modified intention-to

62 s associated with a "biosimilar" for insulin glargine approved in 2015.

63 The glargine arm was excluded from analyses owing to small s

64 receive liraglutide, sitagliptin, or insulin glargine as add-on to metformin.

65 compared with insulin glargine (henceforth, glargine) as first injectable therapy.

66 y outcome was non-inferiority of degludec to glargine, assessed as a reduction in HbA(1c) after 52 we

67 y and safety of insulin degludec and insulin glargine, both administered once daily with mealtime ins

68 tor agonist dulaglutide with that of insulin glargine, both combined with prandial insulin lispro, in

69 er patient-year of exposure for degludec and glargine) but were too low for assessment of differences

70 Unlike glargine, degludec showed strong thermodynamic non-ideal

71 ulin as an additional treatment with insulin glargine demonstrated reductions in HbA1c and body weigh

72 diovascular risk, tirzepatide, compared with glargine, demonstrated greater and clinically meaningful

73 , all of whom were treated with long-acting (glargine, detemir) or neutral protamine Hagedorn (NPH) i

74 protamine Hagedorn [NPH], lispro, glulisine, glargine, detemir, degludec, and aspart), delivery devic

75 week with efsitora and 332.8 U per week with glargine (estimated between-group difference, -43.7 U pe

76 pectively, with insulin degludec and insulin glargine (estimated treatment difference -0.01% points [

77 e, 2.23 for degludec/liraglutide vs 5.05 for glargine; estimated rate ratio, 0.43 [95% CI, 0.30 to 0.

78 year of exposure with efsitora vs. 0.88 with glargine; estimated rate ratio, 0.57 [95% CI, 0.39 to 0.

79 ght gain of 1.15 kg (0.70-1.61) with insulin glargine; estimated treatment difference versus insulin

80 ively, versus 0.83% (0.73-0.93) with insulin glargine; estimated treatment difference versus insulin

81 .4 kg for degludec/liraglutide vs 1.8 kg for glargine; ETD, -3.20 kg [95% CI, -3.77 to -2.64],P < .00

82 betes were randomized to 3 months of insulin glargine followed by 9 months of metformin, or 12 months

83 We investigated 1) the ability of purified glargine (GLA), metabolites 1 (M1) and 2 (M2), IGF-I, an

84 were randomized to the EXE group or insulin glargine (GLAR) control group for a total treatment peri

85 on with another long-acting insulin, insulin glargine (GLAR), DET led to more prolonged increases in

86 pies were insulin glargine U-100 (hereafter, glargine), glimepiride, liraglutide, and sitagliptin.

87 disease, with 1.9, 1.9, 1.4, and 2.0 in the glargine, glimepiride, liraglutide, and sitagliptin grou

88 Addition of insulin glargine, glimepiride, liraglutide, or sitagliptin to me

89 in participants randomly assigned to insulin glargine, glimepiride, liraglutide, or sitagliptin, adde

90 ntly lower in the degludec group than in the glargine group (128+/-56 vs. 136+/-57 mg per deciliter,

91 patients [15%]) was the same as that in the glargine group (33 [15%]).

92 udy medication) and two (<1%) in the insulin glargine group (both cardiovascular death).

93 y 1.1% in the degludec group and 1.2% in the glargine group (estimated treatment difference [degludec

94 the degludec group and in 356 (9.3%) in the glargine group (hazard ratio, 0.91; 95% confidence inter

95 exenatide group versus -0.81% (0.07) in the glargine group (least-squares mean difference -0.20%, SE

96 an weight increased by 1.6 kg in the insulin-glargine group and fell by 0.5 kg in the standard-care g

97 brillation; and an unknown cause (n=3 in the glargine group).

98 (icodec group, 0.53 events per patient-year; glargine group, 0.46 events per patient-year; estimated

99 confidence interval [CI], 0.9 to 1.3) in the glargine group, 1.1 (95% CI, 0.9 to 1.4) in the glimepir

100 the degludec group and in 252 (6.6%) in the glargine group, for an absolute difference of 1.7 percen

101 dec group and -1.15 percentage points in the glargine group, to estimated means of 6.69% and 6.87%, r

102 s 8.09% in the icodec group and 7.96% in the glargine group.

103 degludec/liraglutide group and 8.2% for the glargine group.

104 0.75 mg group, and 54 (18%) patients in the glargine group.

105 degludec/liraglutide group vs -1.13% for the glargine group; estimated treatment difference [ETD], -0

106 similar in the insulin degludec and insulin glargine groups (42.54 vs 40.18 episodes per patient-yea

107 similar for the insulin degludec and insulin glargine groups.

108 lucose levels for more than 6 years, insulin glargine had a neutral effect on cardiovascular outcomes

109 e not increased on tirzepatide compared with glargine (hazard ratio 0.74, 95% CI 0.51-1.08).

110 natide once weekly was compared with insulin glargine (henceforth, glargine) as first injectable ther

111 imes a week (IDeg 3TW) to once-daily insulin glargine (IGlar OD).

112 rovide similar treatment outcomes to insulin glargine in a phase 2a clinical trial.

113 receptor agonist tirzepatide versus insulin glargine in adults with type 2 diabetes and high cardiov

114 tirzepatide 10 mg or 15 mg, or both, versus glargine in HbA(1c) change from baseline to 52 weeks.

115 ty of insulin degludec compared with insulin glargine in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

116 clinical development, compared with insulin glargine in patients with type 2 diabetes who were inade

117 -dose regimen, was noninferior to once-daily glargine in reducing glycated hemoglobin levels.

118 mic control comparable to once-daily insulin glargine in type 2 diabetes patients.

119 insulin lispro, both in addition to insulin glargine, in HbA1c change from baseline at week 52 (noni

120 11 to 1.85), mainly increasing 5 years after glargine initiation (HR, 2.23; 95% CI, 1.32 to 3.77) and

121 Insulin glargine, insulin detemir, and NPH insulin.

122 or active comparators (glimepiride, insulin glargine, insulin lispro, liraglutide, pioglitazone, or

123 d through the Outcome Reduction With Initial Glargine Intervention (ORIGIN) trial.

124 the completed Outcome Reduction With Initial Glargine Intervention trial were assayed for 284 biomark

125 Conclusion Long-term use of insulin glargine is associated with an increased risk of breast

126 centage points) and from 8.28% to 7.08% with glargine (least-squares mean change, -1.16 percentage po

127 appeared to be an even greater benefit with glargine, liraglutide, and glimepiride than with sitagli

128 ction in diabetic rats, insulin- and insulin glargine-loaded nanoparticles of diverse morphologies ha

129 y outcome was non-inferiority of degludec to glargine measured by change in HbA(1c) from baseline to

130 , 50 U of degludec/1.8 mg of liraglutide) or glargine (n = 279; no maximum dose), with twice-weekly t

131 ries 65 years or older who initiated insulin glargine (n = 407 018), insulin detemir (n = 141 588), o

132 31 January 2019: metformin (n = 8), insulin glargine (n = 6), short-acting insulin (n = 2), sitaglip

133 mg (n=295), dulaglutide 0.75 mg (n=293), or glargine (n=296).

134 9%) were more frequent with tirzepatide than glargine (nausea 2%, diarrhoea 4%, decreased appetite <1

135 nists were more frequent with exenatide than glargine (nausea: 36 [15%] of 233 patients vs five [2%]

136 re is currently no strong rationale favoring glargine, neutral protamine Hagedorn insulin, insulin de

137 60 deaths (n=25 [3%] tirzepatide; n=35 [4%] glargine) occurred during the study.

138 dy of Tirzepatide Once a Week Versus Insulin Glargine Once a Day in Participants With Type 2 Diabetes

139 :1) to receive either sitagliptin plus basal glargine once daily (the sitagliptin-basal group) or a b

140 n-basal group) or a basal-bolus regimen with glargine once daily and rapid-acting insulin lispro or a

141 ine) and basal insulin (for example, insulin glargine or insulin detemir), the analogues simulate phy

142 placebo daily and to receive either insulin glargine or standard care.

143 inhaled insulin powder plus bedtime insulin glargine; or twice daily premixed biaspart insulin (70%

144 mg semaglutide versus 38 (11%) with insulin glargine (p=0.0021 and p=0.0202 for 0.5 mg and 1.0 mg se

145 al US sales and net prices for all 3 insulin glargine products from quarter 1 of 2010 through quarter

146 for 0.5 mg and 1.0 mg semaglutide vs insulin glargine, respectively).

147 y, in comparison to free insulin and insulin glargine, respectively.

148 ec/liraglutide compared with up-titration of glargine resulted in noninferior HbA1c levels, with seco

149 inistration of marketed long-acting insulin, glargine, resulted in fluctuating blood glucose levels b

150 Bedtime use of insulin glargine results in fewer episodes of nighttime hypoglyc

151 INTERPRETATION: Compared with insulin glargine, semaglutide resulted in greater reductions in

152 se-escalation regimen) or once-daily insulin glargine (starting dose 10 IU per day, then titrated wee

153 once-daily subcutaneous insulin degludec or glargine, stratified by previous insulin regimen, via a

154 aemic events on inhaled insulin plus insulin glargine than on biaspart insulin.

155 o receive insulin glargine U-100 (hereafter, glargine), the sulfonylurea glimepiride, the glucagon-li

156 (2 mg subcutaneous injection) or once-daily glargine (titrated to target) to be given in addition to

157 short-acting insulin and long-acting insulin glargine to nanoparticles resulted in extended hypoglyce

158 d type 2 diabetes who were receiving insulin glargine treatment.

159 The randomly assigned therapies were insulin glargine U-100 (hereafter, glargine), glimepiride, lirag

160 mly assigned participants to receive insulin glargine U-100 (hereafter, glargine), the sulfonylurea g

161 insulin degludec (3818 patients) or insulin glargine U100 (3819 patients) once daily between dinner

162 ment period were similar for efsitora versus glargine U100 (6.6 vs 5.9 events per patient-year of exp

163 s significantly higher with icodec than with glargine U100 (71.9% vs. 66.9%; estimated between-group

164 ), showing non-inferiority for icodec versus glargine U100 (estimated treatment difference 0.02 perce

165 t 52 weeks was greater with icodec than with glargine U100 (from 8.50% to 6.93% with icodec [mean cha

166 ekly icodec compared with once-daily insulin glargine U100 (glargine U100) in individuals with long-s

167 e once-weekly efsitora or once-daily insulin glargine U100 (glargine).

168 udec vs 2.4% (95% CI, 1.1%-3.7%) for insulin glargine U100 (McNemar P = .35; risk difference, -0.8% [

169 e-daily insulin degludec followed by insulin glargine U100 (n = 249) or to receive insulin glargine U

170 e-daily insulin degludec followed by insulin glargine U100 (n = 361) or to receive insulin glargine U

171 ere randomly assigned to efsitora (n=365) or glargine U100 (n=365).

172 centage points] and from 8.44% to 7.12% with glargine U100 [mean change, -1.35 percentage points]); t

173 0.16 events per person-year of exposure with glargine U100 at week 52 (estimated rate ratio, 1.64; 95

174 to receive once-weekly icodec or once-daily glargine U100 combined with 2-4 daily bolus insulin aspa

175 largine U100 (n = 249) or to receive insulin glargine U100 followed by insulin degludec (n = 252) and

176 largine U100 (n = 361) or to receive insulin glargine U100 followed by insulin degludec (n = 360) and

177 ne 8.29%) and -1.18 percentage points in the glargine U100 group (baseline 8.31%), showing non-inferi

178 in the insulin degludec than in the insulin glargine U100 group experienced severe hypoglycemia duri

179 s 2462.7 episodes per 100 PYE in the insulin glargine U100 group for a rate ratio (RR) of 0.89 (95% C

180 oup and 167 (57%) of 291 participants in the glargine U100 group had an adverse event.

181 vs 428.6 episodes per 100 PYE in the insulin glargine U100 group, for an RR of 0.64 (95% CI, 0.56-0.7

182 ra group and -1.00 percentage points for the glargine U100 group, indicating non-inferiority of efsit

183 and 7.18 (0.05; 55.0 mmol/mol [0.51]) in the glargine U100 group.

184 group and 23 (6%) of 365 participants in the glargine U100 group.

185 nd 8.18% (0.04; 65.9 mmol/mol [0.47]) in the glargine U100 group.

186 f once-weekly efsitora compared with insulin glargine U100 in adults with type 2 diabetes treated wit

187 y significant or severe hypoglycaemia versus glargine U100 in participants with type 2 diabetes treat

188 n icodec as compared with once-daily insulin glargine U100 in patients who had not previously receive

189 r rate of hypoglycemia compared with insulin glargine U100 in patients with type 2 diabetes.

190 ofile similar to those of once-daily insulin glargine U100 in patients with type 2 diabetes.

191 gludec is noninferior or superior to insulin glargine U100 in reducing the rate of symptomatic hypogl

192 ' treatment with insulin degludec vs insulin glargine U100 resulted in a reduced rate of overall symp

193 ' treatment with insulin degludec vs insulin glargine U100 resulted in a reduced rate of overall symp

194 1 [50%] to icodec treatment and 291 [50%] to glargine U100 treatment).

195 hypoglycemia for insulin degludec vs insulin glargine U100 were 185.6 vs 265.4 episodes per 100 patie

196 ypoglycemia with insulin degludec vs insulin glargine U100 were 55.2 vs 93.6 episodes/100 PYE (rate r

197 hypoglycemia for insulin degludec vs insulin glargine U100 were also seen for the full treatment peri

198 pared with once-daily insulin glargine U100 (glargine U100) in individuals with long-standing type 2

199 were randomly assigned (1:1) to efsitora or glargine U100, both with prandial insulin lispro.

200 pp or OD analogue (insulin degludec, insulin glargine U100, or insulin glargine U300).

201 ted in 25 (9%) of 291 participants receiving glargine U100.

202 occurrence was similar between efsitora and glargine U100.

203 insulin icodec than with once-daily insulin glargine U100.

204 hypoglycaemic rates compared with once-daily glargine U100.

205 -weekly insulin icodec or once-daily insulin glargine U100.

206 ndicating non-inferiority of efsitora versus glargine U100.

207 degludec, insulin glargine U100, or insulin glargine U300).

208 ycemia compared with NPH insulin use (HR for glargine vs NPH insulin, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.63-0.80; HR, de

209 The adjusted mean difference versus glargine was -0.22% (95% CI -0.38 to -0.07, -2.40 mmol/m

210 The estimated treatment difference versus glargine was -0.99% (multiplicity adjusted 97.5% CI -1.1

211 Compared with NPH insulin, insulin glargine was associated with an increased risk of breast

212 n velocity in the analytical ultracentrifuge glargine was shown to be primarily dimeric under solvent

213 Insulin glargine was the most frequently used insulin from 2016

214 Doses of glargine were adjusted weekly or more often according to

215 ated degludec and 248 (99%) of 251 allocated glargine were included in the full analysis set (mean ag

216 ts, arising more often with dulaglutide than glargine, were nausea, diarrhoea, and vomiting.

217 vascular events, degludec was noninferior to glargine with respect to the incidence of major cardiova

218 rance, or type 2 diabetes to receive insulin glargine (with a target fasting blood glucose level of <

219 formin only, or active metformin and insulin glargine) with dose titration targeting fasting blood gl

220 ion sequence, to insulin degludec or insulin glargine without stratification by use of a central inte