Multicenter Evaluation of Ultra-Rapid Lispro Insulin with Control-IQ Technology in Adults, Adolescents, and Children with Type 1 Diabetes.

To evaluate the safety and explore the efficacy of use of ultra-rapid lispro (URLi, Lyumjev) insulin in the Tandem t:slim X2 insulin pump with Control-IQ 1.5 technology in children, teenagers, and adults living with type 1 diabetes (T1D). At 14 U.

Ultra rapid lispro showed greater reduction in postprandial glucose versus Humalog in children, adolescents and adults with type 1 diabetes mellitus.

Aim: This study compared the pharmacokinetics, glucodynamics and tolerability following single subcutaneous doses of ultra rapid lispro (URLi) versus Humalog in children (6-11 years), adolescents (12-17 years) and adults (18-64 years) with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1D).

Materials And Methods: The study was a randomized, two-period, subject- and investigator-blind, crossover design in participants with T1D. Participants received a 0.

Efficacy and safety of ultra-rapid lispro versus lispro in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes: The PRONTO-Peds trial.

Aims: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of ultra-rapid lispro (URLi) versus lispro in a paediatric population with type 1 diabetes (T1D) in a Phase 3, treat-to-target study.

Materials And Methods: After a 4-week lead-in to optimize basal insulin, participants were randomized to double-blind URLi (n = 280) or lispro (n = 298) injected 0 to 2 minutes prior to meals (mealtime), or open-label URLi (n = 138) injected up to 20 minutes after start of meals (postmeal). Participants remained on pre-study basal insulin (degludec, detemir or glargine).

Lilly Insulin Glargine Versus Lantus in Insulin-Naïve and Insulin-Treated Adults with Type 2 Diabetes: A Randomized, Controlled Trial (ELEMENT 5).

Introduction: This study compared the efficacy and safety of similar U-100 insulin glargine products, namely, Lilly insulin glargine (LY IGlar; Basaglar) and the reference insulin glargine product (IGlar; Lantus), used once daily in combination with oral antihyperglycemic medications (OAMs) in adults with type 2 diabetes (T2D).

Methods: ELEMENT 5 was a phase III, randomized, multinational, open-label, treat-to-target, 24-week trial. Participants were insulin naïve (glycated hemoglobin [HbA1c] ≥ 7.

Similar Efficacy and Safety of Basaglar and Lantus in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes in Age Groups (< 65 Years, ≥ 65 Years): A Post Hoc Analysis from the ELEMENT-2 Study.

Introduction: To compare efficacy and safety of Basaglar [insulin glargine 100 units/mL; LY insulin glargine (LY IGlar)] to Lantus [insulin glargine 100 units/mL; SA insulin glargine (SA IGlar)] in older (≥ 65 years) or younger (< 65 years) patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D).

Methods: This subgroup analysis of a phase 3, randomized, double-blind, multinational, 24-week study compared LY IGlar and SA IGlar on several clinical efficacy (change in glycated hemoglobin (A1c), basal insulin dose, weight) and safety outcomes (incidence of adverse events, insulin antibodies, hypoglycemia incidence and rates) in patients either ≥ 65 or < 65 years.

Results: Compared with patients aged < 65 years (N = 542), patients aged ≥ 65 years (N = 214) had a significantly longer duration of diabetes; lower baseline A1c and body weight; and body mass index; and were more likely to report prestudy SA IGlar use.

Clinical Outcomes of Patients with Diabetes Who Exhibit Upper-Quartile Insulin Antibody Responses After Treatment with LY2963016 or Lantus Insulin Glargine.

Introduction: We compared insulin antibody response (IAR) profiles in patients with type 1 diabetes (T1D) or type 2 diabetes (T2D) who received LY2963016 insulin glargine (LY IGlar) or Lantus insulin glargine (IGlar) and evaluated the potential relationship between higher IARs and clinical and safety outcomes with a focus on patients who exhibited antibody responses in the upper quartile.

Methods: Data from ELEMENT-1 (52-week open-label in T1D) and ELEMENT-2 (24-week, double-blind study in T2D) were analyzed. Maximum postbaseline IAR levels and proportions of patients in the upper quartile of maximum antibody percent binding (UQMAPB; patients with maximum postbaseline percent binding in the highest 25% of maximum values observed) were compared for differential treatment effects on clinical efficacy outcomes and incidence of adverse events.

Utilization of a multidisciplinary team for inpatient diabetes care.

Diabetes is often noted as a secondary diagnosis when patients are admitted to the hospital for care. Patients admitted to critical care areas are usually more ill and require aggressive glucose control. Often the education and self-care management skills needed for home management are overlooked until discharge, which can cause an increased length of stay.