Heise T, Hövelmann U, Brøndsted L, Adrian C L, Nosek L, Haahr H
Profil, Neuss, Germany.
Novo Nordisk A/S, Søborg, Denmark.
Diabetes Obes Metab. 2015 Jul;17(7):682-8. doi: 10.1111/dom.12468. Epub 2015 May 8.
To evaluate the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of faster-acting insulin aspart and insulin aspart in a randomized, single-centre, double-blind study.
Fifty-two patients with type 1 diabetes (mean age 40.3 years) received faster-acting insulin aspart, insulin aspart, or another faster aspart formulation (not selected for further development), each as a single 0.2 U/kg subcutaneous dose, under glucose-clamp conditions, in a three-way crossover design (3-12 days washout between dosing).
Faster-acting insulin aspart had a faster onset of exposure compared with insulin aspart, shown by a 57% earlier onset of appearance [4.9 vs 11.2 min; ratio 0.43, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.36; 0.51], a 35% earlier time to reach 50% maximum concentration (20.7 vs 31.6 min; ratio 0.65, 95% CI 0.59; 0.72) and a greater early exposure within 90 min after dosing. The greatest difference occurred during the first 15 min, when area under the serum insulin aspart curve was 4.5-fold greater with faster-acting insulin aspart than with insulin aspart. Both treatments had a similar time to maximum concentration, total exposure and maximum concentration. Faster-acting insulin aspart had a significantly greater glucose-lowering effect within 90 min after dosing [largest difference: area under the curve for the glucose infusion rate (AUC(GIR), 0-30 min) ratio 1.48, 95% CI 1.13; 2.02] and 17% earlier time to reach 50% maximum glucose infusion rate (38.3 vs 46.1 min; ratio 0.83, 95% CI 0.73; 0.94). The primary endpoint (AUC(GIR, 0-2 h)) was 10% greater for faster-acting insulin aspart, but did not reach statistical significance (ratio 1.10, 95% CI 1.00; 1.22). Both treatments had similar total and maximum glucose-lowering effects, indicating similar overall potency.
Faster-acting insulin aspart was found to have earlier onset and higher early exposure than insulin aspart, and a greater early glucose-lowering effect, with similar potency.
在一项随机、单中心、双盲研究中评估速效门冬胰岛素和门冬胰岛素的药代动力学和药效学。
52例1型糖尿病患者(平均年龄40.3岁)在葡萄糖钳夹条件下,采用三交叉设计(给药间隔3 - 12天洗脱期),接受速效门冬胰岛素、门冬胰岛素或另一种速效门冬胰岛素制剂(未被选入进一步研发),均皮下注射单剂量0.2 U/kg。
与门冬胰岛素相比,速效门冬胰岛素起效更快,表现为出现时间提前57%[4.9分钟对11.2分钟;比值0.43,95%置信区间(CI)0.36;0.51],达到最大浓度50%的时间提前35%(20.7分钟对31.6分钟;比值0.65,95% CI 0.59;0.72),给药后90分钟内早期暴露量更大。最大差异出现在给药后的前15分钟,此时速效门冬胰岛素的血清门冬胰岛素曲线下面积比门冬胰岛素大4.5倍。两种治疗的达峰时间、总暴露量和最大浓度相似。速效门冬胰岛素在给药后90分钟内具有显著更大的降糖效果[最大差异:葡萄糖输注速率曲线下面积(AUC(GIR),0 - 30分钟)比值1.48,95% CI 1.13;2.02],达到最大葡萄糖输注速率50%的时间提前17%(38.3分钟对46.1分钟;比值0.83,95% CI 0.73;0.94)。速效门冬胰岛素的主要终点(AUC(GIR, 0 - 2小时))比门冬胰岛素高10%,但未达到统计学显著性(比值1.10,95% CI 1.00;1.22)。两种治疗的总降糖效果和最大降糖效果相似,表明总体效力相似。
发现速效门冬胰岛素比门冬胰岛素起效更早、早期暴露更高,且早期降糖效果更大,效力相似。