-
Expert Opinion on Pharmacotherapy Feb 2012Insulin lispro protamine suspension (ILPS) is a protamine-based insulin lispro formulation that allows 24-h coverage while limiting the number of daily injections. ILPS... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Insulin lispro protamine suspension (ILPS) is a protamine-based insulin lispro formulation that allows 24-h coverage while limiting the number of daily injections. ILPS was developed to be the basal insulin component of premixed biphasic formulations with insulin lispro, i.e., the lispro/ILPS 25/75 and 50/50 mixed compounds, but has recently also been marketed as a basal insulin analog formulation, with an indication for the therapy of diabetic patients.
AREAS COVERED
This article reviews the available literature on pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics (PK/PD), efficacy and safety of ILPS administered as basal insulin, or in premixed biphasic formulations, in patients with type 1 and type 2 diabetes mellitus.
EXPERT OPINION
The results of this review suggest that ILPS may be associated with a favorable time-action profile, basal and postprandial glycemic control, and efficacy in terms of rates of patients reaching glycosylated hemoglobin targets; an increased risk of hypoglycemic episodes, compared to other basal insulins, seems to be related to the percentage of patients upgrading from once- to twice-daily injections. This increased risk might be linked with the concomitant use of insulin secretagogues in patients on higher daily dosages and is generally not observed in patients using one injection of ILPS a day. Thus, ILPS can be considered a valid option both as basal insulin and as basal component of the actual premixed formulations of lispro for the therapy of diabetic patients.
Topics: Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Humans; Hypoglycemic Agents; Insulin Lispro; Suspensions
PubMed: 22242803
DOI: 10.1517/14656566.2012.650862 -
Canadian Journal of Anaesthesia =... May 2015Heparin anticoagulation followed by protamine reversal is commonly used in cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) cardiac procedures, but this strategy has some limitations. The... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
Heparin anticoagulation followed by protamine reversal is commonly used in cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) cardiac procedures, but this strategy has some limitations. The primary objective of this study was to determine the reliable alternatives for anticoagulation during CPB for cardiac surgery. For each drug proposed, the secondary objectives were to outline the main advantages and disadvantages, to propose a therapeutic protocol, and to provide a cost-benefit analysis.
SOURCE
A systematic review of the literature was performed between September 2012 and December 2013. It was based on the protocol established by the "Cochrane collaboration Handbook". Twenty articles were analyzed. The Thériaque database from the University Hospital of Grenoble made the economic analysis possible.
PRINCIPAL FINDINGS
Seven alternative anticoagulation strategies were considered: danaparoid sodium, lepirudin, argatroban, bivalirudin, ancrod, idraparinux, and EP217609. Danaparoid sodium has issues with individual variability. Several studies (EVOLUTION-ON, CHOOSE-ON) proposed a reliable therapeutic protocol for bivalirudin. Ancrod resulted in an increase in the transfusion of blood products. Direct thrombin inhibitors offer a promising alternative. EP217609 is a synthetic anticoagulant currently undergoing Phase IIa clinical trials. It is an indirect inhibitor of factor Xa, a direct inhibitor of free and bound thrombin, and can be neutralized by avidin.
CONCLUSIONS
The ideal anticoagulation strategy for cardiac surgery with CPB does not exist. Heparin and protamine remain the gold standard for anticoagulation therapy. To date, bivalirudin is the most promising molecule despite its high cost and lack of a readily available antagonist.
Topics: Anticoagulants; Cardiopulmonary Bypass; Cost-Benefit Analysis; Drug Costs; Heparin; Hirudins; Humans; Peptide Fragments; Protamines; Recombinant Proteins
PubMed: 25697279
DOI: 10.1007/s12630-015-0339-6 -
Cureus Feb 2024The conventional method of heparin and protamine management during cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) is based on total body weight which fails to account for the... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
The conventional method of heparin and protamine management during cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) is based on total body weight which fails to account for the heterogeneous response to heparin in each patient. On the other hand, the literature is inconclusive on whether individualized anticoagulation management based on real-time blood heparin concentration improves post-CBP outcomes.
METHODS
We searched databases of Medline, Excerpta Medica dataBASE (EMBASE), PubMed, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINHL), and Google Scholar, recruiting randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and prospective studies comparing the outcomes of dosing heparin and/or protamine based on measured heparin concentration versus patient's total body weight for CPB. Random effects meta-analyses and meta-regression were conducted to compare the outcome profiles. Primary endpoints include postoperative blood loss and the correlation with heparin and protamine doses, the reversal protamine and loading heparin dose ratio; secondary endpoints included postoperative platelet counts, antithrombin III, fibrinogen levels, activated prothrombin time (aPTT), incidences of heparin rebound, and re-exploration of chest wound for bleeding.
RESULTS
Twenty-six studies, including 22 RCTs and four prospective cohort studies involving 3,810 patients, were included. Compared to body weight-based dosing, patients of individualized, heparin concentration-based group had significantly lower postoperative blood loss (mean difference (MD)=49.51 mL, 95% confidence interval (CI): 5.33-93.71), lower protamine-to-heparin dosing ratio (MD=-0.20, 95% CI: -0.32 ~ -0.12), and higher early postoperative platelet counts (MD=8.83, 95% CI: 2.07-15.59). The total heparin doses and protamine reversal were identified as predictors of postoperative blood loss by meta-regression.
CONCLUSIONS
There was a significant correlation between the doses of heparin and protamine with postoperative blood loss; therefore, précised dosing of both could be critical for reducing bleeding and transfusion requirements. Data from the enrolled studies indicated that compared to conventional weight-based dosing, individualized, blood concentration-based heparin and protamine dosing may have outcome benefits reducing postoperative blood loss. The dosing calculation of heparin based on the assumption of a one-compartment pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) model and linear relationship between the calculated dose and blood heparin concentration may be inaccurate. With the recent advancement of the technologies of machine learning, individualized, precision management of anticoagulation for CPB may be possible in the near future.
PubMed: 38357407
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.54144 -
Diabetes, Obesity & Metabolism Nov 2013The aim of this review is to summarize the clinical efficacy, tolerability and safety data of insulin detemir, and compare its use with that of neutral protamine... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Review
The aim of this review is to summarize the clinical efficacy, tolerability and safety data of insulin detemir, and compare its use with that of neutral protamine Hagedorn (NPH) insulin in randomized controlled trials in people with type 1 or type 2 diabetes. A literature search was conducted with PubMed using predefined search terms. Studies were included if they met the following criteria: randomized, controlled trial, comparison of insulin detemir with NPH insulin, non-hospitalized adults aged ≥18 years with either type 1 or type 2 diabetes, and study duration of ≥12 weeks. The following types of studies were excluded: non-randomized controlled trials, studies of mixed cohorts of patients with type 1 or type 2 diabetes that did not report results separately, pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic studies, reviews, pooled or meta-analyses or health-economic analyses. Fourteen publications met the inclusion criteria. Nine studies in people with type 1 diabetes and three studies in people with type 2 diabetes, using insulin detemir in a basal-bolus regimen were included. Two studies were in people with type 2 diabetes using insulin detemir with oral antidiabetes medicines. In 14 studies of people with type 1 or type 2 diabetes, insulin detemir treatment provided similar or better glycaemic control, lower within-subject variability, similar or lower frequency of hypoglycaemia and less weight gain when compared with NPH insulin.
Topics: Adult; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Drug Therapy, Combination; Humans; Hyperglycemia; Hypoglycemia; Hypoglycemic Agents; Insulin Detemir; Insulin, Isophane; Insulin, Long-Acting; Insulin, Regular, Human; Isophane Insulin, Human; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Weight Gain
PubMed: 23551900
DOI: 10.1111/dom.12106 -
Value in Health : the Journal of the... Feb 2018To assess the relative efficacy and safety of basal insulin regimens in adults with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM). (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
To assess the relative efficacy and safety of basal insulin regimens in adults with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM).
METHODS
A systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA) of randomized controlled trials comparing two or more basal insulin regimens were conducted. The following basal insulin regimens were included: Neutral Protamine Hagedorn (iNPH) (once [od], twice [bid], and four times daily [qid]), insulin detemir (iDet) (od and bid), insulin glargine 100 IU (iGlarg) (od), and insulin degludec (iDegl) (od). We searched the following databases: MEDLINE via OVID, Embase via OVID, and the Cochrane Library (Wiley). Study quality was appraised using Cochrane risk-of-bias checklist for randomized controlled trials. Two outcomes (change in hemoglobin A [HbA] and rate of severe/major hypoglycemia [SH]) were analyzed. Network inconsistency was assessed using Bucher and chi-square tests.
RESULTS
Thirty studies met the eligibility criteria. Twenty-five were included in the HbA network and 16 in the SH network. All studies were of moderate quality. No network inconsistency was evident in the HbA network. Of the seven regimens of interest, iDet (bid) had the highest probability of being best (mean change in HbA -0.48; 95% credible interval -0.69 to -0.29). In contrast, the SH network demonstrated both considerable uncertainty and significant network inconsistency (χ test, P = 0.003).
CONCLUSIONS
Of the specified frequency regimens, iDet (bid) had the highest probability of being the best basal insulin regimen in terms of reduction in HbA. Ranking of the regimens in terms of the SH rate was highly uncertain and no clear conclusion could be made.
Topics: Adult; Bayes Theorem; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1; Glycated Hemoglobin; Humans; Hypoglycemia; Insulin; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 29477399
DOI: 10.1016/j.jval.2017.04.024 -
Journal of Diabetes May 2023To investigate the effectiveness, safety, optimal starting dose, optimal maintenance dose range, and target fasting plasma glucose of five basal insulins in... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
AIMS
To investigate the effectiveness, safety, optimal starting dose, optimal maintenance dose range, and target fasting plasma glucose of five basal insulins in insulin-naïve patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.
METHODS
MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library were searched from January 2000 to February 2022. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed and the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE) approach was adopted. The registration ID is CRD42022319078 in PROSPERO.
RESULTS
Among 11 163 citations retrieved, 35 publications met the planned criteria. From meta-analyses and network meta-analyses, we found that when injecting basal insulin regimens at bedtime, the optimal choice in order of most to least effective might be glargine U-300 or degludec U-100, glargine U-100 or detemir, followed by neutral protamine hagedorn (NPH). Injecting glargine U-100 in the morning may be more effective (ie, more patients archiving glycated hemoglobin < 7.0%) and lead to fewer hypoglycemic events than injecting it at bedtime. The optimal starting dose for the initiation of any basal insulins can be 0.10-0.20 U/kg/day. There is no eligible evidence to investigate the optimal maintenance dose for basal insulins.
CONCLUSIONS
The five basal insulins are effective for the target population. Glargine U-300, degludec U-100, glargine U-100, and detemir lead to fewer hypoglycemic events than NPH without compromising glycemic control.
Topics: Humans; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Insulin Glargine; Insulin, Long-Acting; Hypoglycemia; Hypoglycemic Agents; Insulin; Insulin Detemir; Insulin, Isophane
PubMed: 37038616
DOI: 10.1111/1753-0407.13381 -
Therapeutic Advances in Neurological... 2023Intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) is standard of care for disabling acute ischemic stroke (AIS) within a time window of ⩽ 4.5 h. Some AIS patients cannot be treated...
BACKGROUND AND AIMS
Intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) is standard of care for disabling acute ischemic stroke (AIS) within a time window of ⩽ 4.5 h. Some AIS patients cannot be treated with IVT due to limiting contraindications, including heparin usage in an anticoagulating dose within the past 24 h or an elevated activated prothrombin time (aPTT) > 15 s. Protamine is a potent antidote to unfractionated heparin.
OBJECTIVES
The objective of this study was to investigate the safety and efficacy of IVT in AIS patients after antagonization of unfractionated heparin with protamine.
METHODS
Patients from our stroke center (between January 2015 and September 2021) treated with IVT after heparin antagonization with protamine were analyzed. National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) was used for stroke severity and modified Rankin Scale (mRS) for outcome assessment. Substantial neurological improvement was defined as the difference between admission and discharge NIHSS of ⩾8 or discharge NIHSS of ⩽1. Good outcome at follow-up after 3 months was defined as mRS 0-2. Safety data were obtained for mortality, symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage (sICH), and for adverse events due to protamine. Second, a systematic review was performed searching PubMed and Scopus for studies and case reviews presenting AIS patients treated with IVT after heparin antagonization with protamine. The search was limited from January 1, 2011 to September 29, 2021. Furthermore, we conducted a propensity score matching comparing protamine-treated patients to a control IVT group without protamine (ratio 2:1, match tolerance 0.2).
RESULTS
A total of 16 patients, 5 treated in our hospital and 11 from literature, [65.2 ± 13.1 years, 37.5% female, median premorbid mRS (pmRS) 1 (IQR 1, 4)] treated with IVT after heparin antagonization using protamine were included and compared to 31 IVT patients [76.2 ± 10.9 years, 45% female, median pmRS 1 (IQR 0, 2)]. Substantial neurological improvement was evident in 68.8% of protamine-treated patients 38.7% of control patients ( = 0.028). Good clinical outcome at follow-up was observed in 56.3% 58.1% of patients ( = 0.576). No adverse events due to protamine were reported, one patient suffered sICH after secondary endovascular thrombectomy of large vessel occlusion. Mortality was 6.3% 22.6% ( = 0.236).
CONCLUSION
IVT after heparin antagonization with protamine seems to be safe and, prospectively, may extend the number of AIS patients who can benefit from reperfusion treatment using IVT. Further prospective registry trials would be helpful to further investigate the clinical applicability of heparin antagonization.
PubMed: 36710724
DOI: 10.1177/17562864221149249 -
Journal of Cardiothoracic and Vascular... Feb 2018The aim was to evaluate the predictive value of thromboelastometry for postoperative blood loss in adult cardiac surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass. (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
The aim was to evaluate the predictive value of thromboelastometry for postoperative blood loss in adult cardiac surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass.
DESIGN
Retrospective cohort study and systematic review of the literature.
SETTING
A tertiary university hospital.
PARTICIPANTS
202 patients undergoing elective cardiac surgery.
INTERVENTIONS
Thromboelastometry was performed before cardiopulmonary bypass and 3 minutes after protamine administration.
MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS
The cohort study showed that the preoperative and postoperative thromboelastometric positive predicting value was poor (0%-22%); however, the negative predicting value was high (89%-94%). The systematic review of the literature to evaluate the predictive value of thromboelastometry for major postoperative bleeding in cardiac surgery resulted in 1,311 articles, 11 of which were eligible (n = 1,765; PubMed and Embase, until June 2016). Two studies found a good predictive value, whereas the other 9 studies showed a poor predictability for major postoperative bleeding after cardiac surgery. The overall negative predicting value was high.
CONCLUSIONS
Thromboelastometry does not predict which patients are at risk for major postoperative bleeding.
Topics: Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Cardiac Surgical Procedures; Cohort Studies; Humans; Middle Aged; Postoperative Hemorrhage; Predictive Value of Tests; Retrospective Studies; Thrombelastography
PubMed: 29126688
DOI: 10.1053/j.jvca.2017.08.025 -
BMJ Open Dec 2014To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors versus intermediate-acting insulin for adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM)... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis Review
Safety and effectiveness of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors versus intermediate-acting insulin or placebo for patients with type 2 diabetes failing two oral antihyperglycaemic agents: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.
OBJECTIVE
To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors versus intermediate-acting insulin for adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and poor glycaemic control despite treatment with two oral agents.
SETTING
Studies were multicentre and multinational.
PARTICIPANTS
Ten studies including 2967 patients with T2DM.
INTERVENTIONS
Studies that examined DPP-4 inhibitors compared with each other, intermediate-acting insulin, no treatment or placebo in patients with T2DM.
PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES
Primary outcome was glycosylated haemoglobin (HbA1c). Secondary outcomes were healthcare utilisation, body weight, fractures, quality of life, microvascular complications, macrovascular complications, all-cause mortality, harms, cost and cost-effectiveness.
RESULTS
10 randomised clinical trials with 2967 patients were included after screening 5831 titles and abstracts, and 180 full-text articles. DPP-4 inhibitors significantly reduced HbA1c versus placebo in network meta-analysis (NMA; mean difference (MD) -0.62%, 95% CI -0.93% to -0.33%) and meta-analysis (MD -0.61%, 95% CI -0.81% to -0.41%), respectively. Significant differences in HbA1c were not observed for neutral protamine Hagedorn (NPH) insulin versus placebo and DPP-4 inhibitors versus NPH insulin in NMA. In meta-analysis, no significant differences were observed between DPP-4 inhibitors and placebo for severe hypoglycaemia, weight gain, cardiovascular disease, overall harms, treatment-related harms and mortality, although patients receiving DPP-4 inhibitors experienced less infections (relative risk 0.72, 95% CI 0.57 to 0.91).
CONCLUSIONS
DPP-4 inhibitors were superior to placebo in reducing HbA1c levels in adults with T2DM taking at least two oral agents. Compared with placebo, no safety signals were detected with DPP-4 inhibitors and there was a reduced risk of infection. There was no significant difference in HbA1c observed between NPH and placebo or NPH and DPP-4 inhibitors.
TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER
PROSPERO # CRD42013003624.
Topics: Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Dipeptidyl Peptidase 4; Dipeptidyl-Peptidase IV Inhibitors; Glycated Hemoglobin; Humans; Hypoglycemic Agents; Incretins; Insulin; Insulin, Isophane; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 25537781
DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2014-005752 -
Human Fertility (Cambridge, England) Jul 2023Genetic association studies (GAS) may have the capability to probe the genetic susceptibility alleles in many disorders. This systemic review aimed to assess whether an... (Review)
Review
Genetic association studies (GAS) may have the capability to probe the genetic susceptibility alleles in many disorders. This systemic review aimed to assess whether an association exists between gene(s)/allelic variant(s), and varicocele-related male infertility (VRMI). This review included 19 GAS that investigated 26 genes in 1,826 men with varicocele compared to 2,070 healthy men, and 263 infertile men without varicocele. These studies focussed on candidate genes and relevant variants, with glutathione S-transferase gene being the most frequently studied ( = 5) followed by the nitric oxide synthase 3 (NOS3) gene ( = 3) and the phosphoprotein tyrosine phosphatase 1 gene ( = 2). In one study the genes for NAD(P)H quinone oxidoreductase 1, sperm protamine, human 8-oxoguanine DNA glycosylase 1, methylenetetrahydrofolate reductase, polymerase gamma, heat shock protein 90, mitochondrial DNA, superoxide dismutase 2, transition nuclear protein 1, and transition nuclear protein 2, were assessed. There is no clear indication that any of these polymorphisms are sturdily associated with VRMI. However, three studies established that the polymorphic genotype (GT + TT) for polymorphism of the gene is more frequent in varicocele patients. Further endeavours such as standardising reporting, exploring complementary designs, and the use of GWAS technology are justified to help replicate these early findings.
PubMed: 34587863
DOI: 10.1080/14647273.2021.1983214