Safety Profiles Related to Dosing Errors of Rapid-Acting Insulin Analogs: A Comparative Analysis Using the EudraVigilance Database

被引:0
|
作者
Popa Ilie, Ioana Rada [1 ]
Vonica-Tincu, Andreea Loredana [2 ]
Dobrea, Carmen Maximiliana [2 ]
Butuca, Anca [2 ]
Frum, Adina [2 ]
Morgovan, Claudiu [2 ]
Gligor, Felicia Gabriela [2 ]
Ghibu, Steliana [3 ]
机构
[1] Iuliu Hatieganu Univ Med & Pharm, Dept Endocrinol, Fac Med, 3 5 Louis Pasteur St, Cluj Napoca 400349, Romania
[2] Lucian Blaga Univ Sibiu, Fac Med, Preclin Dept, Sibiu 550169, Romania
[3] Iuliu Hatieganu Univ Med & Pharm, Fac Pharm, Dept Pharmacol Physiol & Pathophysiol, 6A Louis Pasteur St, Cluj Napoca 400349, Romania
关键词
insulin analogs; rapid-acting insulin analogs; dosing errors; real-world evidence; pharmacovigilance; DIABETES-MELLITUS; SEVERE HYPOGLYCEMIA; OLDER-PEOPLE; TYPE-1; LISPRO; METAANALYSIS; ASPART; HYPERGLYCEMIA; PROGRESSION; RETINOPATHY;
D O I
10.3390/biomedicines12102273
中图分类号
Q5 [生物化学]; Q7 [分子生物学];
学科分类号
071010 ; 081704 ;
摘要
Insulin is essential for treating type 1 diabetes and insulin-requiring type 2 diabetes. Background/Objectives: Diabetes is a widespread condition that can lead to multiple and severe complications. Rapid-acting insulin analogs (RAIAs) and long-acting insulin analogs are prescribed for the effective management of diabetes. RAIAs are expected to be associated with a higher number of dosing errors because of their rapid onset, short duration of action, and the need for frequent dosing, compared to other insulin analogs. There are three approved RAIAs on the market: insulin lispro (LIS), insulin aspart (ASP), and insulin glulisine (GLU). The aim of this study is to evaluate the real-world evidence on dosing errors reported for RAIAs in EudraVigilance (EV), an established pharmacovigilance database, in comparison to other insulin analogs and human insulins. Methods: A descriptive analysis and a disproportionality analysis were conducted. Results: ASP and LIS were associated with high percentages of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) (22% and 17%, respectively), with over 70% of the reports involving serious ADRs. A higher frequency of cardiac and eye disorder ADRs was observed for LIS compared with ASP and GLU. GLU showed a higher frequency of ADRs in the skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders category. LIS dosing errors accounted for 5% of the total number of cases, while dosing errors for ASP and GLU were less than 3%. The most frequently reported dosing errors involved improper dosing (49%). Conclusions: Although there were fewer dosing errors of RAIAs in comparison to other insulins, the severity of the potential outcome highlights the importance of precise dosing and timing. Improved the monitoring and reporting of these dosing errors could enhance diabetes patient care. Additionally, smart medical devices could improve therapeutic outcomes.
引用
收藏
页数:20
相关论文
共 22 条
  • [1] Safety of Rapid-Acting Insulin Analogs Versus Regular Human Insulin
    Kitabchi, Abbas E.
    Gosmanov, Aidar R.
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF THE MEDICAL SCIENCES, 2012, 344 (02): : 136 - 141
  • [2] Comparative Pharmacokinetics and Insulin Action for Three Rapid-Acting Insulin Analogs Injected Subcutaneously With and Without Hyaluronidase
    Morrow, Linda
    Muchmore, Douglas B.
    Hompesch, Marcus
    Ludington, Elizabeth A.
    Vaughn, Daniel E.
    DIABETES CARE, 2013, 36 (02) : 273 - 275
  • [3] Efficacy and safety of switching to insulin glulisine from other rapid-acting insulin analogs in children with type 1 diabetes
    Urakami, Tatsuhiko
    Kuwabara, Remi
    Habu, Masako
    Okuno, Misako
    Suzuki, Junichi
    Takahashi, Shori
    JOURNAL OF DIABETES INVESTIGATION, 2015, 6 (01): : 87 - 90
  • [4] Comparative Safety Profiles of Oncology Biosimilars vs. Originators in Europe: An Analysis of the EudraVigilance Database
    Nikitina, Victoria
    Laurini, Greta Santi
    Montanaro, Nicola
    Motola, Domenico
    CANCERS, 2023, 15 (14)
  • [5] Comparative Safety Profiles of Biosimilars vs. Originators Used in Rheumatology: A Pharmacovigilance Analysis of the EudraVigilance Database
    Nikitina, Victoria
    Laurini, Greta Santi
    Montanaro, Nicola
    Motola, Domenico
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MEDICINE, 2025, 14 (05)
  • [6] Efficacy and Safety of Rapid-Acting Insulin Analogs in Special Populations with Type 1 Diabetes or Gestational Diabetes: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
    Norgaard, Kirsten
    Sukumar, Nithya
    Rafnsson, Snorri B.
    Saravanan, Ponnusamy
    DIABETES THERAPY, 2018, 9 (03) : 891 - 917
  • [7] Efficacy and Safety of Rapid-Acting Insulin Analogs in Special Populations with Type 1 Diabetes or Gestational Diabetes: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
    Kirsten Nørgaard
    Nithya Sukumar
    Snorri B. Rafnsson
    Ponnusamy Saravanan
    Diabetes Therapy, 2018, 9 : 891 - 917
  • [8] Therapy-Related Satisfaction and Quality of Life for Japanese People with Diabetes Using Rapid-Acting Insulin Analogs: A Web-Based Survey
    Ishii, Hitoshi
    Maeda, Yasutaka
    Sato, Manaka
    Cai, Zhihong
    Imori, Makoto
    DIABETES THERAPY, 2024, 15 (07) : 1577 - 1595
  • [9] Comparison of the efficacy and safety of rapid-acting insulin analogs, lispro versus aspart, in the treatment of diabetes: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials
    Kapur, Rahul
    Mittra, Shivani
    Tonpe, Geetanjali
    P, P.
    Raj, Praveen
    Gudat, Uwe
    Athalye, Sandeep N.
    EXPERT OPINION ON BIOLOGICAL THERAPY, 2024, 24 (06) : 543 - 561
  • [10] Examining the Glycemic and Hypoglycemic Benefits with Rapid-Acting Insulin Analogs: A Meta Analysis of Insulin Aspart vs Regular Human Insulin in Randomized Controlled Trials
    Heller, Simon
    Bode, Bruce W.
    Kozlovski, Plamen
    Svendsen, Anne Louise
    DIABETES, 2009, 58 : A135 - A135