Achieving Guideline Control with New Pharmacotherapies: Albumin-Binding by Acylation of Insulin and GLP-1

  • Mads Krogsgaard Thomsen

Over the last 15 years, it has become apparent that substantial reduction in the risk of micro- and macro-vascular complications follows from intensified treatment regimens in type 1 and 2 diabetes [1–3]. In simple terms, reducing HbA1c from 9% to 7% in patients with type 1 diabetes leads to an approximate halving of the risk of angiopathyrelated diabetic complications [1, 2].


Human Insulin American Diabetes Association Insulin Glargine Insulin Aspart Insulin Detemir 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    The Diabetes Control and Complications Trial Research Group. The effect of intensive treatment of diabetes on the development and progression of long-term complications in insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus. N Engl J Med 1993;329:977–986.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    The Diabetes Control and Complications Trial/Epidemiology of Diabetes Interventions and complications (DCCT/EDIC) Study Research Group. Intensive diabetes treatment and cardiovascular disease in patients with type 1 diabetes. N Engl J Med 2005;353:2643–2653.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    UK prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS) Group. Intensive blood-glucose with sulphonylureas or insulin compared with conventional treatment and risk of complications in patients with type 2 diabetes (UKPDS 33). Lancet 1998;352:837–853.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Nathan DM, Buse JB, Davidson MB, Heine RJ, Holman RR, Sherwin R, Zinman B. Management of hyperglycaemia in type 2 diabetes: a consensus algorithm for the initiation and adjustment of therapy. Diabetologia 2006;49:1711–1721.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cook MN, Girman CJ, Stein PP, Alexander CM, Holman RR. Glycemic control continues to deteriorate after sulfonylureas are added to metformin among patients with type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Care 2005;28:995–1000.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Drucker DJ, Nauck MA. The incretin system: glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists and dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors in type 2 diabetes. Lancet 2006;368:1696–1705.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Gonder-Frederick LA et-al.Predictors of fear of hypoglycemia sin adolescents with type 1 diabetes and their parents. Pediatric Diabetes 2006;7:215–222.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ghuman J, Zunszain PA, Petitpas I, Bhattacharya AA, Otagiri M, Curry S. Structural basis of the drug-binding specificity of human serum albumin. J Mol Biol 2005;353:38–52.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kojima M, Hosoda H, Date Y, Nakazato M, Matsuo H, Kangawa K. Ghrelin is a growth-hormone-releasing acylated peptide from stomach. Nature 1999;404:656–660.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kurtzhals P, Havelund S, Jonassen I, Kiehr B, Larsen UD, Ribel U, Markussen J. Albumin binding of insulins acylated with fatty acids: characterization of the ligand-protein interaction and correlation between binding affinity and timing of the insulin effect in-vivo. Biochem J 1995;312:725–731.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Knudsen LB, Nielsen PF, Huusfeldt PO, Johansen NL, Madsen K, Pedersen FZ, Thøgersen H, Wilken M, Agersø H. Potent derivatives of glucagon-like peptide-1 with pharmacokinetic properties suitable for once daily administration. J Med Chem 2000;43:1664–1669.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Home P, Kurtzhals P. Insulin detemir: from concept to clinical experience. Expert Opin Pharmacother 2006;7:325–343.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Galloway JA, Spradlin CT, Howey DC, Dupre J.-Intrasubject differences in pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic responses: the immutable problem of present-day treatment. In Diabetes 1985, Serrano-Rios M, Lefebvre PJ, Eds. New York, Excerpta Medica, 1986:877–886.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Heise T, Nosek L, Rønn BB, Endahl L, Heinemann L, Kapitza C, Draeger E. Lower within-subject variability of insulin detemir in comparison to NPH insulin and insulin glargine in people with type 1 diabetes. Diabetes 2004;53:1614–1620.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hermansen K, Fontaine P, Kukolja KK, Peterkova V, Leth G, Gall M-A. Insulin analogues (insulin detemir and insulin aspart) versus traditional human insulins (NPH insulin and regular human insulin) in basal-bolus therapy for patients with Type 1 diabetes. Diabetologia 2004;47:622–629.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hermansen K, Davies M, Derezinski T, Martinez G, Clauson P, Home PA. 26-week, randomized, parallel, treat-to-target trial comparing insulin detemir with NPH insulin as add-on therapy to oral glucose-lowering drugs in insulin-naïve people with type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Care 2006;29:1269–1274.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Finkelstein EA, Ruhm CJ, Kosa KM. Economic causes and consequences of obesity. Annu Rev Public Health 2005;26:239–257.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Larsen PJ, Fledelius C, Knudsen LB, Tang-Christensen M. Systemic Administration of the long-acting GLP-1 derivative NN2211 induces lasting and reversible weight loss in both normal and obese rats. Diabetes 2001;50:2530–2539.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Chang AM, Jakobsen G, Sturis J, Smith MJ, Bloem CJ, An B, Galecki A, Halter JB. The GLP-1 derivative NN2211 restores β-cell sensitivity to glucose in type 2 diabetic patients after single dose. Diabetes 2003;52:1786–1791.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Vilsboll T, Exp Opin Investig Drugs 2007;16:231–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mads Krogsgaard Thomsen
    • 1
  1. 1.CSO of Novo NordiskDenmark

Personalised recommendations