FDA Approves Basaglar® (insulin glargine injection), a Long-Acting Insulin Treatment

Note* - All images used are for editorial and illustrative purposes only and may not originate from the original news provider or associated company.

Related stories

Billerud Introduces New Pharmaceutical Packaging Option

Billerud has officially introduced PharmaKraft, a specialized fibre-based packaging...

AstraZeneca Advances AI Drug Discovery Deal with insitro

AstraZeneca has inked a billion-dollar AI drug discovery partnership...

Managing Quality and Regulatory Risks in Pharmaceutical Technology Transfer

Technology transfer moves more than manufacturing instructions. It moves process knowledge, supplier dependencies, labeling requirements, packaging specifications, and the evidence needed to demonstrate control. For medical device manufacturers, including those supporting drug-device combination products, these interfaces can become recurring sources of compliance gaps during site transitions, acquisitions, and remediation. The central problem is often not a missing procedure. It is a quality system that allows connected activities to change independently. A label revision may be approved while packaging artwork, supplier instructions, or production-system data still reflect an obsolete version. Staying inspection-ready requires manufacturers to manage these dependencies as one controlled system. Why Compliance Gaps Keep Recurring Findings are treated as documentation defects Revising a procedure can resolve an immediate discrepancy without changing the behavior that caused it. If unclear decision rights, weak escalation, or ineffective training remain, the same failure may surface elsewhere. Corrective and preventive action should distinguish the observed finding from its underlying cause and establish how effectiveness will be demonstrated. Ownership is divided across connected functions Quality, Regulatory Affairs, labeling, packaging engineering, operations, suppliers, and digital-system owners often maintain separate workflows. Each team may complete its assigned task while an interface remains uncontrolled. For example, changing an instruction for use can affect packaging configuration, translations, technical documentation, inventory disposition, and release controls. Transitions expose unresolved weaknesses Acquisitions and site transfers can introduce conflicting procedures, incomplete knowledge transfer, or different assumptions about validated processes. Regulatory changes add further demands. When these events coincide with CAPA or change-control backlogs, teams may prioritize administrative closure over risk reduction. Without a coordinated impact assessment, local fixes can create new gaps downstream. Establish the Regulatory Baseline Inspection readiness starts with knowing which requirements apply to the product, activity, and market. Pharmaceutical, device, and combination-product obligations are not interchangeable; transfer planning should identify the applicable requirements rather than assume one quality framework covers every operation. According to FDA’s Quality Management System Regulation overview and FAQs, the QMSR became effective on February 2, 2026, incorporates ISO 13485:2016 by reference, and introduced the updated device inspection process under Compliance Program 7382.850. ISO 13485 certification does not exempt a manufacturer from FDA inspection or guarantee compliance with FDA requirements. For devices marketed in the European Union, Regulation (EU) 2017/745, Annex I, Section 23, provides the primary requirements for information supplied with devices, including labels and instructions for use. Teams should assess the applicable provisions alongside relevant language, product-specific, and market requirements. A labeling review should therefore evaluate required content and consistency with the device’s intended purpose and supporting documentation—not merely artwork accuracy. How to Identify the Real Gaps Begin with a cross-functional assessment that follows actual product and information flows. Select representative transfers, label changes, supplier changes, and CAPAs, then trace each from initiation through implementation and effectiveness review. Map dependencies: Identify affected specifications, suppliers, packaging components, systems, validation activities, and training. Compare records with practice: Check whether approved procedures match what operators and reviewers actually do. Test traceability: Follow a requirement through technical documentation, labeling, production instructions, and release evidence. Examine recurrence: Look for repeated deviations, reopened actions, overdue changes, and findings shared across sites. Assess capacity: Determine whether qualified owners have enough time and authority to complete corrective work. Prioritize gaps by potential patient or user harm, regulatory impact, likelihood of recurrence, and detectability. Document the rationale; an old overdue item is not automatically more important than a newly identified high-risk weakness. Align Quality, Labeling, Packaging, and Change Control Create a coordinated remediation plan with one accountable owner for each action, named contributors, acceptance criteria, and required evidence. Separate immediate containment from systemic correction. Containment might prevent obsolete labels from being issued; correction might redesign approval and implementation controls so obsolete versions cannot return. Use change control as the integration point. Before approval, evaluate effects on regulatory submissions or notifications, technical documentation, supplier controls, packaging performance, validation, electronic master data, inventory, and training. Record both identified impacts and justified decisions that particular activities are unaffected. During technology transfer, define readiness gates before production or release responsibilities move. These should address the transfer of process knowledge, acceptance criteria, receiving-site capability, required qualification or validation, approved documents, and personnel competence. The appropriate evidence depends on the product and process; a generic checklist cannot replace a documented assessment. Finally, verify implementation where the work happens. Confirm that current instructions are available, suppliers received approved requirements, systems contain correct versions, and affected personnel can perform their tasks. A signed approval is not evidence that every downstream change took effect. Mistakes That Undermine Inspection Readiness Closing CAPAs on task completion alone: Effectiveness checks should test whether the underlying failure has been controlled. Updating labels in isolation: Assess packaging, supplier, system, documentation, and inventory consequences. Counting closures instead of evidence: Dashboards need defensible records behind their status indicators. ...
- Advertisement -

Eli Lilly and Company and Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Inc announced that the U.S. FDA granted approval for Basaglar 100 units/mL. BASAGLAR is a long-acting insulin with an identical amino acid sequence to Lantus®, another U-100 insulin glargine.

BASAGLAR is indicated to control high blood sugar in adults and children with type 1 diabetes and adults with type 2 diabetes. BASAGLAR should not be used to treat diabetic ketoacidosis. BASAGLAR should not be used during episodes of low blood sugar (hypoglycemia) or in people with an allergy to insulin glargine or any of the ingredients in BASAGLAR.

“Lilly has a long history of developing and manufacturing insulin, having introduced the world’s first commercial insulin more than 90 years ago,” said David Kendall, MD, vice president, Global Medical Affairs, Lilly Diabetes. “BASAGLAR will be a welcome addition to our insulin and alliance portfolios, offering an option for people with diabetes who may need a long-acting insulin.”

The BASAGLAR FDA approval is based, in part, upon an extensive clinical development program. The submission included results from pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic studies, as well as Phase III studies in people with type 1 and type 2 diabetes comparing the safety and efficacy of BASAGLAR to U.S.- and non-U.S.-approved Lantus.

The FDA approval follows BASAGLAR’s tentative U.S. approval in August 2014, which was contingent upon patent litigation resolution. Per the settlement agreement with Sanofi, BASAGLAR will be available in the U.S. starting on December 15, 2016.

“The BASAGLAR FDA approval marks the first insulin therapy to be approved in the U.S. as part of our alliance with Lilly and broadens our portfolio of treatment options for people with type 1 and type 2 diabetes,” said Paul Fonteyne, president and CEO, BIPI. “We remain committed to the care of people with diabetes and look forward to a successful U.S. launch of BASAGLAR.”

This latest regulatory approval is the 11th for BASAGLAR worldwide, with launches taking place in several countries this year, including under the trade name Abasaglar® in Europe.

BASAGLAR Indication

BASAGLAR is a long-acting, man-made insulin indicated to control high blood sugar in adults and children with type 1 diabetes and adults with type 2 diabetes.

BASAGLAR should not be used to treat diabetic ketoacidosis.

IMPORTANT SAFETY INFORMATION for BASAGLAR®

What is the most important information I should know about BASAGLAR?

  • Do not share your BASAGLAR KwikPen® with other people, even if the needle has been changed. You may give other people a serious infection or get a serious infection from them.
  • Do not change the insulin you use without talking to your healthcare provider. Changes may make you more likely to experience low or high blood sugar. Changes should be made cautiously under the supervision of your healthcare provider.
  • Test your blood sugar levels as your healthcare provider instructs.
  • Your insulin dose may need to change because of illness, stress, other medicines you take, change in diet, or change in physical activity or exercise.

Who should not take BASAGLAR?

  • Do not use BASAGLAR if you are having an episode of low blood sugar (hypoglycemia) or have an allergy to any of the ingredients in BASAGLAR.
  • It is not known if BASAGLAR is safe and effective in children less than six years of age with type 1 diabetes mellitus or in children with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

What should I tell my healthcare provider before using BASAGLAR?

Before using BASAGLAR, tell your healthcare provider about all your medical conditions, including if you:

  • have liver or kidney problems.
  • take any other medicines, especially ones called TZDs (thiazolidinediones).
  • have heart failure or other heart problems. If you have heart failure, it may get worse while you take TZDs with BASAGLAR.
  • are pregnant, planning to become pregnant, or are breastfeeding. BASAGLAR may harm your unborn or breastfeeding baby.
  • Tell your healthcare provider about all the medicines you take, including prescription and over-the-counter medicines, vitamins and herbal supplements.

Before you start using BASAGLAR, talk with your healthcare provider about low blood sugar and how to manage it.

How should I use BASAGLAR?

  • Read the detailed Instructions for Use that come with your BASAGLAR KwikPen®.
  • Use BASAGLAR exactly as your healthcare provider tells you to. Your healthcare provider should tell you how much BASAGLAR to use and when to use it.
  • Know the amount of BASAGLAR you use. Do not change the amount of BASAGLAR you use unless your healthcare provider tells you to.
  • Check your insulin label each time you give your injection to make sure you are using the correct insulin.
  • BASAGLAR may be used any time during the day, but BASAGLAR should be used at the same time each day.
  • Only use BASAGLAR that is clear and colorless. If your BASAGLAR is cloudy or slightly colored, return it to your pharmacy for a replacement.
  • BASAGLAR is injected under your skin (subcutaneously). Do not use BASAGLAR in an insulin pump or inject BASAGLAR in your vein (intravenously).
  • Change (rotate) your injection sites within the area you chose for each dose. Do not use the exact spot for each injection.
  • Do not mix BASAGLAR with any other type of insulin.
  • Check your blood sugar levels. Ask your healthcare provider what your blood sugar should be and when you should check your blood sugar levels.
  • While using BASAGLAR, do not drive or operate heavy machinery until you know how BASAGLAR affects you; and do not drink alcohol or use over-the-counter medicines that contain alcohol.Keep BASAGLAR and all medicines out of the reach of children.

What are the possible side effects of BASAGLAR?

BASAGLAR may cause serious side effects that can lead to death, including:

  • Low blood sugar (hypoglycemia). Signs and symptoms may include dizziness or light-headedness, sweating, confusion, headache, blurred vision, slurred speech, shakiness, fast heartbeat, anxiety, irritability, mood change, or hunger.
  • Severe allergic reaction (whole body reaction). Get medical help right away if you have any of these signs of allergic reaction: a rash over your whole body, trouble breathing, a fast heartbeat, or sweating.
  • Low potassium level in your blood (hypokalemia).
  • Heart failure. Taking certain diabetes pills thiazolidinediones or “TZDs” with BASAGLAR may cause heart failure in some people, even in people who have never had heart failure or heart problems before. If you have already had heart failure it may get worse if you take TZDs with BASAGLAR. Tell your healthcare provider if you have any new or worse symptoms of heart failure including shortness of breath, swelling of the ankles or feet, or sudden weight gain. Treatment with TZDs and BASAGLAR may need to be changed or stopped by your healthcare provider.
  • Get emergency help if you have trouble breathing, shortness of breath, fast heartbeat, swelling of your face, tongue, or throat, sweating, extreme drowsiness, dizziness, or confusion.
  • The most common side effects of BASAGLAR include low blood sugar (hypoglycemia), allergic reactions, including reactions at the injection site, skin thickening or pits at the injection site (lipodystrophy). These are not all of the possible side effects. Ask your healthcare provider for more information or for medical advice about side effects.

Never miss a pharmaceutical headline

The pharmaceutical industry moves fast – stay on top of it with our must - read briefings.

  • The top pharma and life sciences stories, straight to your inbox
  • The biggest news, features, interviews, and analysis
  • Dedicated coverage of the key developments driving the global pharmaceutical sector

Subscribe

- Never miss a story with notifications

- Gain full access to our premium content

- Browse free from any location or device.

Media Packs

Expand Your Reach With Our Customized Solutions Empowering Your Campaigns To Maximize Your Reach & Drive Real Results!

– Access the Media Pack Now

– Book a Conference Call

– Leave Message for Us to Get Back

Latest stories

Related stories

Billerud Introduces New Pharmaceutical Packaging Option

Billerud has officially introduced PharmaKraft, a specialized fibre-based packaging...

AstraZeneca Advances AI Drug Discovery Deal with insitro

AstraZeneca has inked a billion-dollar AI drug discovery partnership...

Managing Quality and Regulatory Risks in Pharmaceutical Technology Transfer

Technology transfer moves more than manufacturing instructions. It moves process knowledge, supplier dependencies, labeling requirements, packaging specifications, and the evidence needed to demonstrate control. For medical device manufacturers, including those supporting drug-device combination products, these interfaces can become recurring sources of compliance gaps during site transitions, acquisitions, and remediation. The central problem is often not a missing procedure. It is a quality system that allows connected activities to change independently. A label revision may be approved while packaging artwork, supplier instructions, or production-system data still reflect an obsolete version. Staying inspection-ready requires manufacturers to manage these dependencies as one controlled system. Why Compliance Gaps Keep Recurring Findings are treated as documentation defects Revising a procedure can resolve an immediate discrepancy without changing the behavior that caused it. If unclear decision rights, weak escalation, or ineffective training remain, the same failure may surface elsewhere. Corrective and preventive action should distinguish the observed finding from its underlying cause and establish how effectiveness will be demonstrated. Ownership is divided across connected functions Quality, Regulatory Affairs, labeling, packaging engineering, operations, suppliers, and digital-system owners often maintain separate workflows. Each team may complete its assigned task while an interface remains uncontrolled. For example, changing an instruction for use can affect packaging configuration, translations, technical documentation, inventory disposition, and release controls. Transitions expose unresolved weaknesses Acquisitions and site transfers can introduce conflicting procedures, incomplete knowledge transfer, or different assumptions about validated processes. Regulatory changes add further demands. When these events coincide with CAPA or change-control backlogs, teams may prioritize administrative closure over risk reduction. Without a coordinated impact assessment, local fixes can create new gaps downstream. Establish the Regulatory Baseline Inspection readiness starts with knowing which requirements apply to the product, activity, and market. Pharmaceutical, device, and combination-product obligations are not interchangeable; transfer planning should identify the applicable requirements rather than assume one quality framework covers every operation. According to FDA’s Quality Management System Regulation overview and FAQs, the QMSR became effective on February 2, 2026, incorporates ISO 13485:2016 by reference, and introduced the updated device inspection process under Compliance Program 7382.850. ISO 13485 certification does not exempt a manufacturer from FDA inspection or guarantee compliance with FDA requirements. For devices marketed in the European Union, Regulation (EU) 2017/745, Annex I, Section 23, provides the primary requirements for information supplied with devices, including labels and instructions for use. Teams should assess the applicable provisions alongside relevant language, product-specific, and market requirements. A labeling review should therefore evaluate required content and consistency with the device’s intended purpose and supporting documentation—not merely artwork accuracy. How to Identify the Real Gaps Begin with a cross-functional assessment that follows actual product and information flows. Select representative transfers, label changes, supplier changes, and CAPAs, then trace each from initiation through implementation and effectiveness review. Map dependencies: Identify affected specifications, suppliers, packaging components, systems, validation activities, and training. Compare records with practice: Check whether approved procedures match what operators and reviewers actually do. Test traceability: Follow a requirement through technical documentation, labeling, production instructions, and release evidence. Examine recurrence: Look for repeated deviations, reopened actions, overdue changes, and findings shared across sites. Assess capacity: Determine whether qualified owners have enough time and authority to complete corrective work. Prioritize gaps by potential patient or user harm, regulatory impact, likelihood of recurrence, and detectability. Document the rationale; an old overdue item is not automatically more important than a newly identified high-risk weakness. Align Quality, Labeling, Packaging, and Change Control Create a coordinated remediation plan with one accountable owner for each action, named contributors, acceptance criteria, and required evidence. Separate immediate containment from systemic correction. Containment might prevent obsolete labels from being issued; correction might redesign approval and implementation controls so obsolete versions cannot return. Use change control as the integration point. Before approval, evaluate effects on regulatory submissions or notifications, technical documentation, supplier controls, packaging performance, validation, electronic master data, inventory, and training. Record both identified impacts and justified decisions that particular activities are unaffected. During technology transfer, define readiness gates before production or release responsibilities move. These should address the transfer of process knowledge, acceptance criteria, receiving-site capability, required qualification or validation, approved documents, and personnel competence. The appropriate evidence depends on the product and process; a generic checklist cannot replace a documented assessment. Finally, verify implementation where the work happens. Confirm that current instructions are available, suppliers received approved requirements, systems contain correct versions, and affected personnel can perform their tasks. A signed approval is not evidence that every downstream change took effect. Mistakes That Undermine Inspection Readiness Closing CAPAs on task completion alone: Effectiveness checks should test whether the underlying failure has been controlled. Updating labels in isolation: Assess packaging, supplier, system, documentation, and inventory consequences. Counting closures instead of evidence: Dashboards need defensible records behind their status indicators. ...

State of API & Peptide CDMO Capacity

Pharmaceutical companies planning peptide or complex small-molecule launches are...

Subscribe

- Never miss a story with notifications

- Gain full access to our premium content

- Browse free from any location or device.

Media Packs

Expand Your Reach With Our Customized Solutions Empowering Your Campaigns To Maximize Your Reach & Drive Real Results!

– Access theMedia Pack Now

– Book a Conference Call

– Leave Message for Us to Get Back

Translate »