The history of insulin for diabetes management began with animal-sourced insulin in the 1920s, extracted from the pancreases of cows and pigs. Porcine insulin was favored due to its close similarity to human insulin. However, the development of biosynthetic human insulin using recombinant DNA technology in the 1980s marked a significant shift. This synthetic insulin was less likely to cause allergic reactions and offered more consistent effects compared to animal insulin. The reliable large-scale production of human insulin also addressed the supply limitations of animal sources.
The Shift Away from Animal-Sourced Insulin
Major manufacturers like Eli Lilly discontinued animal insulin production in the U.S. in the 2000s, driven by the adoption of newer alternatives. While the FDA hasn't approved animal-sourced insulins for sale in the U.S. since then, exceptions for personal importation under specific medical conditions exist.
2025 Availability: A Shifting Global Landscape
Porcine insulin availability is decreasing globally. For years, Wockhardt UK was the primary global manufacturer of Hypurin® porcine insulin. A Medicine Supply Notification in the UK in July 2025 announced the discontinuation of Wockhardt's Hypurin Porcine insulin 10ml vials, with supplies expected to run out over the following months. While vials are being discontinued, Hypurin Porcine insulin is still available in 3ml Penfill (cartridges) for all three formulations. Patients using vials need to switch to cartridges and use a compatible pen device. A new reusable pen, the Mypen2, is expected by September 2025, as the AutoPen Classic is also being discontinued.
Porcine vs. Synthetic Insulin: A Comparison
A comparison highlights the reasons for the shift from porcine insulin to modern synthetic alternatives:
Feature | Porcine Insulin | Synthetic Insulin (Human/Analogs) |
---|---|---|
Source | Extracted from the pancreas of pigs. | Produced using genetically engineered bacteria or yeast. |
Availability | Extremely limited, phasing out globally, mostly in specific cartridge formats. | Widespread, readily available through standard pharmaceutical channels. |
Immunogenicity | Can elicit an immune response, leading to antibody formation and potential allergic reactions. | Minimally immunogenic, reducing the risk of allergic reactions and resistance. |
Structure | Differs from human insulin by a single amino acid. | Identical to human insulin (for recombinant human insulin) or modified for specific pharmacokinetic profiles (analogs). |
Pharmacokinetics | Generally slower and less predictable absorption compared to modern analogs. | Optimized for various action profiles (rapid-acting, long-acting, etc.) and offers more predictable control. |
Cost | Historically less expensive, but now potentially higher due to limited, specialized production. | Can vary, but mass production helps maintain affordability, though pricing remains a major issue for some. |
The Transition to Modern Alternatives
The discontinuation of animal insulin necessitates a transition for remaining users. Studies show switching to synthetic forms is safe and can improve glycemic control. Patients should consult healthcare providers for a transition plan, as abrupt cessation of insulin is dangerous. Consultation with an endocrinologist or diabetologist is often recommended.
The American Diabetes Association's blog, "{Link: The History of a Wonderful Thing We Call Insulin https://diabetes.org/blog/history-wonderful-thing-we-call-insulin}," provides further context on the evolution of insulin production.
Conclusion: A Phased Exit
Porcine insulin is in its final phase globally. The discontinuation of vials by Wockhardt highlights the move towards biosynthetic insulins, offering improved safety, consistency, and supply reliability. A thoughtful transition to modern alternatives is necessary for remaining patients. This shift represents a significant advancement in diabetes treatment.