Intensive replacement of basal insulin in patients with type 1 diabetes given rapid-acting insulin analog at mealtime: a 3-month comparison between administration of NPH insulin four times daily and glargine insulin at dinner or bedtime.
ABSTRACT To establish differences in blood glucose between different regimens of optimized basal insulin substitution in type 1 diabetic patients given lispro insulin at meals, i.e., NPH injected four times a day versus glargine insulin once daily at dinner or at bedtime.
A total of 51 patients with type 1 diabetes on intensive therapy (NPH four times/day and lispro insulin at each meal) were randomized to three different regimens of basal insulin substitution while continuing lispro insulin at meals: continuation of NPH four times/day (n = 17), once daily glargine at dinnertime (n = 17), and once daily glargine at bedtime (n = 17) for 3 months. Blood glucose targets were fasting, preprandial, and bedtime concentrations at 6.4-7.2 mmol/l and 2 h after meals at 8.0-9.2 mmol/l. The primary end point was HbA(1c).
Mean daily blood glucose was lower with dinnertime glargine (7.5 +/- 0.2 mmol/l) or bedtime glargine (7.4 +/- 0.2 mmol/l) versus NPH (8.3 +/- 0.2 mmol/l) (P < 0.05). A greater percentage of blood glucose values were at the target value with glargine at dinner and bedtime versus those with NPH (P < 0.05). HbA(1c) at 3 months did not change with NPH but decreased with glargine at dinnertime (from 6.8 +/- 0.2 to 6.4 +/- 0.1%) and glargine at bedtime (from 7.0 +/- 0.2 to 6.6 +/- 0.1%) (P < 0.04 vs. NPH). Total daily insulin doses were similar with the three treatments, but with glargine there was an increase in basal and a decrease in mealtime insulin requirements (P < 0.05). Frequency of mild hypoglycemia (self-assisted episodes, blood glucose < or =4.0 mmol/l) was lower with glargine (dinnertime 8.1 +/- 0.8 mmol/l, bedtime 7.7 +/- 0.9 mmol/l) than with NPH (12.2 +/- 1.3 mmol/l) (episodes/patient-month, P < 0.04). In-hospital profiles confirmed outpatient blood glucose data and indicated more steady plasma insulin concentrations at night and before meals with glargine versus NPH (P < 0.05). There were no differences between glargine given at dinnertime and at bedtime.
Regimens of basal insulin with either NPH four times/day or glargine once/day in type 1 diabetic patients both result in good glycemic control. However, the simpler glargine regimen decreases the HbA(1c) level and frequency of hypoglycemia versus NPH. In contrast to NPH, which should be given at bedtime, insulin glargine can be administered at dinnertime without deteriorating blood glucose control.
- SourceAvailable from: sciencedirect.com[show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Management of type 1 and type 2 diabetes is continually evolving, and among these evolving therapies is administration of insulin in its various forms. The insulin regimen needs to be tailored to each individual, not only to maximize compliance and glycemic control but also to minimize hypoglycemia and weight gain.Disease-a-month: DM 03/2010; 56(3):148-162. · 1.57 Impact Factor
- [show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: The Diabetes Control and Complications Trial (DCCT) demonstrated the importance of optimal glycemic control achieved through intensive insulin therapy in reducing the microvascular complications associated with type 1 diabetes. However, the DCCT, which was conducted prior to the availability of insulin analogs, also reported a significant increase in severe hypoglycemia with intensive versus conventional therapy. Insulin analogs were developed to aid patients in achieving better diabetes control by providing insulins with optimized pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic characteristics. Insulin glargine was the first long-acting insulin analog with a 24-h duration of action, offering once-daily injection, and has now been in clinical use for over 10 years. The authors performed a systematic search of EMBASE, MEDLINE, and Web of Science (Science Citation Index) to determine the efficacy of insulin glargine in type 1 diabetes in basal-bolus insulin regimens. Randomized controlled trials have demonstrated that glycemic control with insulin glargine is at least comparable to that with neutral protamine Hagedorn (NPH) insulin in adults and in children and adolescents, and with continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion in adults. However, these same trials show a significantly lower risk for hypoglycemia with insulin glargine compared with NPH insulin in adults.Diabetes Technology & Therapeutics 10/2010; 12(11):835-46. · 2.21 Impact Factor
- [show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Severe hypoglycaemia (SH) is one of the most feared complications of type 1 diabetes (T1DM) with a reported prevalence of nearly 40%. In randomized trials of Multiple Daily Injections (MDI) and Continuous Subcutaneous Insulin Infusion (CSII) therapy there is a possible benefit of CSII in reducing SH. However few trials have used basal insulin analogues as the basal insulin in the MDI group and individuals with established SH have often been excluded from prospective studies. In published studies investigating the effect of Real Time Continuous Glucose Monitoring (RT-CGM) benefit in terms of reduced SH has not yet been demonstrated. The primary objective of this study is to elucidate whether in people with T1DM complicated by impaired awareness of hypoglycaemia (IAH), rigorous prevention of biochemical hypoglycaemia using optimized existing self-management technology and educational support will restore awareness and reduce risk of recurrent SH. METHODS: This is a multicentre prospective RCT comparing hypoglycaemia avoidance with optimized MDI and CSII with or without RT-CGM in a 2x2 factorial design in people with type 1 diabetes who have IAH. The primary outcome measure for this study is the difference in IAH (Gold score) at 24 weeks. Secondary outcomes include biomedical measures such as HbA1c, SH incidence, blinded CGM analysis, self monitored blood glucose (SMBG) and response to hypoglycaemia in gold standard clamp studies. Psychosocial measures including well-being and quality of life will also be assessed using several validated and novel measures. Analysis will be on an intention-to-treat basis. DISCUSSION: Most existing RCTs using this study's interventions have been powered for change in HbA1c rather than IAH or SH. This trial will demonstrate whether IAH can be reversed and SH prevented in people with T1DM in even those at highest risk by using optimized conventional management and existing technology.Trial Registration: ISRCTN52164803 Eudract No: 2009-015396-27.BMC Endocrine Disorders 12/2012; 12(1):33. · 2.65 Impact Factor