Article

Improved glycaemic control by switching from insulin NPH to insulin glargine: a retrospective observational study.

CHKS Health Economics Unit, Health Park, Cardiff, UK.
Cardiovascular Diabetology (Impact Factor: 4.21). 01/2009; 8:3. DOI: 10.1186/1475-2840-8-3
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Insulin glargine (glargine) and insulin NPH (NPH) are two basal insulin treatments. This study investigated the effect on glycaemic control of switching from a NPH-based regimen to a glargine-based regimen in 701 patients with type 1 (n= 304) or type 2 (n= 397) diabetes, using unselected primary care data.
Data for this retrospective observational study were extracted from a UK primary care database (The Health Improvement Network). Patients were required to have at least 12 months of data before and after switching from NPH to glargine. The principal analysis was the change in HbA(1c) after 12 months treatment with glargine; secondary analyses included change in weight and total daily insulin dose. Inconsistent reporting of hypoglycemic episodes precludes reliable reporting of this outcome. Multivariate analyses were used to adjust for baseline characteristics and confounding variables.
After adjustment, both diabetic cohorts showed statistically significant reductions in mean HbA(1c) 12 months after the switch, by 0.38% (p < 0.001) in type 1 patients and 0.31% (p < 0.001) in type 2 patients. Improvement in HbA1c was positively correlated with baseline HbA(1c); patients with baseline HbA(1c) > or = 8% had reductions of 0.57% (p < 0.001) and 0.47% (p < 0.001), respectively. There was no significant change in weight or total daily insulin dose while on glargine. The majority of patients received a basal-bolus regimen prior to and after the switch (mean 79.3% before and 77.2% after switch in type 1 patients, and 80.4% and 76.8%, respectively in type 2 patients, p > 0.05).
In routine clinical practice, switching from NPH to glargine provides the opportunity for improving glycaemic control in diabetes patients inadequately controlled by NPH.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
125 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: We started laparoscopic mini-gastric bypass (MGB) for the first time in India in February 2007 for its reported safety, efficacy, and easy reversibility. A retrospective review of prospectively maintained data of all 1,054 consecutive patients (342 men and 712 women) who underwent MGB at our institute from February 2007 to January 2013 was done. Mean age was 38.4 years, preoperative mean weight was 128.5 kg, mean BMI was 43.2 kg/m(2), mean operating time was 52 ± 18.5 min, and mean hospital stay was 2.5 ± 1.3 days. There were 49 (4.6 %) early minor complications, 14 (1.3 %) major complications, and 2 leaks (0.2 %). In late complications, one patient had low albumin and one had excess weight loss; MGB was easily reversed in both (0.2 %). Marginal ulcers were noted in five patients (0.6 %) during follow-up for symptomatic dyspepsia, and anemia was the most frequent late complication occurring in 68 patients (7.6 %). Patient satisfaction was high, and mean excess weight loss was 84, 91, 88, 86, 87, and 85 % at years 1 to 6, respectively. This study confirms previous publications showing that MGB is quite safe, with a short hospital stay and low risk of complications. It results in effective and sustained weight loss with high resolution of comorbidities and complications that are easily managed.
    Obesity Surgery 03/2014; · 3.10 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Insulin is normally added to oral glucose-lowering drugs in people with type 2 diabetes when glycaemic control becomes suboptimal. We evaluated outcomes in people starting insulin therapy with neutral protamine Hagedorn (NPH), detemir, glargine or premixed insulins. Insulin-naïve people with type 2 diabetes (n = 8009), ≥ 35 years old, HbA(1c) ≥ 6.5% and begun on NPH (n = 1463), detemir (n = 357), glargine (n = 2197) or premix (n = 3992), were identified from a UK database of primary care records (The Health Improvement Network). Unadjusted and multivariate-adjusted analyses were conducted, with persistence of insulin therapy assessed by survival analysis. In the study population (n = 4337), baseline HbA(1c) was 9.5 ± 1.6%, falling to 8.4 ± 1.5% over 12 months (change -1.1 ± 1.8%, p < 0.001). Compared with NPH, people taking detemir, glargine and premix had an adjusted reduction in HbA(1c) from baseline, of 0.00% (p = 0.99), 0.19% (p < 0.001) and 0.03% (p = 0.51). Body weight increased by 2.8 kg overall (p < 0.001), and by 2.3, 1.7, 1.9, and 3.3 kg on NPH, detemir, glargine and premix (p < 0.001 for all groups); insulin dose at 12 months was 0.70 (overall), 0.64, 0.61, 0.56 and 0.76 U/kg/day. After 36 months, 57% of people on NPH, 67% on glargine and 83% on premix remained on their initially prescribed insulin. In routine clinical practice, people with type 2 diabetes commenced on NPH experienced a modest disadvantage in glycaemic control after 12 months compared with other insulins. When comparing the insulins, glargine achieved best HbA(1c) reduction, while premix showed greatest weight gain and the highest dose requirement, but had the best persistence of therapy.
    International Journal of Clinical Practice 11/2010; 64(12):1609-18. · 2.43 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To investigate the clinical effects associated with premixed insulin (PM) and basal insulin [insulin NPH (NPH), insulin glargine (IG), insulin detemir (ID)], in insulin-naïve patients with type 2 diabetes in routine clinical care. Cohort study based on data from the Swedish National Diabetes Register, including 5,077 patients, resident in the Western region of Sweden. Patients were included between 1 July 2006 and 31 December 2009 and followed for 12 months. Changes in HbA1c, body mass index (BMI) and required insulin doses were compared between the different insulin types. Covariance adjustments were performed to adjust for differences between the groups. NPH, IG, ID and PM were all associated with significant reductions in HbA1c, mean ± standard deviation ranged between 6.6 ± 17.4 mmol/mol (IG) and 8.9 ± 17.7 mmol/mol (NPH), during the 12 months of follow-up. There were no statistically significant differences in the magnitude of HbA1c reduction between the insulin types. PM required 59% higher and ID 25% higher insulin doses to achieve a similar HbA1c reduction as NPH. PM was associated with a significantly greater increase in BMI compared with NPH (p = 0.016), while IG and ID did not differ significantly from NPH. The number of patients experiencing severe hypoglycemia was low, but highest in patients treated with PM (p = 0.023). NPH, IG, ID and PM were found to be equally effective in lowering HbA1c in insulin-naïve patients with type 2 diabetes in routine clinical care in Sweden. The effects on weight, dose and treatment persistence support the recommendation of NPH or IG as first and second choices in this group of patients requiring initiation of insulin treatment.
    Diabetes therapy : research, treatment and education of diabetes and related disorders. 05/2014;

Full-text (3 Sources)

View
21 Downloads
Available from
Jun 2, 2014