Dataset Information

A randomised, 52-week, treat-to-target trial comparing insulin detemir with insulin glargine when administered as add-on to glucose-lowering drugs in insulin-naive people with type 2 diabetes.

ABSTRACT: This 52-week multinational, randomised, open-label, parallel-group, non-inferiority trial compared clinical outcomes following supplementation of oral glucose-lowering drugs with basal insulin analogues detemir and glargine in type 2 diabetic patients.Insulin-naive adults (n=582, HbA(1c) 7.5-10.0%, BMI 7.0 mmol/l after achieving FPG <7.0 mmol/l. Due to labelling restrictions, no second glargine dose was allowed.Baseline HbA(1c) decreased from 8.6 to 7.2 and 7.1% (NS) with detemir and glargine, respectively. FPG improved from 10.8 to 7.1 and 7.0 mmol/l (NS), respectively. With detemir, 45% of participants completed the study on once daily dosing and 55% on twice daily dosing, with no difference in HbA(1c). Overall, 52% of participants achieved HbA(1c)

SUBMITTER: Rosenstock J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC2235909 | biostudies-literature | 2008 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

A randomised, 52-week, treat-to-target trial comparing insulin detemir with insulin glargine when administered as add-on to glucose-lowering drugs in insulin-naive people with type 2 diabetes.

Rosenstock J J Davies M M Home P D PD Larsen J J Koenen C C Schernthaner G G

Diabetologia 20080116 3

<h4>Aims/hypothesis</h4>This 52-week multinational, randomised, open-label, parallel-group, non-inferiority trial compared clinical outcomes following supplementation of oral glucose-lowering drugs with basal insulin analogues detemir and glargine in type 2 diabetic patients.<h4>Methods</h4>Insulin-naive adults (n=582, HbA(1c) 7.5-10.0%, BMI <or= 40.0 kg/m(2)) were randomised 1:1 to receive insulin detemir or glargine once daily (evening) actively titrated to target fasting plasma glucose (FPG) ...[more]

PMID: 18204830

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Chronically elevated blood glucose levels are associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Many diabetes patients will eventually require insulin treatment to maintain good glycaemic control. There are still uncertainties about the optimal insulin treatment regimens for type 2 diabetes, but the long-acting insulin analogues seem beneficial. Several reviews have compared either insulin detemir or insulin glargine to NPH insulin, but research directly comparing both insulin analogues is limited. OBJECTIVES:To assess the effects of insulin detemir and insulin glargine compared with each other in the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus. SEARCH STRATEGY:We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, The Cochrane Library, online registries of ongoing trials and abstract books. Date of last search was January 2011. SELECTION CRITERIA:All randomised controlled trials comparing insulin detemir with insulin glargine with a duration of 12 weeks or longer were included. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS:Two authors independently selected the studies and extracted the data. Pooling of studies by means of random-effects meta-analysis was performed. MAIN RESULTS:This review examined four trials lasting 24 to 52 weeks involving 2250 people randomised to either insulin detemir or glargine. Overall, risk of bias of the evaluated studies was high. Insulin glargine was dosed once-daily in the evening. Insulin detemir was initiated once-daily in the evening with the option of an additional dose in the morning in three studies and initiated twice-daily in one study. Of randomised patients 13.6% to 57.2% were injecting insulin detemir twice-daily at the end of trial.Glycaemic control, measured by glycosylated haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) and HbA1c equal to or less than 7% with or without hypoglycaemia, did not differ statistically significantly between treatment groups.The results showed no significant differences in overall, nocturnal and severe hypoglycaemia between treatment groups.Insulin detemir was associated with less weight gain. Treatment with insulin glargine resulted in a lower daily basal insulin dose and a lower number of injection site reactions.There was no significant difference in the variability of FPG or glucose values in 24-hour profiles between treatment groups. It was not possible to draw conclusions on quality of life, costs or mortality. Only one trial reported results on health-related quality of life and showed no significant differences between treatment groups. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS:Our analyses suggest that there is no clinically relevant difference in efficacy or safety between insulin detemir and insulin glargine for targeting hyperglycaemia. However, to achieve the same glycaemic control insulin detemir was often injected twice-daily in a higher dose but with less weight gain, while insulin glargine was injected once-daily, with somewhat fewer injection site reactions.

Project description:IntroductionUncontrolled type 2 diabetes (T2D) is associated with an increased risk of micro- and macrovascular complications and mortality. The impact of basal insulins on the risks of mortality and cardiovascular mortality in people with T2D has not been thoroughly investigated in real-world settings. The aim of the present real-word study was to investigate differences in mortality among insulin-naïve people with T2D who initiated insulin detemir (detemir) and insulin glargine (glargine).MethodsWe assessed all-cause and cardiovascular mortality in people with T2D, aged ≥ 40 years and insulin-naïve at treatment initiation. People were identified from the United Kingdom Clinical Practice Research Datalink GOLD national database (2004-2019). Database information included prescribed medications, demographic and clinical variables and mortality. Cause of death was obtained from the Office for National Statistics (ONS). For mortality, 24 clinically relevant confounders were considered and adjusted for using Cox regression analyses.ResultsThe total cohort included 12,847 people with T2D, including 3031 who commenced detemir and 9816 who commenced glargine. Median age was 66.8 years and median diabetes duration was 7.6 years. From the total cohort, 3231 deaths occurred during follow-up and 6897 people were eligible for linkage to the ONS for cardiovascular mortality data (528 cardiovascular deaths). The adjusted hazard ratio (HR) (95% confidence interval [CI]) was 0.86 (0.79; 0.95) for all-cause mortality and 0.83 (0.67; 1.03) for cardiovascular mortality, in favour of detemir versus glargine. These associations were more pronounced among people with obesity (body mass index ≥ 30 kg/m2), with HRs (95% CI) of 0.79 (0.69; 0.91) and 0.69 (0.50; 0.96) for all-cause and cardiovascular mortality, respectively.ConclusionIn this real-world observational study, there was an association between all-cause mortality and basal insulin choice in insulin-naïve people with T2D; the mortality risk was lower with detemir versus glargine after adjustment for potential confounders.

Project description:To lower the barrier for initiating insulin treatment and obtain adequate glycemic control in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), new basal insulin preparations with improved pharmacological properties and consequently a lower risk of hypoglycemia are needed. The objective of this trial was to confirm the efficacy and compare the safety of insulin degludec (IDeg) with insulin glargine (IGlar) in a multinational setting with two thirds of subjects enrolled in China.This was a 26-week, randomized, open-label, parallel-group, treat-to-target, non-inferiority trial in 833 subjects with T2DM (48 % were female, mean age 56 years, diabetes duration 8 years), inadequately controlled on oral antidiabetic drugs (OADs). Subjects were randomized 2:1 to once-daily IDeg (555 subjects) or IGlar (278 subjects), both with metformin. The primary endpoint was the change from baseline in glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) after 26 weeks.The completion rate was high (IDeg 94.2 %; IGlar 91.4 %). Mean HbA1c decreased from 8.3 to 7.0 % in both groups. Estimated treatment difference (ETD) [95 % confidence interval (CI)] IDeg-IGlar in change from baseline was -0.05 % points [-0.18 to 0.08], confirming the non-inferiority of IDeg to IGlar. The proportion of subjects achieving HbA1c <7.0 % was 54.2 and 51.4 % with IDeg and IGlar, respectively (estimated odds ratio [95 % CI] IDeg/IGlar: 1.14 [0.84 to 1.54]). The mean decrease in fasting plasma glucose, self-measured plasma glucose profiles, and insulin dose were similar between groups. Numerically lower rates of overall (estimated rate ratio [95 % CI] IDeg/IGlar: 0.80 [0.59 to 1.10]) and nocturnal (0.77 [0.43 to 1.37]) confirmed hypoglycemia were observed with IDeg compared with IGlar. No treatment differences in other safety parameters were found. Subjects were more satisfied with the IDeg device compared with the IGlar device as reflected by the total Treatment Related Impact Measures-Diabetes Device score (ETD [95 % CI] IDeg-IGlar: 2.2 [0.2 to 4.3]).IDeg provided adequate glycemic control non-inferior to IGlar and a tendency for a lower hypoglycemia rate. IDeg is considered suitable for initiating insulin therapy in T2DM patients on OADs requiring intensified treatment.Clinicaltrials.gov NCT01849289.

Dataset Information

A randomised, 52-week, treat-to-target trial comparing insulin detemir with insulin glargine when administered as add-on to glucose-lowering drugs in insulin-naive people with type 2 diabetes.

Publications

A randomised, 52-week, treat-to-target trial comparing insulin detemir with insulin glargine when administered as add-on to glucose-lowering drugs in insulin-naive people with type 2 diabetes.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure