Dataset Information

Comparison of exenatide with biphasic insulin aspart 30 on glucose variability in type 2 diabetes: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

ABSTRACT: Apart from the mean level of glycemic control, the extent of glucose excursions is another important issue to consider in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) management. Studies have showed that fluctuations of glucose seem to have more deleterious effects than sustained hyperglycemia in the development of diabetic complications as acute glucose swings activate the oxidative stress. However, until now, no randomized controlled trials have been conducted with the primary aim to evaluate glycemic fluctuation in the comparison between twice-daily exenatide and other treatment paradigms (for example, biphasic insulin aspart 30).This multicenter, open-label, randomized, parallel trial includes a 1-week screening period and a 16-week treatment period. After the screening period, 150 patients with confirmed type 2 diabetes who are treated with stable, maximum-tolerated doses of metformin will be randomly assigned to one of two groups for antihyperglycemic therapies: exenatide and biphasic insulin aspart 30. The treatment with exenatide will be initiated at a low dose of 5 ?g twice a day for 4 weeks and then titrated up to a standard dose of 10 ug twice a day until the completion of the study. The adjustment of insulin dose is instructed to achieve an optimal balance between glycemic control and the risk of hypoglycemia as dictated by clinical practice. The primary outcome is the absolute change of mean amplitude of glycemic excursion from baseline to week 16, which is calculated based on a real-time continuous glucose monitoring system (CGMS).This is the first randomized controlled trial using a CGMS to evaluate glycemic fluctuation between twice-daily exenatide and insulin aspart 30, which will provide beneficial evidence of exenatide usage in patients with T2DM.NCT02449603 . Date of registration: 11 May 2015.

SUBMITTER: Xu S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4806460 | biostudies-literature | 2016 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Comparison of exenatide with biphasic insulin aspart 30 on glucose variability in type 2 diabetes: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

Xu Shaoyong S Liu Xiangyang X Ming Jie J Ji Qiuhe Q

Trials 20160324

<h4>Background</h4>Apart from the mean level of glycemic control, the extent of glucose excursions is another important issue to consider in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) management. Studies have showed that fluctuations of glucose seem to have more deleterious effects than sustained hyperglycemia in the development of diabetic complications as acute glucose swings activate the oxidative stress. However, until now, no randomized controlled trials have been conducted with the primary aim to eva ...[more]

PMID: 27009108

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionTo compare blood glucose variability (GV) in Chinese participants with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) whose blood glucose levels are inadequately controlled with metformin monotherapy after twice-daily exenatide or biphasic insulin aspart 30 (BIAsp30).MethodsIn this 16-week multicenter, randomized clinical trial, 104 participants were randomized 1:1 to receive exenatide (exenatide group) or BIAsp30 (BIAsp30 group) twice daily. All participants continued metformin treatment. The primary outcome was the change in GV as measured by a continuous glucose monitoring system (CGMS) from baseline to 16 weeks.ResultsAt 16 weeks, both the Exenatide and BIAsp30 groups effectively decreased mean glucose (MG), but neither group changed the mean amplitude of glycemic excursion (MAGE), largest amplitude of glycemic excursion (LAGE), mean of daily difference (MODD), or standard deviation of blood glucose (SDBG). The decrease in 2-h post-breakfast glucose excursions was greater in the Exenatide group compared to the BIAsp30 group, with a least square (LS) mean difference [95% CI] of (1.58 [0.53, 2.63]). Exenatide also significantly reduced 2-h post-lunch glucose excursion compared to BIAsp30 (LS mean difference [95% CI], 1.19 [0.18, 2.20]). The Exenatide group had significantly reduced body weight and body mass index (BMI), while the BIAsp30 group had increased weight and had no change in BMI. Both treatments were well tolerated with no serious hypoglycemic events and with fewer identified hypoglycemic events in the Exenatide group than in the BIAsp30 group (5.77% vs. 17.31%, P < 0.01).ConclusionAlthough there was no difference in change of GV between Exenatide and BIAsp30, exenatide provided more improvement in postprandial glucose excursion and weight control, without increasing the risk of hypoglycemia in Chinese patients with T2DM whose blood glucose was inadequately controlled with metformin. These findings may provide new options for patients who choose further hypoglycemic treatment, especially in patients with obesity who have large postprandial plasma glucose excursions.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov indentifier: NCT02449603.

Project description:IntroductionThis 32-week, open-label, randomized, parallel-group, multinational trial aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of stepwise insulin intensification of biphasic insulin aspart 30 (BIAsp 30) relative to stepwise intensification of a basal-bolus regimen in insulin-naïve adults with type 2 diabetes (T2D) who continued pretrial treatment with metformin and sulfonylurea.MethodsAdults with T2D were randomized into one of two treatment arms for 32 weeks: (1) BIAsp 30 once daily (OD), with the possibility of stepwise treatment intensification up to BIAsp 30 three times daily (TID); (2) insulin glargine OD, with the possibility of stepwise treatment intensification with insulin aspart up to TID. The primary endpoint was change from baseline in HbA1c after 32 weeks.ResultsAfter 32 weeks, the estimated mean change in HbA1c from baseline was statistically significantly lower in the BIAsp 30 arm (- 1.18%) versus basal-bolus (- 1.36%) [estimated treatment difference 0.18%; 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.01; 0.36; p < 0.05]. The proportion of patients with HbA1c below 7.0% was statistically significantly lower with BIAsp 30 (42.9%) compared with basal-bolus (56.9%) (odds ratio 0.58; 95% CI 0.37; 0.89; p = 0.01). The overall rate of severe or blood glucose (BG)-confirmed hypoglycemic events was numerically lower for BIAsp 30 compared with basal-bolus, and a statistically significantly lower rate in nocturnal severe or BG-confirmed hypoglycemia in the BIAsp 30 arm relative to basal-bolus was observed: estimated rate ratio 0.32 (95% CI 0.13; 0.79), p = 0.0131. The proportion of patients with adverse events was similar in both treatment arms.ConclusionInsulin intensification with BIAsp 30 and basal-bolus showed an improvement in glycemic control; the change in HbA1c was statistically significantly lower for BIAsp 30 compared to basal-bolus. Basal-bolus treatment was accompanied by a numerically, and statistically significantly, higher rate of overall and nocturnal severe or BG-confirmed hypoglycemia, respectively, compared with BIAsp 30.FundingNovo Nordisk A/S.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT02453685.

Dataset Information

Comparison of exenatide with biphasic insulin aspart 30 on glucose variability in type 2 diabetes: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

Publications

Comparison of exenatide with biphasic insulin aspart 30 on glucose variability in type 2 diabetes: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets