Dataset Information

Hypoglycaemia among Insulin-Treated Patients with Diabetes: Southeast Asia Cohort of IO HAT Study

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To provide real-world data on hypoglycaemia incidence in patients with type 1 (T1D) or type 2 diabetes (T2D) from the Southeast Asian cohort of the International Operations Hypoglycaemia Assessment Tool (IO HAT) study.

Methodology

IO HAT was a non-interventional, multicentre, 6-month retrospective and 4-week prospective study of hypoglycaemic events among insulin-treated adults with T1D or T2D, including four countries in Southeast Asia (Singapore, Philippines, Indonesia, and Bangladesh). Data were collected using a two-part self-assessment questionnaire (SAQ1 for retrospective and SAQ2 for prospective). The primary endpoint was the percentage of patients experiencing at least one hypoglycaemic event during the 4-week prospective observational period (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02306681).

Results

A total of 2594 patients completed SAQ1. Nearly all patients reported experiencing any hypoglycaemic event in the 4-week prospective period (T1D, 100%; T2D, 97.3%), with all patients reporting higher rates in the prospective versus retrospective period. Severe hypoglycaemia was also reported higher prospectively (57.2% and 76.9%) than retrospectively (33.9% and 12.2%) in both T1D and T2D, respectively. Nocturnal hypoglycaemia was reported higher retrospectively than prospectively.

Conclusion

Incidence of any and severe hypoglycaemia in the Southeast Asian cohort of IO HAT was higher prospectively versus retrospectively, suggesting hypoglycaemia has previously been under-reported in this region.

SUBMITTER: Pathan F

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7784114 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:To determine participant knowledge and reporting of hypoglycaemia in the non-interventional Hypoglycaemia Assessment Tool (HAT) study.HAT was conducted in 24 countries over a 6-month retrospective/4-week prospective period in 27 585 adults with Type 1 or insulin-treated Type 2 diabetes mellitus. Participants recorded whether hypoglycaemia was based on blood glucose levels, symptoms or both.Hypoglycaemia rates were consistently higher in the prospective compared with the retrospective period. Most respondents (96.8% Type 1 diabetes; 85.6% Type 2 diabetes) knew the American Diabetes Association/European Association for the Study of Diabetes hypoglycaemia definition, but there were regional differences in the use of blood glucose measurements and/or symptoms to define events. Confirmed symptomatic hypoglycaemia rates were highest in Northern Europe/Canada for Type 1 diabetes (63.9 events/year) and in Eastern Europe for Type 2 diabetes (19.4 events/year), and lowest in South East Asia (Type 1 diabetes: 6.0 events/year; Type 2 diabetes: 3.2 events/year). Unconfirmed symptomatic hypoglycaemia rates were highest in Eastern Europe for Type 1 diabetes (5.6 events/year) and South East Asia for Type 2 diabetes (4.7 events/year), and lowest for both in Russia (Type 1 diabetes: 2.1 events/year; Type 2 diabetes: 0.4 events/year). Participants in Latin America reported the highest rates of severe hypoglycaemia (Type 1 diabetes: 10.8 events/year; Type 2 diabetes 3.7 events/year) and severe hypoglycaemia requiring hospitalization (Type 1 diabetes: 0.56 events/year; Type 2 diabetes: 0.44 events/year). The lowest rates of severe hypoglycaemia were reported in South East Asia (Type 1 diabetes: 2.0 events/year) and Northern Europe/Canada (Type 2 diabetes: 1.3 events/year), and the lowest rates of severe hypoglycaemia requiring hospitalization were in Russia (Type 1 diabetes: 0.15 events/year; Type 2 diabetes: 0.09 events/year). The blood glucose cut-off used to define hypoglycaemia varied between regions (Type 1 diabetes: 3.1-3.6 mmol/l; Type 2 diabetes: 3.5-3.8 mmol/l).Under-reporting of hypoglycaemia rates in retrospective recall and regional variations in participant definitions of hypoglycaemia may contribute to the global differences in reported rates. Discrepancies between participant definitions and guidelines may highlight a need to redefine hypoglycaemia criteria. (Clinical Trials Registry No: NCT01696266).

Project description:AIMS/HYPOTHESIS:A head-to-head randomised trial was conducted to evaluate hypoglycaemia safety with insulin degludec 200 U/ml (degludec U200) and insulin glargine 300 U/ml (glargine U300) in individuals with type 2 diabetes treated with basal insulin. METHODS:This randomised (1:1), open-label, treat-to-target, multinational trial included individuals with type 2 diabetes, aged ?18 years with HbA1c ?80 mmol/mol (9.5%) and BMI ?45 kg/m2. Participants were previously treated with basal insulin with or without oral glucose-lowering drugs (excluding insulin secretagogues) and had to fulfil at least one predefined criterion for hypoglycaemia risk. Both degludec U200 and glargine U300 were similarly titrated to a fasting blood glucose target of 4.0-5.0 mmol/l. Endpoints were assessed during a 36 week maintenance period and a total treatment period up to 88 weeks. There were three hypoglycaemia endpoints: (1) overall symptomatic hypoglycaemia (either severe, an event requiring third-party assistance, or confirmed by blood glucose [<3.1 mmol/l] with symptoms); (2) nocturnal symptomatic hypoglycaemia (severe or confirmed by blood glucose with symptoms, between 00:01 and 05:59 h); and (3) severe hypoglycaemia. The primary endpoint was the number of overall symptomatic hypoglycaemic events in the maintenance period. Secondary hypoglycaemia endpoints included the number of nocturnal symptomatic events and number of severe hypoglycaemic events during the maintenance period. RESULTS:Of the 1609 randomised participants, 733 of 805 (91.1%) in the degludec U200 arm and 734 of 804 (91.3%) in the glargine U300 arm completed the trial (87.3% and 87.8% completed on treatment, respectively). Baseline characteristics were comparable between the two treatment arms. For the primary endpoint, the rate of overall symptomatic hypoglycaemia was not significantly lower with degludec U200 vs glargine U300 (rate ratio [RR] 0.88 [95% CI 0.73, 1.06]). As there was no significant difference between treatments for the primary endpoint, the confirmatory testing procedure for superiority was stopped. The pre-specified confirmatory secondary hypoglycaemia endpoints were analysed using pre-specified statistical models but were now considered exploratory. These endpoints showed a lower rate of nocturnal symptomatic hypoglycaemia (RR 0.63 [95% CI 0.48, 0.84]) and severe hypoglycaemia (RR 0.20 [95% CI 0.07, 0.57]) with degludec U200 vs glargine U300. CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION:There was no significant difference in the rate of overall symptomatic hypoglycaemia with degludec U200 vs glargine U300 in the maintenance period. The rates of nocturnal symptomatic and severe hypoglycaemia were nominally significantly lower with degludec U200 during the maintenance period compared with glargine U300. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03078478 FUNDING: This trial was funded by Novo Nordisk (Bagsvaerd, Denmark).

Project description:Aims/hypothesisThe aim of this study was to determine whether random non-fasting C-peptide (rCP) measurement can be used to assess hypoglycaemia risk in insulin-treated type 2 diabetes.MethodsWe compared continuous glucose monitoring-assessed SD of blood glucose and hypoglycaemia duration in 17 patients with insulin-treated type 2 diabetes and severe insulin deficiency (rCP < 200 pmol/l) and 17 matched insulin-treated control patients with type 2 diabetes but who had preserved endogenous insulin (rCP > 600 pmol/l). We then assessed the relationship between rCP and questionnaire-based measures of hypoglycaemia in 256 patients with insulin-treated type 2 diabetes and a comparison group of 209 individuals with type 1 diabetes.ResultsContinuous glucose monitoring (CGM)-assessed glucose variability and hypoglycaemia was greater in individuals with rCP < 200 pmol/l despite similar mean glucose. In those with low vs high C-peptide, SD of glucose was 4.2 (95% CI 3.7, 4.6) vs 3.0 (2.6, 3.4) mmol/l (p < 0.001). In the low-C-peptide vs high-C-peptide group, the proportion of individuals experiencing sustained hypoglycaemia ≤ 4 mmol/l was 94% vs 41% (p < 0.001), the mean rate of hypoglycaemia was 5.5 (4.4, 6.7) vs 2.1 (1.4, 2.9) episodes per person per week (p = 0.004) and the mean duration was 630 (619, 643) vs 223 (216, 230) min per person per week (p = 0.01). Hypoglycaemia ≤ 3 mmol/l was infrequent in individuals with preserved C-peptide (1.8 [1.2, 2.6] episodes per person per week vs 0.4 [0.1, 0.8] episodes per person per week for low vs high C-peptide, p = 0.04) and only occurred at night. In a population-based cohort with insulin-treated type 2 diabetes, self-reported hypoglycaemia was twice as frequent in those with rCP < 200 pmol/l (OR 2.0, p < 0.001) and the rate of episodes resulting in loss of consciousness or seizure was five times higher (OR 5.0, p = 0.001). The relationship between self-reported hypoglycaemia and C-peptide was similar in individuals with type 1 and type 2 diabetes.Conclusions/interpretationLow rCP is associated with increased glucose variability and hypoglycaemia in patients with insulin-treated type 2 diabetes and represents a practical, stable and inexpensive biomarker for assessment of hypoglycaemia risk.