Dataset Information

All-Cause and Cardiovascular Mortality Among Insulin-Naive People With Type 2 Diabetes Treated With Insulin Detemir or Glargine: A Cohort Study in the UK.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Uncontrolled 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).

Methods

We 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.

Results

The 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.

Conclusion

In 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.

SUBMITTER: Husemoen LLN

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8099979 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundChronically 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.ObjectivesTo assess the effects of insulin detemir and insulin glargine compared with each other in the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus.Search strategyWe searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, The Cochrane Library, online registries of ongoing trials and abstract books. Date of last search was January 2011.Selection criteriaAll randomised controlled trials comparing insulin detemir with insulin glargine with a duration of 12 weeks or longer were included.Data collection and analysisTwo authors independently selected the studies and extracted the data. Pooling of studies by means of random-effects meta-analysis was performed.Main resultsThis 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' conclusionsOur 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:Aims/hypothesisThis 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.MethodsInsulin-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) <or= 6.0 mmol/l. An additional morning insulin detemir dose was permitted if pre-dinner plasma glucose (PG) was >7.0 mmol/l after achieving FPG <7.0 mmol/l. Due to labelling restrictions, no second glargine dose was allowed.ResultsBaseline 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) <or= 7.0%: 33% (detemir) and 35% (glargine) without hypoglycaemia. Within-participant variability for self-monitored FPG and pre-dinner PG did not differ by insulin treatment, nor did the relative risk of overall or nocturnal hypoglycaemia. Modest reductions in weight gain were seen with detemir vs glargine in completers (3.0 vs 3.9 kg, p=0.01) and in the intention-to-treat population (2.7 vs 3.5 kg, p=0.03), primarily related to completers on once-daily detemir. Mean daily detemir dose was higher (0.78 U/kg [0.52 with once daily dosing, 1.00 U/kg with twice daily dosing]) than glargine (0.44 IU/kg). Injection site reactions were more frequent with detemir (4.5 vs 1.4%).Conclusions/interpretationSupplementation of oral agents with detemir or glargine achieves clinically important improvements in glycaemic control with low risk of hypoglycaemia. Non-inferiority was demonstrated for detemir using higher insulin doses (mainly patients on twice daily dosing); weight gain was somewhat reduced with once daily insulin detemir.

Project description:IntroductionThis study compared the efficacy and safety of similar U-100 insulin glargine products, namely, Lilly insulin glargine (LY IGlar; Basaglar®) and the reference insulin glargine product (IGlar; Lantus®), used once daily in combination with oral antihyperglycemic medications (OAMs) in adults with type 2 diabetes (T2D).MethodsELEMENT 5 was a phase III, randomized, multinational, open-label, treat-to-target, 24-week trial. Participants were insulin naïve (glycated hemoglobin [HbA1c] ≥ 7.0% to ≤ 11.0%) or on basal insulin (IGlar, neutral protamine Hagedorn or insulin detemir; HbA1c ≤ 11.0%) and taking ≥ 2 OAMs. The primary objective was to show that LY IGlar is noninferior to IGlar in terms of HbA1c reduction (0.4% noninferiority margin).ResultsThe study population (N = 493) was predominantly Asian (48%) or White (46%), with similar baseline characteristics between arms (P > 0.05). At 24 weeks, LY IGlar was noninferior to IGlar in terms of change in HbA1c level from baseline (- 1.25 vs. - 1.22%, respectively; least squares mean difference - 0.04%; 95% confidence interval - 0.22%, 0.15%). Other 24-week efficacy and safety results were also similar between treatments (P > 0.05), including insulin dose; percentage of patients having HbA1c of < 7% and ≤ 6.5%; overall rate and incidence of total, nocturnal, and severe hypoglycemia; adverse events; insulin antibody response; and weight gain. Daily mean 7-point self-monitored blood glucose reduction was similar between treatments at 24 weeks, with no differences at any time point except premorning-meal (fasting) blood glucose (LY IGlar - 2.37 mmol/L; IGlar - 2.69 mmol/L; P = 0.007).ConclusionOverall, LY IGlar and IGlar combined with OAMs provided similar glucose control and safety findings in this T2D population, which included a greater proportion of Asian patients and had broader background basal insulin experience than a previously studied T2D population.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT02302716.FundingEli Lilly and Company and Boehringer Ingelheim. Plain language summary available for this article.