Insulin detemir compared with NPH insulin in children and adolescents with Type 1 diabetes.

AIMS: This study compared the effect of insulin detemir on glycaemic control (HbA(1c), fasting plasma glucose and variability thereof) with that of Neutral Protamine Hagedorn human isophane (NPH) insulin, both combined with insulin aspart, in children with Type 1 diabetes mellitus, and compared the safety of these treatments. METHODS: In this 26-week, open-label, randomized (2 : 1), parallel-group study, 347 (140 prepubertal and 207 pubertal) children with Type 1 diabetes, aged 6-17 years, received insulin detemir (n = 232) or NPH insulin (n = 115) once or twice daily, according to the prestudy regimen, plus premeal insulin aspart. RESULTS: The mean HbA(1c) decreased by approximately 0.8% with both treatments. After 26 weeks, the mean difference in HbA(1c) was 0.1% (95% confidence interval -0.1, 0.3) (insulin detemir 8.0%, NPH insulin 7.9%). Within-subject variation in self-measured fasting plasma glucose was significantly lower with insulin detemir than with NPH insulin (SD 3.3 vs. 4.3, P < 0.001), as was mean fasting plasma glucose (8.4 vs. 9.6 mmol/l, P = 0.022). The risk of nocturnal hypoglycaemia (22.00-07.00 h) was 26% lower with insulin detemir (P = 0.041) and the risk of 24-h hypoglycaemia was similar with the two treatments (P = 0.351). The mean body mass index (BMI) Z-score was lower with insulin detemir (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Basal-bolus treatment with insulin detemir or NPH insulin and premeal insulin aspart in children and adolescents with Type 1 diabetes mellitus improved HbA(1c) to a similar degree. The lower and more predictable fasting plasma glucose, lower risk of nocturnal hypoglycaemia and lower BMI observed with insulin detemir are clinically significant advantages compared with NPH insulin.     

Comparison of insulin detemir and insulin glargine in subjects with Type 1 diabetes using intensive insulin therapy.

AIMS: To compare glycaemic control and risk of hypoglycaemia of twice-daily insulin detemir with once-daily insulin glargine in subjects with Type 1 diabetes. METHODS: In this 26-week, multicentre, open-label, parallel-group trial, 320 subjects with Type 1 diabetes received either insulin detemir twice daily or insulin glargine once daily. each in combination with premeal insulin aspart. RESULTS: After 26 weeks, HbA(1c) had decreased from 8.8 to 8.2% in the insulin detemir group and from 8.7 to 8.2% in the insulin glargine group. Home-measured fasting plasma glucose (PG) was lower with insulin glargine than with insulin detemir (7.0 vs. 7.7 mmol/l, P < 0.001). The overall shape of the home-measured nine-point PG profiles was comparable between treatments (P = 0.125). Overall, there was no significant difference in within-subject variation in PG (P = 0.437). Within-subject variation in predinner PG was lower with insulin detemir than with insulin glargine (P < 0.05). The overall risk of hypoglycaemia was similar with no differences in confirmed hypoglycaemia. However, the risk of severe and nocturnal hypoglycaemia was 72% and 32%, respectively, lower with insulin detemir than with insulin glargine (P < 0.05). Body weight gain was not significantly different comparing insulin detemir and insulin glargine (0.52 kg vs. 0.96 kg, P = 0.193). CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with twice-daily insulin detemir or once-daily insulin glargine, each in combination with insulin aspart, resulted in similar glycaemic control. The overall risk of hypoglycaemia was comparable, whereas the risks of both severe and nocturnal hypoglycaemia were significantly lower with insulin detemir.     

Comparison of three multiple injection regimens for Type 1 diabetes: morning plus dinner or bedtime administration of insulin detemir vs. morning plus bedtime NPH insulin.

AIMS: This trial investigated the efficacy and safety of two different administration-time regimens with insulin detemir (IDet) to that of a conventional basal insulin regimen with NPH insulin (NPH). METHODS: This multinational, 16-week, open, parallel group trial included 400 people with Type 1 diabetes mellitus (DM) randomized to IDet either morning and before dinner (IDetmorn+din) or morning and bedtime (IDetmorn+bed), or to NPH morning and bedtime (NPHmorn+bed), all in combination with mealtime insulin aspart (IAsp). RESULTS: HbA1c was comparable between the three groups after 16 weeks (P = 0.64), with reductions of 0.39-0.49% points. Lower fasting plasma glucose (FPG) was observed with IDetmorn+din and IDetmorn+bed compared with NPHmorn+bed (9.8 and 9.1 vs. 11.1 mmol/l, P = 0.006), whereas the IDet groups did not differ (P = 0.15). Within-person variation in self-measured FPG was significantly lower for both IDet regimens (sd IDetmorn+din 2.5, IDetmorn+bed 2.6 mmol/l) than for NPHmorn+bed (sd 3.1 mmol/l, P < 0.001), but was comparable between the IDet groups (P = 0.48). Ten-point plasma glucose profiles were lower between dinner and breakfast in the IDetmorn+din group (P = 0.043), compared with the two other groups. Risk of overall and nocturnal hypoglycaemia was similar for the three groups. Lower mean bodyweight was observed with IDet compared with NPH after 16 weeks (difference: (IDetmorn+din)-1.3 kg, P < 0.001, (IDetmorn+bed)-0.6 kg, P = 0.050). CONCLUSIONS: Both IDet regimens were well tolerated and provided lower and less variable glucose levels with no, or less, weight gain than NPH at comparable HbA1c. IDet can be administered either at dinner or bedtime, with similar glycaemic control according to the need of the individual person.     

Insulin detemir and insulin aspart: a promising basal-bolus regimen for type 2 diabetes

This trial compared the efficacy and safety of basal-bolus therapy using either the soluble basal insulin analogue insulin detemir (IDet) in combination with meal-time rapid-acting analogue insulin aspart (IAsp), or NPH insulin (NPH) in combination with meal-time regular human insulin (HSI). This was a 22-week, multinational, open-labelled, symmetrically randomised, parallel group trial including 395 people with type 2 diabetes (IDet + IAsp: 195, NPH + HSI: 200). At 22 weeks, HbA1c was comparable between treatments (IDet + IAsp: 7.46%, NPH + HSI: 7.52%, P = 0.515) with decreases from baseline of 0.65% and 0.58%, respectively. Treatment with IDet + IAsp was associated with a significantly lower within-person variation in self-measured fasting plasma glucose (FPG) (SD:1.20 versus 1.54 mmol/L, p < 0.001), as well as a lower body weight gain (0.51 versus 1.13 kg, p = 0.038) than with NPH + HSI. The risk of nocturnal hypoglycaemia was 38% lower with IDet + IAsp than with NPH + HSI, but statistical significance was not attained (P = 0.14). The overall safety profile was similar between the two treatments. Basal-bolus treatment with IDet + IAsp is an effective and well tolerated insulin regimen in people with type 2 diabetes, resulting in glycaemic control comparable to that of NPH + HSI, but with the advantages of less weight gain and a lower day-to-day within-person variation in FPG.     

Improved glycaemic control with insulin glargine plus insulin lispro: a multicentre, randomized, cross-over trial in people with Type 1 diabetes.

AIMS: To compare blood glucose control using insulin glargine + insulin lispro with that on NPH insulin + unmodified human insulin in adults with Type 1 diabetes managed with a multiple injection regimen. METHODS: In this 32-week, five-centre, two-way cross-over study, people with Type 1 diabetes (n = 56, baseline HbA1c 8.0 +/- 0.8%) were randomized to evening insulin glargine + mealtime insulin lispro or to NPH insulin (once- or twice-daily) + mealtime unmodified human insulin. Each 16-week period concluded with a 24-h inpatient plasma glucose profile. RESULTS: HbA1c was lower with glargine + lispro than with NPH + human insulin [7.5 vs. 8.0%, difference -0.5 (95% CI -0.7, -0.3) %, P < 0.001]. This was confirmed by an 8% lower 24-h plasma glucose area under the curve (AUC) (187 vs. 203 mmol l(-1) h(-1), P = 0.037), a 24% reduction in plasma glucose AUC > 7.0 mmol/l1 (47 vs. 62 mmol l(-1) h(-1), P = 0.017) and a 15% lower post-prandial plasma glucose AUC (75 vs. 88 mmol l(-1) h(-1), P = 0.002). There was no reduction in night-time plasma glucose AUC or increase in plasma glucose area < 3.5 mmol/l. Monthly rate of nocturnal hypoglycaemia was reduced by 44% with glargine + lispro (0.66 vs. 1.18 episodes/month, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with NPH insulin + unmodified human insulin, the combination of insulin glargine with a rapid-acting insulin analogue as multiple-injection therapy for Type 1 diabetes improves overall glycaemic control as assessed by HbA1c and 24-h plasma glucose monitoring to a clinically significant degree, together with a reduction in nocturnal hypoglycaemia.     

Insulin detemir used in basal-bolus therapy in people with type 1 diabetes is associated with a lower risk of nocturnal hypoglycaemia and less weight gain over 12 months in comparison to NPH insulin

AIM: The aim of this study was to compare the long-term safety and efficacy of twice-daily insulin detemir or NPH insulin as the basal component of basal-bolus therapy in people with type 1 diabetes. METHODS: A multicentre, open-label, parallel-group study was conducted over 12 months and completed by 308 people (from an original randomized cohort of 428). Patients were randomized in a 2:1 ratio to receive insulin detemir or NPH insulin before breakfast and dinner, with insulin aspart at mealtimes. RESULTS: Glycaemic control improved in both groups with HbA(1c) decreasing by 0.64 and 0.56% point in the insulin detemir and NPH insulin groups, reaching baseline-adjusted final values of 7.53 +/- 0.10% and 7.59 +/- 0.13%, respectively. No significant difference was apparent between treatments in terms of HbA(1c), fasting plasma glucose or 9-point blood glucose profiles. Fewer hypoglycaemic events (major and minor) occurred in association with insulin detemir compared with NPH insulin, but the overall hypoglycaemic risk did not differ statistically significantly (RR for detemir, 0.78 [0.56-1.08]). However, the risk of nocturnal hypoglycaemia during the maintenance phase (month 2-12) was 32% lower in the detemir group (p = 0.02) and lower in every month. This risk reduction remained statistically significant after correction for HbA(1c). After 12 months, baseline-adjusted mean body weight was significantly lower in the insulin detemir group than in the NPH insulin group (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In long-term basal-bolus therapy, insulin detemir with insulin aspart as mealtime insulin is well tolerated and reduces the risks of nocturnal hypoglycaemia and weight gain compared to NPH insulin.     

Lower within-subject variability of fasting blood glucose and reduced weight gain with insulin detemir compared to NPH insulin in patients with type 2 diabetes

AIM: The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of a basal-bolus insulin regimen comprising either insulin detemir or neural protamine hagedorn (NPH) insulin in combination with mealtime insulin aspart in patients with type 2 diabetes. METHODS: This was a 26-week, multinational, open-label, parallel group trial with 505 patients with type 2 diabetes (mean age, 60.4 +/- 8.6 years; mean BMI, 30.4 +/- 5.3 kg/m(2); mean HbA(1c), 7.9 +/- 1.3%). Patients, randomized 2:1 to insulin detemir or NPH insulin, received basal insulin either once or twice daily according to their pretrial insulin treatment and insulin aspart at mealtimes. RESULTS: After 26 weeks of treatment, significant reductions in HbA(1c) were observed for insulin detemir (0.2%-points, p = 0.004) and NPH insulin (0.4%-points; p = 0.0001); HbA(1c) levels were comparable at study end (insulin detemir, 7.6%; NPH insulin, 7.5%). The number of basal insulin injections administered per day had no effect on HbA(1c) levels (p = 0.50). Nine-point self-measured blood glucose (SMBG) profiles were similar for the two treatment groups (p = 0.58), as were reductions in fasting plasma glucose (FPG) (insulin detemir, 0.5 mmol/l; NPH insulin, 0.6 mmol/l). At study end, FPG concentrations were similar for the two treatment groups (p = 0.66). By contrast, within-subject day-to-day variation in fasting SMBG was significantly lower with insulin detemir (p = 0.021). Moreover, patients receiving insulin detemir gained significantly less body weight than those who were administered NPH insulin (1.0 and 1.8 kg, respectively, p = 0.017). The frequency of adverse events and the risk of hypoglycaemia were comparable for the two treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with type 2 diabetes, treated for 26 weeks with insulin detemir plus insulin aspart at mealtimes, experienced comparable glycaemic control but significantly lower within-subject variability and less weight gain compared to patients treated with NPH insulin and insulin aspart. Insulin detemir was well tolerated and had a similar safety profile to NPH insulin.     

Plasma glucose and hypoglycaemia following exercise in people with Type 1 diabetes: a comparison of three basal insulins

Aim The aim of this study was to compare the effects of exercise on plasma glucose excursions when using each of three basal insulins in people with Type 1 diabetes. Research design and methods This was a multinational, open‐label, randomized, three‐period, crossover clinical trial. People with Type 1 diabetes [n = 51, age 39 ± 10 (± sd ) years, 67% men] managed with mealtime plus basal insulin regimens, were exercised for 30 min, 5 h after the last mealtime and basal insulin injection when using insulin detemir, insulin glargine or neutral protamine Hagedorn (NPH) insulin. Results There were no significant differences in the plasma glucose excursions during or for 150 min after exercise. During 30 min exercise, five (11%) participants on insulin detemir developed minor hypoglycaemia, six (12%) for NPH and 18 (38%) for glargine. From the end of exercise to 150 min, five (11%) on insulin detemir developed minor hypoglycaemia, seven (14%) for NPH and nine (19%) for glargine. In total, from start of exercise to 150 min after exercise, 10 (21%) participants on insulin detemir experienced minor hypoglycaemia as compared with 13 (27%) for NPH and 27 (57%) for glargine (P < 0.001 glargine vs. detemir and NPH). Maximum plasma cortisol levels were lower on detemir and NPH than glargine. Conclusions Insulin detemir was associated with less hypoglycaemia than insulin glargine but not NPH insulin in relatively well‐controlled people with Type 1 diabetes during and after exercise.     

Insulin analogues (insulin detemir and insulin aspart) versus traditional human insulins (NPH insulin and regular human insulin) in basal-bolus therapy for patients with Type 1 diabetes

Aims/hypothesis The aim of the trial was to compare the efficacy and tolerability of two types of basal-bolus therapy, using either the soluble long-acting basal insulin analogue, insulin detemir, in combination with the rapid-acting analogue, insulin aspart, or NPH insulin in combination with mealtime regular human insulin.Methods In this 18-week, 1:1 randomised, open-labelled, parallel trial, 595 patients with Type 1 diabetes mellitus received insulin detemir or NPH insulin in the morning and at bedtime in combination with mealtime insulin aspart or regular human insulin respectively.Results Glycaemic control with insulin detemir/insulin aspart was improved in comparison with NPH insulin/regular human insulin (HbA₁c: 7.88% vs 8.11%; mean difference: –0.22% point [95% CI: –0.34 to –0.10]; p<0.001). Self-measured 8-point plasma glucose profiles differed between the groups (p<0.001), with lower postprandial plasma glucose levels in the insulin detemir/insulin aspart group. Within-person day-to-day variation in plasma glucose was lower with insulin detemir/insulin aspart than with NPH insulin/regular human insulin (SD: 2.88 vs 3.12 mmol/l; p<0.001). Risk of overall and nocturnal hypoglycaemia (23.00–06.00 hours) was, respectively, 21% (p=0.036) and 55% (p<0.001) lower in the insulin detemir/insulin aspart group than in the NPH insulin/regular human insulin group. Body weight (adjusted for baseline and change in HbA₁c) was 1 kg lower with insulin detemir/insulin aspart than with NPH insulin/regular human insulin (p<0.001).Conclusions/interpretation Basal-bolus therapy using insulin detemir/insulin aspart offers a better balance of control and tolerability than with NPH insulin/regular human insulin. The low variability and more physiological action profiles generated with these insulin analogues resulted in improved glycaemic control with lower risk of hypoglycaemia and no concomitant body weight increase.     

Better long-term glycaemic control with the basal insulin glargine as compared with NPH in patients with Type 1 diabetes mellitus given meal-time lispro insulin.

BACKGROUND: Glargine is a long-acting insulin analogue potentially more suitable than NPH insulin in intensive treatment of Type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1 DM), but no study has proven superiority. The aim of this study was to test superiority of glargine on long-term blood glucose (BG) as well as on responses to hypoglycaemia vs. NPH. METHODS: One hundred and twenty-one patients with T1 DM on intensive therapy on four times/day NPH and lispro insulin at each meal, were randomized to either continuation of NPH four times/day (n = 60), or once daily glargine at dinner-time (n = 61) for 1 year. Lispro insulin at meal-time was continued in both groups. In 11 patients from each group, responses to stepped hyperinsulinaemic-hypoglycaemia were measured before and after 1 year's treatment. RESULTS: Mean daily BG was lower with glargine [7.6 +/- 0.11 mmol/l (137 +/- 2 mg/dl)] vs. NPH [8.1 +/- 0.22 mmol/l (146 +/- 4 mg/dl)] (P < 0.05). HbA(1c) at 4 months did not change with NPH, but decreased with glargine (from 7.1 +/- 0.1 to 6.7 +/- 0.1%), and remained lower than NPH at 12 months (6.6 +/- 0.1%, P < 0.05 vs. NPH). Frequency of mild hypoglycaemia [self-assisted episodes, blood glucose < or = 4.0 mmol/l (72 mg/dl)] was lower with glargine vs. NPH (7.2 +/- 0.5 and 13.2 +/- 0.6 episodes/patient-month, P < 0.05). After 1 year, NPH treatment resulted in no change of responses to hypoglycaemia, whereas with glargine plasma glucose, thresholds and maximal responses of plasma adrenaline and symptoms to hypoglycaemia improved (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The simpler glargine regimen decreases the percentage of HbA(1c) and frequency of hypoglycaemia and improves responses to hypoglycaemia more than NPH. Thus, glargine appears more suitable than NPH as basal insulin for intensive treatment of T1 DM.     

Hypoglycaemia with insulin aspart: a double-blind, randomised, crossover trial in subjects with Type 1 diabetes.

AIMS: To compare the effects of the rapid-acting insulin analogue insulin aspart and soluble human insulin on hypoglycaemia and glycaemic control in patients with Type 1 diabetes when injected immediately before meals as part of intensive insulin therapy. METHODS: In this multinational, double-blind, randomised, crossover trial, 155 patients with Type 1 diabetes (HbA(1c) < 8.0%) were symmetrically randomised to two 16-week treatment periods on either type of insulin, both injected 0-5 min before meals. NPH insulin was given as basal insulin once or twice daily as needed, and insulin dosages were regularly adjusted using pre-defined algorithms to maintain tight glycaemic control. Treatment periods were separated by a 4-week washout. RESULTS: The rate of major nocturnal (24.00-06.00 h) hypoglycaemic episodes was 72% lower with insulin aspart than with human insulin (0.067 vs. 0.225 events/month; P = 0.001). Total rate of major hypoglycaemia did not differ significantly between treatments (insulin aspart/human insulin relative risk 0.72; 95% CI 0.47-1.09, P = 0.12). The rate of minor events was significantly reduced by 7% with insulin aspart (P = 0.048). Reductions in rate of hypoglycaemia were achieved with maintained overall glycaemic control: Mean HbA(1c) remained constant, slightly below 7.7% on both treatments. CONCLUSIONS: The use of insulin aspart in an intensive insulin regimen in patients with tightly controlled Type 1 diabetes led to clinically significant reductions in major nocturnal hypoglycaemia with no deterioration in glycaemic control. Major nocturnal hypoglycaemia appears to be a strong clinical indication for the use of rapid-acting insulin analogues during intensive insulin therapy.     

A randomized trial of insulin aspart with intensified basal NPH insulin supplementation in people with Type 1 diabetes.

AIMS: Insulin aspart has been shown to improve post-prandial and overall glycaemic control in people with Type 1 diabetes. We hypothesized that insulin aspart with intensified basal NPH insulin supplementation would result in better overall glycaemic control than human regular insulin with standard basal NPH insulin. METHODS: The trial was conducted in 43 centres in seven countries. People with Type 1 diabetes were randomized to mealtime insulin aspart with up to four daily NPH doses if meals were > 5 h apart and a 25% increase in bedtime NPH dose (n = 187), or to mealtime human unmodified insulin with once or twice daily basal NPH insulin (n = 181). Efficacy and safety were evaluated at 12 weeks (primary evaluation period) and 64 weeks. RESULTS: At 12 and 64 weeks there was no statistically significant difference in HbA1c between the insulin aspart and regular insulin groups: -0.09 (95% confidence interval (CI) -0.23, +0.05)% and -0.14 (-0.32, +0.04)%. Post-prandial glucose values were lower and the area under the 24-h self-monitored blood glucose curve above 7.0 mmol/l was 28% smaller with insulin aspart (35.2 +/- 3.2 vs. 48.9 +/- 3.1 mmol/l h, P = 0.0015). No significant differences were found in mild or severe hypoglycaemia, or adverse event rate. At 64 weeks treatment satisfaction was higher in the insulin aspart group (difference 1.57 (95% CI 0.49, 2.64) points, P = 0.004), while quality of life was not different. CONCLUSIONS: Improved post-prandial glycaemic control and treatment satisfaction with insulin aspart were confirmed. Intensifying basal insulin supplementation resulted in a similar HbA1c decrement as previously found with the use of insulin aspart and standard NPH insulin supplementation. This does not support routinely basal NPH insulin intensification when using rapid-acting insulin analogues in daily practice.     

Glycaemic control in type 1 diabetic patients using optimised insulin aspart or human insulin in a randomised multinational study

Insulin aspart (IAsp), is a rapid-acting analogue of human insulin (HI), for use in the meal related treatment of diabetes mellitus. The degree of glycaemic control achieved by IAsp in comparison with HI after algorithm-driven dose optimisation was tested over 3 months. The prospective, multicentre, randomised, open-label study with parallel groups was performed in 48 centres in 11 countries and included 423 basal-bolus treated patients with Type 1 diabetes. Main outcome measures were blood glucose control assessed by HbA1c, nine-point self-monitored blood glucose profiles, insulin dose, quality of life, hypoglycaemia and adverse events. An algorithm-driven increase occurred in the dose and number of daily injections of basal insulin, particularly in the IAsp group. After 12 weeks of treatment, HbA1c was significantly lower in IAsp compared to HI treated subjects by 0.17 (95% CI 0.30-0.04) (P<0.05). Comparison of the blood glucose profiles showed lower blood glucose levels with IAsp after breakfast (mean 8.4 vs 10.1 mmol/l; P<0.0001) and dinner (8.2 vs 9.3 mmol/l; P<0.01). There were no differences between treatments in the incidence of hypoglycaemic episodes or in the adverse event profiles. The WHO Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire score for perceived hyperglycaemia was lower with Iasp (P=0.005), and patients found the insulin aspart treatment more flexible (P=0.022). The current study underlines the need for optimising the basal insulin regimen in order to take full advantage of the pharmacodynamics of IAsp.     

A review of basal insulins.

Tight glycaemic control (ideally, HbA1c<7%) is central to reducing the risk of long-term complications of diabetes. This approach, for both Type 1 and Type 2 diabetes, commonly involves the use of basal insulin, and must be achieved with minimal risk of hypoglycaemia (particularly nocturnal episodes). Indeed, concern around hypoglycaemia is a major barrier to achieving tight glycaemic control, and is a common problem with those protracted-acting insulins most frequently used in clinical practice for basal insulin supply. Other drawbacks include inter- and intra-patient variability that compromises dosing reproducibility and unsuitability for single daily dosing. New long-acting human insulin analogues with action profiles designed to overcome these problems are now available in clinical practice or are under evaluation in clinical trials. Clinical evidence suggests efficacy and safety advantages for these analogues over NPH insulin (the most commonly used basal insulin), and may bring closer the goal of tight glycaemic control in patients with diabetes.     

Transferring to insulin detemir from NPH insulin or insulin glargine in type 2 diabetes patients on basal-only therapy with oral antidiabetic drugs improves glycaemic control and reduces weight gain and risk of hypoglycaemia: 14-week follow-up data from PREDICTIVE

Aim:  The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of insulin detemir in type 2 diabetes patients previously receiving NPH insulin (NPH group, n = 175) or insulin glargine (glargine group, n = 118) in combination with oral antidiabetic drugs (OADs).
Methods:  Patients were transferred to insulin detemir, while the OAD regimen and number of injections remained the same. The incidence of serious adverse drug reactions, including major hypoglycaemia, and haemoglobin A_1c (HbA_1c), fasting glucose, within-patient fasting glucose variability and body weight change were measured at 14 weeks.
Results:  Glycaemic control improved in both NPH (HbA_1c = −0.2%, p < 0.05; fasting glucose −1.0 mmol/l, p < 0.0001) and glargine (HbA_1c = −0.6%, p < 0.0001; fasting glucose −1.4 mmol/l, p < 0.0001) groups, including a reduction in fasting glucose variability (p < 0.01 for both). The incidence of total and nocturnal hypoglycaemia was reduced in both NPH and glargine groups. The incidence of major hypoglycaemia was low and did not change significantly during the follow-up period. Mean body weight was significantly reduced in the NPH (−0.7 kg, p < 0.01) and glargine (−0.5 kg, p < 0.05) groups.
Conclusions:  These results indicate that in type 2 diabetes, transferring from other basal insulins to insulin detemir in combination with OADs was associated with improvements in glycaemic control, which were accompanied by a reduced risk of hypoglycaemia and a reduction in body weight.     

Less weight gain and hypoglycaemia with once‐daily insulin detemir than NPH insulin in intensification of insulin therapy in overweight Type 2 diabetes patients—The PREDICTIVE™ BMI clinical trial1

Objective To assess weight change when once‐daily insulin detemir (detemir) or neutral protamine Hagedorn insulin (NPH) are used in already overweight Type 2 diabetes patients requiring intensified insulin therapy. Research design and methods This 26‐week randomized, controlled trial included adults with Type 2 diabetes [glycated haemoglobin (HbA_1c) 7.5–11.0%, body mass index (BMI) 25–40 kg/m²] who had received two daily doses of insulin (at least one a premix) for ≥ 3 months. Subjects received either detemir (n = 125) or NPH (n = 146) once daily in the evening and insulin aspart at main meals. Concomitant treatment with metformin was allowed. Basal insulin was titrated to a pre‐breakfast plasma glucose target of 6.1 mmol/l without unacceptable hypoglycaemia. Insulin aspart was also titrated (target, postprandial glucose ≤ 10.0 mmol/l without unacceptable hypoglycaemia). Results At 26 weeks, weight had increased significantly less with detemir (0.4 kg) than with NPH (1.9 kg; difference 1.5 kg, P < 0.0001). BMI increase was also less with detemir than with NPH (difference 0.6 kg/m², P < 0.0001). HbA_1c decreased from 8.9 to 7.8% (detemir) and from 8.8 to 7.8% (NPH; not significant for between‐treatment difference). Incidence of hypoglycaemia was lower with detemir [relative risks 0.62 (all events) and 0.43 (nocturnal); P < 0.0001 for both]. Conclusions PREDICTIVE? BMI was the first study to examine the effect of once‐daily detemir with weight as the primary endpoint in a large population of overweight Type 2 diabetes patients. Use of once‐daily detemir for intensification of insulin therapy resulted in less weight gain, less hypoglycaemia and equivalent glycaemic control compared with NPH.     

Long-term efficacy and safety of insulin detemir compared to Neutral Protamine Hagedorn insulin in patients with Type 1 diabetes using a treat-to-target basal–bolus regimen with insulin aspart at meals: a 2-year,randomized, controlled trial

Aims This 24-month, multi-national, open-label, parallel group trial investigated the long-term efficacy and safety of insulin detemir and Neutral Protamine Hagedorn insulin in combination with mealtime insulin aspart in patients with Type 1 diabetes using a treat-to-target concept. Methods Patients were randomized 2 : 1 to detemir (n = 331) or NPH (n = 166) groups. Basal insulin was initiated once daily (evening) and titrated individually based on self-measured plasma glucose (PG) levels, aiming for pre-breakfast and pre-dinner targets ≤ 6.0 mmol/l. A second basal morning dose could be added according to pre-defined criteria. Results After 24 months, superiority of glycated haemoglobin (HbA_1c) was achieved with detemir compared to NPH (detemir 7.36%, NPH 7.58%, mean difference −0.22% points) [95% confidence interval (CI) −0.41 to −0.03%], with reductions of 0.94% and 0.72% points, respectively. Fasting PG (FPG_lab) was also lower with detemir (detemir 8.35 mmol/l, NPH 9.43 mmol/l; P = 0.019). Twenty-two per cent of patients treated with detemir reached an HbA_1c ≤ 7.0% in the absence of confirmed hypoglycaemia during the last month of treatment vs. 13% on NPH (P = 0.019). Risk of major and nocturnal hypoglycaemia was 69% and 46% lower with detemir than with NPH (P < 0.001), respectively; patients treated with detemir gained less weight (detemir 1.7 kg, NPH 2.7 kg; P = 0.024). The overall safety profile was similar in the two groups and treatment with detemir did not result in any unexpected findings. Conclusions Long-term treatment with the insulin analogues detemir + aspart was superior to NPH + aspart in reducing HbA_1c, with added benefits of less major and nocturnal hypoglycaemia and less weight gain.     

Long-acting insulin analogues vs. NPH human insulin in type 1 diabetes. A meta-analysis

Aim:  Basal insulin in type 1 diabetes can be provided using either NPH (Neutral Protamine Hagedorn) human insulin or long-acting insulin analogues, which are supposed to warrant a better metabolic control with reduced hypoglycaemic risk. Aim of this meta-analysis is the assessment of differences with respect to HbA1c (Glycated hemoglobin), incidence of hypoglycaemia, and weight gain, between NPH human insulin and each long-acting analogue.
Methods:  Of 285 randomized controlled trials with a duration > 12 weeks comparing long-acting insulin analogues (detemir or glargine) with NPH insulin in type 1 diabetic patients identified through Medline search and searches on www.clinicaltrials.gov , 20 met eligibility criteria (enrolling 3693 and 2485 in the long-acting analogues and NPH group respectively). Data on HbA1c and body mass index at endpoint, and incidence of any, nocturnal and severe hypoglycaemia, were extracted and meta-analysed.
Results:  Long-acting analogues had a small, but significant effect on HbA1c [-0.07 (−0.13; −0.01)%; p = 0.026], in comparison with NPH human insulin. When analysing the effect of long-acting analogues on body weight, detemir was associated with a significantly smaller weight gain than human insulin [by 0.26 (0.06;0.47) kg/m²; p = 0.012]. Long-acting analogues were associated with a reduced risk for nocturnal and severe hypoglycaemia [OR (Odd Ratio, 95% Confidence Intervals) 0.69 (0.55; 0.86), and OR 0.73 (0.60; 0.89) respectively; all p < 0.01].
Conclusions:  The switch from NPH to long-acting analogues as basal insulin replacement in type 1 diabetic patients had a small effect on HbA1c, and also reduced the risk of nocturnal and severe hypoglycaemia.     

Premixed insulin aspart 30 vs. premixed human insulin 30/70 twice daily: a randomized trial in Type 1 and Type 2 diabetic patients.

AIM: To compare the efficacy and safety of premixed insulin aspart (30% free and 70% protamine-bound, BIAsp 30) with human insulin premix (BHI 30) used in a twice-daily injection regimen in people with Type 1 and Type 2 diabetes. METHODS: People with Type 1 and Type 2 diabetes (n = 294) using twice-daily insulin were randomized to a 12-week open-label comparison of BIAsp 30 and BHI 30. Efficacy was assessed by analysis of variance of 12-week data, adjusted for baseline level. RESULTS: BIAsp 30 was as effective as BHI 30 based on the primary efficacy measure, HbA1c, mean difference -0.01 (90% confidence interval (CI) -0.14; 0.12) %Hb. Meal-time self-measured blood glucose increment averaged over the three main meals was significantly lower in the BIAsp 30 group than in the BHI 30 group (-0.68 (-1.20; -0.16) mmol/l; P < 0.02). Significant improvements were observed after breakfast, before lunch, after dinner and at bedtime (P < 0.02-0.05), with blood glucose around 1.0 mmol/l lower in the BIAsp 30 group. The number of major hypoglycaemic episodes with BIAsp 30 was half that with BHI 30. However, the overall risk of both minor and major hypoglycaemia did not differ significantly between treatments. CONCLUSION: Post-prandial glycaemic control was significantly improved, without increasing the risk of hypoglycaemia, and overall control was similar when people with Type 1 and Type 2 diabetes were treated on a twice-daily regimen with immediate premeal injections of BIAsp 30 compared with BHI 30.     

Efficacy and safety of insulin detemir once daily in combination with sitagliptin and metformin: the TRANSITION randomized controlled trial

Aim: The aim of this trial was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the combination of once‐daily insulin detemir (IDet) and sitagliptin (SITA) versus SITA ± sulphonylurea (SU), both in combination with metformin (MET) in insulin‐naive subjects. Methods: In a 26‐week, open‐label, randomized, parallel‐group study in type 2 diabetes, insulin‐naive subjects concomitantly treated with MET ± second oral antidiabetic drug (OAD) were randomized 1 : 1 to IDet + SITA + MET or SITA + MET ± SU. All continued with MET treatment, and those treated with SU continued if randomized to SITA + MET ± SU. Efficacy endpoints included glycosylated haemoglobin (HbA1c), fasting plasma glucose (FPG), 9‐point self‐measured plasma glucose (SMPG), weight, body mass index (BMI). Safety endpoints included adverse events (AEs) and hypoglycaemia. Results: Significantly higher reductions in HbA1c, FPG and SMPG were achieved with IDet + SITA + MET compared with SITA + MET ± SU. Estimated HbA1c decreased by 1.44% in the IDet + SITA + MET group versus 0.89% in SITA + MET ± SU, p < 0.001. FPG decreased by 3.7 mmol/l (66.3 mg/dl) versus 1.2 mmol/l (22.2 mg/dl), p < 0.001, respectively. Small decreases in weight and BMI were observed in both arms, with no significant differences. AEs were mild or moderate and were more common in the SITA + MET ± SU arm than in the IDet + SITA + MET arm. There was no major hypoglycaemia. Observed rates of hypoglycaemia were very low (1.3/1.7 episodes/patient year) in both arms. The subgroup treated with MET and SUs prior to the trial achieved similar results. Conclusions: The combination of once‐daily IDet with SITA showed a clinically and significantly better improvement in glycaemic control than SITA in combination with or without SUs. Both regimens were associated with a low rate of hypoglycaemia and slight weight reduction.