Insulin therapy in type 2 diabetes: what is the evidence?

Effectiveness and Safety of the Intermittently Scanned Continuous Glucose Monitoring System FreeStyle Libre 2 in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Treated with Basal Insulin or Oral Antidiabetic Drugs: An Observational, Retrospective Real-World Study

Intermittently Scanned Continuous Glucose Monitoring (isCGM) devices are increasingly being used in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) on insulin therapy for their benefits regarding disease management. Evidence of isCGM use in patients with T2DM on basal or non-insulin therapy is lacking. This study aimed at assessing the efficacy and safety of isCGM in this population. This was an observational, retrospective, real-world study enrolling patients with T2DM who were starting the use of isCGM. Data from medical records (i.e., demographics, clinical characteristics, laboratory assessments, and isCGM metrics) were collected over three time periods (baseline, 3 and 6 months). The endpoints were glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) changes and changes in isCGM metrics as defined by the International Consensus from baseline to 3 months and 6 months. Overall, 132 patients were included (69.5% male; mean age 68.2 ± 11.0 years; mean disease duration 19.0 ± 9.4 years; 79.7% on basal insulin ±non-insulin therapy; mean baseline HbA1c 8.1% ± 1.3%). The estimated mean change in HbA1c was statistically significant at three (-0.4 ± 1.0%; p = 0.003) and six months (-0.6 ± 1.3%; p < 0.0001). In conclusion, isCGM proved to be effective and safe in improving glycaemic control in patients with T2DM on basal insulin or non-insulin therapy.

Changes of health-related quality of life after initiating basal insulin treatment among people with type 2 diabetes

To assess the association between insulin regimens and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) after the introduction of basal insulin (BI) among people with type 2 diabetes in real-world clinical settings. 16,339 registered people with diabetes who had inadequate glycaemic control by oral agents initiated BI (either single BI or Basal-bolus) and completed a 6-month follow-up from 209 hospitals were included in the analyses. At the end of the follow-up, the switches of insulin regimens, change of HRQoL (EQ-5D-3L) and their associations were assessed. Initial insulin regimens of single BI and of basal-bolus (BI included Glargine, Detemir, and Neutral Protamine Hagedorn) accounted for 75.6% and 24.4%, respectively. At 6 months, regimens used were BI alone (65.2%), basal-bolus (10.4%), and premixed (6.4%), whereas 17.9% stopped all insulin therapy. The visual analogue scale score increased by 5.46 (P < .001), and the index value increased slightly by 0.02 (P < .001). Univariate analysis showed that people with diabetes taking basal-bolus regimen had the greatest improvement on HRQoL in all dimensions, especially in the reduction of the percentage of Pain/Discomfort (by 10.03%) and Anxiety/Depression (by 11.21%). In multivariable analysis, single BI or premixed insulin at 6 months was associated with more improvement of visual analogue scale score compared with stopping all insulin. Improved HRQoL was observed after initiating BI in people with type 2 diabetes . If the same achievement on HbA1c control can be guaranteed, single BI is preferred to other regimens from the viewpoint of HRQoL. Basal-bolus has the most significant potential to increase HRQoL, however, the people with diabetes characteristics differ from those initiating BI alone. Further longitudinal cohort study with a longer study period might be necessary to evaluate the certain effect.

Effect of Bariatric Surgery on Diagnosed Chronic Kidney Disease and Cardiovascular Events in Patients with Insulin-treated Type 2 Diabetes: a Retrospective Cohort Study from a Large UK Primary Care Database

Aims

To compare the effect of bariatric surgery on renal, chronic kidney disease (CKD) and cardiovascular (CV) outcomes among obese patients with insulin-treated type 2 diabetes (T2D) with and without microalbuminuria (i.e., uACR > 3.0 mg/mmol).

Methods

A retrospective cohort study was conducted among 11,125 active patients with T2D from The Health Improvement Network (THIN) database. Propensity score matching (up to 1:6 ratio) was used to identify patients who underwent bariatric surgery (N = 131) with a non-bariatric cohort (N = 579). Follow-up was undertaken for 10 years (6487 person-years) to compare differences in risk of cardiovascular events and in renal outcomes.

Results

For the matched cohort at baseline: mean age 52 ± 13 years (60% female); weight 116 ± 25 kg, body mass index (BMI) 41 ± 9kg/m², estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR); 70.4 ± 20 mL/min/1.73 m², and median albumin-creatinine ratio (uACR) 2.0 mg/mmol (interquartile range (IQR): 0.9–5.2 mg/mmol). Bariatric surgery was associated with a 54% reduction in developing CKD compared to their matched non-bariatric cohort (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR]: 0.46; 95%CI: 0.24–0.85, P = 0.02). Among patients with microalbuminuria at baseline, bariatric surgery was protective against CKD (aHR: 0.42, 95%CI: 0.18–0.99, P = 0.050). eGFR was significantly increased from baseline favouring the bariatric group during 75% of the follow-up time (calculated mean difference between groups: 4.1 mL/min/1.73 m²; P < 0.05), especially at 5-year point (74.2 vs 67.8 mL/min/1.73 m²; P < 0.001). However, no significant change was observed with non-fatal CVD episodes (aHR: 0.36, 95%CI: 0.11–1.13, P = 0.079). Albumin levels were significantly reduced throughout the 2 years following the surgery (3.9 vs 4.1 g/dL, P < 0.001). uACR and total protein levels had little or no statistical association to the intervention.

Conclusion

Bariatric surgery may protect patients with diabetes with or without microalbuminuria against the risk of CKD and with a modest protective effect on non-fatal CVD risk. Bariatric surgery is also associated with improvements in overall renal outcomes such as eGFR.

(Ultra-)long-acting insulin analogues versus NPH insulin (human isophane insulin) for adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus

BACKGROUND

Evidence that antihyperglycaemic therapy is beneficial for people with type 2 diabetes mellitus is conflicting. While the United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS) found tighter glycaemic control to be positive, other studies, such as the Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes (ACCORD) trial, found the effects of an intensive therapy to lower blood glucose to near normal levels to be more harmful than beneficial. Study results also showed different effects for different antihyperglycaemic drugs, regardless of the achieved blood glucose levels. In consequence, firm conclusions on the effect of interventions on patient-relevant outcomes cannot be drawn from the effect of these interventions on blood glucose concentration alone. In theory, the use of newer insulin analogues may result in fewer macrovascular and microvascular events.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effects of long-term treatment with (ultra-)long-acting insulin analogues (insulin glargine U100 and U300, insulin detemir and insulin degludec) with NPH (neutral protamine Hagedorn) insulin (human isophane insulin) in adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

SEARCH METHODS

For this Cochrane Review update, we searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, ICTRP Search Portal and ClinicalTrials.gov. The date of the last search was 5 November 2019, except Embase which was last searched 26 January 2017. We applied no language restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the effects of treatment with (ultra-)long-acting insulin analogues to NPH in adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected trials, assessed risk of bias, extracted data and evaluated the overall certainty of the evidence using GRADE. Trials were pooled using random-effects meta-analyses.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 24 RCTs. Of these, 16 trials compared insulin glargine to NPH insulin and eight trials compared insulin detemir to NPH insulin. In these trials, 3419 people with type 2 diabetes mellitus were randomised to insulin glargine and 1321 people to insulin detemir. The duration of the included trials ranged from 24 weeks to five years. For studies, comparing insulin glargine to NPH insulin, target values ranged from 4.0 mmol/L to 7.8 mmol/L (72 mg/dL to 140 mg/dL) for fasting blood glucose (FBG), from 4.4 mmol/L to 6.6 mmol/L (80 mg/dL to 120 mg/dL) for nocturnal blood glucose and less than 10 mmol/L (180 mg/dL) for postprandial blood glucose, when applicable. Blood glucose and glycosylated haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) target values for studies comparing insulin detemir to NPH insulin ranged from 4.0 mmol/L to 7.0 mmol/L (72 mg/dL to 126 mg/dL) for FBG, less than 6.7 mmol/L (120 mg/dL) to less than 10 mmol/L (180 mg/dL) for postprandial blood glucose, 4.0 mmol/L to 7.0 mmol/L (72 mg/dL to 126 mg/dL) for nocturnal blood glucose and 5.8% to less than 6.4% HbA1c, when applicable. All trials had an unclear or high risk of bias for several risk of bias domains. Overall, insulin glargine and insulin detemir resulted in fewer participants experiencing hypoglycaemia when compared with NPH insulin. Changes in HbA1c were comparable for long-acting insulin analogues and NPH insulin. Insulin glargine compared to NPH insulin had a risk ratio (RR) for severe hypoglycaemia of 0.68 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.46 to 1.01; P = 0.06; absolute risk reduction (ARR) -1.2%, 95% CI -2.0 to 0; 14 trials, 6164 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The RR for serious hypoglycaemia was 0.75 (95% CI 0.52 to 1.09; P = 0.13; ARR -0.7%, 95% CI -1.3 to 0.2; 10 trials, 4685 participants; low-certainty evidence). Treatment with insulin glargine reduced the incidence of confirmed hypoglycaemia and confirmed nocturnal hypoglycaemia. Treatment with insulin detemir compared to NPH insulin found an RR for severe hypoglycaemia of 0.45 (95% CI 0.17 to 1.20; P = 0.11; ARR -0.9%, 95% CI -1.4 to 0.4; 5 trials, 1804 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The Peto odds ratio for serious hypoglycaemia was 0.16, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.61; P = 0.007; ARR -0.9%, 95% CI -1.1 to -0.4; 5 trials, 1777 participants; low-certainty evidence). Treatment with detemir also reduced the incidence of confirmed hypoglycaemia and confirmed nocturnal hypoglycaemia. Information on patient-relevant outcomes such as death from any cause, diabetes-related complications, health-related quality of life and socioeconomic effects was insufficient or lacking in almost all included trials. For those outcomes for which some data were available, there were no meaningful differences between treatment with glargine or detemir and treatment with NPH. There was no clear difference between insulin-analogues and NPH insulin in terms of weight gain. The incidence of adverse events was comparable for people treated with glargine or detemir, and people treated with NPH. We found no trials comparing ultra-long-acting insulin glargine U300 or insulin degludec with NPH insulin.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

While the effects on HbA1c were comparable, treatment with insulin glargine and insulin detemir resulted in fewer participants experiencing hypoglycaemia when compared with NPH insulin. Treatment with insulin detemir also reduced the incidence of serious hypoglycaemia. However, serious hypoglycaemic events were rare and the absolute risk reducing effect was low. Approximately one in 100 people treated with insulin detemir instead of NPH insulin benefited. In the studies, low blood glucose and HbA1c targets, corresponding to near normal or even non-diabetic blood glucose levels, were set. Therefore, results from the studies are only applicable to people in whom such low blood glucose concentrations are targeted. However, current guidelines recommend less-intensive blood glucose lowering for most people with type 2 diabetes in daily practice (e.g. people with cardiovascular diseases, a long history of type 2 diabetes, who are susceptible to hypoglycaemia or older people). Additionally, low-certainty evidence and trial designs that did not conform with current clinical practice meant it remains unclear if the same effects will be observed in daily clinical practice. Most trials did not report patient-relevant outcomes.

Effect of Bariatric Surgery on Cardiovascular Events and Metabolic Outcomes in Obese Patients with Insulin-Treated Type 2 Diabetes: a Retrospective Cohort Study

AIMS

To compare non-fatal cardiovascular (CV) events and metabolic outcomes, among obese patients with insulin-treated type 2 diabetes who underwent bariatric surgery compared with a propensity-matched non-bariatric cohort.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was conducted among 11,125 active patients with type 2 diabetes from The Health Improvement Network (THIN) database. Propensity score matching (up to 1:6 ratio) was used to identify patients who underwent bariatric surgery (N = 131) with a non-bariatric cohort (N = 579). Follow-up was undertaken for 10 years (9686 person-years) to compare differences in metabolic outcomes and CV risk events that included the following: acute myocardial infarction (AMI), stroke, coronary heart disease (CHD), heart failure (HF) and peripheral artery disease (PAD). Cox proportional regression was used to compute the outcomes between groups.

RESULTS

The mean age was 52 (SD 13) years (60% female); the baseline weight and BMI were 116 (SD 25) kg and 41 (SD 9) kg/m², respectively. Significant reductions in weight and BMI were observed in bariatric group during 10 years of follow-up. Bariatric surgery had a significant cardioprotective effect by reducing the risk of non-fatal CHD (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 0.29, 95% CI 0.16-0.52, p < 0.001) and PAD events (aHR 0.31, 95% CI 0.11-0.89, p = 0.03). However, the surgery had no significant effect on AMI (aHR 0.98, p = 0.95), stroke (HR 0.87, p = 0.76) and HF (HR 0.89, p = 0.73) risks. Bariatric surgery had favourable effects on insulin independence, HbA1c and BP.

CONCLUSION

Among obese insulin-treated patients with type 2 diabetes, bariatric surgery is associated with significant reductions in non-fatal CHD and PAD events, lower body weight, HbA1c, BP and a greater likelihood of insulin independency during 10 years of follow-up.

The relationship between urinary albumin excretion, cardiovascular outcomes and total mortality among a large cohort of insulin-treated patients with type 2 diabetes in routine primary care practices

Background

Albuminuria is a recognized diagnostic and prognostic marker of chronic kidney disease and cardiovascular (CV) risk but the well-known relationship between increments in urinary albumin:creatinine ratio (UACR) and CV outcomes and mortality has not been fully explored in insulin-treated patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) in routine clinical care.

Methods

We investigated data for insulin users with T2D from UK general practices between 2007 and 2014. The UACR at the time of insulin initiation was measured and categorized as &lt;10, 10– 29, 30–300 and &gt;300 mg/g. Patients were followed up for 5 years or the earliest occurrence of all-cause mortality, non-fatal myocardial infarction or stroke. Cox proportional hazards models were fitted to estimate the risk of a composite of these events.

Results

A total of 12 725 patients with T2D (mean age 58.6 ± 13.8 years, mean haemoglobin A1c 8.7 ± 1.8%) initiating insulin therapy between 2007 and 2014 met the inclusion criteria. Compared with patients whose ACR levels at insulin initiation were &lt;10 mg/g, the adjusted risk of the 3-point composite endpoint was 9, 30 and 98% higher in those with ACR levels between 10–29, 30–300 and &gt;300 mg/g, respectively, after a follow-up period of 5 years. The ACR category on its own did not predict risk of all-cause mortality.

Conclusions

This study shows that in patients with T2D on insulin therapy, increased urinary ACR is independently associated with an increased risk of major adverse CV events and all-cause mortality.

Individual and Combined Relationship between Reduced eGFR and/or Increased Urinary Albumin Excretion Rate with Mortality Risk among Insulin-Treated Patients with Type 2 Diabetes in Routine Practice

Background

A low estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) and an increased urinary albumin-to-creatinine ratio (ACR) are well-recognised prognostic markers of cardiovascular (CV) risk, but their individual and combined relationship with CV disease and total mortality among insulin-treated type 2 diabetes (T2D) patients in routine clinical care is unclear.

Methods

We analysed data for insulin users with T2D from UK general practices between 2007 and 2014 and examined the association between mortality rates and chronic kidney disease [categorised by low eGFR (< 60 mL/min/1.73 m²), high eGFR (≥60 mL/min/1.73 m²), low ACR (< 300 mg/g); and high ACR (≥300 mg/g) at insulin initiation] after a 5-year follow-up period using Cox proportional hazard models.

Results

A total of 18,227 patients were identified (mean age: 61.5 ± 13.8 years, mean HbA1c: 8.6 ± 1.8%). After adjusting for confounders, when compared to adults on insulin therapy with an eGFR < 60 and an ACR ≥300 (low eGFR + high ACR) after a follow-up period of 5 years, patients with an eGFR < 60 and an ACR < 300 (low eGFR + low ACR) had a 6% lower mortality rate (aHR: 0.94; 95% CI 0.79-1.12); those with an eGFR > 60 and an ACR ≥300 (high eGFR + high ACR) had a 20% lower mortality rate (aHR: 0.80; 95% CI 0.68-0.96); and those with an eGFR > 60 and an ACR < 300 (high eGFR + low ACR) had the lowest death rate (28% less; aHR: 0.72; 95% CI 0.59-0.87).

Conclusion

This study shows that among a large cohort of insulin-treated T2D patients in routine practice, the combination of reduced eGFR with increased ACR was associated with the greatest risk of premature death, followed closely by those with reduced eGFR and normal ACR levels. Adoption of aggressive CV risk management strategies to reduce mortality in patients with a low eGFR and albuminuria is essential in high-risk patients with T2D.

Effect of adding GLP-1RA on mortality, cardiovascular events, and metabolic outcomes among insulin-treated patients with type 2 diabetes: A large retrospective UK cohort study

BACKGROUND

Combining a GLP-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1RA) with insulin is often an effective treatment strategy for overweight patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D), but little is known about the longer-term effects on cardiovascular and mortality outcomes in routine clinical practice in the United Kingdom. We therefore compared the times to a major nonfatal cardiovascular (CV) event and all-cause mortality among overweight patients with T2D treated with insulin alone versus insulin+GLP-1RA in a large UK database.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was conducted in 18,227 patients with insulin-treated T2D from UK General Practices using The Health Improvement Network database. The 5-year risk of mortality and a 3-point composite of all-cause mortality and nonfatal CV outcomes (myocardial infarction or stroke) was compared between a propensity score-matched cohort of those on insulin alone (n=1,793) and insulin+GLP-1RA (n=1,793), irrespective of other diabetes therapies, providing a total of 12,682 person-years of follow-up. Cox proportional hazard models were used to estimate the hazard ratios of the outcomes.

RESULTS

Hemoglobin A1c reduction was similar between both groups (-0.42 vs -0.33%, P=.089 at 12 months). Overall, 3-point composite events of all-cause mortality and CV events (major adverse cardiovascular even) were 98 versus 55 for the insulin alone versus insulin+GLP-1RA groups, respectively (14.7 vs 9.2 per 1,000 person-years; adjusted hazard ratio [aHR]: 0.64; 95% CI: 0.42-0.98; P=.038). Corresponding composite nonfatal CV events were 33 versus 28 (6.0 vs 5.6 per 1,000 person-years; aHR: 0.76; 95% CI: 0.41-1.42; P=.393), whereas all-cause mortality events were 49 versus 13 (6.9 vs 2.0 per 1,000 person-years; aHR: 0.35; 95% CI: 0.17-0.73; P=.005).

CONCLUSION

Based on a large UK cohort in routine clinical practice, adding a GLP-1RA to insulin therapy is associated with a reduction in risk of composite CV events and all-cause mortality but a nonsignificant higher risk of hospitalization for heart failure in overweight patients with T2D.

Association between insulin-induced weight change and CVD mortality: Evidence from a historic cohort study of 18,814 patients in UK primary care

BACKGROUND

This study explores the association of insulin-induced weight (wt) gain on cardiovascular outcomes and mortality among patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) following insulin initiation using real-world data.

METHODS

A historical cohort study was performed in 18,814 adults with insulin-treated T2D derived from the UK The Health Improvement Network database. Based on the average weight change of 5 kg, 1 year postinsulin initiation, patients were grouped into 5 categories (>5 kg wt loss; 1.0-5.0 kg wt loss; no wt change; 1.0-5.0 kg wt gain; >5.0 kg wt gain) and followed-up for 5 years. Cox proportional hazard models and Kaplan-Meier estimators were fitted to estimate the hazards of a 3-point composite of nonfatal myocardial infarction, stroke, and all-cause mortality between categories.

RESULTS

The median age was 62.8 (IQR: 52.3-71.8) years, HbA_1c : 8.6% (IQR: 7.4-9.8) and mean BMI: 31.8 (6.5) kg/m² . The 5 year probability of survival differed significantly within the wt-change categories (log-rank test P value = .0005). Only 1963 composite events occurred. Compared with the weight-neutral group, the risk of composite events was 31% greater in the >5 kg wt-loss group (aHR: 1.31; 95% CI: 1.02, 1.68), the same in the 1.0 to 5.0 kg wt-gain category, but nonsignificantly increased in the 1.0 to 5.0 kg wt loss (15%) and >5.0 kg wt gain (13%) categories, respectively. In the obese subgroup, this risk was 50% (aHR: 1.50, 95% CI: 1.08-2.08) more in the >5 kg weight-loss group compared with the weight-neutral group.

CONCLUSION

Insulin-induced weight gain did not translate to adverse cardiovascular outcomes and mortality in patients with T2D. These data provide reassurance on the cardiovascular safety of insulin patients with T2D.

Comparative effectiveness and safety of different basal insulins in a real-world setting

AIMS

To compare glucose control and safety of different basal insulin therapies (BI, including Insulin NPH, glargine and detemir) in real-world clinical settings based on a large-scale registry study.

METHODS

In this multi-center 6-month prospective observational study, patients with type 2 diabetes (HbA1c ≥ 7%) who were uncontrolled by oral anti-diabetic drugs (OADs) and were willing to initiate BI therapy were enrolled from 209 hospitals within 8 regions of China. Type and dose of BI were at the physician's discretion and the patients' willingness. Interviews were conducted at 0 months (visit 1), 3 months (visit 2) and 6 months (visit 3). Outcomes included change in HbA1c, hypoglycemia rate and body weight from baseline at 6 months.

RESULTS

A total of 16 341 and 9002 subjects were involved in Intention-To-Treat (ITT) and per-protocol (PP) analysis, respectively. After PS regression adjustment, ITT analysis showed that reduction in HbA1c in glargine (2.2% ± 2.1%) and detemir groups (2.2% ± 2.1%) was higher than that in the NPH group (2.0% ± 2.2%) (P < .01). The detemir group had the lowest weight gain (-0.1 ± 2.9 kg) compared with the glargine (+0.1 ± 3.0 kg) and NPH (+0.3 ± 3.1 kg) groups (P < .05). The glargine group had the lowest rate of minor hypoglycaemia, while there was no difference in severe hypoglycaemia among the 3 groups. The results observed in PP analyses were consistent with those in ITT analysis.

CONCLUSION

In a real-world clinical setting in China, treatment with long-acting insulin analogues was associated with better glycaemic control, as well as less hypoglycaemia and weight gain than treatment with NPH insulin in type 2 diabetes patients. However, the clinical relevance of these observations must be interpreted with caution.

The effects of dual-therapy intensification with insulin or dipeptidylpeptidase-4 inhibitor on cardiovascular events and all-cause mortality in patients with type 2 diabetes: A retrospective cohort study

PURPOSE

To compare time to a composite endpoint of non-fatal acute myocardial infarction, non-fatal stroke or all-cause mortality in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus who had their treatment intensified with a dipeptidylpeptidase-4 inhibitor or insulin following dual-therapy (metformin plus sulfonylurea) failure.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was conducted on 5238 patients newly treated with either a dipeptidylpeptidase-4 inhibitor or insulin following dual-therapy failure (2007-2014). Data were sourced from UK General Practices. The risk of the composite outcome was compared between two treatment groups: metformin + sulfonylurea + insulin ( n = 1584) and metformin + sulfonylurea + dipeptidylpeptidase-4 inhibitor ( n = 3654), while adjusting for baseline covariates. Follow-up was for up to 5 years. Propensity score matching analysis and Cox proportional hazard models were employed.

RESULTS

Overall, 123 and 171 composite outcome events occurred among patients who added insulin versus dipeptidylpeptidase-4 inhibitor, respectively (44.5 vs 14.6 events per 1000 person-years). Addition of insulin was associated with a significantly higher hazard ratio versus the addition of a dipeptidylpeptidase-4 inhibitor (adjusted hazard ratio = 2.6, 95% confidence interval: 1.9-3.4; p < 0.01), an effect that was more pronounced in obese (body mass index: 30-34.9 kg/m²) patients (corresponding adjusted hazard ratio 3.6, 95% confidence interval: 2.3-5.6; p < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

In routine clinical practice, intensification of metformin + sulfonylurea therapy by adding insulin is associated with increased risk of cardiovascular events and death compared with adding a dipeptidylpeptidase-4 inhibitor. These findings are in line with suggestions from previous studies regarding the cardiovascular safety of insulin in type 2 diabetes mellitus, but should be interpreted with caution.

Observational Registry of Basal Insulin Treatment (ORBIT) in patients with type 2 diabetes uncontrolled with oral antihyperglycaemic drugs: Real-life use of basal insulin in China

AIMS

To examine treatment patterns following basal insulin (BI) introduction in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) patients under real-world conditions across China.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Overall, 18 995 patients inadequately controlled (HbA1c ≥ 53 mmol/mol [7%]) with oral antihyperglycaemic drugs (OADs) and willing to receive BI treatment were registered at 209 hospitals and followed at baseline (visit 1), 3 months (visit 2) and 6 months (visit 3). Type of BI was initiated at physicians' discretion.

RESULTS

Retention with BI therapy at 6 months was 75.6%. Use of long-acting BI predominated, with insulin glargine accounting for 71%, detemir 13% and Neutral Protamine Hagedorn (NPH) insulin 16%. Over 70% of long-acting users maintained the same initial BI at visit 3, while 40% of NPH users switched treatment and 24.4% of participants initiated BI with prandial insulin. The initial mean (± SD) dose of BI and total insulin was 0.18 ± 0.07 and 0.25 ± 0.19 IU/kg, respectively, with a mean increase of daily dose by 0.03 and 0.02 IU/kg after 6 months, respectively. Only 56.6% of insulin users reported dose titration at visit 3. Mean HbA1c was 81 mmol/mol (9.6%) at baseline and 57 mmol/mol (7.4%) at 6 months. The frequency of hypoglycaemia was 1.61 and 2.07 episodes/patient-year at baseline and 6 months, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

In real-world clinical settings, add-on BI therapy in T2DM patients is associated with significant improvement in glycaemic control without overtly compromising safety related to hypoglycaemia and weight gain. Evolution of insulin treatment regimens varied among patients, but dose titration was suboptimal. More active BI dose titration might further improve glycaemic outcome in patients receiving BI therapy.

VIDEO ABSTRACT

A free Video Abstract to accompany this article is available at https://vimeo.com/212655959.

Comparison of cardiovascular and metabolic outcomes in people with type 2 diabetes on insulin versus non-insulin glucose-lowering therapies (GLTs): A systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical trials

OBJECTIVES

To compare the cardiovascular and metabolic outcomes of Insulin versus non-insulin glucose lowering therapy (GLT).

METHODS

We included randomised control trials (RCTs) which randomised patients aged >18years with Type 2 Diabetes (T2D) to insulin vs non-insulin GLT. We used risk ratios (RR), risk difference (RD) and odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence interval (95%CI) to analyse the treatment effects of dichotomous outcomes and mean differences (with 95% CI) for continuous outcomes.

RESULTS

We included 18 RCTs with 19,300 participants. There was no significant difference in the risk of all-cause mortality and CV events between the groups (RR=1.01; 95%CI: 0.96-1.06; p=0.69). In 16 trials, insulin showed greater efficacy in glycaemic control (mean diff=-0.20; 95%CI: -0.28 to -0.11) but the proportion achieving HbA1c level of either ⩽7.0% or 7.4% (53 or 57mmol/mol) was similar in both (OR=1.55; 95%CI=0.92-2.62). The non-insulin group had a significant reduction in weight (mean diff=-3.41; 95%CI: -4.50 to -2.32) and an increase in the proportion of adverse events (54.7% vs 45.3%, p=0.044), but the insulin group showed an (RR=1.90; 95%CI: 1.44-2.51) increased risk of hypoglycaemia.

CONCLUSION

There was no difference in the risk of all-cause mortality and adverse cardiovascular (CV) events between Insulin and non-insulin GLTs. Insulin was associated with superior reduction in HbA1c; least reduction in weight and higher risk of hypoglycaemia. Both showed similar proportion of patients achieving HbA1c target. Non-insulin GLTs were associated with a higher risk in reported adverse drug events.

Patterns of glucose lowering drugs utilization in Portugal and in the Netherlands. Trends over time

AIMS

To compare the temporal trends in the consumption patterns of glucose lowering drugs (GLD) between Portugal and the Netherlands from 2004 to 2013 and to examine possible reasons behind the cross-national variation found.

METHODS

All GLD (ATC pharmacological subgroup A10B) were selected for analysis. Consumption data were obtained for the 10-year period. Portuguese and Dutch drug estimates were obtained from nationwide databases.

RESULTS

The consumption of GLD increased in Portugal from 52.9 defined daily dose per 1000 inhabitants per day (DHD) in 2004 to 70.0 DHD in 2013 and in the Netherlands from 44.9 DHD in 2004 to 50.7 DHD in 2013. In Portugal, the use of fixed-dose combinations, especially with dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (DPP-4) increased remarkably and in 2013 represented almost a quarter of total GLD consumption. In the Netherlands, the use of combinations was residual.

CONCLUSIONS

The consumption of GLD rose over the 10-year period in both countries. However, Portuguese overall consumption and costs of GLD were higher. The differentially rapid uptake of DPP-4 inhibitors in Portugal was the main driver of the cost difference.

Insulin degludec--the impact of a new basal insulin on care in type 2 diabetes

Many patients with type 2 diabetes continue to have poor glycaemic control and would benefit from insulin therapy. However, resistance to the introduction of insulin therapy can be high on both the part of the healthcare provider and the patient. A number of new, long-acting basal insulins are in development that provide good metabolic control, but with a lower risk of hypoglycaemia than currently available insulins, and greater flexibility in dosing time from day to day. These attributes may address some of the current barriers to insulin initiation and intensification that currently limit the effectiveness of diabetes care.

Clinical outcomes and costs for patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus initiating insulin therapy in Greece: two-year experience from the INSTIGATE study

AIMS

To evaluate the quality of metabolic control, clinical outcomes, resource costs, and quality of life among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), who initiated insulin for the first time as part of routine clinical practice.

METHODS

The INSTIGATE study is a prospective, multicentric, observational study of patients initiating insulin treatment. This sub-cohort analysis focuses on Hellenic outcomes.

RESULTS

At baseline, 263 Greek patients were enrolled just before initiating insulin for the first time. At the 6-month visit, 237 patients (90.1%) remained and consented to an additional 18-month observation period. In these 237 extension patients, over the 24-month post-initiation period, HbA1c (mean(SD)) decreased from 9.7%(1.6%) to 7.1%(0.9%) and body weight and BMI increased (+3(6)kg and +1.1(2.2)kg/m(2), respectively). At each post-baseline visit approximately one in five patients reported ≥1 episodes of hypoglycaemia in the preceding 3-6 months. Median total costs fluctuated from 438€ at baseline to 538€ up to 6 months and 451€ at 24 months; mean costs were 496(383)€, 573(276)€ and 485(247)€, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

In this cohort, insulin treatment seems to be effective with little long-term impact on cost. Findings should be interpreted in the context of an observational study.

Common standards of basal insulin titration in type 2 diabetes

Type 2 diabetes mellitus has become a worldwide major health problem, and the number of people affected is steadily increasing. Thus, not all patients suffering from the disease can be treated by specialized diabetes centers or outpatient clinics, but by primary care physicians. The latter, however, might have time constraints and have to deal with many kinds of diseases or with multimorbid patients, so their focus is not so much on lowering high blood glucose values. Thus, the physicians, as well as the patients themselves, are often reluctant to initiate and adjust insulin therapy, although basal insulin therapy is considered the appropriate strategy after oral antidiabetic drug failure, according to the latest international guidelines. A substantial number of clinical studies have shown that insulin initiation and optimization can be managed successfully by using titration algorithms-even in cases where patients themselves are the drivers of insulin titration. Nevertheless, tools and strategies are needed to facilitate this process in the daily life of both primary health care professionals and patients with diabetes.

Clinical outcomes of concomitant therapy of exenatide twice daily and basal insulin in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: a retrospective database analysis in the United States

OBJECTIVE

To examine the clinical effectiveness of concomitant therapy of exenatide twice daily and basal insulin in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus in the United States.

METHODS

Data from adults with type 2 diabetes were selected from an electronic medical record database. Concomitant therapy was defined as a basal insulin prescription within 6 months before or after an exenatide prescription between May 2005 and April 2009. Upon initiation, patients were treated with both medications. Clinical effectiveness was measured as mean changes in hemoglobin A1c (primary outcome), body weight, body mass index, blood pressure, and lipid values from a 6-month baseline to mean-adjusted values in a 12-month follow-up period. These changes were assessed by a bootstrapping test.

RESULTS

There were 1752 patients (mean age, 57 years) who initiated concomitant therapy (75% added exenatide to basal insulin, 25% added basal insulin to exenatide). Patients achieved significant mean reductions in hemoglobin A1c (0.5%), body weight (1.8 kg), body mass index (0.6 kg/m2), diastolic blood pressure (0.5 mm Hg), and various lipid measures (all P<.05). Hemoglobin A1c reduction was consistent irrespective of the treatment order. However, body weight, body mass index, and blood pressure reductions were observed in only patients who added exenatide to basal insulin.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, exenatide and basal insulin concomitant therapy was associated with significant reductions in hemoglobin A1c, body weight, body mass index, diastolic blood pressure, and lipids in a large, diverse patient population treated in ambulatory care settings in the United States. In the subgroup analysis, body weight, body mass index, and diastolic blood pressure reductions were observed in only patients who added exenatide to basal insulin.

How pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic principles pave the way for optimal basal insulin therapy in type 2 diabetes

This pedagogical review illustrates the differences between pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic (PD) measures, using insulin therapy as the primary example. The main conclusion is that PD parameters are of greater clinical significance for insulin therapy than PK parameters. The glucose-clamp technique, the optimal method for determining insulin PD, is explained so that the reader can understand the important studies in the literature. Key glucose-clamp studies that compare two basal insulin analogues - insulin glargine and insulin detemir - to Neutral Protamine Hagedorn insulin and to each other are then presented. The review further explains how PD parameters have been translated into useful clinical concepts and simple titration algorithms for everyday clinical practice. Finally, the necessity of overcoming patient and/or physician barriers to insulin therapy and providing continuing education and training is emphasised.

Treat early, treat appropriately

The treatment of type 2 diabetes is shifting from secondary specialist centres to the primary care setting. However, for this shift to be sustainable and successful, primary care physicians (PCPs) must effectively provide aspects of diabetes care traditionally supplied by specialists. In particular, the early and appropriate use of insulin in type 2 diabetes will increasingly become the responsibility of PCPs. This review examines how patients with type 2 diabetes are currently managed across several European countries, and explores the evidence around insulin use in type 2 diabetes and the implications for primary care.

Further improvement in postprandial glucose control with addition of exenatide or sitagliptin to combination therapy with insulin glargine and metformin: a proof-of-concept study

OBJECTIVE

To assess the effect of a 4-week adjunctive therapy of exenatide (EXE) (5-10 microg b.i.d.) or sitagliptin (SITA) (100 mg once daily) in response to a standardized breakfast meal challenge in 48 men or women with type 2 diabetes receiving insulin glargine (GLAR) + metformin (MET).

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

This was a single-center, randomized, open-label, active comparator-controlled study with a three-arm parallel group design, consisting of: screening, 4- to 8-week run-in period, 4-week treatment period, and follow-up. In all three groups, the GLAR dose was titrated according to an algorithm (fasting blood glucose <or=100 mg/dl).

RESULTS

The unadjusted 6-h postprandial blood glucose excursion of both GLAR + MET + EXE and GLAR + MET + SITA was statistically significantly smaller than that of GLAR + MET (606 +/- 104 vs. 612 +/- 133 vs. 728 +/- 132 mg/dl/h; P = 0.0036 and 0.0008). A1C significantly decreased in all three groups (P < 0.0001), with the greatest reduction of -1.9 +/- 0.7 under GLAR + MET + EXE (GLAR + MET + SITA -1.5 +/- 0.7; GLAR + MET -1.2 +/- 0.5%-points; GLAR + MET + EXE vs. GLAR + MET P = 0.0154). The American Diabetes Association A1C target of <7.0% was reached by 80.0, 87.5, and 62.5% of subjects, respectively. GLAR + MET + EXE had the highest number (47) of adverse events, mostly gastrointestinal (56%) with one dropout. GLAR + MET or GLAR + MET + SITA only had 10 and 12 adverse events, respectively, and no dropouts. Hypoglycemia (blood glucose <50 mg/dl) rates were low and comparable among groups. Weight decreased with GLAR + MET + EXE (-0.9 +/- 1.7 kg; P = 0.0396) and increased slightly with GLAR + MET (0.4 +/- 1.5 kg; NS; GLAR + MET + EXE vs. GLAR + MET P = 0.0377).

CONCLUSIONS

EXE or SITA added to GLAR + MET further substantially reduced postprandial blood glucose excursions. Longer-term studies in a larger population are warranted to confirm these findings.

Successes and challenges of insulin therapy for type 2 diabetes in a managed-care setting

OBJECTIVE

Although insulin is the most effective diabetes medication for lowering blood glucose, how insulin is used in clinical practice and how well patients respond to insulin therapy over the course of several years has not been documented. Our objective was to describe glycemic control, side-effects and dose titration over 7 years among persons starting insulin in a health plan that has long used a treatment algorithm similar to the current American Diabetes Association/European Association for the Study of Diabetes (ADA-EASD) algorithm for the management of hyperglycemia.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

Patients (n = 2417) who initiated insulin therapy between 1 January 1999 and 31 December 2004 were followed for a mean of 49.5 months until 30 June 2007, death, or health plan termination. Mean hemoglobin A1C, number of units of insulin purchased and body weight were assessed on a quarterly basis. The proportion experiencing edema or hypoglycemia was assessed annually.

RESULTS

Mean population A1C declined from 9.3 to 7.8% following insulin initiation and remained at that level for 7 years. However, A1C remained above 8% for 40% of patients, half of whom remained above 9.0%. The mean individual coefficient of variation in A1C was 0.12 (inter-quartile range 0.072-0.143). Mean daily insulin dosage started at 55 units and increased to approximately 100 units. Patients gained a mean of 6 lb (2.7 kg) during the first year then gained weight more gradually thereafter. Physicians diagnosed edema in 8-9% of patients annually. Hypoglycemia occurred in fewer than 2% of patients in any given year, with no cases requiring hospitalization.

CONCLUSIONS

Insulin lowered mean A1C by about 1.5 percentage points to stable levels, but this required ongoing dosage increases. Nevertheless, many patients remained in poor control. Insulin is effective when used per ADA-EASD guidelines but health plans wishing to optimize diabetes care may need to intensify insulin therapy or consider the use of adjunct therapies in the years after initiation. This study was limited by its observational descriptive design, and its reliance on insulin purchases rather than actual consumption.