Efficacy and safety of premixed insulin analogs in Asian patients with type 2 diabetes: A systematic review

Safety and Clinical Outcomes of Insulin Degludec in Korean Patients with Diabetes in Real-World Practices: A Prospective, Observational Study

INTRODUCTION

To investigate the safety and effectiveness of insulin degludec (IDeg) in a real-world population of Korean patients with diabetes requiring insulin therapy.

METHODS

This was a multicenter, prospective, single-arm, open-label, non-interventional study. Patients aged ≥ 12 months and treated with previous glucose-lowering medications were eligible to switch to IDeg. The primary endpoint was the incidence of adverse events (AEs), and the secondary endpoints were changes in glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c), fasting plasma glucose (FPG), postprandial glucose (PPG), and target HbA1c < 7.0%.

RESULTS

In total, 3225 and 2450 patients were included in the safety analysis set (SAS) and effectiveness analysis set (EAS), respectively. The mean baseline HbA1c and duration of diabetes were 9.4% and 13.0 years, respectively. Adverse events were reported in 740 patients (22.9%); the majority were mild and resolved. Significant improvements were observed in HbA1c, FPG, and PPG at week 26 (all p < 0.0001). The target of HbA1c < 7% was achieved in 22.2% of patients at week 26.

CONCLUSION

In real-world clinical practice, 26 weeks of IDeg treatment resulted in significant reductions in glycemic parameters with a low incidence of AEs in Korean patients with diabetes. No new safety signals were observed.

CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRY AND REGISTRATION NUMBER

This trial is registered under ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02779413) and the universal trial number is [U1111-1176-2287].

Effectiveness of the Lilly Connected Care Program in Improving Glycemic Management Among Patients With Type 2 Diabetes in China: Retrospective Real-world Study

BACKGROUND

Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is a worldwide public health concern. Mobile health management platforms could be a potential way to achieve effective glycemic control.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to evaluate the real-world effectiveness of the Lilly Connected Care Program (LCCP) platform in glycemic control among patients with T2DM in China.

METHODS

This retrospective study included Chinese patients with T2DM (aged ≥18 years) from April 1, 2017, to January 31, 2020, for the LCCP group and from January 1, 2015, to January 31, 2020, for the non-LCCP group. Propensity score matching was used to match the LCCP and non-LCCP groups to reduce confounding, with covariates including age, sex, the duration of diabetes, baseline hemoglobin A_1c (HbA_1c), and the number of oral antidiabetic medication classes. HbA_1c reduction over 4 months, the proportions of patients achieving an HbA_1c reduction of ≥0.5% or ≥1%, and the proportions of patients reaching to target HbA_1c level of ≤6.5% or <7% were compared between the LCCP and non-LCCP groups. Multivariate linear regression was used to assess factors associated with HbA_1c reduction.

RESULTS

A total of 923 patients were included, among whom 303 pairs of patients were well matched after propensity score matching. HbA_1c reduction during the 4-month follow-up was significantly larger in the LCCP group than the non-LCCP group (mean 2.21%, SD 2.37% vs mean 1.65%, SD 2.29%; P=.003). The LCCP group had a higher proportion of patients with an HbA_1c reduction of ≥1% (209/303, 69% vs 174/303, 57.4%; P=.003) and ≥0.5% (229/303, 75.6% vs 206/303, 68%; P=.04). The proportions of patients reaching the target HbA_1c level of ≤6.5% were significantly different between the LCCP and non-LCCP groups (88/303, 29% vs 61/303, 20.1%; P=.01), whereas the difference in the proportions of patients reaching the target HbA_1c level of <7% was not statistically significant (LCCP vs non-LCCP: 128/303, 42.2% vs 109/303, 36%; P=.11). LCCP participation and higher baseline HbA_1c were associated with a larger HbA_1c reduction, whereas older age, longer diabetes duration, and higher baseline dose of premixed insulin analogue were associated with a smaller HbA_1c reduction.

CONCLUSIONS

The LCCP mobile platform was effective in glycemic control among patients with T2DM in China in the real world.

Basal-bolus insulin therapy for the treatment of non-critically ill patients with type 2 diabetes in Vietnam: effectiveness and factors associated with inpatient glycemic control

Purpose

This study assessed the effectiveness of basal-bolus insulin therapy (BBIT) in non-critically ill patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM) and the factors associated with optimal inpatient glycemic control (IGC) with BBIT.

Methods

This prospective study included 103 patients who were admitted to the University Medical Center and were treated with BBIT. Clinical characteristics, glucose, and glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) levels at admission, renal function tests, basal-bolus insulin dosing, and other treatments were recorded. The optimal IGC was defined and classified for the analysis.

Results

The mean age of the patients was 67.2 ± 12.0 years. The blood glucose and HbA1c levels at admission were 319.2 ± 184.8 mg/dL and 10.7 ± 2.6%, respectively. Optimal IGC was defined as patients with ≥60% of in-hospital blood glucose values within the target range (3.9–10 mmol/L). Of the 103 patients, 66 patients (64%) achieved optimal IGC and only 5 patients (4.9%) had at least one hypoglycemic episode. The number of patients consuming snacks was higher in the poor than in the optimal IGC group whereas an estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) <45-mL/min/1.73 m2 was predominant in the optimal IGC group. Multivariate analysis revealed that snack consumption and glucocorticoid (GC) use were factors associated with poor IGC, while eGFR <45 mL/min/1.73 m2 was a favorable factor for optimal IGC.

Conclusion

BBIT is safe and effective for the treatment of IGC in non-critically ill patients. Moreover, eGFR <45 mL/min/1.73 m2 at admission, snack consumption, and GC therapy were independent factors associated with IGC outcomes.

Comparison of Prevailing Insulin Regimens at Different Time Periods in Hospitalized Patients: A Real-World Experience from a Tertiary Hospital

BACKGROUND

Prevailing insulin regimens for glycemic control in hospitalized patients have changed over time. We aimed to determine whether the current basal-bolus insulin (BBI) regimen is superior to the previous insulin regimen, mainly comprising split-mixed insulin therapy.

METHODS

This was a single tertiary center, retrospective observational study that included non-critically ill patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus who were treated with split-mixed insulin regimens from 2004 to 2007 (period 1) and with BBI from 2008 to 2018 (period 2). Patients from each period were analyzed after propensity score matching. The mean difference in glucose levels and the achievement of fasting and preprandial glycemic targets by day 6 of admission were assessed. The total daily insulin dose, incidence of hypoglycemia, and length of hospital stay were also evaluated.

RESULTS

Among 244 patients from each period, both fasting glucose (estimated mean±standard error, 147.4±3.1 mg/dL vs. 129.4±3.2 mg/dL, P<0.001, day 6) and preprandial glucose (177.7±2.8 mg/dL vs. 152.8±2.8 mg/dL, P<0.001, day 6) were lower in period 2 than in period 1. By day 6 of hospital admission, 42.6% and 67.2% of patients achieved a preprandial glycemic target of <140 mg/dL in periods 1 and 2, respectively (relative risk, 2.00; 95% confidence interval, 1.54 to 2.59), without an increased incidence of hypoglycemia. Length of stay was shorter in period 2 (10.23±0.26 days vs. 8.70±0.26 days, P<0.001).

CONCLUSION

BBI improved glycemic control in a more efficacious manner than a split-mixed insulin regimen without increasing the risk of hypoglycemia in a hospital setting.

Basal Insulin Reduces Glucose Variability and Hypoglycaemia Compared to Premixed Insulin in Type 2 Diabetes Patients: A Study Based on Continuous Glucose Monitoring Systems

Aims

To examine the glycaemic variability and safety of basal and premixed insulin by using continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) systems.

Methods

393 patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) treated with basal or premixed insulin for more than 3 months were enrolled. Patients were classified into a basal insulin group or premixed insulin group according to their insulin regimens. CGMs were used for 72 h with their previous hypoglycaemic regimen unchanged. The following glycaemic parameters were calculated for each 24 h using CGM data.

Results

Despite similar HbA1c and fasting C-peptide concentrations, glycaemic variability (GV), including the mean amplitude of glycaemic excursion (MAGE), standard deviation (SD) and coefficient of variation (CV), and the time below range (TBR) were significantly lower in the basal insulin group than these in the premixed insulin group. Night-time hypoglycaemia was lower in the basal insulin group than that in the premixed insulin group (p<0.01). Among participants with haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) < 7%, the GV and TBR were higher in the premixed insulin group than that in the basal insulin group.

Conclusion

Compared with basal insulin, the patients who use premixed insulin had higher GV, smaller TIR and an increased incidence of hypoglycaemia. For patients who use premixed insulin and with HbA1c < 7%, more attention needs to be given to hypoglycaemic events and asymptomatic hypoglycaemia.

Clinical Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier NCT03566472.

A Pragmatic Study of Basal and Mid-Mixture Insulins as Starter Insulins in Chinese Patients With Type 2 Diabetes: Observations From Long-Term, Real-World Experience

INTRODUCTION

According to Chinese guidelines, basal insulin (BI) or premixed insulins are recommended insulin starters following the failure of oral antihyperglycemic medication (OAM) in Chinese patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D). This pragmatic study investigated the long-term effectiveness, safety, and cost of add-on BI and mid-mixture insulin analog (MMI) regimens in Chinese patients with T2D.

METHODS

This multicenter, open-label, pragmatic study randomized patients 1:1 to receive either BI or MMI with OAMs adjusted according to current standards of care. We evaluated the change in glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) from baseline, safety parameters, and antidiabetic medication costs.

RESULTS

Change in HbA1c from baseline showed a statistically greater decrease at week 48 in the MMI group (MMI: - 2.03% [0.06] vs. BI: - 1.82% [0.06]; P < 0.05). Both groups showed decreases in fasting plasma glucose (mmol/L) (MMI: - 2.53 [0.14] vs. BI: - 3.19 [0.14]; P < 0.01) and postprandial glucose (mmol/L) (MMI: - 4.35 [0.22] vs. BI: - 4.33 [0.23]). More patients in the BI group showed increases in OAM use, while OAM use decreased in the MMI group. Both groups showed stable glycemic control with a very limited insulin dose change from week 24 to week 48. The incidence of total hypoglycemia was higher in the MMI group (MMI: 124% [30.7] vs. BI: 76% [18.5], P < 0.0001), but no incidence of severe hypoglycemia was reported in either group. Treatment costs, in terms of average daily cost and cost of glycemic control, were higher in the BI group.

CONCLUSION

In long-term real-world use, the MMI and BI groups demonstrated improved glycemic control, with the MMI group showing more significant improvement than the BI group. Hypoglycemia incidence was higher in the MMI group, with no major safety issues through week 48. MMI is likely to provide better price value than BI for the treatment of T2D in Chinese patients.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03018938.

Fear of hypoglycemia in adults with diabetes mellitus switching to treatment with IDegAsp co-formulation to examine real-world setting: an observational study (The HATICE study)

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the clinical results of insulin degludec/aspart (IDEgAsp) therapy and its effect on the fear of hypoglycemia.

METHODS

A prospective observational study has been conducted through surveys of 36 patients using insulin because of type 2 diabetes mellitus who initiated treatment with IDegAsp switching from other insulins. Patients, 18-75 years old, were recruited to the study, consecutively. Participants' age, gender, height, weight, body mass index (BMI), daily insulin dose, glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c), hypoglycemia rate, hypoglycemia fear survey (HFS) were recorded at the beginning of the study. By the end of 12th month, data was re-measured and compared with each other.

RESULTS

HbA1c was declined by mean of -1.59% (95% CI -1.06 to -2.12, p<0.001). There was also a significant decrease in mean, daily insulin dose, weight and BMI values of patients via IDegAsp. While there was an increase in the amount of dipeptidyl peptidase 4-inhibitors (DPP4-i) and sodium-glucose co-transporter 2-inhibitors (SGLT2-i), there was a decrease in daily injection frequency. There was also a significant decrease in the median values of monthly hypoglycemia rate (from 2.0 to 1.0, p<0.001) and the entire HFS scores (HFS-T: from 1.09 to 0.73, p<0.001; HFS-B: from 0.83 to 0.60, p<0.001; HFS-W: from 1.33 to 0.88, p<0.001). There was a strong positive correlation between ΔHFS-B and daily injection frequency (Rho: 0.398; P: 0.016).

CONCLUSIONS

IDegAsp co-formulation, combined with DPP4-i and/or SGLT2-i, can provide usefulness in terms of rates of hypoglycemia, reduced HbA1c, less injection administration, and decreased the fear of hypoglycemia in diabetics.

A pragmatic study of mid-mixture insulin and basal insulin treatment in patients with type 2 diabetes uncontrolled with oral antihyperglycaemic medications: A lesson from real-world experience

BACKGROUND

Chinese guidelines for the treatment of type 2 diabetes (T2D) recommend basal or premixed insulins as insulin starters after failed oral antihyperglycaemic medication (OAM). This pragmatic study compared effectiveness and safety of add-on basal insulin analog (BI) and mid-mixture insulin analog (MMI; 50:50 premixed insulin) as starter insulin regimens in Chinese patients with T2D in a real-world setting.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was a multicentre, open-label, randomized, parallel, pragmatic trial. Patients receiving OAMs were randomized 1:1 to BI (n = 410) or MMI (n = 404) for 24 weeks. Insulin titration and OAM adjustment were determined by investigators following usual standard-of-care. The primary outcome was change in glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) from baseline.

RESULTS

Least-squares mean changes in HbA1c from baseline to week 24 were -2.00% and -2.15% for BI and MMI groups, respectively (P = .13). The MMI group demonstrated a greater reduction in concomitant OAM therapies used than BI group (53.8% vs. 35.3%, respectively; P < .001). Very limited daily insulin dose increments were observed from baseline to week 24 in both BI and MMI groups (2.5 U/day and 1.8 U/day, respectively). Although both insulin analogs were well-tolerated without severe hypoglycaemia, small weight gains were seen with both treatments. Higher total hypoglycaemia rates were noticed with the MMI group, while nocturnal hypoglycaemia events were comparable.

CONCLUSIONS

In real-world settings, BI and MMI provided similar improvement in glucose control without conceding hypoglycaemia. The BI group received a greater number of OAMs in real-world settings. Limited insulin dose titration was observed, while more adjustments occurred with OAM usage.

Use of Insulin Glargine 100 U/mL for the Treatment of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus in East Asians: A Review

Insulin glargine (IGlar) 100 U/mL (IGlar-100) is widely used in East Asian countries for the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and is the gold standard of basal insulin treatment. In this review we summarize key information about clinical experience with IGlar-100 in East Asian patients with T2DM, including findings from clinical trials and postmarketing studies. We also provide recommendations and opinions on the optimal use of IGlar-100 in this population. The findings from the studies highlighted in our review indicate that IGlar-100 can be a suitable treatment option for East Asians with T2DM, from initial therapy in combination with oral antihyperglycemic medications through to different combinations and intensification models. FUNDING: Eli Lilly and Company.

Efficacy Comparison of Preprandial and Postprandial Prandilin 25 Administration in Patients with Newly Diagnosed Type 2 Diabetes Using a Continuous Glucose Monitoring System

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this study was to determine the clinical efficacy of preprandial and postprandial Prandilin 25 (premixed insulin lispro 25) administration in patients with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) using a continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) system.

METHODS

This was a single-center, self-controlled comparative clinical trial. Newly diagnosed T2DM patients with hemoglobin A1c > 8.0% were hospitalized and received Prandilin 25 plus metformin treatment. Glycemic control was reached after a 7-to-8-day run-in period. Patients underwent 2 days of treatment consisting of preprandial Prandilin 25 on day 1 and postprandial Prandilin 25 on day 2 at the same dosage. The primary outcome was the 24-h mean amplitude of glycemic excursion (24 hMAGE); secondary outcomes were other daily glycemic variability parameters, including 24-h mean blood glucose (24hMBG), 24-h standard deviation of blood glucose (24hSDBG), large amplitude of glycemic excursion (LAGE), incremental area under the curve (AUC) values for different glucose levels, postprandial glucose excursion, and incidence of hypoglycemia, which were assessed using a CGM system.

RESULTS

Eighty-five patients completed this study. There was no statistically significant difference in 24hMAGE, 24hMBG, 24hSDBG, or LAGE between the preprandial injection group and the postprandial injection group. Similarly, there was no between-treatment difference in the AUC for a blood glucose level below 3.9 mmol/L, in the AUC for a blood glucose level above 10.0 mmol/L, or in the percentages of time that the blood glucose level was below 3.9 mmol/L or above 10.0 mmol/L. Further analysis showed that the pre-meal glucose, peak height, and time to peak after each meal, the relative areas under the CGM curve at 1-4 h after each meal, as well as the incidence of hypoglycemia, were similar for the preprandial and postprandial Prandilin 25 groups.

CONCLUSION

In patients with T2DM managed with premixed insulin lispro 25, postprandial injection (within 30 min of meal onset) may be an acceptable alternative to preprandial injection when the regular preprandial insulin dose is omitted.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Chinese Clinical Trial Register identifier: ChiCTR1800015828.

Comparison of Efficacy and Economic Value of Prandilin 25 and Humalog Mix 25 in Patients with Newly Diagnosed Type 2 Diabetes by a Continuous Glucose Monitoring System

INTRODUCTION

To determine the clinical efficacy and economic value of insulin lispro 25-Prandilin 25 vs. insulin lispro 25-Humalog mix 25 in treatment of newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) by a continuous glucose monitoring system (CGMS).

METHODS

This was a single-center, randomized, case-crossover clinical trial. Participants were randomly allocated to two groups and underwent two kinds of insulin lispro 25 treatment separated by a 1-day washout period. In total, 81 patients with newly diagnosed T2DM with hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) above 9% were hospitalized and randomly divided to receive Prandilin 25/Humalog mix 25 or Humalog mix 25/Prandilin 25 treatment. All participants were subjected to metformin therapy simultaneously. Glycemic control was reached after 7-8 days Prandilin 25 or Humalog mix 25 treatment; each patient received continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) for 5 consecutive days (from day 1 to day 5). On day 3 of CGM performance, Prandilin 25 treatment was switched to Humalog mix 25 treatment at the same dosage or vice versa. Parameters representing glycemic variability (GV) and postprandial glucose excursions, including 24-h mean blood glucose (24hMBG), 24-h standard deviation of blood glucose (24hSDBG), 24-h mean amplitude of glycemic excursion (24hMAGE), large amplitude of glycemic excursion (LAGE), incremental area under the curve (AUC) for different glucose levels, and postmeal relative areas under the CGM curve (AUCpp) for 1-4 h of each meal, were calculated for each patient.

RESULTS

No significant differences were found in the 24hMAGE, 24hMBG, 24hSDBG, LAGE, mean 1-h preprandial blood glucose and the incidence of hypoglycemia between the Prandilin 25 treatment group and Humalog mix 25 treatment group. Similarly, there were no between-treatment differences for AUC and time when blood glucose was below 3.9 mmol/l, between 3.9 mmol/l and 10.0 mmol/l, or above 10.0 mmol/l. Further analysis showed the AUCpp for 1-4 h of each meal for two kinds of treatments were similar. However, the mean estimated cost of Prandilin 25 was only 85% of Humalog mix 25 in one treatment course.

CONCLUSION

Prandilin 25 is non-inferior in clinical efficacy compared with Humalog mix 25. In view of the significant difference in the cost of the two kinds of insulin lispro 25, Prandilin 25 is a much more cost-effective anti-diabetes drug for management of T2DM.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Chinese Clinical Trial Register identifier, ChiCTR1800015829.

Expert Opinion: Patient Selection for Premixed Insulin Formulations in Diabetes Care

Premixed insulins are an important tool for glycemic control in persons with diabetes. Equally important in diabetes care is the selection of the most appropriate insulin regimen for a particular individual at a specific time. Currently, the choice of insulin regimens for initiation or intensification of therapy is a subjective decision. In this article, we share insights, which will help in rational and objective selection of premixed formulations for initiation and intensification of insulin therapy. The glycemic status and its variations in a person help to identify the most appropriate insulin regimen and formulation for him or her. The evolution of objective glucometric indices has enabled better glycemic monitoring of individuals with diabetes. Management of diabetes has evolved from a 'glucocentric' approach to a 'patient-centered' approach; patient characteristics, needs, and preferences should be evaluated when considering premixed insulin for treatment of diabetes.Funding: Novo Nordisk, India.

Comparison of the Effect of Glycemic Control in Type 2 Diabetes Outpatients Treated With Premixed and Basal Insulin Monotherapy in China

Background: Basal and premixed insulin have been widely used for insulin therapy of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) in China. The aim of this study is to compare the sustained efficacy of basal and premixed insulin therapies in T2DM outpatients with insulin monotherapy. Materials and Methods: The survey was conducted in 602 hospitals across China from April to June in 2013. The participants included outpatients who were receiving basal or premixed insulin monotherapy for more than 3 months, and the outcome was attaining a glycated hemoglobin A1C (HbA1c) of <7.0% as a measure of sustained glycemic control. Results: A total of 49,119 T2DM outpatients on basal (n = 11,967) or premixed insulin (n = 37,152) monotherapy were included in the final analyses. Using multivariable model analysis, patients using premixed insulin exhibited a better glycemic control, with more outpatients achieving the target HbA1c level than those using basal insulin (model 1, OR 0.695, 95%CI 0.664-0.728; model 2, OR 0.708, 95%CI 0.676-0.742; model 3, OR 0.717, 95%CI 0.684-0.752; model 4, OR 0.750, 95%CI 0.715-0.787). Using subgroup analysis stratified by age, sex, duration of diabetes, duration of insulin treatment, and complications, still more outpatients in every subgroup treated with premixed insulin achieved the target HbA1c (HbA1c < 7%) than those receiving basal insulin. Conclusions: Premixed insulin monotherapy had a better glycemic control (HbA1c < 7.0%) than basal insulin monotherapy for Chinese T2DM outpatients in daily.

Differential Treatment Response to Insulin Intensification Therapy: A Post Hoc Analysis of a Randomized Trial Comparing Premixed and Basal-Bolus Insulin Regimens

INTRODUCTION

Identification of subgroups of patients that may benefit most from certain treatment is important because individual treatment response varies due to multiple contributing factors. The present study used the subgroup identification based on the differential effect search (SIDES) algorithm to identify subgroups with different treatment responses to insulin intensification therapies.

METHODS

This was a post hoc analysis of a 24-week, multicenter, open-label, randomized, parallel study comparing prandial premixed therapy (PPT) to basal-bolus therapy (BBT). Patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus were randomized to PPT (insulin lispro mix 50/50 thrice daily with meals) or BBT (glargine at bedtime plus mealtime insulin lispro) insulin intensification therapies. The SIDES algorithm was used to identify the subgroups from at-goal patients [glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) <7.0% (53.0 mmol/mol) at the end of 24 weeks; n = 182] who could have benefitted from insulin intensification therapies.

RESULTS

Baseline characteristics of overall at-goal patients were comparable between PPT and BBT groups. The SIDES algorithm identified patients with race other than Caucasian (i.e., African-American, Asian, and Hispanic) and baseline fasting blood glucose (FBG) <8.89 mmol/L as a subgroup that could respond better to PPT relative to BBT than the overall at-goal patient population. In this identified subgroup population, the HbA1c mean (standard deviation) changes from baseline to endpoint in PPT and BBT groups were -2.27 (0.88)% versus -2.05 (0.75)%; p = 0.40, respectively; while in the overall at-goal patients, the HbA1c changes were -2.17 (0.79)% versus -2.34 (1.00)%; p = 0.19, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The preliminary results showed that the subgroup of patients with race other than Caucasian and FBG <8.89 mmol/L may respond better to premixed intensification therapy. This result provides some preliminary information for further investigation in prospective studies.

FUNDING

Eli Lilly and Company.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinicaltrials.gov ID number: NCT00110370.

Efficacy and safety of premixed insulin analogs in Asian patients with type 2 diabetes: A systematic review

AIMS/INTRODUCTION

The primary aim of this systematic review was to provide an overview of the efficacy and safety of premixed insulin analogs in Asians, specifically East Asians, with type 2 diabetes.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library and ClinicalTrials.gov databases were searched from 1 January 1995 to 26 November 2015. Randomized controlled trials involving East Asians with type 2 diabetes treated with any premixed insulin analog were included. Major comparator treatments were basal insulin and basal-bolus insulin. Comparisons were also made between East Asian and Caucasian patients. The primary efficacy outcome was glycated hemoglobin change from baseline to end-point. The primary safety outcome was the incidence of hypoglycemia.

RESULTS

A total of 21 studies were included; most (n = 14) were carried out in China or Japan. The duration of treatment ranged from 12 to 48 weeks. The glycated hemoglobin mean/least squares mean change from baseline to end-point after treatment with premixed insulin analogs ranged from -0.12 to -4.2% (improvement was generally more pronounced with insulin initiation vs intensification). The incidence of hypoglycemia ranged from 8.3 to 72.0% in most studies, with the variability reflecting the definition of hypoglycemia used. Efficacy and safety outcomes for premixed insulin analogs were generally similar to those for basal or basal-bolus insulin. Limited evidence suggests that dosing, efficacy and safety profiles might differ slightly between East Asian and Caucasians receiving premixed insulin analogs.

CONCLUSIONS

These results support the current use of premixed insulin analogs for managing East Asian patients with type 2 diabetes.