Systematic literature review of use of blood glucose monitoring in phase III clinical studies of insulin analogs

Usefulness of YouTube™ videos in training patients for blood glucose self-monitoring in current coronavirus disease-19 pandemic

Objectives:

During the coronavirus disease-19 pandemic, due to restricted health-care access, patients may not get hands-on training for self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) from physicians. YouTube™ is a popular video-sharing web platform that can be used as a source of information for SMBG. This study aimed to assess the usefulness of YouTube™ videos on SMBG.

Material and Methods:

We searched the keywords “blood glucose self-monitoring,” “home blood glucose monitoring,” “blood glucose test,” and “blood sugar test” on YouTube™. The first 40 videos of each search were listed. After the two-stage screening, 49 videos were included for final data analysis. General characteristics and SMBG-specific characteristics (namely, strip handling, lancing device handling, measurement, and post- measurement action) were observed with pre-defined criteria having “yes” and “no” closed option. Data were tested statistically by the binomial test.

Results:

Average duration of 49 videos was 244.20 ± 72.61 s and those were online since 35.14 ± 20.52 months on YouTube™. Information about strip handling was mostly deficient, major being checking the expiry date (16.33% videos had the information). The handling of the lancing device was correct in the majority of the videos except for the disinfection of the tip of the lancing device (6.12% videos had the information). The measurement procedure was also correct in the majority of the videos except for the instruction to dry the hands (38.78% videos had the information) after washing. The post-measurement logbook entry was found in 48.98% videos.

Conclusion:

YouTube™ videos can be used as a potential source of information for patients’ education for SMBG. However, there are various levels of the incompleteness of the tutorials. Primary care physicians may suggest YouTube™ videos after exploring the videos and selecting the most appropriate one for their patients.

Short-acting insulin analogues versus regular human insulin for adult, non-pregnant persons with type 2 diabetes mellitus

BACKGROUND

The use of short-acting insulin analogues (insulin lispro, insulin aspart, insulin glulisine) for adult, non-pregnant people with type 2 diabetes is still controversial, as reflected in many scientific debates.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of short-acting insulin analogues compared to regular human insulin in adult, non-pregnant people with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

SEARCH METHODS

For this update we searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, the WHO ICTRP Search Portal, and ClinicalTrials.gov to 31 October 2018. We placed no restrictions on the language of publication.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised controlled trials with an intervention duration of at least 24 weeks that compared short-acting insulin analogues to regular human insulin in the treatment of people with type 2 diabetes, who were not pregnant.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed the risk of bias. We assessed dichotomous outcomes by risk ratios (RR), and Peto odds ratios (POR), with 95% confidence intervals (CI). We assessed continuous outcomes by mean differences (MD) with 95% CI. We assessed trials for certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 10 trials that fulfilled the inclusion criteria, randomising 2751 participants; 1388 participants were randomised to receive insulin analogues and 1363 participants to receive regular human insulin. The duration of the intervention ranged from 24 to 104 weeks, with a mean of about 41 weeks. The trial populations showed diversity in disease duration, and inclusion and exclusion criteria. None of the trials were blinded, so the risk of performance bias and detection bias, especially for subjective outcomes, such as hypoglycaemia, was high in nine of 10 trials from which we extracted data. Several trials showed inconsistencies in the reporting of methods and results.None of the included trials defined all-cause mortality as a primary outcome. Six trials provided Information on the number of participants who died during the trial, with five deaths out of 1272 participants (0.4%) in the insulin analogue groups and three deaths out of 1247 participants (0.2%) in the regular human insulin groups (Peto OR 1.66, 95% CI 0.41 to 6.64; P = 0.48; moderate-certainty evidence). Six trials, with 2509 participants, assessed severe hypoglycaemia differently, therefore, we could not summarise the results with a meta-analysis. Overall, the incidence of severe hypoglycaemic events was low, and none of the trials showed a clear difference between the two intervention arms (low-certainty evidence).The MD in glycosylated haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) change was -0.03% (95% CI -0.16 to 0.09; P = 0.60; 9 trials, 2608 participants; low-certainty evidence). The 95% prediction ranged between -0.31% and 0.25%. The MD in the overall number of non-severe hypoglycaemic episodes per participant per month was 0.08 events (95% CI 0.00 to 0.16; P = 0.05; 7 trials, 2667 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The 95% prediction interval ranged between -0.03 and 0.19 events per participant per month. The results provided for nocturnal hypoglycaemic episodes were of questionable validity. Overall, there was no clear difference between the two short-acting insulin analogues and regular human insulin. Two trials assessed health-related quality of life and treatment satisfaction, but we considered the results for both outcomes to be unreliable (very low-certainty evidence).No trial was designed to investigate possible long term effects (all-cause mortality, microvascular or macrovascular complications of diabetes), especially in participants with diabetes-related complications. No trial reported on socioeconomic effects.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Our analysis found no clear benefits of short-acting insulin analogues over regular human insulin in people with type 2 diabetes. Overall, the certainty of the evidence was poor and results on patient-relevant outcomes, like all-cause mortality, microvascular or macrovascular complications and severe hypoglycaemic episodes were sparse. Long-term efficacy and safety data are needed to draw conclusions about the effects of short-acting insulin analogues on patient-relevant outcomes.

Hypoglycemia evaluation and reporting in diabetes: Importance for the development of new therapies

Hypoglycemia complicating diabetes therapy is well recognized to be an ever-present threat to patients, their families, providers, payers, and regulators. Despite this being widely acknowledged, the regulatory stance on hypoglycemia as an endpoint in clinical trials to support new product registration has not evolved in any meaningful way since the publication of a position paper by an American Diabetes Association (ADA) Workgroup in 2005. As the impact of hypoglycemia on persons affected by diabetes is of major importance when assessing new treatments, the historical position of regulatory agencies on hypoglycemia is reviewed with respect to product approvals. The purpose of this article is to present proposals for facilitating development of therapies that reduce hypoglycemia risk through (1) development of composite measures of benefit for regulatory endpoints and (2) facilitation of the fulfillment of an unmet clinical need for reducing hypoglycemia. In view of greater comprehension of the effects of hypoglycemia, coupled with improved methodology to assess its frequency, the authors recommend: (1) a numerical cut point of <54 mg/dl (<3.0 mmol/L) as a clinically relevant level with which to define meaningful hypoglycemia for trials of diabetes therapies; (2) utilization in clinical trials of mature glucose monitoring technologies for purposes of regulatory evaluation and clinical decision-making; and (3) development of primary efficacy endpoint composites that include hypoglycemia rates and glycemic control.