Randomized clinical trial of the efficacy and safety of insulin glargine vs. NPH insulin as basal insulin for the treatment of glucocorticoid induced hyperglycemia using continuous glucose monitoring in hospitalized patients with type 2 diabetes and respiratory disease

AIMS

To investigate the clinical efficacy and safety of insulin glargine compared with NPH insulin as basal insulin for the management of corticosteroid-induced hyperglycemia in hospitalized people with type 2 diabetes (T2DM) and respiratory disease.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Randomized, two-arm parallel group, clinical trial undertaken from February 2011 to November 2012 on the pneumology ward of the Hospital Regional Universitario de Málaga (Spain), involving 53 participants with T2DM treated with medium/high doses of intermediate-acting corticosteroids. Participants were randomly assigned to receive one single dose of insulin glargine or NPH insulin in three equally divided doses before each meal as basal insulin within a basal-bolus insulin protocol. The intervention lasted six days or until discharge if earlier.

RESULTS

No significant differences were seen between groups during the study in mean blood glucose (11.43±3.44 mmol/l in glargine vs. 11.88±2.94 mmol/l in NPH, p=0.624), and measures of glucose variability (standard deviation 3.27±1.16 mmol/l vs. 3.61±0.99 mmol/l, p=0.273; coefficient of variation 1.55±0.33 mmol/l vs. 1.72±0.39 mmol/l, p=0.200). Results from CGM were concordant with those obtained with capillary blood glucose reading. The length of hospital stay was also similar between groups (8.2±2.8 days vs. 9.8±3.4 days, p=0.166) There was a non significant trend for lower episodes of mild (4 vs. 8, p=0.351) and severe hypoglycemia (0 vs. 3, p=0.13) in the glargine group.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this study showed that insulin glargine and NPH insulin are equally effective in a basal-bolus insulin protocol to treat glucocorticoid-induced hyperglycemia in people with T2DM on a pneumology ward.

Stress hyperglycaemia in hospitalized patients with coronary artery disease and type 2 diabetes risk

AIMS

(i) To evaluate glucometabolic status of patients without known diabetes hospitalized due to coronary artery disease (CAD), (ii) to assess markers of systemic inflammation determined during admission and to evaluate their relationship with glucometabolic status and (iii) to analyse usefulness of HbA1c determined during admission in patients with CAD to detect abnormal glucose regulation (AGR).

MATERIALS & METHODS

We studied 440 patients with CAD admitted to the cardiology ward. Patients were grouped in four groups during admission according to clinical data, fasting plasma glucose and HbA1c: diabetes, HbA1c > 5·9%, stress hyperglycaemia (SH) and normal. In 199 subjects without known diabetes, an oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) was performed 3 months after discharge, and they were reclassified according to WHO 1998 criteria. Biochemical and inflammatory markers were measured.

RESULTS

The OGTT showed that 27·4% of subjects without known diabetes at admission had diabetes, 11·2% had impaired fasting glucose + impaired glucose tolerance, 33·5% impaired glucose tolerance, 3·6% impaired fasting glucose, and 24·4% normal glucose metabolism. Odds ratio for having diabetes 3 months after discharge in HbA1c > 5·9% group was 5·91 (P < 0·0001) and in SH group was 1·82 (P = 0·38). The best HbA1c cut-off point to predict AGR was 5·85%. HbA1c levels during admission were highly predictive of having AGR (AUC ROC 0·76 [95% CI 0·67-0·84]).

CONCLUSION

We reported a high prevalence of AGR in subjects with CAD. Stress hyperglycaemia in patients with CAD was not associated with an increased risk of diabetes 3 months later. HbA1c in patients hospitalized with CAD was a useful tool to detect AGR.