Suppr超能文献

门冬胰岛素或门冬胰岛素中效混合制剂餐时胰岛素替代治疗与甘精胰岛素基础治疗的比较:2型糖尿病患者起始胰岛素治疗的一项随机对照试验

Prandial insulin substitution with insulin lispro or insulin lispro mid mixture vs. basal therapy with insulin glargine: a randomized controlled trial in patients with type 2 diabetes beginning insulin therapy.

作者信息

Kazda Christof, Hülstrunk Hiltrud, Helsberg Karin, Langer Frank, Forst Thomas, Hanefeld Markolf

机构信息

Lilly Deutschland GmbH, Bad Homburg, Germany.

出版信息

J Diabetes Complications. 2006 May-Jun;20(3):145-52. doi: 10.1016/j.jdiacomp.2005.09.004.

Abstract

PURPOSE

To compare the effects of prandial insulin therapy focusing on postprandial glucose control vs. basal insulin therapy focusing on fasting glucose control in patients with type 2 diabetes.

METHODS

This was an open-label, randomized, parallel, three-arm multicenter trial in patients with type 2 diabetes starting insulin treatment. Patients (n=159) were randomly assigned to 24-week treatment with 3x daily insulin lispro, 3x daily lispro mid mixture (MidMix; 50% lispro, 50% protaminated lispro), or 1x daily insulin glargine; oral antihyperglycemic agents were discontinued. Primary end point was the postprandial glucose excursion 2 h after breakfast at the end of study. Secondary outcomes included HbA1c, self-monitored blood glucose profiles, hypoglycemic episodes, body weight, and patient satisfaction.

RESULTS

At the end of study, glucose excursions 2 h after breakfast were significantly lower with lispro and MidMix than with glargine (P<.001 for each vs. glargine): lispro, -0.6+/-2.0 mmol/l; MidMix, +0.8+/-2.4 mmol/l; glargine, +2.5+/-2.4 mmol/l. Fasting glucose decreases were significantly greater with glargine (-2.6+/-2.4 mmol/l) than with lispro or MidMix (-0.9+/-2.2 mmol/l; +0.9+/-1.8 mmol/l). Nevertheless, HbA1c decreased by 1.1% (lispro) and 1.2% (MidMix), vs. 0.3% with glargine. Hypoglycemic episodes were rare with 1-1.5 self-reported episodes per 100 patient-days.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with type 2 diabetes starting insulin, 3x daily prandial treatment with a rapid-acting analog focusing on postprandial glucose values enabled better control of postprandial and circadian blood glucose profiles than once-daily glargine, in spite suboptimal fasting glucose levels, which targets fasting glucose values. These results support studies suggesting that control of postprandial hyperglycemia plays a key role in achieving HbA1c targets.

摘要

目的

比较在2型糖尿病患者中,以餐后血糖控制为重点的餐时胰岛素治疗与以空腹血糖控制为重点的基础胰岛素治疗的效果。

方法

这是一项开放标签、随机、平行、三臂多中心试验,纳入开始胰岛素治疗的2型糖尿病患者。患者(n = 159)被随机分配接受为期24周的治疗,分别为每日3次赖脯胰岛素、每日3次赖脯胰岛素中效混合制剂(中效混合制剂;50%赖脯胰岛素,50%精蛋白锌赖脯胰岛素)或每日1次甘精胰岛素治疗;停用口服降糖药。主要终点是研究结束时早餐后2小时的餐后血糖波动。次要结局包括糖化血红蛋白(HbA1c)、自我监测的血糖谱、低血糖事件、体重和患者满意度。

结果

研究结束时,赖脯胰岛素和中效混合制剂组早餐后2小时的血糖波动显著低于甘精胰岛素组(与甘精胰岛素组相比,每组P<0.001):赖脯胰岛素组,-0.6±2.0 mmol/L;中效混合制剂组,+0.8±2.4 mmol/L;甘精胰岛素组,+2.5±2.4 mmol/L。甘精胰岛素组空腹血糖下降幅度(-2.6±2.4 mmol/L)显著大于赖脯胰岛素组或中效混合制剂组(-0.9±2.2 mmol/L;+0.9±1.8 mmol/L)。然而,赖脯胰岛素组糖化血红蛋白下降1.1%,中效混合制剂组下降1.2%,而甘精胰岛素组下降0.3%。低血糖事件罕见,每100患者日有1 - 1.5次自我报告的事件。

结论

在开始胰岛素治疗的2型糖尿病患者中,每日3次使用速效类似物进行餐时治疗,重点关注餐后血糖值,与每日1次使用甘精胰岛素相比,尽管空腹血糖水平未达最佳,但能更好地控制餐后和昼夜血糖谱,甘精胰岛素以空腹血糖值为目标。这些结果支持了一些研究,表明控制餐后高血糖在实现糖化血红蛋白目标中起关键作用。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验