Suppr超能文献

在俄罗斯进行的一项为期16周的随机、开放标签、平行组试验:比较每日三次或每日两次给予门冬胰岛素30联合二甲双胍与单用口服抗糖尿病药物治疗2型糖尿病控制不佳患者的疗效。

Comparison of biphasic insulin aspart 30 given three times daily or twice daily in combination with metformin versus oral antidiabetic drugs alone in patients with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes: a 16-week, randomized, open-label, parallel-group trial conducted in russia.

作者信息

Ushakova Olga, Sokolovskaya Vera, Morozova Alla, Valeeva Farida, Zanozina Olga, Sazonova Olga, Zhadanova Elena, Starceva Maria, Kazakova Elena, Saifullina Marina, Shapiro Irina, Tarasov Alexander, Al-Tayar Bassam, Starkova Ninella

机构信息

Department of Prophylactic Medicine, Post-graduate Medical Education Institute, Khabarovsk, Russia.

出版信息

Clin Ther. 2007 Nov;29(11):2374-84. doi: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2007.11.017.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Modern premixed insulins offer a flexible approach to the initiation of insulin therapy in patients with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes. A disadvantage of twice-daily regimens of biphasic insulin aspart 30 (BIAsp 30) is that lunchtime control (when no insulin is administered) can be suboptimal. Therefore, it is possible that administering BIAsp 30 thrice daily might further optimize glycemic control and offer an option for patients in whom metformin (MET) is contraindicated.

OBJECTIVE

This study evaluated the efficacy and safety profiles of 2 different regimens of BIAsp 30 compared with a regimen consisting of oral antidiabetic drugs (OADs) alone.

METHODS

In this multicenter, randomized, open-label, parallel-group trial, insulin-naive patients with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes (baseline glycosylated hemoglobin [HbA(1c) > or =8.0%) who were taking OADs (a sulfonylurea or meglitinide with/without MET or MET only) were randomized to receive BIAsp 30 TID, BIAsp 30 BID + MET, or continuation of their current OAD therapy for 16 weeks. The primary end point was HbA(1c) at the end of the study. Secondary end points included reductions in HbA(1c), mean blood glucose (BG), prandial increment, mean 7-point self-monitored BG profile, weight changes, tolerability (hypoglycemia, adverse events), and satisfaction/quality of life (derived from 2 questionnaires completed at weeks 0, 8, and 16).

RESULTS

The study enrolled 308 insulin-naive patients with type 2 diabetes (78.9% female; mean age, 58.3 years; body mass index, 29.4 kg/m(2); HbA(1c), 10.3%). Both BIAsp 30 TID and BIAsp 30 BID + MET were associated with significantly greater mean (SD) reductions in HbA(1c) relative to OADs alone (absolute percent reduction: 2.9% [1.5%], 3.0% [1.6%], and 2.1% [1.4%], respectively; P < 0.001, both insulin groups vs OAD group) and improved post-prandial glucose control (reduction in mean post-prandial glucose:-6.32 [4.07], -6.44 [4.70], and -3.59 [4.22] mmol/L; P < 0.001, both insulin groups vs OAD group). The mean decrease in the prandial increment was -1.26 mmol/L for BIAsp 30 TID, -2.15 mmol/L for BIAsp 30 BID + MET, and -0.44 mmol/L for OAD. The differences in reduction in the prandial increment were statistically significant for BIAsp 30 TID versus OAD (P = 0.047), BIAsp 30 BID + MET versus OAD (P < 0.001), and BIAsp 30 TID versus BIAsp 30 BID + MET (P = 0.042). Mean body weight increased significantly from baseline with both BIAsp 30 TID and BIAsp 30 BID + MET (+1.71 and +1.50 kg, respectively; both, P < 0.001), and decreased significantly in the OAD group (-0.75 kg; P = 0.003). There were no major hypoglycemic events, and most hypoglycemic events were recorded as symptoms only (144/158 [91.1%]). There were no significant differences in the mean frequency of overall hypoglycemic episodes between BIAsp 30 TID and BIAsp 30 BID + MET (0.73 and 0.69 episodes per patient-year, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

In these patients with type 2 diabetes that was poorly controlled by OADs, BIAsp 30 TID and BIAsp 30 BID plus MET were associated with significantly greater reductions in HbA(1c) and postprandial BG compared with OADs alone. The insulin regimens were associated with significantly more weight gain than OADs alone. There were no differences in rates of hypoglycemia between the insulin regimens.

摘要

背景

现代预混胰岛素为起始胰岛素治疗的2型糖尿病控制不佳患者提供了一种灵活的方法。双相门冬胰岛素30(BIAsp 30)每日两次方案的一个缺点是午餐时的血糖控制(此时未注射胰岛素)可能不理想。因此,每日三次注射BIAsp 30可能会进一步优化血糖控制,并为二甲双胍(MET)禁忌的患者提供一种选择。

目的

本研究评估了两种不同的BIAsp 30方案与单纯口服降糖药(OAD)方案相比的疗效和安全性。

方法

在这项多中心、随机、开放标签、平行组试验中,未使用过胰岛素的2型糖尿病控制不佳患者(基线糖化血红蛋白[HbA(1c)]≥8.0%),正在服用OAD(磺脲类或格列奈类,联合/不联合MET或仅使用MET),被随机分为接受每日三次BIAsp 30、每日两次BIAsp 30加MET或继续当前OAD治疗16周。主要终点是研究结束时的HbA(1c)。次要终点包括HbA(1c)的降低、平均血糖(BG)、餐后血糖增加值、平均7点自我监测血糖谱、体重变化、耐受性(低血糖、不良事件)以及满意度/生活质量(源自第0、8和16周完成的两份问卷)。

结果

该研究纳入了308例未使用过胰岛素的2型糖尿病患者(78.9%为女性;平均年龄58.3岁;体重指数29.4 kg/m²;HbA(1c)为10.3%)。相对于单纯OAD,每日三次BIAsp 30和每日两次BIAsp 30加MET均与HbA(1c)的平均(标准差)显著更大幅度降低相关(绝对降低百分比:分别为2.9%[1.5%]、3.0%[1.6%]和2.1%[1.4%];P<0.001,两个胰岛素组与OAD组相比),并且餐后血糖控制得到改善(平均餐后血糖降低:-6.32[4.07]、-6.44[4.70]和-3.59[4.22]mmol/L;P<0.001,两个胰岛素组与OAD组相比)。BIAsp 30每日三次组的餐后血糖增加值平均降低-1.26 mmol/L,BIAsp 30每日两次加MET组为-2.15 mmol/L,OAD组为-0.44 mmol/L。BIAsp 30每日三次组与OAD组相比(P = 0.047)、BIAsp 30每日两次加MET组与OAD组相比(P<0.001)以及BIAsp 30每日三次组与BIAsp 30每日两次加MET组相比(P = 0.042),餐后血糖增加值降低的差异具有统计学意义。BIAsp 30每日三次组和BIAsp 30每日两次加MET组的平均体重较基线均显著增加(分别增加1.71和1.50 kg;均为P<0.001),而OAD组显著降低(-0.75 kg;P = 0.003)。未发生严重低血糖事件,大多数低血糖事件仅记录为症状(144/158[91.1%])。BIAsp 30每日三次组和BIAsp 30每日两次加MET组之间总体低血糖发作的平均频率无显著差异(分别为每位患者每年0.73次和0.69次)。

结论

在这些OAD控制不佳的2型糖尿病患者中,与单纯OAD相比,BIAsp 30每日三次和BIAsp 30每日两次加MET与HbA(1c)和餐后BG的显著更大幅度降低相关。胰岛素方案与比单纯OAD显著更多的体重增加相关。胰岛素方案之间的低血糖发生率无差异。

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