Hollander Priscilla, Cooper John, Bregnhøj Jesper, Pedersen Claus Bang
Baylor Medical Center Dallas, Texas 75246, USA.
Clin Ther. 2008 Nov;30(11):1976-87. doi: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2008.11.001.
This trial compared the efficacy and safety profiles of the insulin analogues detemir and glargine as the basal insulin component of a basal-bolus regimen in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) who were being treated with oral antidiabetic drugs (OADs) or insulin with or without OADs.
This was a multinational, 52-week, openlabel, parallel-group, noninferiority, treat-to-target trial. Patients with a diagnosis of T2DM for > or = 12 months who had been receiving an OAD or insulin, with or without OADs, for > 4 months were randomized in a 2:1 ratio to receive detemir or glargine. According to the approved labeling, detemir could be administered once or twice daily, and glargine was administered once daily. Insulin aspart was given at mealtimes. Insulin secretagogues and a-glucosidase inhibitors were discontinued at study entry, and existing OADs were continued. Doses of detemir and glargine were titrated to achieve a prebreakfast (and predinner for detemir administered twice daily) plasma glucose target of < or = 6.0 mmol/L. Patients monitored their plasma glucose levels before breakfast and dinner on the 3 days before each of 13 scheduled visits, recorded their insulin doses on 1 of these 3 days, and recorded their 10-point self-monitored plasma glucose (SMPG) at baseline and after 24 and 52 weeks. The primary efficacy end point was glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA(1c)) at 52 weeks; secondary efficacy end points included changes in fasting plasma glucose (FPG), postprandial plasma glucose, insulin doses, and weight change at 52 weeks. Safety end points included the frequency of hypoglycemia and adverse events (AEs).
The intention-to-treat population included 319 patients (58.0% male, 42.0% female; 78.4% white; mean age, 58 years; mean weight, 92.8 kg; mean duration of diabetes, 13.6 years). At study entry, 46.1% of patients were receiving insulin and > or = 1 OAD, 35.4 were receiving insulin only, and 18.5% were receiving > or = 1 OAD only. At 52 weeks, there was no significant difference between detemir and glargine in terms of mean HbA(1c) (7.19% and 7.03%, respectively; mean difference, 0.17% [95% CI, -0.07 to 0.40]) or the mean decrease in HbAlc from baseline (-1.52% and -1.68%). The reduction in HbA(1c) was not significantly affected by whether detemir was administered once or twice daily. There were no significant differences between groups in terms of mean FPG (7.05 and 6.68 mmol/L) or the mean change in FPG from baseline (-2.56 and -2.92 mmol/L; mean difference, 0.36; 95% CI, -0.26 to 0.99). The overall shape of the 10-point SMPG profiles was not significantly different between groups. Mean weight gain at 52 weeks was significantly lower with detemir than with glargine (2.8 vs 3.8 kg; mean difference, -1.04; 95% CI, -2.08 to -0.01; P < 0.05). Doses of basal and prandial insulins at the end of the study were not significantly different between groups. Major hypoglycemic episodes were reported by 4.7% and 5.7% of patients in the respective treatment groups. There was no significant difference in the risk of hypoglycemia between groups. The proportion of patients with AEs and the number of AEs per patient were comparable between groups (185/214 patients [86.4%] reporting 743 AEs and 88/105 patients [83.8%] reporting 377 AEs).
when used as indicated as part of a basal-bolus regimen in patients with T2DM who had previously received other insulin and/or OAD regimens, detemir was noninferior to glargine in its effects on overall glycemic control. Both basal insulins were associated with clinically relevant reductions in hyperglycemia. Both were well tolerated, with no significant difference in the frequency of hypoglycemia or AEs.
本试验比较了地特胰岛素和甘精胰岛素这两种胰岛素类似物作为基础 - 餐时胰岛素强化治疗方案中基础胰岛素成分,用于接受口服降糖药(OADs)治疗或接受胰岛素治疗(无论是否联用OADs)的2型糖尿病(T2DM)患者时的疗效和安全性。
这是一项为期52周的多中心、开放标签、平行组、非劣效性、达标治疗试验。诊断为T2DM≥12个月且接受OAD或胰岛素治疗(无论是否联用OADs)超过4个月的患者按2:1比例随机分组,分别接受地特胰岛素或甘精胰岛素治疗。根据批准的药品说明书,地特胰岛素可每日给药1次或2次,甘精胰岛素每日给药1次。餐时给予门冬胰岛素。研究开始时停用胰岛素促泌剂和α - 葡萄糖苷酶抑制剂,继续使用现有的OADs。滴定地特胰岛素和甘精胰岛素的剂量,以使早餐前(每日给药2次的地特胰岛素为晚餐前)血浆葡萄糖目标值≤6.0 mmol/L。患者在13次预定访视前的3天内监测早餐前和晚餐前的血浆葡萄糖水平,在这3天中的1天记录胰岛素剂量,并在基线、24周和52周时记录10点自我监测的血浆葡萄糖(SMPG)。主要疗效终点为52周时的糖化血红蛋白(HbA1c);次要疗效终点包括52周时空腹血糖(FPG)、餐后血糖、胰岛素剂量及体重变化。安全性终点包括低血糖发生频率和不良事件(AE)。
意向性治疗人群包括319例患者(男性58.0%,女性42.0%;78.4%为白人;平均年龄58岁;平均体重92.8 kg;糖尿病平均病程13.6年)。研究开始时,46.1%的患者接受胰岛素和≥1种OAD治疗,35.4%仅接受胰岛素治疗,18.5%仅接受≥1种OAD治疗。52周时,地特胰岛素和甘精胰岛素在平均HbA1c方面无显著差异(分别为7.19%和7.03%;平均差值0.17% [95% CI, - 0.07至0.40]),或HbA1c从基线的平均降幅( - 1.52%和 - 1.68%)无显著差异。地特胰岛素每日给药1次或2次对HbA1c降低的影响无显著差异。两组间平均FPG(7.05和6.68 mmol/L)或FPG从基线的平均变化( - 2.56和 - 2.92 mmol/L;平均差值0.36;95% CI, - 0.26至0.99)无显著差异。两组间10点SMPG曲线的总体形态无显著差异。52周时地特胰岛素组的平均体重增加显著低于甘精胰岛素组(2.8 kg对3.8 kg;平均差值 - 1.04;95% CI, - 2.08至 - 0.01;P < 0.05)。研究结束时基础胰岛素和餐时胰岛素剂量在两组间无显著差异。各治疗组分别有4.7%和5.7%的患者报告发生严重低血糖事件。两组间低血糖风险无显著差异。两组间发生AE的患者比例及每位患者的AE数量相当(214例患者中的185例[86.4%]报告743例AE,105例患者中的88例[83.8%]报告377例AE)。
在先前接受过其他胰岛素和/或OAD治疗方案的T2DM患者中,地特胰岛素作为基础 - 餐时胰岛素强化治疗方案的一部分使用时,在总体血糖控制效果上不劣于甘精胰岛素。两种基础胰岛素均可使高血糖得到临床相关程度的降低。二者耐受性均良好,低血糖或AE发生频率无显著差异。