Egger M, Smith G D, Teuscher A U, Teuscher A
Department of Medicine, University of Berne, Switzerland.
BMJ. 1991 Sep 14;303(6803):622-6. doi: 10.1136/bmj.303.6803.622.
To investigate the apparent increased risk of severe hypoglycaemia associated with use of human insulin by comparing the pattern of symptoms of hypoglycaemia with human insulin and porcine insulin.
Randomised controlled double blind crossover trial of treatment with human insulin and porcine insulin, with two treatment periods of six weeks.
Diabetes outpatient department of a university teaching hospital in Berne, Switzerland.
44 patients (25 men, 19 women) aged 14 to 60 years, with insulin dependent diabetes mellitus. All patients met the following criteria: receiving treatment with fast acting soluble insulin and long acting protamine insulin; performing multiple daily fingerstick blood glucose self measurements; and had stable glycaemic control with about one mild hypoglycaemic episode a week during the preceding two months.
Patients were randomised to receive either human or porcine insulin for six weeks and were then changed over to the other type of insulin for a further six weeks.
Questionnaire recording "autonomic" and "neuroglycopenic" symptoms that occurred during hypoglycaemic episodes confirmed by a blood glucose concentration less than or equal to 2.8 mmol/l.
Insulin doses and blood glucose, glycated haemoglobin A1c, and fructosamine concentrations were similar during the two treatment periods. 493 questionnaires on hypoglycaemia (234 during treatment with human insulin and 259 during treatment with porcine insulin) were analysed. With human insulin patients were more likely to report lack of concentration (52% v 35%, p = 0.0003) and restlessness (53% v 45%, p = 0.004) and less likely to report hunger (33% v 42%, p = 0.016) than during treatment with porcine insulin. The difference in the pattern of symptoms during the two treatments was similar to that between the 12 patients with a history of recurrent hypoglycaemic coma and the 32 patients without such a history.
The pattern of symptoms associated with human insulin could impair patients' ability to take appropriate steps to avoid severe hypoglycaemia. Caution should be exercised when transferring patients from animal insulin to human insulin, and a large scale randomised trial of the two types of insulin may be justified.
通过比较使用人胰岛素和猪胰岛素时低血糖症状的模式,调查与人胰岛素使用相关的严重低血糖风险明显增加的情况。
人胰岛素和猪胰岛素治疗的随机对照双盲交叉试验,有两个为期六周的治疗期。
瑞士伯尔尼一所大学教学医院的糖尿病门诊。
44名年龄在14至60岁之间的胰岛素依赖型糖尿病患者(25名男性,19名女性)。所有患者均符合以下标准:接受速效可溶性胰岛素和长效鱼精蛋白胰岛素治疗;每天多次进行指尖血糖自我测量;在前两个月内血糖控制稳定,每周约有一次轻度低血糖发作。
患者被随机分配接受人胰岛素或猪胰岛素治疗六周,然后再改用另一种胰岛素治疗六周。
通过记录血糖浓度小于或等于2.8 mmol/l确诊的低血糖发作期间出现的“自主神经”和“神经低血糖”症状的问卷。
两个治疗期内胰岛素剂量、血糖、糖化血红蛋白A1c和果糖胺浓度相似。分析了493份关于低血糖的问卷(人胰岛素治疗期间234份,猪胰岛素治疗期间259份)。与人胰岛素治疗相比,使用猪胰岛素治疗时患者更易报告注意力不集中(52%对35%,p = 0.0003)和烦躁不安(53%对45%,p = 0.004),而报告饥饿的可能性较小(33%对42%,p = 0.016)。两种治疗期间症状模式的差异与12例有反复低血糖昏迷病史的患者和32例无此类病史的患者之间的差异相似。
与人胰岛素相关的症状模式可能会损害患者采取适当措施避免严重低血糖的能力。将患者从动物胰岛素转换为人胰岛素时应谨慎,对这两种胰岛素进行大规模随机试验可能是合理的。