Weise Alexander, Pfützner Johannes W, Borig Julia, Pfützner Anna M, Safinowski Michael, Hänel Heike, Musholt Petra B, Pfützner Andreas
IKFE-Institute for Clinical Research and Development, Mainz, Germany.
J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2009 Jan;3(1):149-53. doi: 10.1177/193229680900300116.
Prefilled insulin pens have become a convenient and accurate way for diabetes patients to inject insulin. Their ease of use has helped to reduce the resistance of patients with type 1 diabetes and type 2 diabetes in the United States and Europe toward initiation of insulin therapy. This study compared the dosing accuracy of two prefilled insulin pens (the SoloStar((R)) from Sanofi Aventis, Berlin, Germany, and the Next Generation [NG] FlexPen((R)) from Novo Nordisk, Mainz, Germany).
The dosing accuracy was tested for both pens with x 24 10 international units of insulin (IU) and 9 x 30 IU injection volumes to investigate whether the pens comply within the acceptable International Organization for Standardization (ISO) limits of 10% (±1 IU) for 10 IU and 5% (±1.5 IU) for 30 IU. The doses were applied each with a new needle strictly according to the instructions for use of the pen manufacturers. A sensitive pharmaceutical balance was used for the assessment of the applied volumes, and the results were corrected for the specific density of the insulin formulations. We used 18 insulin pens (from two different production lots each) for the two volumes, respectively, resulting in a total of 432 doses per pen with 10 IU and 162 doses per pen with 30 IU.
Both pens showed a very good performance, which was better for the 10 IU dose than in comparative previous studies. The NG FlexPen (mean absolute percent deviation 10 IU/30 IU: 1.63 ± 0.84%/1.23 ± 0.76%) was even more accurate than the SoloStar (2.11 ± 0.92%/1.54 ± 0.84%, p < .001/p < .05 versus the NG FlexPen). Only 0.2% of the doses were outside the ISO limit at 10 IU, with the NG FlexPen (0.6% at 30 IU). The corresponding figures for the SoloStar were 0.4% and 1.8%, respectively.
A direct head-to-head comparison of the two prefilled insulin pens with a standardized protocol resulted in a more stable dosing accuracy of both pens as compared to previous investigations. In this investigation, the NG FlexPen was more accurate than the SoloStar at both tested doses.
预填充胰岛素笔已成为糖尿病患者注射胰岛素的一种方便且准确的方式。其易用性有助于降低美国和欧洲1型糖尿病和2型糖尿病患者对开始胰岛素治疗的抵触情绪。本研究比较了两种预填充胰岛素笔(德国柏林赛诺菲安万特公司生产的索乐笔(SoloStar((R)))和德国美因茨诺和诺德公司生产的下一代[NG]优伴笔(FlexPen((R))))的给药准确性。
对两种笔分别用24×10国际单位(IU)胰岛素和9×30 IU的注射剂量进行给药准确性测试,以调查笔的给药量是否符合国际标准化组织(ISO)规定的可接受限度,即10 IU时为10%(±1 IU),30 IU时为5%(±1.5 IU)。每次给药都严格按照笔制造商的使用说明使用新针头。使用灵敏的药物天平评估给药量,并根据胰岛素制剂的比重对结果进行校正。两种剂量分别使用18支胰岛素笔(每种来自两个不同生产批次),因此10 IU剂量时每支笔共给药432次,30 IU剂量时每支笔共给药162次。
两种笔均表现出非常好的性能,10 IU剂量时的性能比以往比较研究中的更好。NG优伴笔(10 IU/30 IU的平均绝对百分比偏差:1.63±0.84%/1.23±0.76%)甚至比索乐笔(2.11±0.92%/1.54±0.84%,与NG优伴笔相比,p<0.001/p<0.05)更准确。10 IU时只有0.2%的给药量超出ISO限度,NG优伴笔在30 IU时为0.6%。索乐笔在10 IU和30 IU时的相应数字分别为0.4%和1.8%。
与以往研究相比,采用标准化方案对两种预填充胰岛素笔进行直接的头对头比较,结果显示两种笔给药准确性更稳定。在本研究中,两种测试剂量下NG优伴笔均比索乐笔更准确。