Suppr超能文献

在一项为期 26 周的 1 型糖尿病儿科患者临床试验中,作为基础-餐时胰岛素方案的一部分,赖脯胰岛素和谷赖胰岛素的疗效和安全性相当。

Comparable efficacy and safety of insulin glulisine and insulin lispro when given as part of a Basal-bolus insulin regimen in a 26-week trial in pediatric patients with type 1 diabetes.

机构信息

University of Cape Town Diabetes Clinical Trials Unit, New Groote Schuur Hospital, Cape Town, South Africa.

出版信息

Diabetes Technol Ther. 2011 Mar;13(3):327-34. doi: 10.1089/dia.2010.0072. Epub 2011 Feb 3.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

We compared the efficacy and safety of insulin glulisine with insulin lispro as part of a basal-bolus regimen in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes.

METHODS

Overall, 572 children and adolescents (4-17 years old) using insulin glargine or neutral protamine Hagedorn insulin as basal insulin were enrolled in a 26-week, multicenter, open, centrally randomized, parallel-group, noninferiority study. Subjects were randomized to receive glulisine (n = 277) or lispro (n= 295) 0-15 min premeal.

RESULTS

Baseline-to-endpoint hemoglobin A1c changes were similar between the two insulins: adjusted mean change (glulisine vs. lispro), 0.10% versus 0.16%; between-treatment difference (glulisine-lispro), &minsu;0.06, 95% confidence interval (-0.24; 0.12); and prespecified noninferiority margin, 0.4%. Overall, for all age groups together, the percentage of patients achieving American Diabetes Association age-specific A1c targets at endpoint was significantly higher (P = 0.039) with glulisine (38.4%) versus lispro (32.0%). From Month 4 to endpoint, both "all" and "severe" symptomatic hypoglycemia rates were similar (3.10 vs. 2.91 and 0.06 vs. 0.07 events/patient-month, respectively). Frequency and type of adverse events, serious adverse events, or hypoglycemia reported as serious adverse events were similar between both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Glulisine was as effective as lispro in baseline-to-endpoint A1c change, and both treatments were similarly well tolerated.

摘要

背景

我们比较了赖脯胰岛素和谷赖胰岛素作为基础-餐时胰岛素方案的一部分在儿童和青少年 1 型糖尿病患者中的疗效和安全性。

方法

共有 572 名使用甘精胰岛素或中性鱼精蛋白锌胰岛素作为基础胰岛素的儿童和青少年(4-17 岁)参加了一项 26 周、多中心、开放、中心随机、平行组、非劣效性研究。受试者被随机分为赖脯胰岛素(n = 277)或谷赖胰岛素(n = 295)组,于餐前 0-15 分钟给药。

结果

两种胰岛素的基线至终点糖化血红蛋白(HbA1c)变化相似:调整后的平均变化(谷赖胰岛素与赖脯胰岛素),0.10%比 0.16%;治疗间差异(谷赖胰岛素-赖脯胰岛素),<0.06,95%置信区间(-0.24;0.12);和预先指定的非劣效性边界,0.4%。总体而言,对于所有年龄组,在终点达到美国糖尿病协会(ADA)特定年龄 HbA1c 目标的患者比例,谷赖胰岛素(38.4%)显著高于赖脯胰岛素(32.0%)(P = 0.039)。从第 4 个月到终点,所有“严重”症状性低血糖的发生率相似(分别为 3.10%比 2.91%和 0.06%比 0.07%事件/患者-月)。两组报告的不良事件、严重不良事件或低血糖的频率和类型相似。

结论

谷赖胰岛素在基线至终点 HbA1c 变化方面与赖脯胰岛素同样有效,且两者的耐受性均良好。

相似文献

本文引用的文献

4
7
Insulin glulisine: a faster onset of action compared with insulin lispro.赖脯胰岛素:与门冬胰岛素相比,起效更快。
Diabetes Obes Metab. 2007 Sep;9(5):746-53. doi: 10.1111/j.1463-1326.2007.00746.x. Epub 2007 Jun 26.

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