Suppr超能文献

基础-餐时胰岛素与预混人胰岛素类似物强化治疗 1 型和 2 型糖尿病时对血糖变异性和以患者为中心结局的比较效果:一项随机、对照、交叉试验。

Comparative effectiveness of basal-bolus versus premix analog insulin on glycemic variability and patient-centered outcomes during insulin intensification in type 1 and type 2 diabetes: a randomized, controlled, crossover trial.

机构信息

Department of Biostatistics, Harvard School of Public Health, Brigham and Women's Hospital, 655 Huntington Avenue, Boston, Massachusetts 02115, USA.

出版信息

J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2012 Oct;97(10):3504-14. doi: 10.1210/jc.2012-1763. Epub 2012 Jul 31.

Abstract

CONTEXT

In patients with diabetes, intraday glucose variability might predict health outcomes independently from glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c).

OBJECTIVE

Our objective was to evaluate patient satisfaction (PS), quality of life (QoL), glycemic control, and variability during insulin intensification to HbA1c below 7.0%.

PATIENTS, DESIGN, AND SETTING: Eighty-two type 1 and 306 insulin-treated type 2 diabetes patients (47% male; age 54±11 yr; HbA1c=7.8±0.7%) participated in this multicenter, randomized, crossover trial at 52 U.S. centers.

INTERVENTIONS

Interventions included insulin glargine plus premeal glulisine (n=192) vs. twice-daily premix 75/25 or 70/30 analog insulin (n=196) for 12 wk and crossed to the alternate arm for 12 wk.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Main outcome measures included PS and QoL questionnaires, 3-d continuous glucose monitoring (CGM), and HbA1c every 4-8 wk.

RESULTS

Mean±se HbA1c change was -0.39±0.09% for glargine-glulisine and -0.05±0.09% for premix (P<0.0001). The PS net benefit scale (0-100) improved from 51.1 to 60.5±1.2 for glargine-glulisine and worsened to 45.4±1.2 for premix (P<0.0001). The PS regimen acceptance scale was comparable (P=0.33). Overall QoL favored glargine-glulisine (P<0.001), as did perceived health (P<0.0001), symptom distress (P<0.0001), general health perceptions (P<0.01), and psychosocial (P<0.02). CGM daily glucose mean, daily glucose sd (glycemic variability), and percent time over 140 mg/dl were lower for glargine-glulisine by 13.1±2.7 mg/dl, 5.9±1.4 mg/dl, and 7.3±1.6%, respectively (all P<0.0001), with no difference in CGM percent time below 70 mg/dl (P=0.09). Symptomatic hypoglycemia rates were comparable. HbA1c, mean CGM daily glucose, and glycemic variability were independent predictors of PS net benefit.

CONCLUSIONS

Patient satisfaction was impacted more positively by improved QoL, reduced glucose variability, and better glycemic control with a basal-bolus regimen than negatively by the burden of additional injections, thereby facilitating insulin intensification and the ability to achieve HbA1c below 7.0%.

摘要

背景

在糖尿病患者中,日内血糖变异性可能独立于糖化血红蛋白(HbA1c)预测健康结局。

目的

我们的目的是评估胰岛素强化治疗使 HbA1c 低于 7.0%时患者的满意度(PS)、生活质量(QoL)、血糖控制和变异性。

患者、设计和地点:82 例 1 型和 306 例胰岛素治疗的 2 型糖尿病患者(47%为男性;年龄 54±11 岁;HbA1c=7.8±0.7%)参与了这项多中心、随机、交叉试验,该试验在美国 52 个中心进行。

干预措施

干预措施包括甘精胰岛素加餐前门冬胰岛素(n=192)与预混 75/25 或 70/30 类似胰岛素(n=196),治疗 12 周,然后交叉到另一组,治疗 12 周。

主要观察指标

主要观察指标包括 PS 和 QoL 问卷、3 天连续血糖监测(CGM)和每 4-8 周 HbA1c。

结果

甘精胰岛素-门冬胰岛素的平均 HbA1c 变化为-0.39±0.09%,预混胰岛素为-0.05±0.09%(P<0.0001)。甘精胰岛素-门冬胰岛素的 PS 净效益量表(0-100)从 51.1 提高到 60.5±1.2,而预混胰岛素则恶化到 45.4±1.2(P<0.0001)。PS 方案接受量表相当(P=0.33)。总体 QoL 有利于甘精胰岛素-门冬胰岛素(P<0.001),也有利于感知健康(P<0.0001)、症状困扰(P<0.0001)、一般健康感知(P<0.01)和心理社会(P<0.02)。甘精胰岛素-门冬胰岛素的 CGM 每日平均血糖、每日血糖标准差(血糖变异性)和 140mg/dl 以上的时间百分比分别降低了 13.1±2.7mg/dl、5.9±1.4mg/dl 和 7.3±1.6%(均 P<0.0001),但 70mg/dl 以下的 CGM 时间百分比无差异(P=0.09)。症状性低血糖的发生率相当。HbA1c、平均 CGM 每日血糖和血糖变异性是 PS 净效益的独立预测因子。

结论

与额外注射的负担相比,基于基础-餐时胰岛素方案改善 QoL、降低血糖变异性和更好的血糖控制对患者满意度的影响更为积极,从而促进了胰岛素强化治疗和达到 HbA1c 低于 7.0%的能力。

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