Suppr超能文献

门冬胰岛素快速起效在1型糖尿病患者碳水化合物计数法中的疗效与安全性:两项随机对照试验的事后分析

Efficacy and Safety of Fast-Acting Insulin Aspart in People with Type 1 Diabetes Using Carbohydrate Counting: A Post Hoc Analysis of Two Randomised Controlled Trials.

作者信息

Rose Ludger, Kadowaki Takashi, Pieber Thomas R, Buchholtz Kristine, Ekelund Magnus, Gorst-Rasmussen Anders, Philis-Tsimikas Athena

机构信息

Institute of Diabetes Research, Hohenzollernring 70, 48145, Münster, Germany.

Department of Prevention of Diabetes and Lifestyle-Related Diseases, Graduate School of Medicine, The University of Tokyo, 7-3-1 Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, 113-8655, Japan.

出版信息

Diabetes Ther. 2019 Jun;10(3):1029-1041. doi: 10.1007/s13300-019-0608-4. Epub 2019 Apr 4.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION

Insulin dosing based on carbohydrate counting is the gold standard for improving glycaemic control in type 1 diabetes (T1D). This post hoc analysis aimed to explore the efficacy and safety of fast-acting insulin aspart (faster aspart) according to bolus dose adjustment method in people with T1D.

METHODS

Post hoc analysis of two 26-week, treat-to-target, randomised trials investigating treatment with double-blind mealtime faster aspart, insulin aspart (IAsp), or open-label post-meal faster aspart (onset 1, n = 1143; onset 8, n = 1025). Participants with previous experience continued carbohydrate counting (onset 1, n = 669 [58.5%]; onset 8, n = 428 [41.8%]), while remaining participants used a bolus algorithm.

RESULTS

In onset 1, HbA1c reduction was statistically significantly in favour of mealtime faster aspart versus IAsp with carbohydrate counting (estimated treatment difference [ETD 95% CI] - 0.19% [- 0.30; - 0.09]; - 2.08 mmol/mol [- 3.23; - 0.93]). In onset 8, there was no statistically significant difference in HbA1c reduction with either dose adjustment method, although a trend towards improved HbA1c was observed for mealtime faster aspart with carbohydrate counting (ETD - 0.14% [- 0.28; 0.003]; - 1.53 mmol/mol [- 3.10; 0.04]). In both trials, bolus insulin doses and overall rates of severe or blood glucose-confirmed hypoglycaemia were similar between treatments across dose adjustment methods.

CONCLUSION

For people with T1D using carbohydrate counting, mealtime faster aspart may offer improved glycaemic control versus IAsp, with similar insulin dose and weight gain and no increased risk of hypoglycaemia.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01831765 (onset 1) and NCT02500706 (onset 8).

FUNDING

Novo Nordisk.

摘要

引言

基于碳水化合物计数的胰岛素给药是改善1型糖尿病(T1D)血糖控制的金标准。这项事后分析旨在探讨速效门冬胰岛素(速秀霖)根据大剂量调整方法在T1D患者中的疗效和安全性。

方法

对两项为期26周、达标治疗的随机试验进行事后分析,这两项试验分别研究双盲餐时速秀霖、门冬胰岛素(IAsp)或开放标签餐后速秀霖(起效1组,n = 1143;起效8组,n = 1025)的治疗效果。有既往经验的参与者继续采用碳水化合物计数法(起效1组,n = 669 [58.5%];起效8组,n = 428 [41.8%]),而其余参与者则使用大剂量算法。

结果

在起效1组中,与采用碳水化合物计数法的IAsp相比,餐时速秀霖在糖化血红蛋白(HbA1c)降低方面具有统计学显著优势(估计治疗差异[ETD 95% CI] - 0.19% [-0.30;-0.09];-2.08 mmol/mol [-3.23;-0.93])。在起效8组中,两种剂量调整方法在HbA1c降低方面均无统计学显著差异,但采用碳水化合物计数法的餐时速秀霖观察到有HbA1c改善的趋势(ETD - 0.14% [-0.28;0.003];-1.53 mmol/mol [-3.10;0.04])。在两项试验中,不同剂量调整方法的各治疗组之间,大剂量胰岛素剂量以及严重或血糖确认的低血糖总体发生率相似。

结论

对于采用碳水化合物计数法的T1D患者,餐时速秀霖与IAsp相比可能提供更好的血糖控制,胰岛素剂量和体重增加相似,且低血糖风险未增加。

试验注册

ClinicalTrials.gov:NCT01831765(起效1组)和NCT02500706(起效8组)。

资助

诺和诺德公司。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/0845/6531584/47cc0d83ecfb/13300_2019_608_Fig1_HTML.jpg

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验