Division of Endocrinology, Branch of National Clinical Research Center for Metabolic Disease, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China.
Department of Epidemiology and Health Statistics, School of Public Health, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China.
Endocr Pract. 2021 Aug;27(8):790-797. doi: 10.1016/j.eprac.2021.03.015. Epub 2021 Apr 6.
Many patients with type 2 diabetes treated with premixed insulin gradually have inadequate glycemic control and switch to a basal-bolus regimen, which raises some concerns for weight gain and increased hypoglycemic risk. Switching to combination use of glp-1 agonist and basal insulin may be an alternative option.
After a 12-week premixed human insulin 70/30 dosage optimization period, 200 patients with HbA1c of 7.0% to 10.0% were randomized into 24-week treatment groups with exenatide twice a day plus glargine or with aspart 70/30 twice a day.
After 24 weeks, the patients receiving exenatide plus glargine (n = 90) had improved HbA1c control compared with those receiving aspart 70/30 (n = 90) (least squares mean change: ‒0.59 vs ‒0.13%; difference [95% CI]: ‒0.45 [‒0.74 to ‒0.17]) in the full analysis set population. Weight decreased 3.5 kg with exenatide and decreased 0.4 kg with aspart 70/30 (P < .001). The insulin dose was reduced 10.7 units/day (95% CI, ‒12.2 to ‒9.2 units; P < .001) with exenatide, and increased 9.7 units/day (95% CI, 8.2 to 11.2 units; P < .001) with aspart 70/30. The most common adverse events were gastrointestinal adverse effects in the exenatide group (nausea [21%], vomiting [16%], diarrhea [13%]). The incidence of hypoglycemia was similar in 2 groups (27% for exenatide and 38% for aspart 70/30; P = .1).
In premixed human insulin‒treated patients with type 2 diabetes with inadequate glycemic control, switching to exenatide twice a day plus glargine was superior to aspart 70/30 twice a day for glycemic and weight control.
许多接受预混胰岛素治疗的 2 型糖尿病患者的血糖控制逐渐不佳,继而转为基础-餐时胰岛素方案,但该方案会引起体重增加和低血糖风险增加等担忧。改用 GLP-1 激动剂联合基础胰岛素可能是一种替代选择。
在接受为期 12 周的预混人胰岛素 70/30 剂量优化治疗后,200 例糖化血红蛋白(HbA1c)为 7.0%~10.0%的患者被随机分为两组,分别接受为期 24 周的艾塞那肽每日 2 次联合甘精胰岛素或门冬胰岛素 70/30 每日 2 次治疗。
在 24 周时,与接受门冬胰岛素 70/30 治疗的患者(n=90)相比,接受艾塞那肽联合甘精胰岛素治疗的患者(n=90)的 HbA1c 控制得到改善(最小二乘均数变化:‑0.59 比‑0.13%;差值[95%CI]:‑0.45[‑0.74 至 ‑0.17])。在全分析集人群中,艾塞那肽组体重减轻 3.5 kg,门冬胰岛素 70/30 组体重减轻 0.4 kg(P<0.001)。艾塞那肽组胰岛素剂量每日减少 10.7 个单位(95%CI,‑12.2 至 ‑9.2 个单位;P<0.001),而门冬胰岛素 70/30 组胰岛素剂量每日增加 9.7 个单位(95%CI,8.2 至 11.2 个单位;P<0.001)。艾塞那肽组最常见的不良反应为胃肠道不良反应(恶心[21%]、呕吐[16%]、腹泻[13%])。两组低血糖发生率相似(艾塞那肽组为 27%,门冬胰岛素 70/30 组为 38%;P=0.1)。
在血糖控制不佳的接受预混人胰岛素治疗的 2 型糖尿病患者中,与每日 2 次门冬胰岛素 70/30 相比,每日 2 次艾塞那肽联合甘精胰岛素在血糖和体重控制方面更优。