Avgerinos Ioannis, Papanastasiou Georgia, Karagiannis Thomas, Michailidis Theodoros, Liakos Aris, Mainou Maria, Matthews David R, Tsapas Apostolos, Bekiari Eleni
Clinical Research and Evidence-Based Medicine Unit, Second Medical Department, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Thessaloniki, Greece.
Diabetes Centre, Second Medical Department, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Thessaloniki, Greece.
Diabetes Obes Metab. 2021 Oct;23(10):2395-2401. doi: 10.1111/dom.14461. Epub 2021 Jun 22.
We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials to assess the efficacy and safety of the novel, ultra-rapid-acting insulins aspart and lispro in adults with type 1 or type 2 diabetes. Our primary outcome was change in HbA1c from baseline. We additionally assessed eight efficacy and six safety endpoints. We calculated weighted mean differences (WMD) for continuous outcomes and odds ratios (ORs) for dichotomous outcomes, alongside 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We additionally assessed statistical heterogeneity among studies with the I statistic, considering values greater than 60% as indicative of substantial heterogeneity. Nine studies comprising 5931 patients were included in the systematic review; eight active-controlled studies could be synthesized in terms of a meta-analysis. Treatment with ultra-rapid-acting insulins had a similar effect on change in HbA1c compared with rapid-acting insulins (WMD -0.02%, 95% CI -0.08 to 0.05, I = 61% for patients with type 1 diabetes and -0.02%, 95% CI -0.09 to 0.04, I = 19% for patients with type 2 diabetes). Similarly, no difference was evident in terms of change in fasting plasma glucose, self-measured plasma glucose, body weight, basal or bolus insulin dose, incidence of serious adverse events and hypoglycaemia. Compared with rapid-acting insulins, ultra-rapid-acting insulins reduced 1- and 2-hour postprandial glucose (PPG) increment based on a liquid meal test, both in patients with type 1 and type 2 diabetes (WMD -0.94 mmol/L, 95% CI -1.17 to -0.72, I = 0% and -0.56 mmol/L, 95% CI -0.79 to -0.32, I = 0%, respectively, for change in 1-hour PPG increment). In conclusion, ultra-rapid-acting insulins were as efficacious and safe as rapid-acting insulins, showing a favourable effect solely on PPG control.
我们对随机对照试验进行了系统评价和荟萃分析,以评估新型超短效胰岛素门冬胰岛素和赖脯胰岛素在1型或2型糖尿病成人患者中的疗效和安全性。我们的主要结局是糖化血红蛋白(HbA1c)相对于基线的变化。我们还评估了8个疗效终点和6个安全性终点。我们计算了连续性结局的加权平均差(WMD)和二分性结局的比值比(OR),以及95%置信区间(CI)。我们还使用I统计量评估了研究之间的统计学异质性,将大于60%的值视为存在显著异质性。系统评价纳入了9项研究,共5931例患者;8项活性对照研究可纳入荟萃分析。与速效胰岛素相比,超短效胰岛素对HbA1c变化的影响相似(1型糖尿病患者的WMD为-0.02%,95%CI为-0.08至0.05,I=61%;2型糖尿病患者的WMD为-0.02%,95%CI为-0.09至0.04,I=19%)。同样,在空腹血糖变化、自我测量血糖、体重、基础或餐时胰岛素剂量、严重不良事件和低血糖发生率方面,未发现明显差异。与速效胰岛素相比,超短效胰岛素在1型和2型糖尿病患者中,基于流食试验均降低了餐后1小时和2小时血糖(PPG)的增加值(餐后1小时PPG增加值变化的WMD分别为-0.94 mmol/L,95%CI为-1.17至-0.72,I=0%;以及-0.56 mmol/L,95%CI为-0.79至-0.32,I=0%)。总之,超短效胰岛素与速效胰岛素一样有效且安全,仅在PPG控制方面显示出良好效果。