Foulds Abigail, Josey Claire, Kehlenbrink Sylvia, Rollman Bruce L, Chang Chung-Chou H, Lalama Christina, Ansbro Éimhín, Prust Margaret L, Zabeen Bedowra, Ramaiya Kaushik, Ogle Graham, Chae Sae-Rom, Luo Jing
University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA.
Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
BMJ Open. 2025 Jan 30;15(1):e092432. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2024-092432.
Long-acting insulin analogues are the standard of care for people with type 1 diabetes (T1D) in high-income countries but remain largely inaccessible and understudied in low-resource settings. In settings where glycaemic control is typically poor and food insecurity is common, long-acting insulin analogues may offer tangible clinical benefits for people with T1D. To determine whether insulin glargine, a long-acting insulin analogue, reduces the risk of serious hypoglycaemia and/or improves glycaemic time-in-range (TIR) versus human insulin regimens in this population, we are conducting the Human vs Analogue Insulin for Youth with Type 1 Diabetes in Low-Resource Settings randomised controlled trial.
This is a 1:1 randomised, parallel-group clinical trial comparing biosimilar insulin glargine with human insulin (Neutral Protamine Hagedorn (NPH) or premixed 70/30 insulin) in 400 youth with type 1 diabetes (T1D) recruiting in Dhaka, Bangladesh (n=250) and Mwanza, Tanzania (n=150). Blinded continuous glucose monitors will be used to assess glycaemic control in both study arms over 14-day periods at baseline and at 3, 6 and 12 months after randomisation. The co-primary outcomes are the per cent time in serious hypoglycaemia (<54 mg/dL) and TIR (70-180 mg/dL) at 6 months of follow-up. Secondary outcomes include TIR at 12 months and time-in-hypoglycaemia, time-above-range, nocturnal hypoglycaemic events and glycaemic control (ie, haemoglobin A1C (HbA1c)) at 6- and 12-months of follow-up. Treatment satisfaction and quality of life are assessed at baseline, 6- and 12 month follow-up. Additionally, the study is conducting qualitative interviews, quantitative assessments of treatment satisfaction and quality of life, as well as assessing the cost-effectiveness of analogue insulin use in low-resource settings.
This study was approved by the Institutional Review Board at the University of Pittsburgh (STUDY21110122), the National Health Research Ethics Committee at the National Institute for Medical Research in Tanzania (NIMR/HQ/R.8a/Vol.IX/4265) and the Ethical Review Committee (ERC) of Diabetic Association of Bangladesh (BADAS-ERC/EC/22/405). Research findings will be shared by the local partner organisations and institutions with relevant stakeholders including youth living with diabetes, policy makers, healthcare workers and the general public. Findings will also be shared at local, regional and international scientific meetings.
ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT05614089.
在高收入国家,长效胰岛素类似物是1型糖尿病(T1D)患者的标准治疗药物,但在资源匮乏地区,其获取渠道仍然有限,相关研究也较少。在血糖控制通常较差且粮食不安全情况普遍的地区,长效胰岛素类似物可能会给T1D患者带来切实的临床益处。为了确定长效胰岛素类似物甘精胰岛素与人类胰岛素治疗方案相比,是否能降低该人群严重低血糖风险和/或改善血糖在目标范围内时间(TIR),我们正在开展一项名为“资源匮乏地区1型糖尿病青少年人群人胰岛素与类似物胰岛素对比研究”的随机对照试验。
这是一项1:1随机、平行组临床试验,在孟加拉国达卡(n = 250)和坦桑尼亚姆万扎(n = 150)招募400名1型糖尿病(T1D)青少年,将生物类似物甘精胰岛素与人类胰岛素(中性鱼精蛋白锌胰岛素(NPH)或预混70/30胰岛素)进行对比。在基线以及随机分组后3个月、6个月和12个月时,使用盲法连续血糖监测仪对两个研究组进行为期14天的血糖控制评估。共同主要结局是随访6个月时严重低血糖(<54mg/dL)的时间百分比和TIR(70 - 180mg/dL)。次要结局包括随访12个月时的TIR、低血糖时间、高于目标范围时间、夜间低血糖事件以及随访6个月和12个月时的血糖控制情况(即糖化血红蛋白(HbA1c))。在基线、随访6个月和12个月时评估治疗满意度和生活质量。此外,该研究还将进行定性访谈、治疗满意度和生活质量的定量评估,并评估在资源匮乏地区使用类似物胰岛素的成本效益。
本研究已获得匹兹堡大学机构审查委员会(STUDY21110122)、坦桑尼亚国家医学研究所国家卫生研究伦理委员会(NIMR/HQ/R.8a/Vol.IX/4265)以及孟加拉国糖尿病协会伦理审查委员会(BADAS - ERC/EC/22/405)的批准。研究结果将由当地合作伙伴组织和机构与包括糖尿病青少年患者、政策制定者、医护人员和普通公众在内的相关利益攸关方分享。研究结果还将在地方、区域和国际科学会议上公布。
ClinicalTrials.gov:NCT05614089。