首页> 外文期刊>Diabetes, obesity & metabolism >Lower within-subject variability of fasting blood glucose and reduced weight gain with insulin detemir compared to NPH insulin in patients with type 2 diabetes.
【24h】

Lower within-subject variability of fasting blood glucose and reduced weight gain with insulin detemir compared to NPH insulin in patients with type 2 diabetes.

机译:与NPH胰岛素相比,2型糖尿病患者的空腹血糖受试者内部变异性较低,降脂增重减少。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

AIM: The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of a basal-bolus insulin regimen comprising either insulin detemir or neural protamine hagedorn (NPH) insulin in combination with mealtime insulin aspart in patients with type 2 diabetes. METHODS: This was a 26-week, multinational, open-label, parallel group trial with 505 patients with type 2 diabetes (mean age, 60.4 +/- 8.6 years; mean BMI, 30.4 +/- 5.3 kg/m(2); mean HbA(1c), 7.9 +/- 1.3%). Patients, randomized 2:1 to insulin detemir or NPH insulin, received basal insulin either once or twice daily according to their pretrial insulin treatment and insulin aspart at mealtimes. RESULTS: After 26 weeks of treatment, significant reductions in HbA(1c) were observed for insulin detemir (0.2%-points, p = 0.004) and NPH insulin (0.4%-points; p = 0.0001); HbA(1c) levels were comparable at study end (insulin detemir, 7.6%; NPH insulin, 7.5%). The number of basal insulin injections administered per day had no effect on HbA(1c) levels (p = 0.50). Nine-point self-measured blood glucose (SMBG) profiles were similar for the two treatment groups (p = 0.58), as were reductions in fasting plasma glucose (FPG) (insulin detemir, 0.5 mmol/l; NPH insulin, 0.6 mmol/l). At study end, FPG concentrations were similar for the two treatment groups (p = 0.66). By contrast, within-subject day-to-day variation in fasting SMBG was significantly lower with insulin detemir (p = 0.021). Moreover, patients receiving insulin detemir gained significantly less body weight than those who were administered NPH insulin (1.0 and 1.8 kg, respectively, p = 0.017). The frequency of adverse events and the risk of hypoglycaemia were comparable for the two treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with type 2 diabetes, treated for 26 weeks with insulin detemir plus insulin aspart at mealtimes, experienced comparable glycaemic control but significantly lower within-subject variability and less weight gain compared to patients treated with NPH insulin and insulin aspart. Insulin detemir was well tolerated and had a similar safety profile to NPH insulin.
机译:目的:本研究的目的是比较包含特地米尔胰岛素或神经鱼精蛋白哈格多恩(NPH)胰岛素与餐前门冬胰岛素联合治疗的基础大剂量胰岛素治疗2型糖尿病的有效性和安全性。方法:这是一项为期26周的跨国开放标签平行研究,共纳入505名2型糖尿病患者(平均年龄60.4 +/- 8.6岁;平均BMI 30.4 +/- 5.3 kg / m(2) ;平均HbA(1c),7.9 +/- 1.3%)。患者按2:1的比例接受胰岛素地特米尔或NPH胰岛素的治疗,根据他们的审前胰岛素治疗和就餐时的门冬胰岛素,每天一次或两次接受基础胰岛素。结果:在治疗26周后,观察到Detemir胰岛素(0.2%点,p = 0.004)和NPH胰岛素(0.4%点; p = 0.0001)的HbA(1c)显着降低;在研究结束时,HbA(1c)水平相当(胰岛素地特米尔,7.6%; NPH胰岛素,7.5%)。每天施用的基础胰岛素注射次数对HbA(1c)水平无影响(p = 0.50)。两个治疗组的九点自测血糖(SMBG)曲线相似(p = 0.58),空腹血糖(FPG)下降也是如此(胰岛素地特米尔,0.5 mmol / l; NPH胰岛素,0.6 mmol / l)。 l)。在研究结束时,两个治疗组的FPG浓度相似(p = 0.66)。相比之下,胰岛素特替米尔的受试者禁食SMBG的日常变化显着降低(p = 0.021)。而且,接受地特胰岛素治疗的患者的体重显着低于接受NPH胰岛素治疗的患者(分别为1.0和1.8千克,p = 0.017)。两组的不良事件发生频率和低血糖风险相当。结论:与NPH胰岛素和门冬胰岛素治疗的患者相比,在进餐时用地特胰岛素加门冬胰岛素治疗26周的2型糖尿病患者经历了相当的血糖控制,但受试者内的变异性明显降低,体重增加较少。地特胰岛素具有良好的耐受性,其安全性与NPH胰岛素相似。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号