首页> 外文期刊>Diabetes technology & therapeutics >Comparison of prandial AIR inhaled insulin alone to intensified insulin glargine alone and to AIR insulin plus intensified insulin glargine in patients with type 2 diabetes previously treated with once-daily insulin glargine.
【24h】

Comparison of prandial AIR inhaled insulin alone to intensified insulin glargine alone and to AIR insulin plus intensified insulin glargine in patients with type 2 diabetes previously treated with once-daily insulin glargine.

机译:单独对胰岛素胰岛素胰岛素和患有2型糖尿病患者的胰岛素胰岛素单独加强胰岛素胰岛素的胰岛素胰岛素的比较。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

BACKGROUND: Patients with type 2 diabetes often initiate insulin with once-daily basal insulin. Over time, many patients intensify their insulin regimens in an attempt to attain and sustain glycemic targets. This study compares three intensification approaches: changing insulin glargine to preprandial AIR inhaled insulin (developed by Alkermes, Inc. [Cambridge, MA] and Eli Lilly and Company [Indianapolis, IN]; AIR is a registered trademark of Alkermes, Inc.), intensifying glargine via validated titration algorithms (IG), or adding AIR insulin while intensifying glargine (AIR + IG). METHODS: Five hundred sixty patients with hemoglobin A(1c) (A1C) of 7.5-10.5%, on one or more antihyperglycemic medications, and on once-daily insulin glargine for > or =4 months were randomly allocated to one of the three treatments lasting 52 weeks. The primary objective assessed between-group differences in A1C mean change from baseline to 24 weeks using last-observation-carried-forward (LOCF) in the intent-to-treat population. RESULTS: At 24 weeks, A1C was reduced from a mean baseline of 8.5% to 7.7%, 7.9%, and 7.5% for the AIR, IG, and AIR + IG groups, respectively. AIR produced 0.20% greater A1C decrease than IG (least-squares mean difference = -0.20%; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.39, -0.02). AIR + IG had a 0.35% greater A1C decrease versus IG (95% CI, -0.57, -0.13). The -0.15% difference between AIR + IG versus AIR was not significant (P < 0.198). More hypoglycemia categorized as severe occurred with AIR alone versus IG alone at LOCF end points. More nocturnal hypoglycemia occurred with IG alone versus AIR alone and AIR + IG. CONCLUSIONS: Preprandial inhaled insulin provides an alternative for patients not optimized on insulin glargine alone. Glycemic control, hypoglycemic risk, delivery preference, and regimen complexity must be considered when selecting insulin initiation and optimization regimens.
机译:背景:2型糖尿病患者经常引发胰岛素,每日日期胰岛素。随着时间的推移,许多患者加剧了他们的胰岛素方案,试图达到和维持血糖目标。本研究比较了三种强化方法:改变胰岛素狼科到预追踪空气吸入胰岛素(由Arkermes,Inc。[剑桥,MA]和Eli Lilly和Eli Lilly和Company [Indianapolis,In]; Air是Akalmes,Inc。的注册商标,通过验证的滴定算法(Ig)增强狼醋,或在强化狼原体(空气+ Ig)的同时添加空气胰岛素。方法:血红蛋白A(1C)(A1C)的五百六十六条患者,在一种或多种抗血糖药物上,每天每日胰岛素Glargine用于>或= 4个月,随机分配给三种治疗之一持续52周。在A1C的局部差异之间评估的主要目的在于使用最后观察的人口中的最后观察到前进(LOCF)从基线转变为24周。结果:24周,A1C分别从平均基线减少8.5%至7.7%,7.9%和7.5%,分别用于空气,Ig和空气+ Ig组。空气产生0.20%的A1C减少比Ig(最小二乘差异= -0.20%; 95%置信区间[CI],-0.39,-0.02)。空气+ Ig具有0.35%的A1C减少与Ig(95%Ci,-0.57,-0.13)。空气+ IG与空气之间的-0.15%差异不显着(P <0.198)。更多的低血糖被分类为严重的严重发生,仅在LOCF端点上单独使用IG。更多的夜间低血糖症发生在单独的Ig与空气单独和空气+ Ig。结论:预浸期吸入胰岛素为单独在胰岛素狼原体未优化的患者提供替代方案。在选择胰岛素启动和优化方案时,必须考虑血糖控制,降血糖风险,产物偏好和方案复杂性。

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