首页> 外文期刊>Endocrine practice: official journal of the American College of Endocrinology and the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists >A comparison of twice-daily biphasic insulin aspart 70/30 and once-daily insulin glargine in persons with type 2 diabetes mellitus inadequately controlled on basal insulin and oral therapy: a randomized, open-label study.
【24h】

A comparison of twice-daily biphasic insulin aspart 70/30 and once-daily insulin glargine in persons with type 2 diabetes mellitus inadequately controlled on basal insulin and oral therapy: a randomized, open-label study.

机译:在基础胰岛素和口服疗法控制不力的2型糖尿病患者中,每日两次两次双天胰岛素门冬氨酸70/30和每日一次甘精胰岛素的比较:一项随机,开放标签研究。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

OBJECTIVE: To compare efficacy and safety of biphasic insulin aspart 70/30 (BIAsp 30) with insulin (glargine) in type 2 diabetic patients who were not maintaining glycemic control on basal insulin and oral antidiabetic drugs. METHODS: In a 24-week, open-label, parallel-group trial, type 2 diabetic patients who were not maintaining glycemic control on basal insulin (glargine or neutral protamine Hagedorn) + oral antidiabetic drugs were randomly assigned to twice-daily BIAsp 30 + metformin or once-daily glargine + metformin + secretagogues (secretagogues were discontinued in the BIAsp 30 arm). RESULTS: One hundred thirty-seven patients were randomly assigned to the BIAsp 30 group and 143 patients were randomly assigned to the glargine group. Of 280 patients randomized, 229 (81.8%) completed the study. End-of-trial hemoglobin A1c reductions were -1.3% (BIAsp 30) vs -1.2% (glargine) (treatment difference: 95% confidence interval, -0.06 [-0.32 to 0.20]; P = .657). Of patients taking BIAsp 30, 27.3% reached a hemoglobin A1c level <7.0% compared with 22.0% of patients taking glargine (treatment difference: P = .388). Glucose increment averaged over 3 meals was lower in the BIAsp 30 arm (treatment difference: -17.8 mg/dL, P = .001). Fasting plasma glucose reductions from baseline were -13.8 mg/dL (BIAsp 30) vs -42.5 mg/dL (glargine) (P = .0002). Final minor hypoglycemia rate, insulin dose, and weight change were higher in the BIAsp 30 arm (6.5 vs 3.4 events/patient per year, P<.05; 1.19 vs 0.63 U/kg; and 3.1 vs 1.4 kg, P = .0004, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Despite not receiving secretagogues, patients taking BIAsp 30 + metformin achieved similar hemoglobin A1c levels and lower postprandial plasma glucose compared with those receiving glargine + metformin + secretagogues. The large improvement in the glargine group suggests the patients were not true basal failures at randomization. While switching to BIAsp 30 improves glycemic control in this patient population, remaining on basal insulin and optimizing the dose may be equally effective in the short term.
机译:目的:比较在不维持基础胰岛素和口服降糖药血糖控制的2型糖尿病患者中,双相天冬氨酸70/30(BIAsp 30)与胰岛素(甘草碱)的疗效和安全性。方法:在一项为期24周,开放标签,平行组的试验中,将不维持基础胰岛素(甘精胰岛素或中性鱼精蛋白哈格多恩)+口服降糖药血糖控制的2型糖尿病患者随机分配至每日两次BIAsp 30 +二甲双胍或每日一次甘精胰岛素+二甲双胍+促分泌素(在BIAsp 30组中停用了促分泌素)。结果:137例患者被随机分配至BIAsp 30组,143例患者被随机分配至甘精胰岛素组。在随机分组的280位患者中,有229位(81.8%)完成了研究。试验结束时血红蛋白A1c的降低为-1.3%(BIAsp 30)对-1.2%(甘草碱)(治疗差异:95%置信区间,-0.06 [-0.32至0.20]; P = .657)。服用BIAsp 30的患者中,达到27.3%的血红蛋白A1c水平<7.0%,而服用甘精胰岛素的患者为22.0%(治疗差异:P = .388)。在BIAsp 30组中,三餐的平均葡萄糖增量较低(治疗差异:-17.8 mg / dL,P = .001)。空腹血糖从基线水平降低为-13.8 mg / dL(BIAsp 30)与-42.5 mg / dL(甘草碱)(P = .0002)。 BIAsp 30组的最终轻微低血糖发生率,胰岛素剂量和体重变化较高(每年每名患者6.5 vs 3.4事件/患者,P <.05; 1.19 vs 0.63 U / kg; 3.1 vs 1.4 kg,P = .0004 , 分别)。结论:尽管未接受促分泌素,但与接受甘精胰岛素+二甲双胍+促分泌素的患者相比,服用BIAsp 30 +二甲双胍的患者达到了相似的血红蛋白A1c水平,并降低了餐后血浆葡萄糖。甘精胰岛素组的巨大改善表明患者在随机分组时并非真正的基础衰竭。虽然改用BIAsp 30可以改善该患者的血糖控制,但短期内继续使用基础胰岛素和优化剂量可能同样有效。

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