» Articles » PMID: 29872460

A Patient-level Analysis of Efficacy and Hypoglycaemia Outcomes Across Treat-to-target Trials with Insulin Glargine Added to Oral Antidiabetes Agents in People with Type 2 Diabetes

Overview
Journal Eur Endocrinol
Specialty Endocrinology
Date 2018 Jun 7
PMID 29872460
Citations 3
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

A better understanding of hypoglycaemia risk when insulin is used in combination with one or more oral antidiabetes agents may assist in the treatment decision-making process for the clinician and address concerns regarding hypoglycaemia when initiating or intensifying insulin therapy. The objective of this study was to analyse efficacy and hypoglycaemia outcomes in people with type 2 diabetes receiving insulin glargine (IG) with metformin (MET), sulphonylurea (SU) or MET+SU. Patient-level data were pooled from 15 randomised, treat-to-target trials (fasting plasma glucose [FPG] targets <5.6 mmol/l) with a duration >24 weeks. Efficacy outcomes included glycated haemoglobin (HbA), FPG and HbA target achievement. Overall hypoglycaemia events were assessed by a confirmed PG value of <3.9, <3.1 and <2.8 mmol/l or assistance required; daytime, nocturnal (00:01-05:59 AM); and severe (assistance required or with confirmed PG <2.0 mmol/l). Overall, 2,837 IG patients were analysed, with either MET (634), SU (906) or MET+SU (1,297) as background oral antidiabetes agents. Endpoint HbA in IG+MET and IG+MET+SU-treated patients was significantly lower than in IG+SU-treated patients (adjusted difference -0.32 %; p=0.0001 and -0.33 %; p=0.0002, respectively). Fewer patients achieved endpoint HbA <7.0 % with IG+SU (32 %) versus IG+MET (57 %) or IG+MET+SU (49 %). IG+SU and IG+MET+SU led to significant increases in overall, daytime and nocturnal hypoglycaemia versus IG+MET; severe hypoglycaemia was rare. Weight gain was lowest in IG+MET patients (adjusted difference -1.51 kg versus IG+SU; p<0.0001; -0.78 kg versus IG+MET+SU; p=0.0037) despite higher insulin doses (0.51 U/kg versus 0.43 and 0.42 U/kg, respectively). Better glycaemic goal achievement and reduced risk of hypoglycaemia and weight gain were observed with IG+MET versus IG+SU and IG+MET+SU, albeit with an increased insulin dose requirement.

Citing Articles

Optimizing Glycemic Control Through Titration of Insulin Glargine 100 U/mL: A Review of Current and Future Approaches with a Focus on Asian Populations.

Deerochanawong C, Bajpai S, Dwipayana I, Hussein Z, Aileen Mabunay M, Rosales R Diabetes Ther. 2017; 8(6):1197-1214.

PMID: 29094298 PMC: 5688987. DOI: 10.1007/s13300-017-0322-z.


Impact of patient and treatment characteristics on glycemic control and hypoglycemia in patients with type 2 diabetes initiated to insulin glargine or NPH: A post hoc, pooled, patient-level analysis of 6 randomized controlled trials.

Porcellati F, Lin J, Lucidi P, Bolli G, Fanelli C Medicine (Baltimore). 2017; 96(5):e6022.

PMID: 28151905 PMC: 5293468. DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000006022.


How much is too much? Outcomes in patients using high-dose insulin glargine.

Reid T, Gao L, Gill J, Stuhr A, Traylor L, Vlajnic A Int J Clin Pract. 2015; 70(1):56-65.

PMID: 26566714 PMC: 4738456. DOI: 10.1111/ijcp.12747.

References
1.
Tenzer-Iglesias P, Shannon M . Managing hypoglycemia in primary care. J Fam Pract. 2012; 61(10 Suppl):S1-8. View

2.
Garber A . Hypoglycaemia: a therapeutic concern in type 2 diabetes. Lancet. 2012; 379(9833):2215-6. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(12)60947-7. View

3.
. Risk of hypoglycaemia in types 1 and 2 diabetes: effects of treatment modalities and their duration. Diabetologia. 2007; 50(6):1140-7. DOI: 10.1007/s00125-007-0599-y. View

4.
Wright A, Burden A, Paisey R, Cull C, Holman R . Sulfonylurea inadequacy: efficacy of addition of insulin over 6 years in patients with type 2 diabetes in the U.K. Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS 57). Diabetes Care. 2002; 25(2):330-6. DOI: 10.2337/diacare.25.2.330. View

5.
Miller C, Phillips L, Ziemer D, Gallina D, COOK C . Hypoglycemia in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Arch Intern Med. 2001; 161(13):1653-9. DOI: 10.1001/archinte.161.13.1653. View