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

Robert J. Ligthelm, Titus Gylvin, Tony DeLuzio, Philip Raskin

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

18 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

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 oncedaily 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 A 1c 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.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)41-50
Number of pages10
JournalEndocrine Practice
Volume17
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 2011

Fingerprint

Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus
Insulin
Metformin
Therapeutics
Hypoglycemic Agents
Glucose
Hemoglobins
insulin aspart, insulin aspart protamine drug combination 30:70
Insulin Glargine
Hemoglobin A
Protamines
Random Allocation
Hypoglycemia
Meals
Fasting
Confidence Intervals
Safety
Weights and Measures

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Endocrinology
  • Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism

Cite this

@article{3ca6b6cccc9946eabb178c1cfc7dfa27,
title = "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",
abstract = "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 oncedaily 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 A 1c 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.",
author = "Ligthelm, {Robert J.} and Titus Gylvin and Tony DeLuzio and Philip Raskin",
year = "2011",
month = "1",
doi = "10.4158/EP10079.OR",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "17",
pages = "41--50",
journal = "Endocrine Practice",
issn = "1530-891X",
publisher = "American Association of Clinical Endocrinology",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - 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

T2 - A randomized, open-label study

AU - Ligthelm, Robert J.

AU - Gylvin, Titus

AU - DeLuzio, Tony

AU - Raskin, Philip

PY - 2011/1

Y1 - 2011/1

N2 - 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 oncedaily 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 A 1c 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.

AB - 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 oncedaily 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 A 1c 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.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=79952384658&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=79952384658&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.4158/EP10079.OR

DO - 10.4158/EP10079.OR

M3 - Article

C2 - 20713345

AN - SCOPUS:79952384658

VL - 17

SP - 41

EP - 50

JO - Endocrine Practice

JF - Endocrine Practice

SN - 1530-891X

IS - 1

ER -