Limits...
Postprandial blood glucose response to a standard test meal in insulin-requiring patients with diabetes treated with insulin lispro mix 50 or human insulin mix 50.

Gao Y, Li G, Li Y, Guo X, Yuan G, Gong Q, Yan L, Zheng Y, Zhang J - Int. J. Clin. Pract. (2008)

Bottom Line: Two-hour PPBG (p = 0.004) and 1-h PPBG excursion (p < 0.001) were significantly lower with LM50 as compared with human insulin mix 50.Insulin lispro mix 50 provided better postprandial glycaemic control compared with human insulin mix 50 while providing the convenience of injecting immediately before meals.Both treatments were generally well tolerated by all randomly assigned patients.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Endocrinology, Peking University First Hospital, Beijing, China.

ABSTRACT

Aim: To compare the 2-h postprandial blood glucose (PPBG) excursion following a standard test meal in insulin-requiring patients with diabetes treated twice daily with human insulin mix 50 vs. insulin lispro mix 50 (LM50).

Methods: This was a multicentre, randomised, open-label, crossover comparison of two insulin treatments for two 12-week treatment periods in 120 Chinese patients. One- and 2-h PPBG and excursion values were obtained following a standardised test meal. Fasting blood glucose (FBG), haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), insulin dose, rate of hypoglycaemia and safety data were obtained. A crossover analysis using SAS Proc MIXED was employed.

Results: Mean 2-h PPBG excursion decreased from 6.32 +/- 3.07 mmol/l at baseline to 3.47 +/- 2.97 mmol/l at end-point in the LM50 group, and from 6.31 +/- 2.88 at baseline to 5.02 +/- 3.32 mmol/l at end-point in the human insulin mix 50 group (p < 0.001). Two-hour PPBG (p = 0.004) and 1-h PPBG excursion (p < 0.001) were significantly lower with LM50 as compared with human insulin mix 50. Both treatment groups were equivalent for HbA1c control, 1-h PPBG and insulin dose requirements. Mean FBG was higher with LM50 than with human insulin mix 50 (p = 0.023). The overall incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events and hypoglycaemia rate per 30 days were similar between treatment groups.

Conclusions: Insulin lispro mix 50 provided better postprandial glycaemic control compared with human insulin mix 50 while providing the convenience of injecting immediately before meals. Both treatments were generally well tolerated by all randomly assigned patients.

Show MeSH

Related in: MedlinePlus

Patient disposition: (a) reason for discontinuation/non-compliance, (b) reason for discontinuation/adverse events and (c) reason for discontinuation/personal conflict or other patient decision
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection


getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC2658027&req=5

fig02: Patient disposition: (a) reason for discontinuation/non-compliance, (b) reason for discontinuation/adverse events and (c) reason for discontinuation/personal conflict or other patient decision

Mentions: Of the 142 patients screened, 120 patients were included in the study, with 60 randomised to each sequence group. Table 1 summarises the demographic and baseline characteristics for all randomised patients (108 with type 2 and 12 with type 1 diabetes). One hundred and fifteen patients completed the study (57 in sequence group 1 and 58 in sequence group 2). Figure 2 presents a schematic representation of patient disposition in the study.


Postprandial blood glucose response to a standard test meal in insulin-requiring patients with diabetes treated with insulin lispro mix 50 or human insulin mix 50.

Gao Y, Li G, Li Y, Guo X, Yuan G, Gong Q, Yan L, Zheng Y, Zhang J - Int. J. Clin. Pract. (2008)

Patient disposition: (a) reason for discontinuation/non-compliance, (b) reason for discontinuation/adverse events and (c) reason for discontinuation/personal conflict or other patient decision
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC2658027&req=5

fig02: Patient disposition: (a) reason for discontinuation/non-compliance, (b) reason for discontinuation/adverse events and (c) reason for discontinuation/personal conflict or other patient decision
Mentions: Of the 142 patients screened, 120 patients were included in the study, with 60 randomised to each sequence group. Table 1 summarises the demographic and baseline characteristics for all randomised patients (108 with type 2 and 12 with type 1 diabetes). One hundred and fifteen patients completed the study (57 in sequence group 1 and 58 in sequence group 2). Figure 2 presents a schematic representation of patient disposition in the study.

Bottom Line: Two-hour PPBG (p = 0.004) and 1-h PPBG excursion (p < 0.001) were significantly lower with LM50 as compared with human insulin mix 50.Insulin lispro mix 50 provided better postprandial glycaemic control compared with human insulin mix 50 while providing the convenience of injecting immediately before meals.Both treatments were generally well tolerated by all randomly assigned patients.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Endocrinology, Peking University First Hospital, Beijing, China.

ABSTRACT

Aim: To compare the 2-h postprandial blood glucose (PPBG) excursion following a standard test meal in insulin-requiring patients with diabetes treated twice daily with human insulin mix 50 vs. insulin lispro mix 50 (LM50).

Methods: This was a multicentre, randomised, open-label, crossover comparison of two insulin treatments for two 12-week treatment periods in 120 Chinese patients. One- and 2-h PPBG and excursion values were obtained following a standardised test meal. Fasting blood glucose (FBG), haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), insulin dose, rate of hypoglycaemia and safety data were obtained. A crossover analysis using SAS Proc MIXED was employed.

Results: Mean 2-h PPBG excursion decreased from 6.32 +/- 3.07 mmol/l at baseline to 3.47 +/- 2.97 mmol/l at end-point in the LM50 group, and from 6.31 +/- 2.88 at baseline to 5.02 +/- 3.32 mmol/l at end-point in the human insulin mix 50 group (p < 0.001). Two-hour PPBG (p = 0.004) and 1-h PPBG excursion (p < 0.001) were significantly lower with LM50 as compared with human insulin mix 50. Both treatment groups were equivalent for HbA1c control, 1-h PPBG and insulin dose requirements. Mean FBG was higher with LM50 than with human insulin mix 50 (p = 0.023). The overall incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events and hypoglycaemia rate per 30 days were similar between treatment groups.

Conclusions: Insulin lispro mix 50 provided better postprandial glycaemic control compared with human insulin mix 50 while providing the convenience of injecting immediately before meals. Both treatments were generally well tolerated by all randomly assigned patients.

Show MeSH
Related in: MedlinePlus