Simon Heller1, David White2, Ellen Lee2, Julia Lawton3, Daniel Pollard4, Norman Waugh5, Stephanie Amiel6, Katharine Barnard7, Anita Beckwith8, Alan Brennan4, Michael Campbell4, Cindy Cooper2, Munyaradzi Dimairo2, Simon Dixon4, Jackie Elliott1, Mark Evans9,10, Fiona Green11, Gemma Hackney2, Peter Hammond12, Nina Hallowell3, Alan Jaap13, Brian Kennon14, Jackie Kirkham3, Robert Lindsay15, Peter Mansell16, Diana Papaioannou2, David Rankin3, Pamela Royle5, W Henry Smithson17, Carolin Taylor18. 1. Academic Unit of Diabetes, Endocrinology and Metabolism, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK. 2. Clinical Trials Research Unit, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK. 3. Centre for Population Health Sciences, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK. 4. School of Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK. 5. Division of Health Sciences, Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK. 6. Diabetes Research Group, King's College London, London, UK. 7. Human Development and Health, Faculty of Medicine, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK. 8. King's College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK. 9. Institute of Metabolic Science, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK. 10. Wolfson Diabetes Clinic, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, UK. 11. Dumfries Royal Infirmary NHS Trust, Dumfries, UK. 12. Harrogate and District NHS Foundation Trust, Harrogate, UK. 13. Edinburgh Centre for Endocrinology and Diabetes, Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK. 14. Queen Elizabeth University Hospital, NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde, Glasgow, UK. 15. Institute of Cardiovascular and Medical Sciences, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK. 16. Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust, Nottingham, UK. 17. Department of General Practice, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland. 18. Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Sheffield, UK.
Abstract
BACKGROUND:Insulin is generally administered to people with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) using multiple daily injections (MDIs), but can also be delivered using infusion pumps. In the UK, pumps are recommended for patients with the greatest need and adult use is less than in comparable countries. Previous trials have been small, of short duration and have failed to control for training in insulin adjustment. OBJECTIVE: To assess the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of pump therapy compared with MDI for adults with T1DM, with both groups receiving equivalent structured training in flexible insulin therapy. DESIGN: Pragmatic, multicentre, open-label, parallel-group cluster randomised controlled trial, including economic and psychosocial evaluations. After participants were assigned a group training course, courses were randomly allocated in pairs to either pump or MDI. SETTING:Eight secondary care diabetes centres in the UK. PARTICIPANTS: Adults with T1DM for > 12 months, willing to undertake intensive insulin therapy, with no preference for pump or MDI, or a clinical indication for pumps. INTERVENTIONS:Pump or MDI structured training in flexible insulin therapy, followed up for 2 years. MDI participants used insulin analogues. Pump participants used a Medtronic Paradigm®VeoTM (Medtronic, Watford, UK) with insulin aspart (NovoRapid, Novo Nordisk, Gatwick, UK). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcome - change in glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) at 2 years in participants whose baseline HbA1c was ≥ 7.5% (58 mmol/mol). Key secondary outcome - proportion of participants with HbA1c ≤ 7.5% at 2 years. Other outcomes at 6, 12 and 24 months - moderate and severe hypoglycaemia; insulin dose; body weight; proteinuria; diabetic ketoacidosis; quality of life (QoL); fear of hypoglycaemia; treatment satisfaction; emotional well-being; qualitative interviews with participants and staff (2 weeks), and participants (6 months); and ICERs in trial and modelled estimates of cost-effectiveness. RESULTS: We randomised 46 courses comprising 317 participants: 267 attended a Dose Adjustment For Normal Eating course (132 pump; 135 MDI); 260 were included in the intention-to-treat analysis, of which 235 (119 pump; 116 MDI) had baseline HbA1c of ≥ 7.5%. HbA1c and severe hypoglycaemia improved in both groups. The drop in HbA1c% at 2 years was 0.85 on pump and 0.42 on MDI. The mean difference (MD) in HbA1c change at 2 years, at which the baseline HbA1c was ≥ 7.5%, was -0.24% [95% confidence interval (CI) -0.53% to 0.05%] in favour of the pump (p = 0.098). The per-protocol analysis showed a MD in change of -0.36% (95% CI -0.64% to -0.07%) favouring pumps (p = 0.015). Pumps were not cost-effective in the base case and all of the sensitivity analyses. The pump group had greater improvement in diabetes-specific QoL diet restrictions, daily hassle plus treatment satisfaction, statistically significant at 12 and 24 months and supported by qualitative interviews. LIMITATION: Blinding of pump therapy was not possible, although an objective primary outcome was used. CONCLUSION: Adding pump therapy to structured training in flexible insulin therapy did not significantly enhance glycaemic control or psychosocial outcomes in adults with T1DM. RESEARCH PRIORITY: To understand why few patients achieve a HbA1c of < 7.5%, particularly as glycaemic control is worse in the UK than in other European countries. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN61215213. FUNDING: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 21, No. 20. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND:Insulin is generally administered to people with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) using multiple daily injections (MDIs), but can also be delivered using infusion pumps. In the UK, pumps are recommended for patients with the greatest need and adult use is less than in comparable countries. Previous trials have been small, of short duration and have failed to control for training in insulin adjustment. OBJECTIVE: To assess the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of pump therapy compared with MDI for adults with T1DM, with both groups receiving equivalent structured training in flexible insulin therapy. DESIGN: Pragmatic, multicentre, open-label, parallel-group cluster randomised controlled trial, including economic and psychosocial evaluations. After participants were assigned a group training course, courses were randomly allocated in pairs to either pump or MDI. SETTING: Eight secondary care diabetes centres in the UK. PARTICIPANTS: Adults with T1DM for > 12 months, willing to undertake intensive insulin therapy, with no preference for pump or MDI, or a clinical indication for pumps. INTERVENTIONS: Pump or MDI structured training in flexible insulin therapy, followed up for 2 years. MDI participants used insulin analogues. Pump participants used a Medtronic Paradigm® VeoTM (Medtronic, Watford, UK) with insulin aspart (NovoRapid, Novo Nordisk, Gatwick, UK). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcome - change in glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) at 2 years in participants whose baseline HbA1c was ≥ 7.5% (58 mmol/mol). Key secondary outcome - proportion of participants with HbA1c ≤ 7.5% at 2 years. Other outcomes at 6, 12 and 24 months - moderate and severe hypoglycaemia; insulin dose; body weight; proteinuria; diabetic ketoacidosis; quality of life (QoL); fear of hypoglycaemia; treatment satisfaction; emotional well-being; qualitative interviews with participants and staff (2 weeks), and participants (6 months); and ICERs in trial and modelled estimates of cost-effectiveness. RESULTS: We randomised 46 courses comprising 317 participants: 267 attended a Dose Adjustment For Normal Eating course (132 pump; 135 MDI); 260 were included in the intention-to-treat analysis, of which 235 (119 pump; 116 MDI) had baseline HbA1c of ≥ 7.5%. HbA1c and severe hypoglycaemia improved in both groups. The drop in HbA1c% at 2 years was 0.85 on pump and 0.42 on MDI. The mean difference (MD) in HbA1c change at 2 years, at which the baseline HbA1c was ≥ 7.5%, was -0.24% [95% confidence interval (CI) -0.53% to 0.05%] in favour of the pump (p = 0.098). The per-protocol analysis showed a MD in change of -0.36% (95% CI -0.64% to -0.07%) favouring pumps (p = 0.015). Pumps were not cost-effective in the base case and all of the sensitivity analyses. The pump group had greater improvement in diabetes-specific QoL diet restrictions, daily hassle plus treatment satisfaction, statistically significant at 12 and 24 months and supported by qualitative interviews. LIMITATION: Blinding of pump therapy was not possible, although an objective primary outcome was used. CONCLUSION: Adding pump therapy to structured training in flexible insulin therapy did not significantly enhance glycaemic control or psychosocial outcomes in adults with T1DM. RESEARCH PRIORITY: To understand why few patients achieve a HbA1c of < 7.5%, particularly as glycaemic control is worse in the UK than in other European countries. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN61215213. FUNDING: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 21, No. 20. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.
Authors: Wen Wan; M Reza Skandari; Alexa Minc; Aviva G Nathan; Parmida Zarei; Aaron N Winn; Michael O'Grady; Elbert S Huang Journal: Med Decis Making Date: 2018-11 Impact factor: 2.583
Authors: Gregory P Forlenza; Laurel H Messer; Cari Berget; R Paul Wadwa; Kimberly A Driscoll Journal: Curr Diab Rep Date: 2018-09-26 Impact factor: 4.810
Authors: John B Buse; Satish K Garg; Julio Rosenstock; Timothy S Bailey; Phillip Banks; Bruce W Bode; Thomas Danne; Jake A Kushner; Wendy S Lane; Pablo Lapuerta; Darren K McGuire; Anne L Peters; John Reed; Sangeeta Sawhney; Paul Strumph Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2018-06-24 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: Fiona Campbell; Julia Lawton; David Rankin; Mark Clowes; Elizabeth Coates; Simon Heller; Nicole de Zoysa; Jackie Elliott; Jenna P Breckenridge Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2018-11-27 Impact factor: 2.655
Authors: Emma S Scott; Rachel T McGrath; Andrzej S Januszewski; Daniel Calandro; Anandwardhan A Hardikar; David N O'Neal; Gregory Fulcher; Alicia J Jenkins Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2019-12-29 Impact factor: 2.692