Huang-Tz Ou1,2,3, Tsung-Ying Lee1, Ye-Fong Du4, Chung-Yi Li5,6. 1. Institute of Clinical Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, College of Medicine, National Cheng Kung University, Tainan, Taiwan. 2. Department of Pharmacy, College of Medicine, National Cheng Kung University, Tainan, Taiwan. 3. Department of Pharmacy, National Cheng Kung University Hospital, Tainan, Taiwan. 4. Division of Endocrinology and Metabolism, Department of Internal Medicine, National Cheng Kung University Hospital, Tainan, Taiwan. 5. Department of Public Health, College of Medicine, National Cheng Kung University, Tainan, Taiwan. 6. Department of Public Health, China Medical University, Taichung, Taiwan.
Abstract
AIM: We compared the effects of two types of basal insulin: long-acting insulin analogues vs. intermediate/long-acting human insulin, on diabetes-related complications in type 1 diabetes. METHODS: A total of 1188 patients with type 1 diabetes who had recently started on long-acting insulin analogues or intermediate/long-acting human insulin were identified in 2004-2008 and followed until death or the end of 2013. Clinical outcomes included acute (i.e. hyperglycaemia, hypoglycaemia) and chronic (i.e. nephropathy, retinopathy, neuropathy, cardiovascular diseases) complications. Diabetes-related complications were measured as a composite outcome which included acute and chronic complications. Cox proportional hazards models were used to assess the time to event hazard ratio. Three propensity score (PS) methods were applied to adjust for baseline imbalances between basal insulin groups, including the PS-matching approach (as the main analysis), standardized mortality ratio weighting (SMRW) and inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW). RESULTS: Long-acting insulin analogues vs. intermediate/long-acting human insulin had a lower risk for a composite of diabetes-related complications {adjusted hazards ratios [aHRs] [95% confidence interval (CI)] 0.782 [0.639, 0.956], 0.743 [0.598, 0.924] and 0.699 [0.577, 0.846] according to the PS-matching approach, SMRW and IPTW, respectively}. Compared with intermediate/long-acting human insulin, using long-acting insulin analogues had a lower hypoglycaemia risk: aHRs (95% CI) 0.681 (0.498, 0.930), 0.662 (0.466, 0.943) and 0.639 (0.471, 0.867) from the PS-matching approach, SMRW and IPTW, respectively. No statistical differences were found between two types of insulin on individual chronic complications. CONCLUSION: A trend of lower diabetes-related complications associated with long-acting insulin analogues vs. intermediate/long-acting human insulin was observed. A reduced hypoglycaemia risk with long-acting insulin analogues was confirmed in this 'real-world' study.
AIM: We compared the effects of two types of basal insulin: long-acting insulin analogues vs. intermediate/long-acting humaninsulin, on diabetes-related complications in type 1 diabetes. METHODS: A total of 1188 patients with type 1 diabetes who had recently started on long-acting insulin analogues or intermediate/long-acting humaninsulin were identified in 2004-2008 and followed until death or the end of 2013. Clinical outcomes included acute (i.e. hyperglycaemia, hypoglycaemia) and chronic (i.e. nephropathy, retinopathy, neuropathy, cardiovascular diseases) complications. Diabetes-related complications were measured as a composite outcome which included acute and chronic complications. Cox proportional hazards models were used to assess the time to event hazard ratio. Three propensity score (PS) methods were applied to adjust for baseline imbalances between basal insulin groups, including the PS-matching approach (as the main analysis), standardized mortality ratio weighting (SMRW) and inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW). RESULTS: Long-acting insulin analogues vs. intermediate/long-acting humaninsulin had a lower risk for a composite of diabetes-related complications {adjusted hazards ratios [aHRs] [95% confidence interval (CI)] 0.782 [0.639, 0.956], 0.743 [0.598, 0.924] and 0.699 [0.577, 0.846] according to the PS-matching approach, SMRW and IPTW, respectively}. Compared with intermediate/long-acting humaninsulin, using long-acting insulin analogues had a lower hypoglycaemia risk: aHRs (95% CI) 0.681 (0.498, 0.930), 0.662 (0.466, 0.943) and 0.639 (0.471, 0.867) from the PS-matching approach, SMRW and IPTW, respectively. No statistical differences were found between two types of insulin on individual chronic complications. CONCLUSION: A trend of lower diabetes-related complications associated with long-acting insulin analogues vs. intermediate/long-acting humaninsulin was observed. A reduced hypoglycaemia risk with long-acting insulin analogues was confirmed in this 'real-world' study.
Authors: G B Bolli; M Songini; M Trovati; S Del Prato; G Ghirlanda; R Cordera; R Trevisan; G Riccardi; C Noacco Journal: Nutr Metab Cardiovasc Dis Date: 2008-08-03 Impact factor: 4.222
Authors: S P Laing; A J Swerdlow; S D Slater; A C Burden; A Morris; N R Waugh; W Gatling; P J Bingley; C C Patterson Journal: Diabetologia Date: 2003-05-28 Impact factor: 10.122
Authors: Mirjam Hempenius; Kim Luijken; Anthonius de Boer; Olaf Klungel; Rolf Groenwold; Helga Gardarsdottir Journal: Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf Date: 2020-05-11 Impact factor: 2.890