Shingo Iwasaki1, Junji Kozawa1, Takekazu Kimura1,2, Kenji Fukui1,3, Hiromi Iwahashi1,2, Akihisa Imagawa1, Iichiro Shimomura1. 1. 1Department of Metabolic Medicine, Graduate School of Medicine, Osaka University, 2-2-B5 Yamadaoka, Suita, 565-0871 Japan. 2. 2Department of Diabetes Care Medicine, Graduate School of Medicine, Osaka University, Suita, Japan. 3. 3Department of Community Medicine, Graduate School of Medicine, Osaka University, Suita, Japan.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to determine the efficacy of insulin degludec (IDeg) relative to insulin glargine (IGlar) or insulin detemir (IDet) in glycemic control, as evaluated by continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) in insulin-deficient patients with type 1 diabetes. METHODS: We studied 28 outpatients treated with IGlar or IDet (IGlar/IDet). Basal insulin was switched to IDeg when glycemic control was considered unstable, as judged by the dawn phenomenon or nocturnal hypoglycemia. Whole-day CGM data were also divided into daytime and nighttime data. RESULTS: The dawn phenomenon or nocturnal hypoglycemia under IGlar/IDet treatment was observed in all patients. Among 26 patients who completed the study, there were no significant differences in parameters representing glycemic variability, hyperglycemia, mean glycemic control, and HbA1c or insulin therapy-related quality of life at the night score. Measures of hypoglycemia [whole-day %Low and area under the curve (AUC) below 70] were significantly lower under IDeg treatment than under IGlar/IDet treatment (%Low, 9.6 ± 11.5 vs. 14.7 ± 14.9%, p = 0.045; AUC below 70, 85.5 ± 126.0 vs. 145.0 ± 178.6 mg/dl h, p = 0.030). Dividing patients into two groups according to percentage or degree of hypoglycemia under IGlar/IDet treatment, the whole-day, daytime and nighttime %Low in the high-percentage groups and AUC below 70 in the high-degree groups were significantly ameliorated, respectively (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Patients with unstable glycemic control under IGlar/IDet treatment did not improve glycemic control upon switching to IDeg, but the frequency and the degree of hypoglycemia was reduced in insulin-deficient outpatients with type 1 diabetes, especially in those suffering from severe hypoglycemia.
INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to determine the efficacy of insulin degludec (IDeg) relative to insulin glargine (IGlar) or insulin detemir (IDet) in glycemic control, as evaluated by continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) in insulin-deficient patients with type 1 diabetes. METHODS: We studied 28 outpatients treated with IGlar or IDet (IGlar/IDet). Basal insulin was switched to IDeg when glycemic control was considered unstable, as judged by the dawn phenomenon or nocturnal hypoglycemia. Whole-day CGM data were also divided into daytime and nighttime data. RESULTS: The dawn phenomenon or nocturnal hypoglycemia under IGlar/IDet treatment was observed in all patients. Among 26 patients who completed the study, there were no significant differences in parameters representing glycemic variability, hyperglycemia, mean glycemic control, and HbA1c or insulin therapy-related quality of life at the night score. Measures of hypoglycemia [whole-day %Low and area under the curve (AUC) below 70] were significantly lower under IDeg treatment than under IGlar/IDet treatment (%Low, 9.6 ± 11.5 vs. 14.7 ± 14.9%, p = 0.045; AUC below 70, 85.5 ± 126.0 vs. 145.0 ± 178.6 mg/dl h, p = 0.030). Dividing patients into two groups according to percentage or degree of hypoglycemia under IGlar/IDet treatment, the whole-day, daytime and nighttime %Low in the high-percentage groups and AUC below 70 in the high-degree groups were significantly ameliorated, respectively (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Patients with unstable glycemic control under IGlar/IDet treatment did not improve glycemic control upon switching to IDeg, but the frequency and the degree of hypoglycemia was reduced in insulin-deficient outpatients with type 1 diabetes, especially in those suffering from severe hypoglycemia.
Entities:
Keywords:
Degludec; Glycemic variability; Hypoglycemia; Type 1 diabetes
Authors: Anthony L McCall; Daniel J Cox; John Crean; Maury Gloster; Boris P Kovatchev Journal: Diabetes Technol Ther Date: 2006-12 Impact factor: 6.118
Authors: R Schiaffini; P Ciampalini; A Fierabracci; S Spera; P Borrelli; G F Bottazzo; A Crinò Journal: Diabetes Metab Res Rev Date: 2002 Jul-Aug Impact factor: 4.876
Authors: H Yagasaki; K Kobayashi; T Saitou; K Nagamine; Y Mitsui; M Mochizuki; K Kobayashi; H Cho; K Ohyama; S Amemiya; S Nakazawa Journal: Exp Clin Endocrinol Diabetes Date: 2009-10-15 Impact factor: 2.949
Authors: George T Kondos; Julie Anne Hoff; Alexander Sevrukov; Martha L Daviglus; Daniel B Garside; Stephen S Devries; Eva V Chomka; Kiang Liu Journal: Circulation Date: 2003-05-12 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Daniel J Cox; Derek Ford; Linda Gonder-Frederick; William Clarke; Roger Mazze; Katie Weinger; Lee Ritterband Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2009-12 Impact factor: 19.112