| 1. |
- Niemi, MEK, et al.
(författare)
-
- 2021
-
swepub:Mat__t
|
|
| 2. |
- Kanai, M, et al.
(författare)
-
- 2023
-
swepub:Mat__t
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
- Home, P.D., et al.
(författare)
-
Rosiglitazone evaluated for cardiovascular outcomes in oral agent combination therapy for type 2 diabetes (RECORD): a multicentre, randomised, open-label trial
- 2009
-
Ingår i: The Lancet. - : Elsevier: Lancet. - 0140-6736 .- 1474-547X. ; 373:9681, s. 2125-2135
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Rosiglitazone is an insulin sensitiser used in combination with metformin, a sulfonylurea, or both, for lowering blood glucose in people with type 2 diabetes. We assessed cardiovascular outcomes after addition of rosiglitazone to either metformin or sulfonylurea compared with the combination of the two over 5-7 years of follow-up. We also assessed comparative safety. Methods: In a multicentre, open-label trial, 4447 patients with type 2 diabetes on metformin or sulfonylurea monotherapy with mean haemoglobin A 1c (HbA 1c) of 7·9% were randomly assigned to addition of rosiglitazone (n=2220) or to a combination of metformin and sulfonylurea (active control group, n=2227). The primary endpoint was cardiovascular hospitalisation or cardiovascular death, with a hazard ratio (HR) non-inferiority margin of 1·20. Analysis was by intention to treat. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00379769. Findings: 321 people in the rosiglitazone group and 323 in the active control group experienced the primary outcome during a mean 5·5-year follow-up, meeting the criterion of non-inferiority (HR 0·99, 95% CI 0·85-1·16). HR was 0·84 (0·59-1·18) for cardiovascular death, 1·14 (0·80-1·63) for myocardial infarction, and 0·72 (0·49-1·06) for stroke. Heart failure causing admission to hospital or death occurred in 61 people in the rosiglitazone group and 29 in the active control group (HR 2·10, 1·35-3·27, risk difference per 1000 person-years 2·6, 1·1-4·1). Upper and distal lower limb fracture rates were increased mainly in women randomly assigned to rosiglitazone. Mean HbA 1c was lower in the rosiglitazone group than in the control group at 5 years. Interpretation: Addition of rosiglitazone to glucose-lowering therapy in people with type 2 diabetes is confirmed to increase the risk of heart failure and of some fractures, mainly in women. Although the data are inconclusive about any possible effect on myocardial infarction, rosiglitazone does not increase the risk of overall cardiovascular morbidity or mortality compared with standard glucose-lowering drugs. Funding: GlaxoSmithKline plc, UK. © 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
|
|
| 5. |
- Home, P. D., et al.
(författare)
-
Improved health status with insulin degludec compared with insulin glargine in people with Type 1 diabetes
- 2012
-
Ingår i: Diabetic Medicine. - Hoboken, USA : Wiley-Blackwell. - 0742-3071 .- 1464-5491. ; 29:6, s. 716-720
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Aims: The efficacy and safety of insulin degludec (degludec), a new-generation ultra-long-acting basal insulin, was compared with insulin glargine (glargine) in people with Type 1 diabetes mellitus in a 16-week, open-label, randomized trial. Health status, an important aspect of effective diabetes management, was also assessed. Methods: Degludec (n = 59) or glargine (n = 59) were injected once daily, with insulin aspart at mealtimes. Health status assessment utilized the validated Short Form 36 Health Survey, version 2, which has two summary component scores for mental and physical well-being, each comprising four domains.Results: At study end, HbA1c reductions were comparable between groups, but confirmed nocturnal hypoglycaemia was significantly less frequent with degludec [relative rate 0.42 (95% CI 0.250.69)], and overall hypoglycaemia numerically less frequent [relative rate 0.72 (95% CI 0.521.00)]. After 16 weeks, a significant improvement in Short Form 36 Health Survey mental component score of +3.01 (95% CI 0.325.70) was obtained for degludec against glargine, attributable to significant differences in the social functioning [+8.04 (95% CI 1.8914.18)] and mental health domains [+2.46 (95% CI 0.104.82)]. For mental component score, Cohens effect size was 0.42, indicating a small-to-medium clinically meaningful difference. The physical component score [+0.66 (95% CI 2.30 to 3.62)] and remaining domains were not significantly different between degludec and glargine.Conclusions: In the context of comparable overall glycaemic control with glargine, degludec improved mental well-being as measured using the mental component score of the Short Form 36 Health Survey. The improvements in overall mental component score and the underlying social functioning and mental health domains with degludec compared with glargine may relate to the observed reduction in hypoglycaemic events.
|
|
| 6. |
- Birkeland, Kare I., et al.
(författare)
-
Insulin degludec in type 1 diabetes : a randomized controlled trial of a new-generation ultra-long-acting insulin compared with insulin glargine
- 2011
-
Ingår i: Diabetes Care. - : American Diabetes Association. - 0149-5992 .- 1935-5548. ; 34:3, s. 661-665
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- OBJECTIVE: Insulin degludec (IDeg) is a basal insulin that forms soluble multihexamers after subcutaneous injection, resulting in an ultra-long action profile. We assessed the efficacy and safety of IDeg formulations administered once daily in combination with mealtime insulin aspart in people with type 1 diabetes.RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: In this 16-week, randomized, open-label trial, participants (mean: 45.8 years old, A1C 8.4%, fasting plasma glucose [FPG] 9.9 mmol/L, BMI 26.9 kg/m(2)) received subcutaneous injections of IDeg(A) (600 mu mol/L; n = 59), IDeg(B) (900 mu mol/L; n = 60), or insulin glargine (IGlar; n = 59), all given once daily in the evening. Insulin aspart was administered at mealtimes.RESULTS: At 16 weeks, mean A1C was comparable for IDeg(A) (7.8 +/- 0.8%), IDeg(B) (8.0 +/- 1.0%), and IGlar (7.6 +/- 0.8%), as was FPG (8.3 +/- 4.0, 8.3 +/- 2.8, and 8.9 +/- 3.5 mmol/L, respectively). Estimated mean rates of confirmed hypoglycemia were 28% lower for IDeg(A) compared with IGlar (rate ratio [RR]: 0.72 [95% CI 0.52-1.00]) and 10% lower for IDeg(B) compared with IGlar (RR: 0.90 [0.65-1.24]); rates of nocturnal hypoglycemia were 58% lower for IDeg(A) (RR: 0.42 [0.25-0.69]) and 29% lower for IDeg(B) (RR: 0.71 [0.44-1.16]). Mean total daily insulin dose was similar to baseline. The frequency and pattern of adverse events was similar between insulin treatments.CONCLUSIONS: In this clinical exploratory phase 2 trial in people with type 1 diabetes, IDeg is safe and well tolerated and provides comparable glycemic control to IGlar at similar doses, with reduced rates of hypoglycemia.
|
|
