Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2011 Feb;34(2):249-55.
doi: 10.2337/dc10-1701.

The DURAbility of Basal versus Lispro mix 75/25 insulin Efficacy (DURABLE) trial: comparing the durability of lispro mix 75/25 and glargine

John B Buse  1 , Bruce H R Wolffenbuttel, William H Herman, Stephen Hippler, Sherry A Martin, Honghua H Jiang, Sylvia K Shenouda, Jessie L Fahrbach
Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

The DURAbility of Basal versus Lispro mix 75/25 insulin Efficacy (DURABLE) trial: comparing the durability of lispro mix 75/25 and glargine

John B Buse et al. Diabetes Care. 2011 Feb.

Abstract

Objective: This study compared the durability of glycemic control of twice-daily insulin lispro mix 75/25 (LM75/25: 75% insulin lispro protamine suspension/25% lispro) and once-daily insulin glargine, added to oral antihyperglycemic drugs in type 2 diabetes patients.

Research design and methods: During the initiation phase, patients were randomized to LM75/25 or glargine. After 6 months, patients with A1C ≤ 7.0% advanced to the maintenance phase for ≤ 24 months. The primary objective was the between-group comparison of duration of maintaining the A1C goal.

Results: Of 900 patients receiving LM75/25 and 918 patients receiving glargine who completed initiation, 473 and 419, respectively, had A1C ≤ 7.0% and continued into maintenance. Baseline characteristics except age were similar in this group. Median time of maintaining the A1C goal was 16.8 months for LM75/25 (95% CI 14.0-19.7) and 14.4 months for glargine (95% CI 13.4-16.8; P = 0.040). A1C goal was maintained in 202 LM75/25-treated patients (43%) and in 147 glargine-treated patients (35%; P = 0.006). No differences were observed in overall, nocturnal, or severe hypoglycemia. LM75/25 patients had higher total daily insulin dose (0.45 ± 0.21 vs. 0.37 ± 0.21 units/kg/day) and more weight gain (5.4 ± 5.8 vs. 3.7 ± 5.6 kg) from baseline. Patients taking LM75/25 and glargine with lower baseline A1C levels were more likely to maintain the A1C goal (P = 0.043 and P < 0.001, respectively).

Conclusions: A modestly longer durability of glycemic control was achieved with LM75/25 compared with glargine. Patients with lower baseline A1C levels were more likely to maintain the goal, supporting the concept of earlier insulin initiation.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00279201.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Flow diagram of patients’ disposition. bid, twice daily; qd, once daily. *P = 0.048 between-group difference. †One further death related to pancreatic carcinoma occurred in the LM75/25 group after study discontinuation.
Figure 2
Figure 2
A: Time to failure of regimen to maintain A1C goal in patients receiving insulin lispro mix 75/25 (LM75/25) and glargine. B: A1C by visit. C: Percentage of patients maintaining the A1C goal at the end point within the LM75/25 treatment group by baseline A1C subgroup. D: Percentage of patients maintaining the A1C goal at the end point within the glargine treatment group by baseline A1C subgroup. The between-group comparison showed a significantly higher percentage of LM75/25-treated patients with a baseline A1C >10.0% maintained the A1C goal at the end point compared with glargine-treated patients with a baseline A1C >10.0% at the end point (P = 0.044). E: Percentage of patients maintaining A1C goal at end point within the LM75/25 treatment group by baseline BMI subgroup. F: Percentage of patients maintaining the A1C goal at the end point within the glargine treatment group by baseline BMI subgroup (between-group comparison showed significantly higher percentage of LM75/25-treated patients with baseline BMI 28–34 kg/m2 maintained A1C goal at end point compared with glargine-treated patients with baseline BMI 28–34 kg/m2 at end point, P < 0.001).
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Nathan DM, Buse JB, Davidson MB, et al. Management of hyperglycemia in type 2 diabetes: a consensus algorithm for the initiation and adjustment of therapy: a consensus statement from the American Diabetes Association and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes. Diabetes Care 2006;29:1963–1972 - PubMed
    1. Rodbard HW, Jellinger PS, Davidson JA, et al. Statement by an American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists/American College of Endocrinology consensus panel on type 2 diabetes mellitus: an algorithm for glycemic control. Endocr Pract 2009;15:540–559 - PubMed
    1. Malone JK, Kerr LF, Campaigne BN, Sachson RA, Holcombe JH, Lispro Mixture-Glargine Study Group Combined therapy with insulin lispro Mix 75/25 plus metformin or insulin glargine plus metformin: a 16-week, randomized, open-label, crossover study in patients with type 2 diabetes beginning insulin therapy. Clin Ther 2004;26:2034–2044 - PubMed
    1. Raskin P, Allen E, Hollander P, et al. INITIATE Study Group Initiating insulin therapy in type 2 diabetes: a comparison of biphasic and basal insulin analogs. Diabetes Care 2005;28:260–265 - PubMed
    1. Holman RR, Thorne KI, Farmer AJ, et al. 4-T Study Group Addition of biphasic, prandial, or basal insulin to oral therapy in type 2 diabetes. N Engl J Med 2007;357:1716–1730 - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms

Associated data