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
. 2016 Feb 25;6(2):e008377.
doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2015-008377.

Effects of biphasic, basal-bolus or basal insulin analogue treatments on carotid intima-media thickness in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: the randomised Copenhagen Insulin and Metformin Therapy (CIMT) trial

Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Effects of biphasic, basal-bolus or basal insulin analogue treatments on carotid intima-media thickness in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: the randomised Copenhagen Insulin and Metformin Therapy (CIMT) trial

Louise Lundby-Christensen et al. BMJ Open. .

Abstract

Objective: To assess the effect of 3 insulin analogue regimens on change in carotid intima-media thickness (IMT) in patients with type 2 diabetes.

Design and setting: Investigator-initiated, randomised, placebo-controlled trial with a 2 × 3 factorial design, conducted at 8 hospitals in Denmark.

Participants and interventions: Participants with type 2 diabetes (glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) ≥ 7.5% (≥ 58 mmol/mol), body mass index >25 kg/m(2)) were, in addition to metformin versus placebo, randomised to 18 months open-label biphasic insulin aspart 1-3 times daily (n=137) versus insulin aspart 3 times daily in combination with insulin detemir once daily (n=138) versus insulin detemir alone once daily (n=137), aiming at HbA1c ≤ 7.0% (≤ 53 mmol/mol).

Outcomes: Primary outcome was change in mean carotid IMT (a marker of subclinical cardiovascular disease). HbA1c, insulin dose, weight, and hypoglycaemic and serious adverse events were other prespecified outcomes.

Results: Carotid IMT change did not differ between groups (biphasic -0.009 mm (95% CI -0.022 to 0.004), aspart+detemir 0.000 mm (95% CI -0.013 to 0.013), detemir -0.012 mm (95% CI -0.025 to 0.000)). HbA1c was more reduced with biphasic (-1.0% (95% CI -1.2 to -0.8)) compared with the aspart+detemir (-0.4% (95% CI -0.6 to -0.3)) and detemir (-0.3% (95% CI -0.4 to -0.1)) groups (p<0.001). Weight gain was higher in the biphasic (3.3 kg (95% CI 2.7 to 4.0) and aspart+detemir (3.2 kg (95% CI 2.6 to 3.9)) compared with the detemir group (1.9 kg (95% CI 1.3 to 2.6)). Insulin dose was higher with detemir (1.6 IU/kg/day (95% CI 1.4 to 1.8)) compared with biphasic (1.0 IU/kg/day (95% CI 0.9 to 1.1)) and aspart+detemir (1.1 IU/kg/day (95% CI 1.0 to 1.3)) (p<0.001). Number of participants with severe hypoglycaemia and serious adverse events did not differ.

Conclusions: Carotid IMT change did not differ between 3 insulin regimens despite differences in HbA1c, weight gain and insulin doses. The trial only reached 46% of planned sample size and lack of power may therefore have affected our results.

Trial registration number: NCT00657943.

Keywords: ULTRASONOGRAPHY.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Flow of participants through trial.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Changes from baseline and differences between treatments in mean carotid intima-media thickness (IMT) (mean (95% CI)) during 18 months treatment with three insulin regimens: biphasic (green), aspart (Asp)+detemir (Det) (red) and detemir (blue), from the random-effects model with baseline as covariate using multiply imputed data, adjusted for stratification variables.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Changes (mean (95% CI)) during 18 months treatment with three insulin regimens: biphasic (green), aspart+detemir (red) and detemir (blue) in glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) (A), fasting plasma glucose (B), insulin dose (C) and weight (D). Numbers on the right hand side of the graphs indicate the absolute/relative changes from trial entry to end-of-trial.

References

    1. Inzucchi SE, Bergenstal RM, Buse JB et al. . Management of hyperglycaemia in type 2 diabetes: a patient-centered approach. Position statement of the American Diabetes Association (ADA) and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes (EASD). Diabetologia 2012;55:1577–96. 10.1007/s00125-012-2534-0 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Abraira C, Colwell JA, Nuttall FQ et al. . Veterans Affairs Cooperative Study on glycemic control and complications in type II diabetes (VA CSDM). Results of the feasibility trial. Veterans Affairs Cooperative Study in Type II Diabetes. Diabetes Care 1995;18:1113–23. 10.2337/diacare.18.8.1113 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Hemmingsen B, Lund SS, Gluud C et al. . Intensive glycaemic control for patients with type 2 diabetes: systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis of randomised clinical trials. BMJ 2011;343:d6898 10.1136/bmj.d6898 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Ceriello A, Colagiuri S. International Diabetes Federation guideline for management of postmeal glucose: a review of recommendations. Diabet Med 2008;25:1151–6. 10.1111/j.1464-5491.2008.02565.x - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Esposito K, Ciotola M, Carleo D et al. . Post-meal glucose peaks at home associate with carotid intima-media thickness in type 2 diabetes. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2008;93:1345–50. 10.1210/jc.2007-2000 - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms

Associated data