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
. 2016 Sep;7(3):561-73.
doi: 10.1007/s13300-016-0191-x. Epub 2016 Aug 12.

Clinical Effects and Safety of Direct-Acting Insulin Analogs in Patients with Type 1 Diabetes: A Nation-Wide Observational Cohort Study

Vincent Lak  1 , Ann-Marie Svensson  2 , Mervete Miftaraj  2 , Stefan Franzén  2 , Björn Eliasson  3
Affiliations

Clinical Effects and Safety of Direct-Acting Insulin Analogs in Patients with Type 1 Diabetes: A Nation-Wide Observational Cohort Study

Vincent Lak et al. Diabetes Ther. 2016 Sep.

Abstract

Introduction: Studies comparing direct-acting insulin analogs (DAIs) in terms of effectiveness and long-term safety are scarce. Our aim was to explore these variables in clinical practice among patients with type 1 diabetes, including the elderly and those with renal impairment.

Methods: We linked four national registers in a population-based cohort study. Patients with type 1 diabetes and continuous use of all currently available DAIs (lispro, aspart, or glulisine) in 2005-2013 were monitored for up to 7.5 years. Inverse probability of treatment weighting was used to adjust for differences in baseline characteristics between treatment groups. Unadjusted mean HbA1c and weights were plotted. Hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals of cardiovascular events (CVEs) and mortality were estimated using Cox proportional hazards regression models.

Results: We included 41,165 patients-14,047 lispro, 26,813 aspart, and 305 glulisine users. At baseline, the mean age was highest among glulisine users (49.4 years), followed by 41.0 years for lispro users and 40.1 years for aspart users. A total of 9.2% of the patients were 65 years or older. Diabetes duration was shortest among glulisine users (11.6 years), followed by 15.4 years for aspart users and 19.5 years for lispro users. The mean HbA1c and weights during the follow-up period were similar. The numerical differences at baseline were subsequently adjusted for. There were no significant differences between groups regarding hyperglycemia requiring hospitalization, CVE, or mortality, while Cox regression suggested lower rates of hypoglycemia among glulisine users. Severe hypoglycemia was more common, and severe hyperglycemia was less common among patients aged 65 years or older, while severe hypoglycemia and hyperglycemia were more common in patients with low renal function (estimated glomerular filtration rate).

Conclusion: There were no pronounced differences in effectiveness and long-term cardiovascular safety and mortality between the DAIs, although there were some differences in clinical characteristics between patients using the three types of insulin. Severe hypoglycemia was more common among older patients, while severe hypoglycemia and hyperglycemia were more common among patients with impaired renal function.

Funding: Sanofi.

Keywords: Cohort study; Effectiveness; Elderly; Insulin analogs; Insulin aspart; Insulin glulisine; Insulin lispro; Renal failure; Safety; Type 1 diabetes.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Patient selection flow chart. Stages of inclusion and exclusion, used databases used. A.P. ApoDos prescription, DAI direct-acting insulin analogs, NDR National Diabetes Register, O.P. ordinary prescription, PDR Prescribed Drug Register
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Average HbA1c during follow-up period among patients treated with lispro, aspart, and glulisine. HbA1c in mmol/mol. Blue lispro; red aspart; green glulisine. Shaded areas represent 95% confidence intervals
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Average weight during follow-up period among patients treated with lispro, aspart, and glulisine. Weight in kilograms. Blue lispro; red aspart; green glulisine. Shaded areas represent 95% confidence intervals
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. American Diabetes Association Approaches to glycemic treatment. Diabetes Care. 2015;38(Suppl):S41–S48. doi: 10.2337/dc15-S010. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Grunberger G. Insulin analogs—are they worth it? Yes! Diabetes Care. 2014;37(6):1767–1770. doi: 10.2337/dc14-0031. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Home PD. The pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of rapid-acting insulin analogues and their clinical consequences. Diabetes Obes Metab. 2012;14(9):780–788. doi: 10.1111/j.1463-1326.2012.01580.x. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Dreyer M, Prager R, Robinson A, Busch K, Ellis G, Souhami E, et al. Efficacy and safety of insulin glulisine in patients with type 1 diabetes. Horm Metab Res. 2005;37(11):702–707. doi: 10.1055/s-2005-870584. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Kawamori R, Kadowaki T, Ishii H, Iwasaki M, Iwamoto Y. Efficacy and safety of insulin glulisine in Japanese patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus. Diabetes Obes Metab. 2009;11(9):891–899. doi: 10.1111/j.1463-1326.2009.01086.x. - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources