Ultra-rapid-acting insulins for adults with diabetes: A systematic review and meta-analysis
- PMID: 34105242
- DOI: 10.1111/dom.14461
Ultra-rapid-acting insulins for adults with diabetes: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Abstract
We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials to assess the efficacy and safety of the novel, ultra-rapid-acting insulins aspart and lispro in adults with type 1 or type 2 diabetes. Our primary outcome was change in HbA1c from baseline. We additionally assessed eight efficacy and six safety endpoints. We calculated weighted mean differences (WMD) for continuous outcomes and odds ratios (ORs) for dichotomous outcomes, alongside 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We additionally assessed statistical heterogeneity among studies with the I2 statistic, considering values greater than 60% as indicative of substantial heterogeneity. Nine studies comprising 5931 patients were included in the systematic review; eight active-controlled studies could be synthesized in terms of a meta-analysis. Treatment with ultra-rapid-acting insulins had a similar effect on change in HbA1c compared with rapid-acting insulins (WMD -0.02%, 95% CI -0.08 to 0.05, I2 = 61% for patients with type 1 diabetes and -0.02%, 95% CI -0.09 to 0.04, I2 = 19% for patients with type 2 diabetes). Similarly, no difference was evident in terms of change in fasting plasma glucose, self-measured plasma glucose, body weight, basal or bolus insulin dose, incidence of serious adverse events and hypoglycaemia. Compared with rapid-acting insulins, ultra-rapid-acting insulins reduced 1- and 2-hour postprandial glucose (PPG) increment based on a liquid meal test, both in patients with type 1 and type 2 diabetes (WMD -0.94 mmol/L, 95% CI -1.17 to -0.72, I2 = 0% and -0.56 mmol/L, 95% CI -0.79 to -0.32, I2 = 0%, respectively, for change in 1-hour PPG increment). In conclusion, ultra-rapid-acting insulins were as efficacious and safe as rapid-acting insulins, showing a favourable effect solely on PPG control.
Keywords: antidiabetic drug; glycaemic control; insulin therapy; meta-analysis.
© 2021 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
References
REFERENCES
-
- Raccah D. Options for the intensification of insulin therapy when basal insulin is not enough in type 2 diabetes mellitus. Diabetes Obes Metab. 2008;10(s2):76-82.
-
- Khunti K, Nikolajsen A, Thorsted BL, Andersen M, Davies MJ, Paul SK. Clinical inertia with regard to intensifying therapy in people with type 2 diabetes treated with basal insulin. Diabetes Obes Metab. 2016;18(4):401-409.
-
- Home PD. Plasma insulin profiles after subcutaneous injection: how close can we get to physiology in people with diabetes? Diabetes Obes Metab. 2015;17(11):1011-1020.
-
- Owens DR, Bolli GB. The continuing quest for better subcutaneously administered prandial insulins: a review of recent developments and potential clinical implications. Diabetes Obes Metab. 2020;22(5):743-754.
-
- Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, et al. The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate healthcare interventions: explanation and elaboration. BMJ. 2009;339:b2700.
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical