In:
Diabetes, Obesity and Metabolism, Wiley, Vol. 22, No. 5 ( 2020-05), p. 779-787
Abstract:
Treat‐to‐target, randomized controlled trials have confirmed lower rates of hypoglycaemia at equivalent glycaemic control with insulin degludec (degludec) versus insulin glargine 100 units/mL (glargine U100) in patients with type 1 (T1D) or type 2 diabetes (T2D). Treat‐to‐target trials are designed to enable comparisons of safety and tolerability at a similar HbA1c level. In this post hoc analysis of the SWITCH 1 and 2 trials, we utilised a patient‐level modelling approach to compare how glycaemic control might differ between basal insulins at a similar rate of hypoglycaemia. Materials and Methods Data for HbA1c and symptomatic hypoglycaemia from the SWITCH 1 and SWITCH 2 trials were analyzed separately for patients with type 1 diabetes and type 2 diabetes, respectively. The association between the individual patient‐level risk of hypoglycaemia and HbA1c was investigated using a Poisson regression model and used to estimate potential differences in glycaemic control with degludec versus glargine U100, at the same rate of hypoglycaemia. Results Improvements in glycaemic control increased the incidence of hypoglycaemia with both basal insulins across diabetes types. Our analysis suggests that patients could achieve a mean HbA1c reduction of 0.70 [0.05; 2.20] 95% CI (for type 1 diabetes) or 0.96 [0.39; 1.99] 95% CI (for type 2 diabetes) percentage points (8 [1; 24] 95% CI or 10 [4; 22] 95% CI mmol/mol, respectively) further with degludec than with glargine U100 before incurring an equivalent risk of hypoglycaemia. Conclusion Our findings suggest that patients in clinical practice may be able to achieve lower glycaemia targets with degludec versus glargine U100, before incurring an equivalent risk of hypoglycaemia.
Type of Medium:
Online Resource
ISSN:
1462-8902
,
1463-1326
Language:
English
Publisher:
Wiley
Publication Date:
2020
detail.hit.zdb_id:
2004918-3
