Insulin lispro therapy in pregnancies complicated by type 1 diabetes mellitus. Human insulin analogue [LYS(B28), PRO(B29)]: the ideal pump insulin? [Comparison of intensified traditional insulin therapy and micropump therapy in pregnant women with type 1 diabetes mellitus]. Effect of the rapid-acting insulin analogue insulin aspart on quality of life and treatment satisfaction in patients with Type 1 diabetes. Evaluation of efficacy and safety of human insulin (Novo) in the treatment of insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus: a double-blind, multicenter clinical trial. Comparison of insulin with or without continuation of oral hypoglycemic agents in the treatment of secondary failure in NIDDM patients. Special management of insulin lispro in continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion in young diabetic children: a randomized cross-over study. Effects of insulin pump vs. injection treatment on quality of life and impact of disease in children with type 1 diabetes mellitus in a randomized, prospective comparison. Improved mealtime treatment of diabetes mellitus using an insulin analogue. Multicenter Insulin Lispro Study Group.
To compare the efficacy and safety of preprandial administration of rapid-acting lispro analogue with regular short-acting insulin to pregnant women with type 1 diabetes.
                Open randomised multicentre study. Women were treated with multiple insulin injections aiming at normoglycaemia. Blood glucose was determined six times daily, HbA(1c) every 4 weeks. Diurnal profiles of blood glucose were analysed at gestational week 14 and during the study period at weeks 21, 28 and 34.
                33 pregnant women with type 1 DM were randomised to treatment with lispro insulin (n=16) or regular insulin (n=17).
                Blood glucose was significantly lower (P<0.01) after breakfast in the lispro group, while there were no significant group differences in glycemic control during the rest of the day. Severe hypoglycaemia occurred in two patients in the regular group but biochemical hypoglycaemia (blood glucose <3.0 mmol/l) was more frequent in the lispro than in the regular group (5.5 vs. 3.9%, respectively). HbA(1c) values at inclusion were 6.5 and 6.6% in the lispro and regular group respectively. HbA(1c) values declined during the study period and were similar in both groups. There was no perinatal mortality. Complications during pregnancy, route of delivery and foetal outcome did not differ between the groups. Retinopathy progressed in both groups, one patient in the regular group developed proliferative retinopathy.
                The results suggest that it is possible to achieve at least as adequate glycemic control with lispro as with regular insulin therapy in type 1 diabetic pregnancies. The short-acting insulin analogue lispro ([LYS(B28), PRO(B29)] is absorbed from the subcutis more rapidly than soluble insulin (S). To compare the clinical effectiveness of lispro vs S, 11 Type 1 patients using continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) therapy (6 F, 5 M, age 30 +/- 2.5 years, diabetes duration 14 +/- 1.0 years, BMI 24.0 +/- 0.8 kg m(-2), HbA1c 6.5 +/- 0.2%) were studied in an open, randomized, crossover study for 6 months (3 months lispro and 3 months S or vice versa). During lispro treatment mean fasting and 2 h postprandial blood glucose were lower compared to the S phase (fasting 6.5 +/- 0.4 vs 7.5 +/- 0.4 mmol l(-1) (NS), postprandial 6.8 +/- 0.3 vs 8.3 +/- 0.3 mmol l(-1), p = 0.03). In patients treated first with lispro HbA1c levels improved from 6.3 +/- 0.2% to 5.7 +/- 0.3%; On reversion to S HbA1c increased to 6.2 +/- 0.2%. In the group treated first with S, HbA1c fell (6.7 +/- 0.4% vs 6.5 +/- 0.3%) and then improved further to 6.3 +/- 0.3% with lispro. None of these changes were significant. There was no significant difference with respect to hypoglycaemic or other adverse events. It can be concluded that lispro in CSII therapy is safe and may improve postprandial glucose excursions. Ten pregnant women, affected by type I diabetes mellitus, observed for the first time during the II-III month of pregnancy, were examined. These patients were divided in two groups at random: group A underwent continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion with micropump CPI 9100 Lilly; group B underwent intensified insulin therapy with three daily doses of MC rapid insulin, two of which associated with MC intermediate insulin. All the patients were able to monitor their own blood glucose levels at home by means of reactive strips and reflectometer. In both the groups the mean glycemic values during fast and two hours after meals, and the eventual presence of urinary keton bodies and hypoglycemic crisis were evaluated during the course of pregnancy: these parameters turned out to be identical in the two groups. The increased need of insulin, the maternal body weight gain, the week and mode of delivery, the neonatal weight and the maternal and fetal complications also turned out to be identical in the two groups. To conclude, a good maternal metabolic control can be obtained either with the intensified conventional insulin therapy of with micropumps, if the patients, being properly instructed, are responsible for the monitoring of their own blood glucose levels at home. To compare quality of life (QoL) and treatment satisfaction in patients with Type 1 diabetes receiving the rapid-acting insulin analogue, insulin aspart (IAsp), with that in patients receiving soluble human insulin (HI).
                In this 6-month, multinational, randomized, open-label trial, 424 patients from German-speaking countries were subjected to psychometric assessment before and after randomization (ratio 2 : 1) to basal-bolus treatment with either IAsp (n = 283) or HI (n = 141). Patients on HI were advised to keep an injection-meal interval of 30 min, whereas patients on IAsp were advised to inject immediately before meals. Treatment satisfaction and diabetes-related QoL were assessed using validated instruments to measure the domains of patients' individual treatment goals, physical complaints, worries about the future, social relations, leisure time flexibility, daily hassles, diet restrictions, burdens and fear of hypoglycaemia, blood glucose fluctuations, self-efficacy, and fear of insulin analogues.
                After 6 months, IAsp was associated with significantly greater improvement in treatment satisfaction than HI in two different scales (P < 0.01), and in QoL with respect to diet restrictions (P < 0.01). Improved satisfaction was mainly due to increased dietary and leisure time flexibility (P < 0.0001). Twenty-three percent of the IAsp group vs. 14% of the HI group achieved small but important improvements of total QoL (between-group difference, P < 0.06). The number needed to treat (NNT) with IAsp for an important increase in QoL was calculated to be 10. Regression analyses of potential predictors of improvement in QoL highlighted patients intensely striving for physical strength (P < 0.01; NNT = 7) and patients feeling less protected against hypoglycaemia (P < 0.005; NNT = 8) as being the most likely to benefit from IAsp.
                Under these study conditions, IAsp improved treatment satisfaction and quality of life regarding diet restrictions when compared with human insulin. The 'numbers needed to treat' for important quality of life benefits indicate that the effect of IAsp in this regard is not trivial. The safety and efficacy of human insulin (Novo) were evaluated in a double-blind, parallel, multicenter trial in which 47 insulin-dependent diabetic patients were randomly divided into two equal groups and treated with either purified pork or human insulin (Actrapid and Monotard, Novo) for 12 wk. Mean levels of fasting plasma glucose, glycohemoglobin, and daily insulin dosages showed no statistical differences between the two groups, and there was no significant difference in the incidence of hypoglycemic reactions. The results from this clinical trial indicate that human insulin, prepared by enzymatic transpeptidation of pork insulin, appears to be as safe and efficacious as purified pork insulin in the treatment of insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus. Optimal insulin regimens for non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus (NIDDM) patients with secondary failure are controversial. We evaluated the efficacy, side effects, and quality of life of patients receiving insulin either alone or in combination with their previous oral hypoglycemic agents (OHAs).
                Fifty-three Chinese patients with NIDDM (mean age 53.9 +/- 12.6 years, duration of diabetes 9.0 +/- 4.9 years, body wt 60.4 +/- 13.3 kg with corresponding body mass index 24.2 +/- 4.3 kg/m2, receiving the maximum dose of sulfonylurea and/or metformin) were confirmed to have OHA failure. Twenty-seven patients were randomized to continue OHAs and were given additional bedtime insulin (combination group); 26 patients were randomized to insulin therapy alone with twice-daily insulin (insulin group). Insulin doses were increased incrementally, aiming at fasting plasma glucose (FPG) < 7.8 mmol/l during a stabilization period of up to 8 weeks. Insulin dosage, body weight, glycemic control, and quality of life were assessed before and at 3 and 6 months after stabilization.
                Both groups showed similar improvement of glycemic control. For the combination group, FPG decreased from 13.5 +/- 2.7 to 8.9 +/- 3.0 mmol/l at 3 months (P < 0.0001) and to 8.6 +/- 2.5 mmol/l at 6 months (P < 0.0001). For the insulin group, FPG decreased from 13.5 +/- 3.6 to 7.5 +/-3.0 mmol/l at 3 months (P < 0.0001) and to 9.8 +/- 3.5 mmol/l at 6 months (P < 0.0001). No significant differences were observed between the groups. Similarly, both groups had significant improvement of fructosamine and glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c). Fructosamine fell from a mean of 458 to 365 mumol/l at 3 months (P < 0.0001) and to 371 mumol/l at 6 months (P < 0.0001) and from 484 to 325 mumol/l at 3 months (P < 0.0001) and to 350 mumol/l at 6 months (P < 0.0001) for the combination and insulin groups, respectively. HbA1c decreased from 10.2 to 8.4% at 3 months (P < 0.0001) and to 8.7% at 6 months (P < 0.0001) in the combination group and from 10.7 to 7.8% at 3 months (P < 0.0001) and to 8.4% at 6 months (P < 0.0001) in the insulin group. Despite similar improvement of glycemia, insulin requirements were very different. At 3 months, the combination group was receiving a mean of 14.4 U/day compared with 57.5 U/day in the insulin group (P < 0.0001). Similar findings were observed at 6 months (15.0 vs 57.2 U/day, P < 0>0001). Both groups gained weight. However, for the combination group, weight gain was 1.6 +/- 1.8 kg at 3 months and 2.1 +/- 2.5% kg at 6 months (both P < 0.0001 vs baseline), whereas for the insulin group, weight gain was 3.5 +/- 4.3 and 5.2 +/- 4.1 kg, respectively (both P < 0.0001 vs baseline). Weight gain was significantly greater in the insulin group (P < 0.05 at 3 months, and P < 0.005 at 6 months). Fasting plasma triglyceride decreased in the insulin group (1.8 +/- 1.0 to 1.4 +/- 0.8 mmol/l at 3 months [P < 0.005] and to 1.4 +/ 0.7 mmol/l at 6 months [P < 0.02] but not in the combination group. No changes were observed in total and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol. No severe hypoglycemic reactions were recorded in either group. Mild reactions occurred with similar frequency in both groups. Well-being and quality of life improved significantly in both groups. The majority of patients (82.7%) wanted to continue insulin beyond 6 months, irrespective of the treatment group.
                In NIDDM patients with secondary OHA failure, therapy with a combination of OHAs and insulin and with insulin alone was equally effective and well tolerated. However, combination therapy was associated with a lower insulin dose and less weight gain. Combination treatment may be considered when OHA failure occurs as a potential intermediate stage before full insulin replacement. To compare the safety, efficacy and management of insulin lispro (LP) with regular human insulin (RH) in young diabetic children treated with continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII).
                27 very young diabetic children (age 4.6 +/- 2.2 years) treated with CSII participated in an open-label, randomized cross-over multicenter study comparing 2 periods of 16 weeks of CSII with LP or RH.
                Mean daily basal rate was significantly higher during the LP period (p = 0.04). No differences were seen in changes in HbA1c levels, number of hypoglycemic events, cutaneous infections and catheter occlusions. There was no significant difference between the two treatments for preprandial and postprandial glucose values, although prandial glucose excursions tended to be lower with LP (significant at dinner, p = 0.01). Mean blood glucose levels were significantly higher at 0.00 and 3.00 a.m. during LP therapy (p < 0.05). No episode of ketoacidosis occurred during LP treatment. More parents indicated that LP made their own and the child's daily life easier (p = 0.02) and preferred LP (p = 0.01).
                LP in CSII therapy in children is safe, as effective as RH, improved postprandial excursions, met the needs of young children in their daily life well, and gained their parents' satisfaction and preference. However, a shorter duration of LP resulted in hyperglycemia during the first part of the night, which must be compensated for by increasing nocturnal basal rates during this time. Effects of pump treatment vs. four times daily injections were explored in children with diabetes with regard to quality of life and impact of disease as well as adverse effects and parameters of metabolic control.
                An open, parallel, randomized controlled prospective comparative study lasting 14 months was completed by 38 type 1 children with diabetes (age 4-16 yr) following a 3.5-months run-in phase. Standardized quality-of-life Pediatric Quality of life Inventory (PedsQL) and impact of disease scores were obtained every 3.5 months as well as regular medical parameters. Parallel treatment group data and longitudinal within-patient data were analysed for each treatment modality.
                Within-patient comparisons of the two treatment modalities showed significant improvement in PedsQL and impact scores after pump treatment. Treatment group comparisons did not show significant improvement. Pump treatment resulted in decreased symptomatic hypoglycaemia and lowered haemoglobin A1c by 0.22% after run in.
                Within-patient comparison suggests that metabolic control, frequency of severe hypoglycaemia (a threefold decrease), quality of life and impact of disease scores are improved by pump treatment in comparison to regular treatment with four daily insulin injections. The absorption of regular human insulin from subcutaneous injection sites is delayed due to the self-association of insulin to multimeric forms. The insulin analogue insulin lispro has a weak self-association and a fast absorption rate. We examined the safety and efficacy of insulin lispro in the premeal treatment of patients with diabetes mellitus. A 12-month study was performed in 336 patients with insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus (IDDM) and 295 patients with non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus (NIDDM). The patients were randomized to inject either regular human insulin 30 to 45 minutes before eating, or insulin lispro immediately before each meal, in addition to basal insulin. The postprandial rise in serum glucose was lower in patients receiving insulin lispro than in those receiving regular human insulin therapy. At end point the increment was significantly lower at 1 hour (35%) and at 2 hours (64%) after the meal in IDDM patients; in NIDDM patients, the increment was nonsignificantly lower at 1 hour (19%) and significantly lower at 2 hours (48%). IDDM patients receiving insulin lispro achieved significantly lower glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) levels in patients receiving regular human insulin (8.1% vs 8.3%). In NIDDM patients, HbA1c levels decreased equally in both treatment groups. Due to its fast absorption rate, insulin lispro improves postprandial control in diabetes. Insulin lispro can be considered one step toward optimal insulin therapy and improved patient convenience.
Our analysis suggests only a minor benefit of short acting insulin analogues in the majority of diabetic patients treated with insulin. Until long term efficacy and safety data are available we suggest a cautious response to the vigorous promotion of insulin analogues. For safety purposes, we need a long-term follow-up of large numbers of patients and well designed studies in pregnant women to determine the safety profile for both the mother and the unborn child.