Effect of the fast-acting insulin analog lispro on the risk of nocturnal hypoglycemia during intensified insulin therapy. U.K. Lispro Study Group. Improved mealtime treatment of diabetes mellitus using an insulin analogue. Multicenter Insulin Lispro Study Group. Effectiveness of human ultralente versus NPH insulin in providing basal insulin replacement for an insulin lispro multiple daily injection regimen. A double-blind randomized prospective trial. The Canadian Lispro Study Group. Efficacy of insulin lispro in combination with NPH human insulin twice per day in patients with insulin-dependent or non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus. Multicenter Insulin Lispro Study Group. Combination daytime chlorpropamide-metformin/bedtime insulin in the treatment of secondary failures in non insulin dependent diabetes. Insulin analogues (insulin detemir and insulin aspart) versus traditional human insulins (NPH insulin and regular human insulin) in basal-bolus therapy for patients with type 1 diabetes. Insulin lispro: a potential role in preventing nocturnal hypoglycaemia in young children with diabetes mellitus. A controlled randomized study on the effect of long-term physical exercise on the metabolic control in type 2 diabetic patients. Comparison of bedtime insulin regimens in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. A randomized, controlled trial. A randomized, controlled trial comparing insulin lispro with human soluble insulin in patients with Type 1 diabetes on intensified insulin therapy. The UK Trial Group. Insulin lispro is as effective as regular insulin in optimising metabolic control and preserving beta-cell function at onset of type 1 diabetes mellitus. Comparison of insulin regimens in patients with non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus. Continuous subcutaneous glucose monitoring improved metabolic control in pediatric patients with type 1 diabetes: a controlled crossover study. Intensive replacement of basal insulin in patients with type 1 diabetes given rapid-acting insulin analog at mealtime: a 3-month comparison between administration of NPH insulin four times daily and glargine insulin at dinner or bedtime. Improved postprandial blood glucose control and reduced nocturnal hypoglycemia during treatment with two novel insulin lispro-protamine formulations, insulin lispro mix25 and insulin lispro mix50. Mix50 Study Group. Efficacy of conversion from bedtime NPH insulin to morning insulin glargine in type 2 diabetic patients on basal-prandial insulin therapy. Use of insulin aspart, a fast-acting insulin analog, as the mealtime insulin in the management of patients with type 1 diabetes. Addition of neutral protamine lispro insulin or insulin glargine to oral type 2 diabetes regimens for patients with suboptimal glycemic control: a randomized trial. Bedtime insulin/daytime glipizide. Effective therapy for sulfonylurea failures in NIDDM. Metabolic efficacy of preprandial administration of Lys(B28), Pro(B29) human insulin analog in IDDM patients. A comparison with human regular insulin during a three-meal test period. Different effects of insulin and oral antidiabetic agents on glucose and energy metabolism in type 2 (non-insulin-dependent) diabetes mellitus. Special management of insulin lispro in continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion in young diabetic children: a randomized cross-over study.
To measure the effectiveness of insulin lispro, a fast-acting insulin analog, in reducing hypoglycemic episodes when used in a basal bolus regimen by patients with type 1 diabetes using intensive insulin therapy.
                In 11 diabetes outpatient clinics in the U.K., 165 subjects with type 1 diabetes were enrolled in a randomized crossover open-label study with a 2-month run-in period and then treated with a basal bolus regimen. Patients used human NPH insulin at night with either premeal insulin lispro for 4 months followed by human regular insulin for another 4 months or human regular insulin for 4 months followed by insulin lispro for another 4 months. The main outcome measures were the number of hypoglycemic episodes during both treatments and HbA1c level.
                A total of 135 patients were randomized, with 68 receiving insulin lispro and 67 receiving human regular insulin for the first 4 months. The data for the first 4 months of treatment only were compared as two independent groups because of a period effect and a treatment-period interaction. Glycemic control was equally tight during treatment with human regular insulin (HbA1c, 6.2 +/- 0.8%) and insulin lispro (6.0 +/- 0.9%). A total of 1,156 hypoglycemic episodes occurred during treatment with human regular insulin compared with 775 hypoglycemic episodes that occurred during treatment with insulin lispro (P = 0.04). This difference was chiefly because of a reduced number of nocturnal episodes (181 vs. 52, P = 0.001) in the insulin lispro group.
                The use of a fast-acting insulin analog, insulin lispro, as part of a basal bolus regimen reduces nocturnal hypoglycemia in patients with type 1 diabetes who maintain tight glycemic control during intensive insulin therapy. 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. To compare human ultralente (UL) insulin with human NPH insulin as basal insulin replacement in patients who use insulin lispro before meals.
                There were 178 patients with type 1 diabetes who were randomized to receive either human NPH or UL insulin once daily at bedtime in a 1-year double-blind clinical study. Eight-point blood glucose profiles were collected once monthly in the first 4 months, then every 2 months for the remainder of the study. Patients were also asked to perform premeal blood glucose measurements every day throughout the study. If before-supper blood glucose levels consistently exceeded 8 mmol/l despite optimal postprandial control with the lunch dose of insulin lispro, a second dose of basal insulin before breakfast was administered.
                For the group as a whole, insulin doses before meals and basal insulin doses were similar at baseline. At study's end, meal doses remained the same (30 +/- 1 U/day for UL., 29 +/- 1 U/day for NPH), while basal requirements were somewhat higher for the UL group than the NPH group: 30 +/- 1 U/day vs. 26 +/- 1 U/day, respectively (P < 0.05). The rates of severe hypoglycemia were similar for patients on NPH (0.05 +/- 0.03 per patient every 30 days) and for UL (0.07 +/- 0.04 per patient every 30 days) insulin. There was no significant difference for glycemic control between the NPH and UL groups overall (HbAlc at the end of the study: 7.6 +/- 0.1 vs. 7.7 +/- 0.1%, respectively), and by study's end a similar number of patients in the NPH and the UL groups needed to be switched to twice daily basal insulin (21 and 24%, respectively). Patients requiring twice-daily injections of basal insulin had a longer duration of diabetes (17.8 +/- 1.5 vs. 14.0 +/- 0.8 years, P < 0.05) and a highest baseline HbAlc (8.6 +/- 0.1 vs. 8.0 +/- 0.1%, P < 0.002) and were significantly older (38 +/- 2 vs. 34 +/- 1 years, P < 0.007). Patients who were switched to twice-daily NPH insulin had lower HbAlc levels at study's end compared with those switched to twice-daily UL insulin (7.7 +/- 0.2 vs. 8.2 +/- 0.3%), but this difference was not statistically significant. Distribution of hypoglycemia across the day was also similar in both groups.
                UL or NPH insulin, when used as the basal insulin for multiple injection regimens, results in similar glycemic control in patients using insulin lispro before meals. However, in patients who require a second injection of basal insulin, NPH insulin appears to provide lower prebreakfast and prelunch glucose levels compared with UL insulin. A common treatment regimen for patients with either insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus (IDDM) or non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus (NIDDM) is a combination of rapid-acting insulin and intermediate-acting insulin administered twice each day. It is usually recommended that regular human insulin be injected 30 to 45 minutes before a meal. In practice, patients often inject regular human insulin closer to mealtime, causing a higher post-prandial serum glucose level and an increased potential for hypoglycemia in the postabsorptive period. Insulin lispro, a rapid-acting insulin analogue, is best injected just before a meal because of its more rapid absorption and shorter duration of action. In 707 randomized patients, 379 with IDDM and 328 with NIDDM, we studied the effect of twice-daily insulin lispro or regular human insulin in combination with NPH human insulin (isophane insulin) on premeal, 2-hour postprandial, and bedtime glycemic control. Assessments were based on the results of a seven-point blood glucose profile, the insulin dose (by formulation and time of administration), the incidence and frequency of hypoglycemic episodes, and the glycated hemoglobin value. Treatment with insulin lispro resulted in lower postprandial glucose levels and smaller increases in glucose level after the morning and evening meals compared with treatment with regular human insulin. Overall glycemic control, frequency of hypoglycemic events, and total insulin dose were not different between the two groups. Insulin lispro in combination with NPH human insulin in a twice-per-day regimen allows injection closer to mealtime and improves post-prandial glycemic control without increasing the risk of hypoglycemia. To determine the effectiveness of the combination therapy with daytime chlorpropamide-metformin and bedtime NPH insulin in the treatment of secondary failures in NIDDM and to study its effects on insulin secretion.
                Non randomized open study with a duration of two months. The patients were followed six months after ending the study. INSTITUTION: Department of Diabetes and Lipid Metabolism. Instituto Nacional de la Nutrición "Salvador Zubirán", Mexico City. CHARACTERISTICS OF THE PATIENTS: Nine patients (seven women and two men) were included. All had NIDDM and secondary failure to antidiabetic oral drugs. Their fasting plasma glucose was 14.5 +/- 2 mM/L and their HbA1c 13.37 +/- 2.9%. At the entry and at the end of the study a 5h-OGTT was done with assays of plasma glucose and C-peptide.
                Chlorpropamide (375 mg/day) plus metformin (1200 mg/day) and bedtime insulin (0.1 U/kg/day).
                After two months on combination therapy, fasting plasma glucose and HbA1c levels were remarkably improved (decreases of 7.3 +/- 0.6 and 9.1 +/- 1.02 respectively, p less than 0.002). The insulin dose was small (6.77 +/- 2.09 U/day). Side effects were minimal and infrequent. During the 5h-OGTT, the mean glucose area under the curve also decreased. The insulin secretion did not change but the C-peptide/glucose ratio increased. At the end of the study, the insulin dose was tapered off and stopped when possible. The four patients with the best glycemic control during the study were able to suspend the bedtime insulin and maintain a good control six months after the insulin suspension.
                The combination therapy is useful in the treatment of secondary failures in NIDDM: Its advantages are the very low mean daily insulin dose needed, the low incidence of side effects and, if a HbA1c less than 8.7% is achieved, the restoration of oral antidiabetic drugs efficacy. The very low insulin dose used in this study could be explained by complementary effects of metformin and bedtime insulin on hepatic glucose output and a putative decrease in peripheral resistance attributable both to sulfonylurea and metformin. The aim of the trial was to compare the efficacy and tolerability of two types of basal-bolus therapy, using either the soluble long-acting basal insulin analogue, insulin detemir, in combination with the rapid-acting analogue, insulin aspart, or NPH insulin in combination with mealtime regular human insulin.
                In this 18-week, 1:1 randomised, open-labelled, parallel trial, 595 patients with Type 1 diabetes mellitus received insulin detemir or NPH insulin in the morning and at bedtime in combination with mealtime insulin aspart or regular human insulin respectively.
                Glycaemic control with insulin detemir/insulin aspart was improved in comparison with NPH insulin/regular human insulin (HbA1c: 7.88% vs 8.11%; mean difference: -0.22% point [95% CI: -0.34 to -0.10]; p<0.001). Self-measured 8-point plasma glucose profiles differed between the groups (p<0.001), with lower postprandial plasma glucose levels in the insulin detemir/insulin aspart group. Within-person day-to-day variation in plasma glucose was lower with insulin detemir/insulin aspart than with NPH insulin/regular human insulin (SD: 2.88 vs 3.12 mmol/l; p<0.001). Risk of overall and nocturnal hypoglycaemia (23.00-06.00 hours) was, respectively, 21% (p=0.036) and 55% (p<0.001) lower in the insulin detemir/insulin aspart group than in the NPH insulin/regular human insulin group. Body weight (adjusted for baseline and change in HbA1c) was 1 kg lower with insulin detemir/insulin aspart than with NPH insulin/regular human insulin (p<0.001).
                Basal-bolus therapy using insulin detemir/insulin aspart offers a better balance of control and tolerability than with NPH insulin/regular human insulin. The low variability and more physiological action profiles generated with these insulin analogues resulted in improved glycaemic control with lower risk of hypoglycaemia and no concomitant body weight increase. The long duration of action of soluble insulin given in the evening could contribute to the high prevalence of nocturnal hypoglycaemia seen in young children with Type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM). We examined whether replacing soluble insulin with insulin lispro reduced this risk in children on a three times daily insulin regimen.
                Open crossover study comparing insulin lispro vs. soluble insulin in 23 (16 boys) prepubertal children (age 7-11 years) with T1DM on three injections/day; long-acting isophane insulin remained identical. At the end of each 4-month treatment arm, an overnight 15-min venous sampled blood glucose profile was performed.
                Despite similar blood glucose levels pre-evening meal (lispro vs. soluble: mean +/- se 6.5 +/- 1.0 vs. 7.1 +/- 1.1 mmol/l, P = 0.5), post-meal (18.00-22.00 h) blood glucose levels were lower on insulin lispro (area under curve 138 +/- 12 vs. 170 +/- 13 mmol min-1 l-1, P = 0.03). In contrast, in the early night (22.00-04.00 h) the prevalence of low blood glucose levels (< 3.5 mmol/l) was lower on lispro (8% of blood glucose levels) than on soluble insulin (13%, P = 0.01). In the early morning (04.00-07.00 h) mean blood glucose and prevalence of low levels were no different between the two treatment groups, and fasting (07.00 h) blood glucose levels were similar (6.1 +/- 0.8 vs. 6.3 +/- 0.9 mmol/l, P = 0.8). At the end of each treatment arm there were no differences in HbA1c (lispro vs. soluble 8.6% vs. 8.4%, P = 0.3), or in insulin doses (mean, range 0.97, 0.68-1.26 vs. 0.96, 0.53-1.22 U/kg per day, P = 0.2).
                The shorter duration of action of insulin lispro given before the evening meal may reduce the prevalence of early nocturnal hypoglycaemia without compromising HbA1c in young children with T1DM. The effects of 4 months' physical exercise on the metabolic control in non-insulin-dependent diabetes were studied in 25 patients divided randomly into exercise (n = 13) and control (n = 12) groups. In the exercise group glycosylated hemoglobin A1 fell from 9.6-8.6% (p less than 0.01) and the 2 hour plasma glucose in oral glucose tolerance test decreased from 19.7-16.5 mmol/l (p less than 0.01). The mean fall in fasting plasma glucose from 11.8-10.5 mmol/l was not statistically significant. The responses of plasma insulin and C-peptide to oral glucose increased significantly during the exercise period. However, patients with initially poorest metabolic control were not able to improve their physical fitness and did not show significant improvement in metabolic control. In the control group no changes occurred in any parameter of glucose metabolism. The results suggest that physical exercise is beneficial for the glycemic control in patients with mild and moderate non-insulin-dependent diabetes. Increased insulin response is at least one main mechanism of the action of exercise. Compared with other insulin regimens, combination therapy with oral hypoglycemic agents and bedtime insulin produces similar improvement in glycemic control but induces less weight gain.
                To determine whether bedtime insulin regimens differ with respect to their effects on weight gain in patients with type 2 diabetes.
                Randomized, controlled trial.
                Four outpatient clinics at central hospitals.
                96 patients (mean age, 58 +/- 1 years; mean body mass index, 29 +/- 1 kg/m2) whose type 2 diabetes was poorly controlled with sulfonylurea therapy (mean glycosylated hemoglobin value, 9.9% +/- 0.2%; mean fasting plasma glucose level, 11.9 +/- 0.3 mmol/L [214 +/- 5 mg/dL]).
                Random assignment to 1 year of treatment with bedtime intermediate-acting insulin plus glyburide (10.5 mg) and placebo, metformin (2 g) and placebo, glyburide and metformin, or a second injection of intermediate-acting insulin in the morning. Patients were taught to adjust the bedtime insulin dose on the basis of fasting glucose measurements.
                Body weight, biochemical and symptomatic hypoglycemias, and indices of glycemic control.
                At 1 year, body weight remained unchanged in patients receiving bedtime insulin plus metformin (mean change, 0.9 +/- 1.2 kg; P < 0.001 compared with all other groups) but increased by 3.9 +/- 0.7 kg, 3.6 +/- 1.2 kg, and 4.6 +/- 1.0 kg in patients receiving bedtime insulin plus glyburide, those receiving bedtime insulin plus both oral drugs, and those receiving bedtime and morning insulin, respectively. The greatest decrease in the glycosylated hemoglobin value was observed in the bedtime insulin and metformin group (from 9.7% +/- 0.4% to 7.2% +/- 0.2% [difference, -2.5 +/- 0.4 percentage points] at 1 year; P < 0.001 compared with 0 months and P < 0.05 compared with other groups). This group also had significantly fewer symptomatic and biochemical cases of hypoglycemia (P < 0.05) than the other groups.
                Combination therapy with bedtime insulin plus metformin prevents weight gain. This regimen also seems superior to other bedtime insulin regimens with respect to improvement in glycemic control and frequency of hypoglycemia. Despite considerable experience with insulin lispro, few blinded comparisons with soluble insulin are available. This study compared insulin lispro with human soluble insulin in patients with Type 1 diabetes mellitus on multiple injection therapy who inject shortly before meals.
                Glucose control, frequency of hypoglycaemia and patient preference were examined in the course of a prospective, randomized, double-blind, crossover comparison, with a 6-week run-in period and 12 weeks on each therapy. Ninety-three patients took part, all on multiple daily doses of insulin, with soluble insulin before meals and NPH (isophane) insulin at night. The main outcome measures were self-monitored blood glucose profiles, glycated haemoglobin, frequency of hypoglycaemic episodes, patient satisfaction and well-being and patient preference.
                Blood glucose levels were significantly lower after breakfast and lunch, but higher before breakfast, lunch and supper, in patients taking insulin lispro. Levels of HbA(1c) were 7.4 +/- 1.1% on Humulin S and 7.5 +/- 1.1% on insulin lispro (P = 0.807). The overall frequency of symptomatic hypoglycaemia did not differ, but patients on insulin lispro were less likely to experience hypoglycaemia between midnight and 6 a.m., and more likely to experience episodes from 6 a.m. to midday. Questionnaires completed by 84/87 patients at the end of the study showed that 43 (51%) were able to identify each insulin correctly, nine (11%) were incorrect, and 32 (38%) were unable to tell the insulins apart. No significant preference emerged: 35 (42%) opted for insulin lispro, 24 (29%) opted for Humulin S, while the remainder had no clear preference.
                Substitution of insulin lispro for soluble insulin in a multiple injection regimen improved post-prandial glucose control at the expense of an increase in fasting and pre-prandial glucose levels. Patients who already injected shortly before meals expressed no clear preference for the fast-acting analogue, and did not improve their overall control as a result of using it. Nocturnal hypoglycaemia was however, less frequent on insulin lispro, and may emerge as a robust indication for its use. The aim of the study was to examine the effects of intensive insulin therapy using lispro on metabolic control, immunogenicity and beta-cell function of newly diagnosed type 1 diabetic subjects in comparison with intensive insulin therapy using regular insulin. An open study was conducted in 45 newly diagnosed type 1 diabetic subjects. Patients were randomly assigned to intensive insulin therapy using insulin lispro (lispro) (lispro, n=22; 22.8 years) or intensive insulin therapy using regular insulin (regular) (regular, n=23; 24.4 years): three to five injections of subcutaneous rapid-acting insulin before meals and Neutral Protamine Hagedorn (NPH) before dinner/bed-time. GAD, IA2, insulin antibodies, basal and stimulated plasma C-peptide and HbA(1c) were measured initially and at months 1, 4, 8 and 12. Daily blood glucose profiles tended to be lower in the lispro group, particularly values after breakfast, without reaching statistical significance. There were no differences in terms of HbA(1c) throughout the study. The proportion of subjects achieving an HbA(1c)<6% at the end of the study was similar in both groups (regular 73.9%, lispro 68.0%). The number of mild hypoglycemic episodes tended to be lower with lispro, but not significantly. beta-Cell function was not significantly different in both groups. During follow-up there were no differences in antibodies, including IAAb. In summary, insulin lispro used in intensive insulin therapy is as effective as regular insulin in optimizing metabolic control and preserving beta-cell function at diagnosis of type 1 diabetes. Insulin is widely used to improve metabolic control in patients with non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus (NIDDM), but there is no consensus about the optimal regimen of insulin treatment.
                We treated 153 patients with NIDDM for three months with five regimens: (1) oral hypoglycemic drug therapy plus NPH insulin given at 7 a.m. (the morning-NPH group), (2) oral hypoglycemic drug therapy plus NPH insulin given at 9 p.m. (the evening-NPH group), (3) NPH and regular insulin (ratio, 70 units to 30 units) given before breakfast and dinner (the two-insulin-injection group), (4) NPH insulin at 9 p.m. and regular insulin before meals (the multiple-insulin-injection group), and (5) continued oral hypoglycemic drug therapy (the control group).
                The mean (+/- SE) value for glycosylated hemoglobin decreased similarly in all four insulin-treatment groups (1.7 +/- 0.3, 1.9 +/- 0.2, 1.8 +/- 0.3, and 1.6 +/- 0.3 percent, respectively). The decrease was significantly greater in these four groups than in the control group (0.5 +/- 0.2 percent; P < 0.001 vs. all insulin-treated groups). Weight gain was significantly less (1.2 +/- 0.5 kg) in the evening-NPH group than in the other insulin-treatment groups (2.2 +/- 0.5 kg in the morning-NPH group, 1.8 +/- 0.5 kg in the two-insulin-injection group, and 2.9 +/- 0.5 kg in the multiple-injection group; P < 0.05). In addition, the increment in the mean diurnal serum free insulin concentration was 50 to 65 percent smaller in the evening-NPH group than in the other insulin-treatment groups. Subjective well-being improved significantly more in the insulin-treatment groups than in the control group (P < 0.001).
                In patients with NIDDM who are receiving oral hypoglycemic drug therapy, the addition of NPH insulin in the evening improves glycemic control in a manner similar to combination therapy with NPH insulin in the morning, a two-insulin-injection regimen, or a multiple-insulin-injection regimen, but induces less weight gain and hyperinsulinemia. The data thus suggest that patients with NIDDM do not benefit from multiple insulin injections and that nocturnal insulin administration appears preferable to daytime administration. To improve metabolic control and prevent complications, both acute and late, we need to adjust treatment on the basis of the blood glucose (BG) profile, as not even the most active BG self-monitoring gives sufficient information.
                We have used Continuous Glucose Monitoring System (CGMS; Medtronic MiniMed, Northridge, CA) in a controlled crossover study including 27 diabetic patients aged 12.5 +/- 3.3 (mean; standard deviation; range: 5-19) years. All patients were treated with intensive insulin therapy, 14 with multiple injections, and 13 with pumps. The patients were randomized into an open or blind study arm. Both arms wore the CGMS sensor for 3 days every 2 weeks. CGMS profiles were used in the open study arm to adjust insulin therapy at follow-up visits every 6 weeks. Both the patients and the diabetes team were masked to the CGMS profiles in the blinded arm, and insulin therapy adjustments were based solely on 7-point BG profiles performed by the patients. At 3 months the 2 study arms were crossed over.
                Despite initial problems with a device new to both patients and the diabetes team, hemoglobin A(1)C decreased significantly in the open arm (from 7.70%-7.31%) but not in the blind arm (7.75%-7.65%). A total of 26/27 patients experienced daytime low subcutaneous glucose (<3.0 mmol/L;.8 episodes/day; duration 58 +/- 29 minutes; 5.5% of total time), and 27/27 patients had at least 1 nocturnal episode of low subcutaneous glucose (.4 episodes/night; duration 132 +/- 81 minutes; 10.1% of total time).
                Use of CGMS facilitated an improved treatment, and patients received new insight and increased motivation. In this study, we found CGMS to be a useful tool for education and improving metabolic control. To establish differences in blood glucose between different regimens of optimized basal insulin substitution in type 1 diabetic patients given lispro insulin at meals, i.e., NPH injected four times a day versus glargine insulin once daily at dinner or at bedtime.
                A total of 51 patients with type 1 diabetes on intensive therapy (NPH four times/day and lispro insulin at each meal) were randomized to three different regimens of basal insulin substitution while continuing lispro insulin at meals: continuation of NPH four times/day (n = 17), once daily glargine at dinnertime (n = 17), and once daily glargine at bedtime (n = 17) for 3 months. Blood glucose targets were fasting, preprandial, and bedtime concentrations at 6.4-7.2 mmol/l and 2 h after meals at 8.0-9.2 mmol/l. The primary end point was HbA(1c).
                Mean daily blood glucose was lower with dinnertime glargine (7.5 +/- 0.2 mmol/l) or bedtime glargine (7.4 +/- 0.2 mmol/l) versus NPH (8.3 +/- 0.2 mmol/l) (P < 0.05). A greater percentage of blood glucose values were at the target value with glargine at dinner and bedtime versus those with NPH (P < 0.05). HbA(1c) at 3 months did not change with NPH but decreased with glargine at dinnertime (from 6.8 +/- 0.2 to 6.4 +/- 0.1%) and glargine at bedtime (from 7.0 +/- 0.2 to 6.6 +/- 0.1%) (P < 0.04 vs. NPH). Total daily insulin doses were similar with the three treatments, but with glargine there was an increase in basal and a decrease in mealtime insulin requirements (P < 0.05). Frequency of mild hypoglycemia (self-assisted episodes, blood glucose < or =4.0 mmol/l) was lower with glargine (dinnertime 8.1 +/- 0.8 mmol/l, bedtime 7.7 +/- 0.9 mmol/l) than with NPH (12.2 +/- 1.3 mmol/l) (episodes/patient-month, P < 0.04). In-hospital profiles confirmed outpatient blood glucose data and indicated more steady plasma insulin concentrations at night and before meals with glargine versus NPH (P < 0.05). There were no differences between glargine given at dinnertime and at bedtime.
                Regimens of basal insulin with either NPH four times/day or glargine once/day in type 1 diabetic patients both result in good glycemic control. However, the simpler glargine regimen decreases the HbA(1c) level and frequency of hypoglycemia versus NPH. In contrast to NPH, which should be given at bedtime, insulin glargine can be administered at dinnertime without deteriorating blood glucose control. The objective of this 6-month, open-label, randomized, two-period crossover study was to compare glycemic control when patients were treated with (1) 2 manufactured premixed insulin formulations containing insulin lispro and a novel insulin lispro-protamine formulation, neutral protamine lispro (NPL), and (2) 2 manufactured premixed human insulin formulations, human insulin 50/50 and human insulin 30/70. One hundred individuals, 37 with type 1 diabetes mellitus (12 females, 25 males; mean age, 39.4 years; mean body mass index [BMI], 24.8; mean duration of diabetes, 12.9 years) and 63 with type 2 diabetes mellitus (33 females, 30 males; mean age, 59.0 years; mean BMI, 28.4; mean duration of diabetes, 12.6 years), were treated with insulin lispro mixtures. Insulin lispro Mix50 (50% insulin lispro/50% NPL) and human insulin 50/50 (50% regular insulin/50% neutral protamine Hagedorn [NPH] insulin) were administered before breakfast; insulin lispro Mix25 (25% insulin lispro/75% NPL) and human insulin 30/70 (30% regular insulin/70% NPH) were administered before dinner. Blood glucose (BG), hypoglycemic episodes (hypoglycemic signs or symptoms or BG <3.0 mmol/L), insulin dose and timing of dose before meals, and hemoglobin A1c were measured. Mean doses of insulin lispro and human insulin mixtures were similar overall and for both diabetes subgroups. However, compared with human insulin mixtures, twice-daily administration of insulin lispro mixtures resulted in improved postprandial glycemic control, similar overall glycemic control, and less nocturnal hypoglycemia, as well as offering the convenience of dosing closer to meals. In normal subjects, approximately half of the daily insulin requirement constitutes basal insulin. We investigated whether increasing the dose of insulin glargine up to half of the total insulin requirement could lead to better glycemic control in type 2 diabetic patients who were treated on basal-prandial insulin therapy. A total of 62 patients with type 2 diabetes on mealtime rapid-acting insulin analogue and bedtime NPH were randomized to either continuation of bedtime NPH (n=31) or morning glargine (n=31) for 6 months while continuing the aspart/lispro at each meal. The two groups were matched for age, sex, diabetes duration, BMI, HbA(1C), endogenous insulin secretion, and proportion of numbers using aspart/lispro and using oral hypoglycemic agents. The dose of insulin glargine was increased by 2-4 units to meet the target fasting blood glucose, whereas the dose of NPH was principally unchanged as a control group. Mean HbA(1C) at baseline was similar between patients with glargine and NPH (7.2% versus 6.9%). The percentage of glargine dose increased significantly (31% at baseline to 48% at 6 months) without any significant changes in total insulin dose. Mean HbA(1C) at 3 months was 6.6% with glargine and 7.0% with NPH (P<0.0001, adjusted mean change between-treatment difference 0.6% [95% CI 0.3-0.9]), and the values at 6 months were 6.6% and 6.9%, respectively (P=0.007). Frequency of hypoglycemia did not differ between the groups. Increasing the dose of glargine without changing the total daily insulin dose resulted in significantly better glycemic control in type 2 diabetic patients on basal-prandial insulin therapy. Conversion from bedtime NPH to morning glargine appears efficacious with no increase in frequency of hypoglycemia. To compare long-term glycemic control and safety of using insulin aspart (IAsp) with that of regular human insulin (HI).
                This was a multicenter randomized open-label 6-month study (882 subjects) with a 6-month extension period (714 subjects) that enrolled subjects with type 1 diabetes. Subjects administered IAsp immediately before meals or regular HI 30 min before meals; basal NPH insulin was taken as a single bedtime dose in the majority of subjects. Glycemic control was assessed with HbA1c values and 8-point blood glucose profiles at 3-month intervals.
                Mean postprandial blood glucose levels (mg/dl +/- SEM) were significantly lower for subjects in the IAsp group compared with subjects in the HI group after breakfast (156 +/- 3.4 vs. 185 +/- 4.7), lunch (137 +/- 3.1 vs. 162 +/- 4.1), and dinner (153 +/- 3.1 vs. 168 +/- 4.1), when assessed after 6 months of treatment. Mean HbA1c values (% +/- SEM) were slightly, but significantly, lower for the IAsp group (7.78% +/- 0.03) than for the regular HI group (7.93% +/- 0.05, P = 0.005) at 6 months. Similar postprandial blood glucose and HbA1c values were observed at 12 months. Adverse events and overall hypoglycemic episodes were similar for both treatment groups.
                Postprandial glycemic control was significantly better with IAsp compared with HI after 6 and 12 months of treatment. The improvement was not obtained at an increased risk of hypoglycemia. HbA1c was slightly, but significantly, lower for IAsp compared with HI at 6 and 12 months. Injection of long-acting insulin at bedtime is a common therapeutic approach for patients with type 2 diabetes that is poorly controlled with oral regimens. Neutral protamine lispro (NPL) insulin has demonstrated better glycemic control and similar incidence of hypoglycemic events than that of neutral protamine Hagedorn insulin.
                To compare the clinical efficacy and safety of bedtime NPL insulin or insulin glargine in patients with type 2 diabetes who had suboptimal glycemic control while receiving stable doses of metformin and sulfonylurea.
                Open-label, randomized trial.
                Teaching hospital (Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria, Second University of Naples), Naples, Italy.
                116 adults receiving stable doses of metformin plus sulfonylurea for longer than 90 days with hemoglobin A(1c) (HbA(1c)) levels of 7.5% to 10% and fasting plasma glucose levels of 6.7 mmol/L or greater (> or =120 mg/dL).
                10 IU of NPL insulin or insulin glargine injected subcutaneously at bedtime with weekly dose titrations to target fasting glucose levels less than 5.6 mmol/L (<100 mg/dL) in addition to stable oral regimens. Patients receiving nighttime sulfonylurea before the study were switched to metformin.
                The primary outcome was change in HbA(1c) levels from baseline to week 36. Secondary outcomes were HbA(1c) levels less than 7%, self-reported hypoglycemic episodes, insulin dose, self-monitored glucose level, and body weight. Twenty patients in each group had continuous glucose monitoring for 3 consecutive days before adding insulin and at week 36.
                Improvement in HbA(1c) levels was similar in both groups (1.83% and 1.89% for NPL and glargine, respectively). The difference between the groups was 0.06 percentage point (95% CI, -0.1 to 0.15 percentage points). Secondary outcomes did not differ between groups. Hemoglobin A(1c) levels less than 7% occurred in 62% of patients receiving NPL and 64% of patients receiving glargine (difference, 2.0 percentage points [CI, -1.1 to 5.0 percentage points]). Fasting plasma glucose levels less than 5.6 mmol/L (<100 mg/dL) occurred in 40% of patients receiving NPL and 41% of patients receiving glargine (difference, 1.0 percentage point [CI, -0.9 to 3.0 percentage points]). Any hypoglycemic event occurred in 74% of patients receiving NPL and 67% of patients receiving glargine (difference, 7 percentage points [CI, -5 to 13 percentage points]). Continuous glucose level monitoring in the patients who had this measurement did not differ statistically.
                The study was not blinded, had limited power to detect differences in hypoglycemic events, and did not obtain continuous glucose level monitoring for all patients.
                Similar glycemic control occurred with the addition of NPL or glargine insulin to oral regimens in patients with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes. Hypoglycemia was similar in the 2 groups, but sample size limited the ability to make a definite safety assessment. Bedtime insulin (BI)/daytime sulfonylurea (DSU) therapy was studied double-blind in 30 non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus subjects in whom sulfonylurea (SU) therapy had failed. Subjects were switched to glipizide for 2 months (phase I) to confirm failure (fasting plasma glucose [FPG] 12.0 +/- 0.4 mmol/l) and then randomly assigned into three groups: BI-DSU; BI-no DSU; and DSU-no BI. During phase II (3 months), the BI dose was fixed (20 U/1.73 m2, low-dose). In phase III (3 months), BI was titrated up (high-dose) to achieve good control or until hypoglycemic symptoms prevented further dose increases. In phase IV (6 months), 25 of the 30 original subjects received open-labeled, high-dose BI-DSU. Low-dose BI-DSU markedly reduced FPG (13.6 +/- 0.8 to 8.0 +/- 0.6 mmol/l, P < 0.001), mean 24-h glucose (P < 0.001), HbA1c (8.9 +/- 0.7 to 7.6 +/- 0.3%, P = 0.07), and basal hepatic glucose production (HGP) (P < 0.005). A positive correlation (r = 0.69, P < 0.05) between the declines in FPG and HGP was observed. Neither low-dose BI alone nor DSU alone reduced FPG, mean 24-h glucose, HbA1c, or basal HGP. High-dose (40 +/- 5 U/day) BI plus DSU further reduced the FPG (6.3 +/- 0.6 mmol/l), HbA1c (7.1 +/- 0.3%), mean 24-h plasma glucose, and basal HGP (all P < 0.05 vs. phase II).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS) The objective of this study was to compare the efficacy of the rapid-acting Lys(B28), Pro(B29) human insulin analog, insulin lispro, with currently available short-acting human insulin in a multiple injection therapy (MIT) regimen with respect to blood glucose and plasma insulin profiles and to serum metabolites (lactate, free fatty acids, glycerol, and beta-hydroxybutyrate) in 12 well-controlled type 1 diabetic subjects (8 male, HbA1c 6.8 +/- 0.9% [mean +/- SD]).
                After a run-in period of 4 weeks, patients were treated with either lispro at mealtime or human insulin 30 min before the meal for two periods of 4 weeks in a randomized open-label crossover study. Intermediate-acting insulin (NPH insulin) was given at bedtime. At the end of both study periods, metabolic profiles were assessed from 10:00 P.M. to 7:00 P.M. the next day.
                During the treatment periods, glycemic control was stable during lispro but improved during human insulin (delta HbA1c lispro 0.1 +/- 0.48, NS; human insulin -0.41 +/- 0.34%, P < 0.05). Glucose excursions, as measured by the incremental AUC, during the day and for the 2-h postprandial periods, were lower, although not significantly, for lispro. Insulin profiles demonstrated a faster rise after administration of lispro as compared with human insulin, peaking at 61 +/- 11.9 and 111 +/- 48.1 min (P < 0.01). Glycerol levels showed a slight increase before lunch and dinner, suggestive of enhanced lipolytic activity and compatible with the lower insulin levels.
                Lispro insulin applied in an MIT regimen creates more physiologic insulin profiles and tends to lower the glycemic excursions during the day compared with short-acting insulin. The analog can be applied safely in an MIT regimen, with mealtime intervals up to 5 h. Which therapy should be used in Type 2 (non-insulin-dependent) diabetic patients with "secondary sulfonylurea failure", insulin or a combination of sulfonylurea and metformin? To address this question, we have compared the effect of 6 months of insulin therapy twice daily with that of a combination of glibenclamide and metformin in 24 Type 2 diabetic subjects, who no longer responded to treatment with sulfonylureas. Both treatments resulted in an equivalent 30% improvement in mean daily blood glucose (p less than 0.001), without significant effect on serum lipids. Insulin improved glycaemic control primarily by reducing basal hepatic glucose production (p less than 0.05), but had no significant effect on peripheral glucose metabolism. The combination of glibenclamide and metformin enhanced significantly total body glucose metabolism (p less than 0.05), predominantly by stimulating the non-oxidative pathway. Neither insulin nor the combination therapy altered B-cell response to a test meal. Insulin therapy resulted in a 6% increase in body weight, 63% of which was accounted for by increased fat mass. Although body weight was unchanged during sulfonylurea/metformin therapy, lean body mass and energy expenditure decreased significantly (p less than 0.05). We conclude that insulin and glibenclamide/metformin have different long-term effects on glucose and energy metabolism in Type 2 diabetes. 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.
Long acting insulin preparations seem to exert a beneficial effect on nocturnal glucose levels. Their effect on the overall diabetes control is clinically unremarkable. Their use as a basal insulin regimen for type 1 diabetes mellitus warrants further substantiation.