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. Continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion versus intensive conventional insulin therapy in type I and type II diabetic pregnancy. 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. Effect of the fast-acting insulin analog lispro on the risk of nocturnal hypoglycemia during intensified insulin therapy. U.K. Lispro Study Group. Multiple insulin injections using a pen injector versus insulin pump treatment in young diabetic patients. Insulin therapy protects the central and peripheral nervous system of intensive care patients. Metabolic and immunologic effects of insulin lispro in gestational diabetes. Improved treatment satisfaction but no difference in metabolic control when using continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion vs. multiple daily injections in children at onset of type 1 diabetes mellitus. Long-term effects of self-management education for patients with Type 2 diabetes taking maximal oral hypoglycaemic therapy: a randomized trial in primary care. Comparative double-blind trial of the effectiveness and antigenicity of semisynthetic human insulin and purified porcine insulin in newly treated diabetic subjects. Human (semisynthetic) insulin and porcine insulin in the treatment of non-insulin-dependent diabetes. A double-blind, comparative clinical trial. [Effectiveness of treatment with metformin in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus poorly controlled with insulin treatment]. Continuous subcutaneous glucose monitoring improved metabolic control in pediatric patients with type 1 diabetes: a controlled crossover study. A randomized trial of continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion and intensive injection therapy in type 1 diabetes for patients with long-standing poor glycemic control. Comparison of the safety and effectiveness of human and bovine long-acting insulins. Incremental value of continuous glucose monitoring when starting pump therapy in patients with poorly controlled type 1 diabetes: the RealTrend study. Randomized trial of human versus animal species insulin in diabetic pregnant women: improved glycemic control, not fewer antibodies to insulin, influences birth weight. Maternal metabolic control and perinatal outcome in women with gestational diabetes treated with regular or lispro insulin: comparison with non-diabetic pregnant women. Effect of rosiglitazone versus insulin on the pancreatic beta-cell function of subjects with type 2 diabetes. Insulin versus a combination of insulin and sulfonylurea in the treatment of NIDDM patients with secondary oral failure. 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. A randomized, prospective trial comparing the efficacy of continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion with multiple daily injections using insulin glargine. A 52-week, multinational, open-label, parallel-group, noninferiority, treat-to-target trial comparing insulin detemir with insulin glargine in a basal-bolus regimen with mealtime insulin aspart in patients with type 2 diabetes. A strategy for selection of elderly type 2 diabetic patients for insulin therapy, and a comparison of two insulin preparations. A twelve month double-blind randomized study of the efficacy and immunogenicity of human and porcine insulins in non-insulin-dependent diabetics. Continuous glucose monitoring-guided insulin adjustment in children and adolescents on near-physiological insulin regimens: a randomized controlled trial. Low doses of insulin as a treatment of tardive dyskinesia: conjuncture or conjecture? A controlled trial of insulin infusion and parenteral nutrition in extremely low birth weight infants with glucose intolerance. [Long-term effect of combination glibenclamide-insulin treatment in the secondary failure of sulfonylurea therapy--results of a one-year double blind study]. Long-term improvement in insulin sensitivity by changing lifestyles of people with impaired glucose tolerance: 4-year results from the Finnish Diabetes Prevention Study. Insulin adjustment by a diabetes nurse educator improves glucose control in insulin-requiring diabetic patients: a randomized trial. Effects of metformin and rosiglitazone, alone and in combination, in nonobese women with polycystic ovary syndrome and normal indices of insulin sensitivity. Early insulin therapy in very-low-birth-weight infants. Effectiveness of sensor-augmented insulin-pump therapy in type 1 diabetes. Use of insulin aspart, a fast-acting insulin analog, as the mealtime insulin in the management of patients with type 1 diabetes. Metformin for obese, insulin-treated diabetic patients: improvement in glycaemic control and reduction of metabolic risk factors. 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. A 26-week, randomized, parallel, treat-to-target trial comparing insulin detemir with NPH insulin as add-on therapy to oral glucose-lowering drugs in insulin-naive people with type 2 diabetes.
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. Two groups of pregnant diabetic women, fifteen with type I and fourteen with type II diabetes, were randomly assigned either to CSII or to ICT and the subgroups compared with respect to glycaemic control, insulin requirement and perinatal out-come. Ten non-diabetic pregnant women served as controls for the variations in the metabolic parameters considered (24-hour mean blood glucose and glycosylated hemoglobin). Strict glycaemic control was achieved and maintained by both regimens before week 13 in all patients with type I and in 57.1% of patients with type II diabetes. The mean insulin requirements in the type I group increased up to week 34-36 and then stabilized to term in patients receiving CSII and rose progressively to term in those receiving ICT. In the type II group insulin requirements rose up to week 36 in patients receiving CSII and up to week 32 in those receiving ICT, stabilizing thereafter on both regimens. No significant differences in mean insulin requirement at the different stages of gestation were found between the patients receiving CSII and those receiving ICT of either group. Perinatal outcome was satisfactory in both groups, although control of foetal growth was better with ICT than with CSII. CSII is a practical, safe and effective method of maintaining maternal normoglycemia in pregnancy but for the present we cannot consider it superior to ICT in the treatment of pregnant diabetic women. 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. 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. Continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) of 6 months duration was compared with 6 months of multiple insulin injections (MII) using a pen injector (NovoPen) in a prospective cross-over study with 20 young insulin dependent diabetics by evaluating metabolic control, insulin requirements and patient acceptability. Following both intensified regimens (CSII/MII) serum fructosamine declined significantly from 4.1 +/- 0.7 to 3.4 +/- 0.5 mmol/l and 3.6 +/- 0.7 mmol/l respectively (normal range: 2.2 +/- 0.2 mmol/l). When comparing CSII and MII no significant differences could be demonstrated in mean blood glucose (MBG), fasting plasma ketone bodies, fasting plasma free fatty acids (FFA), fasting plasma human growth hormone (HGH), fasting plasma glucagon or serum fructosamine. Mean insulin requirement was 11.4% higher during MII and glucose instability--demonstrated by the M-values and by the frequency of blood glucose values below 4 mmol/l--was significantly (p less than 0.02) higher during the MII treatment. All of the patients reported a better well-being on both treatment regimens and none of them wanted to go back to conventional therapy (CT). In conclusion, on a long-term basis both regimens result in identical metabolic control, but due to physical discomfort during pump treatment, the insulin pen injector was preferred by the majority (80%) of the patients. To investigate the effectiveness of maintaining blood glucose levels below 6.1 mmol/L with insulin as prevention of secondary injury to the central and peripheral nervous systems of intensive care patients.
                The authors studied the effect of intensive insulin therapy on critical illness polyneuropathy (CIPNP), assessed by weekly EMG screening, and its impact on mechanical ventilation dependency, as a prospectively planned subanalysis of a large randomized, controlled trial of 1,548 intensive care patients. In the 63 patients admitted with isolated brain injury, the authors studied the impact of insulin therapy on intracranial pressure, diabetes insipidus, seizures, and long-term rehabilitation at 6 and 12 months follow-up.
                Intensive insulin therapy reduced ventilation dependency (p = 0.0007; Mantel-Cox log rank test) and the risk of CIPNP (p < 0.0001). The risk of CIPNP among the 405 long-stay (> or =7 days in intensive care unit) patients was lowered by 49% (p < 0.0001). Of all metabolic and clinical effects of insulin therapy, and corrected for known risk factors, the level of glycemic control independently explained this benefit (OR for CIPNP 1.26 [1.09 to 1.46] per mmol blood glucose, p = 0.002). In turn, prevention of CIPNP explained the ability of intensive insulin therapy to reduce the risk of prolonged mechanical ventilation (OR 3.75 [1.49 to 9.39], p = 0.005). In isolated brain injury patients, intensive insulin therapy reduced mean (p = 0.003) and maximal (p < 0.0001) intracranial pressure while identical cerebral perfusion pressures were obtained with eightfold less vasopressors (p = 0.01). Seizures (p < 0.0001) and diabetes insipidus (p = 0.06) occurred less frequently. At 12 months follow-up, more brain-injured survivors in the intensive insulin group were able to care for most of their own needs (p = 0.05).
                Preventing even moderate hyperglycemia with insulin during intensive care protected the central and peripheral nervous systems, with clinical consequences such as shortening of intensive care dependency and possibly better long-term rehabilitation. To compare the immunologic response to insulin lispro with that to regular human insulin, thereby assuring its safety for use in women with gestational diabetes, and to verify that it is effective.
                We compared the metabolic and immunologic effects of insulin lispro and regular human insulin in 42 women >18 years of age diagnosed with gestational diabetes by oral glucose tolerance testing at 14-32 weeks of gestation. Patients were randomized to receive regular human insulin or insulin lispro before consuming a test meal. Serum insulin, blood glucose, and C-peptide concentrations were measured. Throughout the remainder of gestation, patients received premeal insulin lispro or regular human insulin combined with basal insulin and performed blood glucose self-monitoring before and after each meal. Insulin antibodies and HbA1c were determined at enrollment and 6 weeks later. In addition, 10 patients received continuous intravenous insulin (4 lispro, 6 regular human insulin) and dextrose infusions intrapartum to assess placental insulin transfer.
                Anti-insulin antibody levels were similar in the two groups. Insulin lispro was not detectable in the cord blood. During a meal test, areas under the curve for glucose, insulin, and C-peptide were significantly lower in the lispro group. Mean fasting and postprandial glucose concentrations and end point HbA1c were similar in the two groups. The lispro group demonstrated fewer hypoglycemic episodes (symptoms and blood glucose concentrations <55 mg/dl). No fetal or neonatal abnormalities were noted in either treatment group.
                Insulin lispro may be considered a treatment option for women with gestational diabetes. The aim of this study was to compare safety, metabolic control, and treatment satisfaction in children/adolescents at onset of type 1 diabetes mellitus who were treated with either continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) or multiple daily injections (MDI).
                Seventy-two children/adolescents (7-17 yr of age) were enrolled in this open, randomized, parallel, multicenter study. Approximately half of the patients were treated with MDI (natural protamine hagedorn [NPH] insulin twice daily and rapid-acting insulin three to -four times daily, n = 38) by pen, and the other half received CSII (n = 34). The patients were followed for 24 months with clinical visits at the entry of the study and after 1, 6, 12, and 24 months. During these visits, hemoglobin A1c, insulin doses, weight, and height were registered. Severe episodes of hypoglycemia and ketoacidosis as well as technical problems were recorded. In addition, the patients/parents answered the Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire.
                There was no significant difference in metabolic control between the treatment groups. Treatment satisfaction was significantly higher in the group treated with CSII compared with the MDI group (p <or= 0.01 at all screening visits). There were no episodes of ketoacidosis and there was no significant difference regarding severe hypoglycemia between the treatment groups.
                CSII treatment proved to be a safe therapy in children/adolescents followed for 24 months after onset of their diabetes. Treatment satisfaction was higher in the CSII group, although there was no difference in metabolic control compared with the MDI group. Education is an essential part of the management of patients with Type 2 diabetes, but the long-term effects are unclear and not well investigated in primary care.
                Fifty-four patients (39-75 years) treated with maximal dosages of oral hypoglycaemic agents, needing to start insulin (HbA(1c)> or = 7.0%), were randomly allocated to a 6-month educational programme by a diabetes nurse (DN group) or usual care (UC group). Main outcome measures were HbA(1c), number of patients with HbA(1c) < 7.0%, and number of patients treated with insulin 18 months after baseline.
                Six weeks after the intervention HbA(1c) levels had improved from 8.2 (1.1) to 7.2 (1.3) in the DN group, and from 8.8 (1.5) to 8.4 (1.7) in the UC group. Adjusted for baseline values, at 6 weeks HbA(1c) improved 0.7% (95% confidence interval 0.1, 1.4) more in DN than in UC. Of the patients in DN, 60% reached HbA(1c) < 7.0% compared with 17% in UC (P < 0.01). However, at 18 months there were no significant differences for HbA(1c), number of patients with HbA(1c) < 7.0%, or number treated with insulin.
                Education was effective in improving glycaemic control and in delaying the need for insulin therapy in patients treated with maximal oral hypoglycaemic therapy. The reduced effect after 1 year was probably due to the discontinuation of the educational programme. Short-term education should not be offered without regular reinforcements integrated into standard diabetes care. A double-blind comparative trial of the effectiveness and antigenicity of semisynthetic human insulin (Novo) and highly purified (Monocomponent) porcine insulin was performed over a 12 month period in 20 diabetic subjects newly treated with insulin. Human insulin was shown to be indistinguishable from porcine insulin of comparable purity with respect to plasma glucose and glycosylated hemoglobin levels and insulin dose requirements. Human insulin was no less antigenic than porcine insulin; significant IgG-associated insulin binding activity was detected in six of the ten patients in the human insulin treated group and four of the ten patients in the porcine insulin treated group. In all patients, the binding activity was of low capacity. No adverse reactions to human insulin were noted. It is concluded that semisynthetic human insulin, like purified porcine insulin, is safe and effective. Although there may be advantages for human insulin in the setting of insulin allergy, this study does not indicate that human insulin has advantages over purified porcine insulin with respect to elicitation of antibodies of the IgG class. Twenty-one patients with non-insulin-dependent diabetes, who had not previously received insulin therapy, participated in a double-blind comparative trial of six months' duration to evaluate the efficacy of human (semisynthetic) insulin. Patients were allocated at random to treatment either with human (semisynthetic) insulin (10 patients) or with an equivalent porcine insulin regimen (11 patients). Sex ratio, age, body mass index, duration of diabetes, C-peptide concentrations, baseline metabolic control and initial insulin requirements were similar in both groups. After six months, no significant differences between the treatment effects of human (semisynthetic) insulin and porcine insulin, as assessed by measurements of fasting and postprandial plasma glucose levels, the concentration of glycosylated haemoglobin, serum lipid levels, insulin dose, and body weight, were found. No adverse reactions, injection-site anomalies, or drug-related biochemical abnormalities were noted in either group. It was concluded that human (semisynthetic) insulin is as effective as porcine insulin in initiating the treatment of patients with non-insulin-dependent diabetes who require insulin therapy. Combined treatment with insulin plus metformin could be a good alternative to improve the glycemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus poorly controlled with insulin therapy. We retrospectively studied 21 obese insulin-treated type 2 diabetic patients with deficient metabolic control (HbA1c 9.2 +/- 1.2%) who were treated with metformin for a minimum of 8 months. After 4 months of treatment, a significant decrease in the percentage of HbA1c was observed (delta HbA1c -1.07 +/- 1.12%; p < 0.01), with maintained values since then. Non changes in body weight or insulin requirement were noted. Our results suggest that the addition of metformin to insulin treatment is a safe and effective strategy for the improvement of glycemic control among obese type 2 diabetic patients. 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 assess in a randomized crossover trial the efficacy of continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion in improving glycemic control and health-related quality of life in type 1 diabetic patients with long-standing poor glycemic control.
                A total of 79 patients in 11 Dutch centers were randomized to 16 weeks of continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion followed by 16 weeks intensive injection therapy or the reverse order. Glycemic control was assessed by HbA(1c), self-reported hypoglycemic events, and blood glucose memory meter read outs. Changes in quality of life were assessed by self-report questionnaires administered at baseline and 16 weeks.
                As the drop-out rate after crossover was high (17 of 79 patients [22%]), we analyzed the trial as a parallel clinical trial, using data of the first half of the crossover phase only. At 16 weeks, mean HbA(1c) was 0.84% (95% CI -1.31 to -0.36) lower in the continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion group compared with the insulin injection group (P = 0.002). Stability of blood glucose self-measurement values, expressed as SD of the nine-point blood glucose profiles, improved in the insulin pump group by 29.3 +/- 41.1 vs. 8.2 +/- 36.5% in the injection group (P = 0.039). The number of mild hypoglycemic episodes per patient-week was 0.99 (95% CI 0.11-1.87) higher in the insulin pump group (P = 0.028). Weight gain was similar in both groups. Scores on the Short-Form 36-Item subscales 'general health' and 'mental health' improved in the continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion group, compared with stable values in the injection group (P = 0.048 and 0.050, respectively).
                Continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion improves glycemic control and some aspects of health-related quality of life in patients with a history of long-term poor glycemic control. Since ultralente insulin pharmacokinetics suggest faster absorption by human insulin when compared with bovine insulin using the subcutaneous route, the safety and efficacy of human ultralente in the outpatient setting was evaluated. Twenty type I patients participated in a randomized study using a crossover design of four six-week phases: (a) one daily injection of human ultralente; (b) two daily injections of human ultralente; (c) one daily injection of bovine ultralente and (d) two daily injections of bovine ultralente. Pre-meal human regular insulin was used with ultralente insulins and comprised 39 +/- 2% of the total daily insulin dose. Total and ultralente daily insulin doses were lower with human ultralente insulin (51.3 +/- 3.0 total and 30.9 +/- 3.4 ultra lente u/day) when compared to bovine ultralente insulin (57.8 +/- 4.4 and 36.1 +/- 4.4 u/day, p less than 0.01), yet the metabolic control achieved was virtually identical during both phases: (hemoglobin Alc 8.6 +/- 0.2% human vs. 8.4 +/- 0.4 bovine, p = NS). The frequency of mild hypoglycemia was 3.0 +/- 0.5 events per week vs 2.0 +/- 0.3 (p = NS). No severe hypoglycemia occurred. There were no differences between blood glucose daily profiles, insulin doses, hemoglobin Alc (8.6 +/- 0.4% BID vs. 8.4 +/- 0.3% QD injections) and occurrence of hypoglycemia between the single and two-dose long-acting regimens. These data indicate that long-acting semi-synthetic human insulin (a) can be effectively used as a once daily injection, (b) may be more biologically active than bovine, and (c) can be associated with safe and effective diabetes control. To compare the improvements in glycemic control associated with transitioning to insulin pump therapy in patients using continuous glucose monitoring versus standard blood glucose self-monitoring.
                The RealTrend study was a 6-month, randomized, parallel-group, two-arm, open-label study of 132 adults and children with uncontrolled type 1 diabetes (A1C >or=8%) being treated with multiple daily injections. One group was fitted with the Medtronic MiniMed Paradigm REAL-Time system (PRT group), an insulin pump with integrated continuous subcutaneous glucose monitoring (CGM) capability, with instructions to wear CGM sensors at least 70% of the time. Conventional insulin pump therapy was initiated in the other group (continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion [CSII] group). Outcome measures included A1C and glycemic variability.
                A total of 115 patients completed the study. Between baseline and trial end, A1C improved significantly in both groups (PRT group -0.81 +/- 1.09%, P < 0.001; CSII group -0.57 +/- 0.94%, P < 0.001), with no significant difference between groups. When the 91 patients who were fully protocol-compliant (including CGM sensor wear >or=70% of the time) were considered, A1C improvement was significantly greater in the PRT group (P = 0.004) (PRT group -0.96 +/- 0.93%, P < 0.001; CSII group -0.55 +/- 0.93%, P < 0.001). Hyperglycemia parameters decreased in line with improvements in A1C with no impact on hypoglycemia.
                CGM-enabled insulin pump therapy improves glycemia more than conventional pump therapy during the first 6 months of pump use in patients who wear CGM sensors at least 70% of the time. Macrosomia occurs in infants of diabetic mothers in spite of "nearly normal maternal blood glucose levels" with insulin treatment. Insulin antibodies may carry bound insulin into the fetal blood and thus may be associated with fetal hyperinsulinemia and macrosomia in these infants. Our objective was to test the hypothesis that human insulin is associated with lower insulin antibody levels and less macrosomia than is animal species insulin.
                Forty-three insulin-requiring pregnant (< 20 weeks' gestation) women, previously treated with animal insulin, were randomized to human and animal insulins and studied at weeks 10 through 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, and 38, at delivery, and at 3 months post partum. Infant blood was drawn at delivery (cord) and at 1 day and 3 months post partum 1 hour after a glucose-amino acid challenge.
                Women receiving human insulin required significantly less insulin per kilogram of body weight and showed significant dampening of glucose excursions (p < 0.05 for each comparison). Infants born to mothers receiving human insulin weighed 2880 +/- 877 gm compared with 3340 +/- 598 gm for infants of women treated with animal insulin (p < 0.05). There was no difference in insulin antibody levels between groups for either mothers or infants. Infants born to mothers receiving human insulin had a 1 hour C-peptide level after the glucose-amino acid challenge at 3 months of age of 0.21 +/- 0.13 pmol/ml compared with 0.32 +/- 0.13 pmol/ml (p = 0.01).
                Administration of human insulin to pregnant diabetic women has a therapeutic advantage over animal insulin, with less maternal hyperglycemia or hypoglycemia, fewer larger-for-gestational-age infants, and less neonatal hyperinsulinemia. Our data do not support the hypothesis that maternal antibodies to insulin influence infant birth weight. To compare maternal glucose levels and neonatal outcome, achieved in women with gestational diabetes (GDM) receiving either regular insulin or insulin lispro, with those of a control group of non-diabetic pregnant women.
                We enrolled 49 pregnant women with GDM, randomly allocated to the treatment with either insulin lispro (n=25) or regular insulin (n=24), and 50 pregnant women with normal GCT, matched for age, parity, pre-pregnancy weight and BMI, who formed the control group. All the women were caucasian, non-obese, with a singleton pregnancy and delivered term live born infants. Women of both groups were requested to perform a blood glucose profile (consisting of nine determinations: fasting/pre-prandial, 1 and 2h post-prandial) every week from the time of diagnosis to 38 weeks (study subgroups) or every 2 weeks from 28 to 38 weeks' gestation (control group).
                Overall pre-prandial blood glucose values in diabetic women were significantly higher than those of controls; at the 1h post-prandial time point, blood glucose values of GDM women receiving insulin lispro were similar to those of controls, whereas in the regular group they were significantly higher. Overall, both the lispro and regular insulin obtained optimal metabolic control at the 2h post-prandial time point, although near-normal blood glucose levels 2h after lunch could be observed only in the lispro group. There were no statistically significant differences between the groups in neonatal outcome and anthropometric characteristics; however, the rate of infants with a cranial-thoracic circumference (CC/CT) ratio between the 10th and the 25th percentile was significantly higher in the group treated with regular insulin in comparison to the lispro and control groups.
                Fasting/pre-prandial and 1h post-prandial maternal blood glucose levels in non-diabetic pregnant women fell well below the currently accepted criteria of glycemic normality in diabetic pregnancies. In women with GDM, the use of insulin lispro enabled the attainment of near-normal glucose levels at the 1h post-prandial time point and was associated with normal anthropometric characteristics; the use of regular insulin was not able to blunt the 1h peak post-prandial response to a near-normal extent and resulted in infants with a tendency toward the disproportionate growth. Insulin lispro can be regarded as a valuable option for the treatment of gestational diabetes. In a previous study, we found observational evidence of improvement in beta-cell function when rosiglitazone was added to a failing oral antihyperglycemic regimen consisting of sulfonylureas and metformin. To confirm our previous observations, we designed and performed a prospective, randomized, and controlled study.
                A total of 17 subjects with type 2 diabetes, inadequately controlled on a maximized oral antihyperglycemic double regimen of glimepiride and metformin, were randomized to the addition of rosiglitazone or insulin to their treatment regimens for a period of 6 months. At baseline and at 6 months, the following were performed: measurement of fasting plasma glucose, fasting proinsulin, and insulin levels; frequently sampled intravenous glucose tolerance test; and glucagon stimulation test for C-peptide.
                Nine subjects were randomized to the addition of 8 mg rosiglitazone, and eight subjects were randomized to the addition of one injection of insulin (premixed 70/30) before their evening meal. The treatment groups were well matched for age, duration of diabetes, and BMI. Most important, the HbA(1c) was well matched between groups before treatment (8.7 +/- 0.3 and 9.0 +/- 0.3%; NS) and at the end of the 6 months (7.8 +/- 0.5 and 7.8 +/- 0.3%; NS). After 6 months, at the end of the study, there was a significant improvement in acute insulin response to glucose in the rosiglitazone group (+15.3 microIU x ml(-1) x 10 min(-1); P < 0.001) that led to an increase in the disposition index from 0.18 at baseline to 4.18 at 6 months (P = 0.02). Furthermore, at the end of the study, the proinsulin-to-insulin ratio had decreased in the rosiglitazone group by 36% (P = 0.03) but did not change significantly in the insulin treatment group.
                Rosiglitazone, but not insulin, induced a recovery of pancreatic beta-cell function, as evidenced by the restoration of the first-phase insulin response to glucose, improvement in the disposition index, and a decrease in the proinsulin-to-insulin ratio in subjects with type 2 diabetes in whom oral antihyperglycemic therapy failed. This improvement was independent of the correction of glucotoxicity. Comparison of the effectiveness of combined therapy vs. an insulin regimen in NIDDM patients with secondary failure of oral hypoglycemic agents. RESEARCH DESIGN, PATIENTS AND METHODS: 27 NIDDM patients were randomly allocated to Group A (n = 14, insulin) and Group B (n = 13, insulin and sulfonylurea) with crossover after 3 months. After the next 3 months a decision was made about the further treatment according to the metabolic control. The patients were then treated for another year with the more successful regimen. Metabolic control, residual beta-cell secretory capacity, degree of peripheral insulin resistance (clamp) and insulin dose were followed during the whole study.
                (median, interquartile range, in brackets; *, statistically significant difference at P < 0.05): the combined therapy was better than insulin alone in 2/3 of patients. Glycemic control was better (HbA1c at 3 months: Group A = 7.9(1.1)% vs. Group B = 7.0(0.5)%*; HbA1c at 6 months: Group A = 7.4(1.5)% vs. Group B = 8.1(1.5)%. Insulin dose was lower during the combined therapy in the first 3 months: Group A = 0.62(0.18) U/kg body weight vs. Group B = 0.39(0.16) U/kg body weight*. Combined treatment was associated with increased C-peptide excretion both fasting and postprandially. No significant differences in peripheral insulin resistance were noted between the two groups. The combined treatment remained successful even after one year. The two groups of patients with different effective treatment did not differ significantly in any of the observed parameters.
                the combined therapy was more effective than insulin alone. Its favourable effect persisted after treatment for a year. It seems better to start the treatment of the oral failure with combined therapy compared with insulin first and later followed by combined therapy. On the basis of the observed parameters it is impossible to determine in advance which kind of treatment is more suitable for the individual patient. 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 efficacy of the insulin analogs now available for multiple daily injection (MDI) and continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) therapy in type 1 diabetes has not yet been established in pediatric patients. Our principal aim in this short-term study was to compare the efficacy of CSII to MDI with glargine in lowering HbA(1c) levels in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes.
                Thirty-two youth with type 1 diabetes (age 8-21 years) were randomly assigned to receive either MDI treatment with once-daily glargine and premeal/snack insulin aspart or CSII with insulin aspart. Dose titration in both groups was based on home self-monitored blood glucose measurements and monthly HbA(1c). HbA(1c), total daily insulin dose (TDD), self-monitored blood glucose readings, and adverse events were compared after 16 weeks of therapy.
                While there was no significant change in the glargine group (HbA(1c) 8.2% at baseline vs. 8.1% at 16 weeks), youth randomized to CSII had a sharp reduction in HbA(1c) levels, from 8.1 to 7.2% after 16 weeks of therapy (P < 0.02 vs. baseline and <0.05 vs. glargine group). TDD was unchanged in the glargine group, but significantly dropped with CSII (1.4 units/kg at baseline vs. 0.9 units/kg at 16 weeks, P < 0.01). Both groups had similar basal doses and insulin-to-carbohydrate ratios. Fasting self-monitored blood glucose was similar in both groups, but lunch, dinner, and bedtime readings were significantly lower in the CSII group (P < 0.01).
                Lower HbA(1c) and premeal glucose levels were more achievable in this short-term study with CSII than with glargine-based MDI treatment. CSII is an efficacious treatment to improve metabolic control in youth with type 1 diabetes. This trial compared the efficacy and safety profiles of the insulin analogues detemir and glargine as the basal insulin component of a basal-bolus regimen in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) who were being treated with oral antidiabetic drugs (OADs) or insulin with or without OADs.
                This was a multinational, 52-week, openlabel, parallel-group, noninferiority, treat-to-target trial. Patients with a diagnosis of T2DM for > or = 12 months who had been receiving an OAD or insulin, with or without OADs, for > 4 months were randomized in a 2:1 ratio to receive detemir or glargine. According to the approved labeling, detemir could be administered once or twice daily, and glargine was administered once daily. Insulin aspart was given at mealtimes. Insulin secretagogues and a-glucosidase inhibitors were discontinued at study entry, and existing OADs were continued. Doses of detemir and glargine were titrated to achieve a prebreakfast (and predinner for detemir administered twice daily) plasma glucose target of < or = 6.0 mmol/L. Patients monitored their plasma glucose levels before breakfast and dinner on the 3 days before each of 13 scheduled visits, recorded their insulin doses on 1 of these 3 days, and recorded their 10-point self-monitored plasma glucose (SMPG) at baseline and after 24 and 52 weeks. The primary efficacy end point was glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA(1c)) at 52 weeks; secondary efficacy end points included changes in fasting plasma glucose (FPG), postprandial plasma glucose, insulin doses, and weight change at 52 weeks. Safety end points included the frequency of hypoglycemia and adverse events (AEs).
                The intention-to-treat population included 319 patients (58.0% male, 42.0% female; 78.4% white; mean age, 58 years; mean weight, 92.8 kg; mean duration of diabetes, 13.6 years). At study entry, 46.1% of patients were receiving insulin and > or = 1 OAD, 35.4 were receiving insulin only, and 18.5% were receiving > or = 1 OAD only. At 52 weeks, there was no significant difference between detemir and glargine in terms of mean HbA(1c) (7.19% and 7.03%, respectively; mean difference, 0.17% [95% CI, -0.07 to 0.40]) or the mean decrease in HbAlc from baseline (-1.52% and -1.68%). The reduction in HbA(1c) was not significantly affected by whether detemir was administered once or twice daily. There were no significant differences between groups in terms of mean FPG (7.05 and 6.68 mmol/L) or the mean change in FPG from baseline (-2.56 and -2.92 mmol/L; mean difference, 0.36; 95% CI, -0.26 to 0.99). The overall shape of the 10-point SMPG profiles was not significantly different between groups. Mean weight gain at 52 weeks was significantly lower with detemir than with glargine (2.8 vs 3.8 kg; mean difference, -1.04; 95% CI, -2.08 to -0.01; P < 0.05). Doses of basal and prandial insulins at the end of the study were not significantly different between groups. Major hypoglycemic episodes were reported by 4.7% and 5.7% of patients in the respective treatment groups. There was no significant difference in the risk of hypoglycemia between groups. The proportion of patients with AEs and the number of AEs per patient were comparable between groups (185/214 patients [86.4%] reporting 743 AEs and 88/105 patients [83.8%] reporting 377 AEs).
                when used as indicated as part of a basal-bolus regimen in patients with T2DM who had previously received other insulin and/or OAD regimens, detemir was noninferior to glargine in its effects on overall glycemic control. Both basal insulins were associated with clinically relevant reductions in hyperglycemia. Both were well tolerated, with no significant difference in the frequency of hypoglycemia or AEs. Sixty-six patients with secondary failure to oral hypoglycaemic therapy were assessed in hospital, and those whose fasting blood glucose concentration was greater than or equal to 10.0 mmol l-1 were treated with insulin once a day for 6 months. Only 22 patients fulfilled this criterion, and they were randomly allocated to a daily injection of either Humulin-Zn (12 patients) or Neulente insulin (10 patients). The remaining patients were considered to be noncompliant with therapy. At the end of 6 months' insulin therapy a significant (p less than 0.05) improvement occurred in HbA1c from a median (range) of 13.2(9.8-16.4)% and 13.1(10.5-16.2)% to 10.6(8-14.2)% and 11.2(8.7-13.5)% in patients given Humulin-Zn and Neulente, respectively. However, there were 46 episodes of hypoglycaemia reported by patients who received Humulin-Zn, 36 of which occurred between 0300 and 0600 h. Only four episodes were reported by the Neulente-treated group. In addition, six patients treated with Humulin-Zn (but only one patient on Neulente insulin) required the addition of short-acting insulin. The patients not treated with insulin showed a significant (p less than 0.05) improvement in blood glucose control 2 months after in-patient assessment but this improvement was not sustained to 6 months. This study aims to compare the effectiveness and immunogenicity of semisynthetic human insulin (NOVO) and highly purified (monocomponent) porcine insulin over a 12 month period in 16 non-insulin-dependent diabetic subjects not previously exposed to insulin. Sixteen patients were randomly allocated for treatment with either human (n = 9) or monocomponent porcine (n = 7) insulin in a double-blind trial. Both groups were identical with respect to age, sex and measures of metabolic control. Significant insulin antibody was detected in seven of the nine patients (78%) 3 months after the commencement of human insulin therapy whereas it was detected in all patients (100%) in the group treated with monocomponent porcine insulin as early as 2 months after insulin therapy. Besides the delayed rise of insulin antibodies during the first 3 months of human insulin therapy, it tended to have a lower mean insulin antibody titer, though statistically insignificant, at the end of the study. No adverse reaction to either type of insulins was noted. It is concluded that both semisynthetic human and monocomponent porcine insulin were safe and effective. Although human insulin showed a slightly lower immunogenicity than monocomponent porcine insulin of the same formulation and purities, it was not non-immunogenic. Hence, there is no reason to treat all insulin-requiring diabetic subjects with human insulin except those who have developed insulin allergy or those at risk or with a history of allergy. This randomized controlled trial assesses the effect on glycemic control of continuous glucose monitoring system (CGMS)-guided insulin therapy adjustment in young people with type 1 diabetes on intensive diabetes treatment regimens with continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) or glargine.
                Pediatric subjects were recruited if they had an HbA(1c) (A1C) <10% and had been on CSII or glargine for at least 3 months. Thirty-six subjects were randomized to insulin adjustment on the basis of 72 h of CGMS every 3 weeks or intermittent self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) for 3 months. A1C and fructosamine were measured at baseline and 6 and 12 weeks. Follow-up A1C was measured at 6 months. Mean baseline A1C was 8.2% (n = 19) in the CGMS group and 7.9% (n = 17) in the control group.
                There was a significant improvement in A1C from baseline values in both groups, but there was no difference in the degree of improvement in A1C at 12 weeks between the CGMS (-0.4% [95% CI -0.7 to -0.1]) and the control group (-0.4% [-0.8 to 0.2]). In the CGMS group, improved A1C was at the cost of increased duration of hypoglycemia.
                CGMS is no more useful than intermittent fingerstick SMBG and frequent review in improving diabetes control in reasonably well-controlled patients on near-physiological insulin regimens when used in an outpatient clinic setting. Tardive dyskinesia (TD) induced by antipsychotic drugs represents a great concern for patients and psychiatrists. Considering its pathophysiological mechanisms, there exists a convergence towards the development of postsynaptic dopaminergic hypersensitivity as a possible cause of TD. Hypersensitivity following receptor blockade is the consequence of an increased number of receptors and such a synthesis is energy-dependent. In the brain, under normal conditions, energy is almost exclusively provided by glucose utilization. We thus hypothesized that, if glucose availability were reduced, the metabolically hyperactive structures should represent the best functional target of a reduction in fuel availability. Twenty chronic schizophrenic outpatients (13 males, 7 females), aged 20-67 (mean: 38.3), accepted to participate in this double-blind, placebo-controlled study. They were randomly assigned to either the insulin treatment group (10 patients) or to the insulin-placebo group (10 patients). They received a subcutaneous injection of 10 units of standard insulin or placebo at 10 a.m. From day 1 to day 15, injections were performed daily and, thereafter, every other week for 5 weeks totalizing 20 injections in 90 days. At day 7, the insulin treatment group showed a sharp decrease in the intensity of TD symptoms which persisted throughout the duration of the study. By contrast, no change in TD symptomatology was observed in the insulin-placebo-treated group. Although a direct effect on DA neurones, or at least the participation of such an effect, cannot be excluded, our data favor a role of decreased glucose availability in reversing receptor hypersensitivity. To determine whether a continuous insulin infusion improves glucose tolerance in extremely low birth weight infants, we conducted a prospective, randomized trial in 24 neonates 4 to 14 days old (mean birth weight 772.9 +/- 128 gm; mean gestational age 26.3 +/- 1.6 weeks). Infants who had glucose intolerance were randomly assigned to receive either intravenous glucose and total parenteral nutrition with insulin through a microliter-sensitive pump or standard intravenous therapy alone. One infant assigned to receive insulin never required it. The groups were similar in birth weight, gestational age, race, gender, medical condition, and energy intake before the study. The mean duration of therapy was 14.6 days (range 7 to 21 days). During the study, the 11 insulin-treated infants tolerated higher glucose infusion rates (20.1 +/- 2.5 vs 13.2 +/- 3.2 mg/kg/min (1.1 +/- 0.1 vs 0.7 +/- 0.2 mmol/L); p less than 0.01), had greater nonprotein energy intake (124.7 +/- 18 vs 86.0 +/- 6 kcal/kg/day; p less than 0.01), and had better weight gain (20.1 +/- 12.1 vs 7.8 +/- 5.1 gm/kg/day; p less than 0.01) than the 12 control infants. The incidence of hypoglycemia, electrolyte imbalance, chronic lung disease, and death did not differ between groups. We conclude that a controlled insulin infusion improves and sustains glucose tolerance, facilitates provision of calories, and enhances weight gain in glucose-intolerant premature infants. The long-term efficacy of combined insulin-glibenclamide treatment was investigated in 79 secondary drug failure patients by means of a double-blind, randomized placebo-controlled study. During a one-year follow-up period the patients on insulin plus glibenclamide required significantly lower exogenous insulin doses. Coincidentally, C-peptide concentrations were significantly raised in the verum versus the placebo group. Additionally, the administration of glibenclamide resulted in a decreased level of hyperglycaemia during the first six months of the observation period. Glibenclamide withdrawal after six and again after twelve months of the combined therapy provoked a deterioration of glycaemic control, as well as a lowering of the C-peptide concentrations. The findings demonstrate a prolonged beneficial effect of the combined treatment, in contrast to the solely short-term effects predicted by numerous studies. The metabolic improvement must be ascribed in part to the beta-cytotropic effect of glibenclamide. Extrapancreatic pathways via receptor/postreceptor mechanisms cannot be excluded. Lifestyle interventions reduce the incidence of type 2 diabetes among individuals with impaired glucose tolerance (IGT). However, it is unknown whether this is due to improved insulin sensitivity or insulin secretion. We investigated at baseline insulin sensitivity and insulin secretion applying frequently sampled intravenous glucose tolerance test (FSIGT) in 87 of 101 obese middle-aged subjects with IGT randomized into an intervention or a control group in the Finnish Diabetes Prevention Study. FSIGT was repeated after 4 years in 52 people. There were no significant differences in any of the baseline anthropometric or metabolic characteristics between the groups. The 4-year weight and waist circumference decreases were greater in the intervention than in the control group (P = 0.043 and P = 0.025, respectively). At 4-year examination, insulin sensitivity (Si) tended to be higher in the intervention group (the difference between the mean values 36%; P = 0.067, and P = 0.136 after adjustment for age, sex, BMI, and baseline Si value). There was strong correlation between the 4-year changes in Si and weight (r = -0.628 and r = -0.710, for intervention and control groups; P < 0.001 for both). In the entire group, Si improved by 64% in the highest tertile of weight loss but deteriorated by 24% in those who gained weight (lowest tertile). Acute insulin response declined significantly in the control group. In conclusion, Si markedly improved by weight reduction during the 4-year follow-up of individuals with IGT. Insulin secretion remained constant for years in individuals with IGT who were able to lose weight. Diabetic patients taking insulin often have suboptimal glucose control, and standard methods of health care delivery are ineffective in improving such control. This study was undertaken to determine if insulin adjustment according to advice provided by telephone by a diabetes nurse educator could lead to better glucose control, as indicated by level of glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c).
                The authors conducted a prospective randomized trial involving 46 insulin-requiring diabetic patients who had poor glucose control (HbA1c of 0.085 or more). Eligible patients were those already taking insulin and receiving endocrinologist-directed care through a diabetes centre and whose most recent HbA1c level was 0.085 or higher. The patients were randomly assigned to receive standard care or to have regular telephone contact with a diabetes nurse educator for advice about adjustment of insulin therapy.
                At baseline there was no statistically significant difference between the 2 groups in terms of HbA1c level (mean [and standard deviation] for standard-care group 0.094 [0.008] and for intervention group 0.096 [0.010]), age, sex, type or duration of diabetes, duration of insulin therapy or complications. After 6 months, the mean HbA1c level in the standard-care group was 0.089 (0.010), which was not significantly different from the mean level at baseline. However, the mean HbA1c level in the intervention group had fallen to 0.078 (0.008), which was significantly lower than both the level at baseline for that group (p < 0.001) and the level for the standard-care group at 6 months (p < 0.01).
                Insulin adjustment according to advice from a diabetes nurse educator is an effective method of improving glucose control in insulin-requiring diabetic patients. To determine whether insulin-sensitizing drugs would improve ovulation and T levels in women with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS), without clinical or biochemical criteria indicating insulin resistance and whether the combination of two distinct insulin-sensitizing drugs would be of any benefit over either drug alone.
                Randomized controlled double-blind trial.
                A referral center in Caracas, Venezuela.
                One hundred twenty-eight nonobese PCOS women with normal indices of insulin sensitivity-that is, normal glucose tolerance, fasting insulin, peak insulin during an oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT), and fasting glucose-to-insulin ratio. Twenty-eight women were lost to follow-up initially and did not receive any intervention.
                One hundred women received twice daily one of the following for 6 months: metformin (850 mg), rosiglitazone (4 mg), combination of both drugs, or at least one placebo.
                Frequencies of ovulation and serum free T after 6 months.
                Frequencies of ovulation were higher after treatment with an insulin-sensitizing drug (ovulations per subject in 6 months: metformin, 3.3; rosiglitazone, 2.4; and combination, 3.4) than with placebo (0.4). Ovulatory frequencies increased significantly more with metformin than rosiglitazone, and the combination was not more potent. After treatment, serum free-T levels were comparable among all active treatment groups (metformin: 2.34 pg/mL, rosiglitazone: 3.06 pg/mL, and combination: 2.39 pg/mL) and were significantly lower than in the placebo group (7.26 pg/mL). Compared with placebo, fasting insulin levels, area under the insulin curve during OGTT, the homeostatic model assessment of insulin sensitivity, and OGTT-derived insulin sensitivity index improved significantly after metformin or combination therapies but not after rosiglitazone.
                These findings suggest that insulin-sensitizing drugs increase ovulatory frequency and ameliorate hyperandrogenemia, even in nonobese women with PCOS who appear to have normal insulin sensitivity. Studies involving adults and children being treated in intensive care units indicate that insulin therapy and glucose control may influence survival. Hyperglycemia in very-low-birth-weight infants is also associated with morbidity and mortality. This international randomized, controlled trial aimed to determine whether early insulin replacement reduced hyperglycemia and affected outcomes in such neonates.
                In this multicenter trial, we assigned 195 infants to continuous infusion of insulin at a dose of 0.05 U per kilogram of body weight per hour with 20% dextrose support and 194 to standard neonatal care on days 1 to 7. The efficacy of glucose control was assessed by continuous glucose monitoring. The primary outcome was mortality at the expected date of delivery. The study was discontinued early because of concerns about futility with regard to the primary outcome and potential harm.
                As compared with infants in the control group, infants in the early-insulin group had lower mean (+/-SD) glucose levels (6.2+/-1.4 vs. 6.7+/-2.2 mmol per liter [112+/-25 vs. 121+/-40 mg per deciliter], P=0.007). Fewer infants in the early-insulin group had hyperglycemia for more than 10% of the first week of life (21% vs. 33%, P=0.008). The early-insulin group had significantly more carbohydrate infused (51+/-13 vs. 43+/-10 kcal per kilogram per day, P<0.001) and less weight loss in the first week (standard-deviation score for change in weight, -0.55+/-0.52 vs. -0.70+/-0.47; P=0.006). More infants in the early-insulin group had episodes of hypoglycemia (defined as a blood glucose level of <2.6 mmol per liter [47 mg per deciliter] for >1 hour) (29% in the early-insulin group vs. 17% in the control group, P=0.005), and the increase in hypoglycemia was significant in infants with birth weights of more than 1 kg. There were no differences in the intention-to-treat analyses for the primary outcome (mortality at the expected date of delivery) and the secondary outcome (morbidity). In the intention-to-treat analysis, mortality at 28 days was higher in the early-insulin group than in the control group (P=0.04).
                Early insulin therapy offers little clinical benefit in very-low-birth-weight infants. It reduces hyperglycemia but may increase hypoglycemia (Current Controlled Trials number, ISRCTN78428828.)
                2008 Massachusetts Medical Society Recently developed technologies for the treatment of type 1 diabetes mellitus include a variety of pumps and pumps with glucose sensors.
                In this 1-year, multicenter, randomized, controlled trial, we compared the efficacy of sensor-augmented pump therapy (pump therapy) with that of a regimen of multiple daily insulin injections (injection therapy) in 485 patients (329 adults and 156 children) with inadequately controlled type 1 diabetes. Patients received recombinant insulin analogues and were supervised by expert clinical teams. The primary end point was the change from the baseline glycated hemoglobin level.
                At 1 year, the baseline mean glycated hemoglobin level (8.3% in the two study groups) had decreased to 7.5% in the pump-therapy group, as compared with 8.1% in the injection-therapy group (P<0.001). The proportion of patients who reached the glycated hemoglobin target (<7%) was greater in the pump-therapy group than in the injection-therapy group. The rate of severe hypoglycemia in the pump-therapy group (13.31 cases per 100 person-years) did not differ significantly from that in the injection-therapy group (13.48 per 100 person-years, P=0.58). There was no significant weight gain in either group.
                In both adults and children with inadequately controlled type 1 diabetes, sensor-augmented pump therapy resulted in significant improvement in glycated hemoglobin levels, as compared with injection therapy. A significantly greater proportion of both adults and children in the pump-therapy group than in the injection-therapy group reached the target glycated hemoglobin level. (Funded by Medtronic and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00417989.)
                2010 Massachusetts Medical Society 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. The efficacy and safety of metformin in the treatment of obese, non-insulin-dependent, diabetic subjects poorly controlled by insulin after secondary failure to respond to sulphonylureas has been investigated. Fifty insulin-treated, obese diabetics participated in this prospective, randomised double-blind six-month trial. After a four-week run-in period, during which all patients were given placebo (single-blind), patients were randomly assigned to continue to receive placebo or to active treatment with metformin. At six months, there was a relevant and significant improvement in glycaemic control in diabetics receiving the combined insulin-metformin treatment (decrease in glucose -4.1 mmol.l-1; glycosylated haemoglobin A1 decrease -1.84%). No significant changes were seen in diabetics receiving insulin and placebo. There was a significant decrease in blood lipids (trygliceride and cholesterol), an increase in HDL-cholesterol and a reduction in blood pressure in diabetics taking metformin. These positive findings were most marked in the 14 diabetics who experienced a good response to metformin (glucose profile < 10 mmol.l-1), and were less marked but still significant in the remaining 13 diabetics, whose response to therapy was not so good (glucose profile > 10 mmol.l-1). The fasting insulin level was significantly lower after six months of combined insulin-metformin treatment as shown by a 25% reduction in the daily dose of insulin (-21.6 U/day). Metformin was well tolerated by all diabetics.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS) 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 assess efficacy and tolerability of insulin detemir or NPH insulin added to oral therapy for type 2 diabetes in a treat-to-target titration protocol.
                Individuals (n = 476) with HbA(1c) (A1C) 7.5-10.0% were randomized to addition of twice-daily insulin detemir or NPH insulin in a parallel-group, multicenter trial. Over 24 weeks, insulin doses were titrated toward prebreakfast and predinner plasma glucose targets of < or =6.0 mmol/l (< or =108 mg/dl). Outcomes assessed included A1C, percentage achieving A1C < or =7.0%, risk of hypoglycemia, and body weight.
                At 24 weeks, A1C had decreased by 1.8 and 1.9% (from 8.6 to 6.8 and from 8.5 to 6.6%) for detemir and NPH, respectively (NS). In both groups, 70% of participants achieved an A1C </= 7.0%; [corrected] there was a trend towards [corrected] the proportion achieving this without hypoglycemia being [corrected] higher with insulin detemir than with NPH insulin (34% [corrected] vs. 25[corrected]%, P = 0.052[corrected]). Compared with NPH insulin, the risk for all hypoglycemia with insulin detemir was reduced by 47% (P < 0.001) and nocturnal hypoglycemia by 55% (P < 0.001). Mean weight gain was 1.2 kg with insulin detemir and 2.8 kg with NPH insulin (P < 0.001), and the difference in baseline-adjusted final weight was -1.58 (P < 0.001).
                Addition of basal insulin to oral drug therapy in people with suboptimal control of type 2 diabetes achieves guideline-recommended A1C values in most people with aggressive titration. Insulin detemir compared with NPH insulin achieves this with reduced hypoglycemia and less weight gain.
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.