scholarly journals Insulin degludec/insulin aspart vs biphasic insulin aspart 30 twice daily in Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes: A randomized controlled trial

2016 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 210-217 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yukiko Onishi ◽  
Kenichi Yamada ◽  
Jeppe Zacho ◽  
Jan Ekelund ◽  
Yasuhiko Iwamoto
Keyword(s):  
Type 2 Diabetes ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trial ◽  
Insulin Aspart ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Japanese Patients ◽  
Insulin Degludec ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Biphasic Insulin ◽  
Biphasic Insulin Aspart 30

scholarly journals Comparison of a soluble co-formulation of insulin degludec/insulin aspart vs biphasic insulin aspart 30 in type 2 diabetes: a randomised trial

2012 ◽  
Vol 167 (2) ◽  
pp. 287-294 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leo Niskanen ◽  
Lawrence A Leiter ◽  
Edward Franek ◽  
Jianping Weng ◽  
Taner Damci ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Type 2 Diabetes ◽  
Insulin Aspart ◽  
Randomised Trial ◽  
Insulin Degludec ◽  
Treat To Target ◽  
Target Trial ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Biphasic Insulin ◽  
Biphasic Insulin Aspart 30

ObjectiveInsulin degludec/insulin aspart (IDegAsp) is a soluble co-formulation of insulin degludec (70%) and insulin aspart (IAsp: 30%). Here, we compare the efficacy and safety of IDegAsp, an alternative IDegAsp formulation (AF: containing 45% IAsp), and biphasic IAsp 30 (BIAsp 30).DesignSixteen-week, open-label, randomised, treat-to-target trial.MethodsInsulin-naive subjects with type 2 diabetes (18–75 years) and a HbA1c of 7–11% were randomised to twice-daily IDegAsp (n=61), AF (n=59) or BIAsp 30 (n=62), all in combination with metformin. Insulin was administered pre-breakfast and dinner (main evening meal) and titrated to pre-breakfast and pre-dinner plasma glucose (PG) targets of 4.0–6.0 mmol/l.ResultsMean HbA1c after 16 weeks was comparable for IDegAsp, AF and BIAsp 30 (6.7, 6.6 and 6.7% respectively). With IDegAsp, 67% of subjects achieved HbA1c <7.0% without confirmed hypoglycaemia in the last 4 weeks of treatment compared with 53% (AF) and 40% (BIAsp 30). Mean fasting PG was significantly lower for IDegAsp vs BIAsp 30 (treatment difference (TD): −0.99 mmol/l (95% confidence interval: −1.68; 0.29)) and AF vs BIAsp 30 (TD: −0.88 mmol/l (−1.58; −0.18)). A significant, 58% lower rate of confirmed hypoglycaemia was found for IDegAsp vs BIAsp 30 (rate ratio (RR): 0.42 (0.23; 0.75)); rates were similar for AF vs BIAsp 30 (RR: 0.92 (0.54; 1.57)). IDegAsp and AF had numerically lower rates of nocturnal confirmed hypoglycaemia vs BIAsp 30 (RR: 0.33 (0.09; 1.14) and 0.66 (0.22; 1.93) respectively).ConclusionsIDegAsp provided comparable overall glycaemic control to BIAsp 30 with a significantly lower rate of hypoglycaemia.

scholarly journals Comparison of Insulin Degludec/Insulin Aspart and Biphasic Insulin Aspart 30 in Uncontrolled, Insulin-Treated Type 2 Diabetes: A Phase 3a, Randomized, Treat-to-Target Trial

Diabetes Care ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 37 (8) ◽  
pp. 2084-2090 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gregory R. Fulcher ◽  
Jens Sandahl Christiansen ◽  
Ganapathi Bantwal ◽  
Miroslawa Polaszewska-Muszynska ◽  
Henriette Mersebach ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Type 2 Diabetes ◽  
Insulin Aspart ◽  
Insulin Degludec ◽  
Treat To Target ◽  
Target Trial ◽  
Biphasic Insulin Aspart ◽  
Biphasic Insulin ◽  
Biphasic Insulin Aspart 30
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document