Efficacy and safety of insulin detemir once daily in combination with sitagliptin and metformin: the TRANSITION randomized controlled trial.

AIM: The aim of this trial was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the combination of once-daily insulin detemir (IDet) and sitagliptin (SITA) versus SITA ± sulphonylurea (SU), both in combination with metformin (MET) in insulin-naive subjects. METHODS: In a 26-week, open-label, randomized, parallel-group study in type 2 diabetes, insulin-naive subjects concomitantly treated with MET ± second oral antidiabetic drug (OAD) were randomized 1 : 1 to IDet + SITA + MET or SITA + MET ± SU. All continued with MET treatment, and those treated with SU continued if randomized to SITA + MET ± SU. Efficacy endpoints included glycosylated haemoglobin (HbA1c), fasting plasma glucose (FPG), 9-point self-measured plasma glucose (SMPG), weight, body mass index (BMI). Safety endpoints included adverse events (AEs) and hypoglycaemia. RESULTS: Significantly higher reductions in HbA1c, FPG and SMPG were achieved with IDet + SITA + MET compared with SITA + MET ± SU. Estimated HbA1c decreased by 1.44% in the IDet + SITA + MET group versus 0.89% in SITA + MET ± SU, p < 0.001. FPG decreased by 3.7 mmol/l (66.3 mg/dl) versus 1.2 mmol/l (22.2 mg/dl), p < 0.001, respectively. Small decreases in weight and BMI were observed in both arms, with no significant differences. AEs were mild or moderate and were more common in the SITA + MET ± SU arm than in the IDet + SITA + MET arm. There was no major hypoglycaemia. Observed rates of hypoglycaemia were very low (1.3/1.7 episodes/patient year) in both arms. The subgroup treated with MET and SUs prior to the trial achieved similar results. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of once-daily IDet with SITA showed a clinically and significantly better improvement in glycaemic control than SITA in combination with or without SUs. Both regimens were associated with a low rate of hypoglycaemia and slight weight reduction.

No evidence of increased risk of malignancies in patients with diabetes treated with insulin detemir: a meta-analysis.

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: Recent epidemiological studies suggest that treatment with insulin glargine (A21Gly,B31Arg,B32Arg human insulin) may promote cancer growth. The present meta-analysis was performed to assess the risk of cancer during treatment with insulin detemir (B29Lys(epsilon-tetradecanoyl),desB30 human insulin), another long-acting insulin analogue. METHODS: This meta-analysis was performed in a population of 8,693 patients with type 1 or type 2 diabetes, who were included in Novo Nordisk-sponsored, randomised and controlled diabetes trials of at least 12 weeks in duration that compared insulin detemir with NPH insulin or insulin glargine. In a blinded manner, the adverse events with suspected treatment-emergent malignant tumours were obtained from these studies under three system-organ classes: 'Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (including cysts and polyps)', 'Neoplasm' and 'Surgical and medical procedures'. Conditional ORs were estimated applying both the Mantel-Haenzel and Peto methods to ensure robustness of results. RESULTS: Separate analyses were performed for trials comparing insulin detemir with NPH insulin and insulin detemir with insulin glargine. In the first analysis, 16 studies were included with a total of 3,983 patients treated with insulin detemir and 2,661 patients treated with NPH insulin. In the second analysis, five studies were included with a total of 1,219 patients treated with insulin detemir and 830 patients treated with insulin glargine. The estimated OR for a cancer diagnosis between NPH insulin and insulin detemir was statistically significantly >1, with the ratio favouring insulin detemir. There was a more than twofold higher cancer occurrence in the NPH insulin-treated population. For the insulin detemir comparison with insulin glargine, there was a non-significant difference in ORs in favour of insulin detemir. CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: In these randomised controlled diabetes trials, patients treated with insulin detemir had a lower or similar occurrence of a cancer diagnosis compared with patients treated with NPH insulin or insulin glargine, respectively.

Improved glycaemic control of thrice-daily biphasic insulin aspart compared with twice-daily biphasic human insulin; a randomized, open-label trial in patients with type 1 or type 2 diabetes.

AIM: This trial evaluated the potential for improving glycaemic control by intensifying a conventional twice-daily therapy with premixed human insulin (HI) to a thrice-daily regimen using premixed formulations of biphasic insulin aspart (BIAsp) in patients with type 1 or type 2 diabetes. METHODS: This was a multicentre, open-label, parallel group trial. After a 4-week run-in period, patients were randomized 1 : 1 to 16 weeks of treatment. A total of 748 patients were screened, 664 were exposed to trial drug and 604 completed the trial. RESULTS: Haemoglobin A(1c), the primary efficacy endpoint, was shown to be significantly lower for the BIAsp treatment group compared with the biphasic HI (BHI) 30 group [estimated mean difference: -0.32, 95% confidence interval (CI) (-0.48; -0.16), p = 0.0001]. The average blood glucose level was significantly lower in the BIAsp group [estimated mean difference: -0.79, 95% CI (-1.17; -0.40), p = 0.0001]. There were few major hypoglycaemic episodes, 11 in the BIAsp group and 7 in the BHI 30 group. Although intensification of insulin therapy with BIAsp three times a day was associated with a higher risk of minor hypoglycaemia (relative risk = 1.58, p = 0.0038), the overall rate of minor hypoglycaemia remained low with both the BIAsp and the BHI treatments (13.1 vs. 8.3 episodes/patient year respectively). Overall safety and patient satisfaction were similar with the two insulin therapies. CONCLUSIONS: This trial confirmed that a thrice-daily BIAsp regimen can safely be used to intensify treatment for patients inadequately controlled on twice-daily BHI. A treat-to-target trial is required to explore the full potential of the BIAsp regimens and evaluate their use as a viable alternative to intensification with a basal-bolus regimen.

Comparison of different procedures to identify probable cases of myocardial infarction and stroke in two Swedish prospective cohort studies using local and national routine registers.

In prospective cohort studies, person-time time is calculated from baseline until the first definite event occurs or until censoring. A way to correctly identify and date definite events when only routine registers are available is to retrieve all hospital discharge notes and death certificates with a diagnosis of probable event and perform a consecutive revision. It is important to detect all possible hospital stays as they may contain useful information for the revision study. Furthermore, loss to follow-up can be avoided by extending the retrieval outside the specific geographical area where the cohort was defined. The aims of this study were (i) to describe a comprehensive retrieval of probable myocardial infarctions (diagnosis with International Classification of Diseases 8th and 9th revisions codes 410-414) or stroke (codes 430-438), (ii) to quantify the relative efficiency of different local and national routine registers or their combination compared with the use of all available registers together, and (iii) to audit local and national registers by comparing their outcome at the county level. The study was performed in two prospective cohorts studies i.e., 'Men-born-1914' (n = 500) from Skåne (period 1982-1993), and Skara-1 (n = 683) from Skaraborg (period 1988-1994.). All available routine registers were linked to the cohorts. The use of all available routine registers improved retrieval of both individual and hospital stays with a discharge diagnosis of probable event and gave an enhanced basis for a future validation study. Local registers were not completely covered by the national register, but the accessible combination of national inpatient and mortality registers was an efficient alternative.