A review of the NG17 recommendations for the use of basal insulin in type 1 diabetes.

AIMS: To revisit the data analysis used to inform National Institute of Health and Care Excellence (NICE) NG17 guidance for initiating basal insulin in adults with type 1 diabetes mellitus (diabetes). METHODS: We replicated the data, methodology and analysis used by NICE diabetes in the NG17 network meta-analysis (NMA). We expanded this data cohort to a more contemporary data set (extended 2017 NMA) and restricted the studies included to improve the robustness of the data set (restricted 2017 NMA) and in a post hoc analysis, changed the index comparator from neutral protamine Hagedorn (NPH) insulin twice daily to insulin detemir twice daily. RESULTS: The absolute changes in HbA1c were similar to those reported in the NG17. However, all 95% credible intervals for change in HbA1c point estimates crossed the line of null effect, except for detemir twice daily (in the NICE and extended 2017 NMAs) and NPH four times daily. In the detemir twice-daily centred post hoc analysis, the 95% credible intervals for change in HbA1c crossed the line of null effect for all basal therapies, except NPH. CONCLUSIONS: In NG17, comparisons of basal insulins were based solely on efficacy of glycaemic control. Many of the trials used in this analysis were treat-to-target, which minimize differences in HbA1c . In the NMAs, statistical significance was severely undermined by the wide credible intervals. Despite these limitations, point estimates of HbA1c were used to rank the insulins and formed the basis of NG17 guidance. This study queries whether such analyses should be used to make specific clinical recommendations.

A multicentre, UK, retrospective, observational study to assess the effectiveness of insulin glargine 300 units/ml in treating people with Type 1 diabetes mellitus in routine clinical practice (SPARTA).

AIM: To conduct an open-label study to provide UK real-world evidence regarding the use of insulin glargine 300 units/ml (U300) in people with Type 1 diabetes mellitus. METHODS: People with Type 1 diabetes who had been prescribed U300 ≥6 months before data collection and had HbA1c levels recorded within 3 months prior to U300 (baseline) were included. The primary endpoint was change in HbA1c from baseline to month 6 after U300 initiation. Other endpoints included number of documented hypoglycaemic and diabetic ketoacidosis episodes, and change in daily basal insulin dose. RESULTS: A total of 298 people with Type 1 diabetes were included [mean age 42.1 years, mean HbA1c 79 mmol/mol (9.4%)]. After U300 initiation, the mean reduction in HbA1c from baseline to month 6 was -4 mmol/mol (-0.4%; P<0.001; n=188). The total daily basal insulin dose at 6 months was 1.3 units higher than at the time of U300 initiation (P<0.001; n=275) but was not significantly different from the prior basal insulin dose. There was no clinically significant difference in weight between baseline and month 6 [mean difference +0.7 kg, 95% CI -0.1, 1.5; P=0.084; n=115). During the 6 months before and after U300 initiation, severe hypoglycaemic episodes were documented for 6/298 and 4/298 participants. Diabetic ketoacidosis episodes requiring Accident and Emergency department visits or hospitalization were documented for 4/298 and 6/298 participants, before and after U300 initiation, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In people with Type 1 diabetes, a change in basal insulin to U300 was associated with clinically and statistically significant HbA1c improvements, without significant changes in basal insulin dose and weight. Documented severe hypoglycaemia episodes and diabetic ketoacidosis requiring Accident and Emergency department visits or hospitalization were low and similar before and after U300 initiation.