The Effect of Insulin Degludec Versus Insulin Glargine U100 on Glucose Metrics Recorded During Continuous Glucose Monitoring in People With Type 1 Diabetes and Recurrent Nocturnal Severe Hypoglycemia.

AIM: Comparing continuous glucose monitoring (CGM)-recorded metrics during treatment with insulin degludec (IDeg) versus insulin glargine U100 (IGlar-100) in people with type 1 diabetes (T1D) and recurrent nocturnal severe hypoglycemia. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is a multicenter, two-year, randomized, crossover trial, including 149 adults with T1D and minimum one episode of nocturnal severe hypoglycemia within the last two years. Participants were randomized 1:1 to treatment with IDeg or IGlar-100 and given the option of six days of blinded CGM twice during each treatment. CGM traces were reviewed for the percentage of time-within-target glucose range (TIR), time-below-range (TBR), time-above-range (TAR), and coefficient of variation (CV). RESULTS: Seventy-four participants were included in the analysis. Differences between treatments were greatest during the night (23:00-06:59). Treatment with IGlar-100 resulted in 54.0% vs 49.0% with IDeg TIR (70-180 mg/dL) (estimated treatment difference [ETD]: -4.6%, 95% confidence interval [CI]: -9.1, -0.0, P = .049). TBR was lower with IDeg at level 1 (54-69 mg/dL) (ETD: -1.7% [95% CI: -2.9, -0.5], P < .05) and level 2 (<54 mg/dL) (ETD: -1.3% [95% CI: -2.1, -0.5], P = .001). TAR was higher with IDeg compared with IGlar-100 at level 1 (181-250 mg/dL) (ETD: 4.0% [95% CI: 0.8, 7.3], P < .05) and level 2 (> 250 mg/dL) (ETD: 4.0% [95% CI: 0.8, 7.2], P < .05). The mean CV was lower with IDeg than that with IGlar-100 (ETD: -3.4% [95% CI: -5.6, -1.2], P < .05). CONCLUSION: For people with T1D suffering from recurrent nocturnal severe hypoglycemia, treatment with IDeg, compared with IGlar-100, results in a lower TBR and CV during the night at the expense of more TAR.

Effect of insulin degludec versus insulin glargine U100 on nocturnal glycaemia assessed by plasma glucose profiles in people with type 1 diabetes prone to nocturnal severe hypoglycaemia.

AIM: To compare nocturnal glucose profiles according to hourly plasma glucose measurements during treatment with insulin degludec and insulin glargine U100 in a cohort of people with type 1 diabetes prone to nocturnal severe hypoglycaemia. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The HypoDeg trial is a 2-year investigator-initiated, randomized, controlled crossover trial in 149 participants randomized to treatment with insulin degludec and insulin glargine U100 for 12 months each. The 51 participants in this predefined substudy stayed at least one night in hospital during each treatment arm for plasma glucose samples to be taken. Endpoints were glucose profiles, including mean plasma glucose, glycaemic variability and risk of hypoglycaemia. RESULTS: There were no differences between treatments regarding mean plasma glucose. We saw a flatter glucose profile during insulin degludec compared with insulin glargine U100 treatment, which had a nadir at 4:00 AM, with a subsequent rise. During treatment with insulin degludec, the participants had lower glycaemic variability, with an estimated treatment difference of -4.3% (95% confidence interval [CI] -8.1 to -0.5; P < 0.05). Participants treated with insulin degludec were less likely to experience nocturnal hypoglycaemia below 3.0 mmol/L (hazard ratio 0.36 [95% CI 0.17-0.73; P < 0.05]). CONCLUSION: Based on nocturnal plasma glucose measurements, treatment with insulin degludec compared with insulin glargine U100 administered in the evening results in lower glycaemic variability and lower risk of nocturnal hypoglycaemia without differences in mean plasma glucose.

Continuous Glucose Monitoring-Recorded Hypoglycemia with Insulin Degludec or Insulin Glargine U100 in People with Type 1 Diabetes Prone to Nocturnal Severe Hypoglycemia.

Background and Aims: Nocturnal hypoglycemia is mainly a consequence of inappropriate basal insulin therapy in type 1 diabetes (T1D) and may compromise optimal glycemic control. Insulin degludec is associated with a lower risk of nocturnal hypoglycemia in T1D. As nocturnal hypoglycemia is often asymptomatic, we applied continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) to detect a more precise occurrence of nocturnal hypoglycemia in the HypoDeg trial, comparing insulin degludec with insulin glargine U100 in people with T1D and previous nocturnal severe hypoglycemia. Materials and Methods: In the HypoDeg trial, 149 people with T1D were included in an open-label randomized cross-over trial. Sixty-seven participants accepted optional participation in the predefined substudy of 4 × 6 days of blinded CGM requiring completion of at least one CGM period in each treatment arm. CGM data were reviewed for hypoglycemic events. Results: Treatment with insulin degludec resulted in a relative rate reduction (RRR) of 36% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 10%-54%; P < 0.05) in nocturnal CGM-recorded hypoglycemia (≤3.9 mmol/L), corresponding to an absolute rate reduction (ARR) of 0.85 events per person-week. In nocturnal CGM-recorded hypoglycemia (≤3.0 mmol/L), we found an RRR of 53% (95% CI: 36%-65%; P < 0.001), corresponding to an ARR of 0.75 events per person-week. At the lower detection limit of the CGM (≤2.2 mmol/L), treatment with insulin degludec resulted in a significant RRR of 58% (95% CI: 23%-77%; P = 0.005). The reductions were primarily due to significant RRRs in asymptomatic hypoglycemia. Conclusion: In people with T1D, prone to nocturnal severe hypoglycemia, insulin degludec compared with insulin glargine U100 significantly reduces nocturnal CGM-recorded hypoglycemia. www.clinicaltrials.gov (#NCT02192450).

Comparison of treatment with insulin degludec and glargine U100 in patients with type 1 diabetes prone to nocturnal severe hypoglycaemia: The HypoDeg randomized, controlled, open-label, crossover trial.

AIM: To investigate whether the long-acting insulin analogue insulin degludec compared with insulin glargine U100 reduces the risk of nocturnal symptomatic hypoglycaemia in patients with type 1 diabetes (T1D). METHODS: Adults with T1D and at least one episode of nocturnal severe hypoglycaemia during the last 2 years were included in a 2-year prospective, randomized, open, multicentre, crossover trial. A total of 149 patients were randomized 1:1 to basal-bolus therapy with insulin degludec and insulin aspart or insulin glargine U100 and insulin aspart. Each treatment period lasted 1 year and consisted of 3 months of run-in or crossover followed by 9 months of maintenance. The primary endpoint was the number of blindly adjudicated nocturnal symptomatic hypoglycaemic episodes. Secondary endpoints included the occurrence of severe hypoglycaemia. We analysed all endpoints by intention-to-treat. RESULTS: Treatment with insulin degludec resulted in a 28% (95% CI: 9%-43%; P = .02) relative rate reduction (RRR) of nocturnal symptomatic hypoglycaemia at level 1 (≤3.9 mmol/L), a 37% (95% CI: 16%-53%; P = .002) RRR at level 2 (≤3.0 mmol/L), and a 35% (95% CI: 1%-58%; P = .04) RRR in all-day severe hypoglycaemia compared with insulin glargine U100. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with T1D prone to nocturnal severe hypoglycaemia have lower rates of nocturnal symptomatic hypoglycaemia and all-day severe hypoglycaemia with insulin degludec compared with insulin glargine U100.

Prediction of carotid intima-media thickness and its relation to cardiovascular events in persons with type 2 diabetes.

AIMS: To investigate measures of carotid intima-media thickness (IMT) and conventional cardiovascular (CV) risk factors as predictors of future carotid IMT, and the prediction of CV events during follow-up based on measures of carotid IMT. METHODS: Observational longitudinal study including 230 persons with type 2 diabetes (T2D). RESULTS: Mean age at follow-up was 66.7 (SD 8.5) years, 30.5% were women and mean body mass index (BMI) was 31.8 (4.4) kg/m2. Carotid IMT was measured at baseline, after 18 months of intervention in the Copenhagen Insulin and Metformin Therapy (CIMT) trial and after a mean follow-up of 6.4 (1.0) years. Baseline carotid IMT, carotid IMT after 18 months' intervention, and CV risk factors (age, sex and baseline systolic blood pressure) gave the best prediction of carotid IMT (root mean-squared error of prediction of 0.106 and 95% prediction error probability interval of -0.160, 0.204). CONCLUSIONS: Measures of carotid IMT combined with CV risk factors at baseline predicts attained carotid IMT better than measures of carotid IMT or CV risk factors alone. Carotid IMT did not predict CV events, and the present results do not support the use of carotid IMT as a predictor of CV events in persons with T2D.

The effect of insulin degludec on risk of symptomatic nocturnal hypoglycaemia in adults with type 1 diabetes and high risk of nocturnal severe hypoglycaemia (the HypoDeg trial): study rationale and design.

BACKGROUND: Hypoglycaemia, especially nocturnal, remains the main limiting factor of achieving good glycaemic control in type 1 diabetes. The effect of first generation long-acting insulin analogues in reducing nocturnal hypoglycaemia is well documented in patient with type 1 diabetes. The effect of the newer long-acting insulin degludec on risk of nocturnal hypoglycaemia remains undocumented in patients with type 1 diabetes and recurrent severe nocturnal hypoglycaemia. The HypoDeg trial is designed to investigate whether insulin degludec in comparison with insulin glargine U100 is superior in limiting the occurrence of nocturnal hypoglycaemia in patients with recurrent nocturnal severe hypoglycaemia. This paper reports the study design of the HypoDeg trial. METHODS/DESIGN: A Danish investigator-initiated, prospective, randomised, open, blinded endpoint (PROBE), multicentre, two-year cross-over study investigating the effect of insulin degludec versus insulin glargine U100 on frequency of nocturnal hypoglycaemia in patients with type 1 diabetes and one or more episodes of nocturnal severe hypoglycaemia during the preceding two years as the major inclusion criteria. Patients are randomised (1:1) to basal therapy with insulin degludec or insulin glargine. Insulin aspart is used as bolus therapy in both treatment arms. DISCUSSION: In contrast to most other insulin studies the HypoDeg trial includes only patients at high risk of hypoglycaemia. The HypoDeg trial will compare treatment with insulin degludec to insulin glargine U100 in terms of risk of nocturnal hypoglycaemic episodes in patients with type 1 diabetes with the greatest potential to benefit from near-physiological insulin replacement therapy. www.clinicaltrials.gov : NCT02192450.

Cardiac ventricular sizes are reduced in patients with long-term, normoalbuminuric type 1 diabetes compared to the non-diabetic background population.

AIMS: Type 1 diabetes entails increased cardiovascular morbidity and cardiac chamber sizes are associated with cardiovascular disease. The aim of this study was to compare cardiac chamber sizes in normoalbuminuric persons with type 1 diabetes to a background population without diabetes. METHODS: In a cross-sectional study, we examined 71 normoalbuminuric persons with long-term type 1 diabetes without known cardiovascular disease using cardiac multi-detector computed tomography. Cardiac chamber sizes and left ventricular remodelling were compared to persons without diabetes from the Copenhagen General Population Study. RESULTS: Participants were median (interquartile range) 54 (48-60) (type 1 diabetes) and 57 (50-64) (without diabetes) years old and 59% were men (both groups). Participants with type 1 diabetes had smaller left ventricular mass (-3.5 g/m2, 95% confidence interval -5.8 to -1.3) and left (-4.0 mL/m2, 95% confidence interval -6.9 to -1.0) and right (-11.7 mL/m2, 95% confidence interval -15.4 to -7.9) ventricular volumes in multivariable analyses (adjusted for age, sex, body composition, blood pressure and antihypertensive medication), but no differences in atrial volumes. CONCLUSION: Persons with long-term type 1 diabetes had smaller left ventricular mass and biventricular volumes, yet similar atrial sizes, compared to a background population without diabetes. These findings may reflect subclinical development of diabetic cardiomyopathy.

Generalised arterial calcification in normoalbuminuric patients with type 1 diabetes with and without cardiovascular autonomic neuropathy.

BACKGROUND: Type 1 diabetes is associated with increased risk of cardiovascular disease and the diabetic complication cardiovascular autonomic neuropathy in itself entails increased cardiovascular risk by mechanisms not yet fully understood. Arterial calcification is an important predictor of cardiovascular events; the aim of this study was to investigate the level of generalised arterial calcification in patients with long-term, normoalbuminuric type 1 diabetes and the association with cardiovascular autonomic neuropathy, as these factors have not been investigated in type 1 diabetes. METHODS: Participants were examined for calcification of coronary and carotid arteries through non-contrast multi-detector computed tomography scans. Generalised arterial calcification was defined as the presence of calcium in both the coronary and carotid arteries. RESULTS: A total of 53 patients with type 1 diabetes were included. Coronary and carotid artery calcium scores were correlated ( r = 0.720, p < 0.0001). Cardiovascular autonomic neuropathy was associated with increased coronary ( p = 0.002) and carotid ( p = 0.001) artery calcium scores. Seventeen of 20 patients with cardiovascular autonomic neuropathy (85%) demonstrated generalised arterial calcification compared to 11 (33%) patients without cardiovascular autonomic neuropathy; patients with cardiovascular autonomic neuropathy had an odds ratio of 11.3 (95% confidence interval = 2.7-47.1, p < 0.001) for generalised arterial calcification. CONCLUSION: Cardiovascular autonomic neuropathy is associated with increased level of generalised arterial calcification in patients with normoalbuminuric, long-term type 1 diabetes.

Left ventricular remodelling and cardiac chamber sizes in long-term, normoalbuminuric type 1 diabetes patients with and without cardiovascular autonomic neuropathy.

AIMS: Type 1 diabetes is associated with increased cardiovascular (CV) morbidity and mortality, and cardiovascular autonomic neuropathy (CAN) is an important CV risk factor. The study aimed to explore associations between CAN and altered cardiac chamber sizes in persons with type 1 diabetes. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study of 71 asymptomatic, normoalbuminuric participants with long-term type 1 diabetes (39 with CAN, determined by >1 abnormal autonomic function test) examined with cardiac multi detector computed tomography scans, which allowed measurements of left ventricular mass and all four cardiac chamber volumes. Cardiac chambers were indexed according to body surface area (ml/m2 or g/m2). RESULTS: Persons with and without CAN had mean ±â€¯SD age of 57 ±â€¯7 and 50 ±â€¯8 years (p < 0.001) and diabetes duration of 36 ±â€¯11 and 32 ±â€¯9 years (p < 0.05), respectively. Increasing autonomic dysfunction, evaluated by decrease in heart rate variability during deep breathing (in beats per minute), was associated with larger right (-0.5, 95% CI -1.0 to -0.0, p < 0.05) and trend towards larger left (-0.4, 95% CI -0.8-0.0, p < 0.1) ventricular volumes in multivariable linear regression. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that impaired autonomic function may be associated with modest enlargement of ventricular volumes; this might be an early sign of progression towards heart failure.

Psychosocial interventions for reducing diabetes distress in vulnerable people with type 2 diabetes mellitus: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Diabetes distress (DD) disproportionately affects vulnerable people with type 2 diabetes mellitus and interventions targeting this population are therefore relevant. A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed to assess the evidence for an effect of psychosocial interventions for reducing DD, and, secondly HbA1c, depression, and health-related quality of life in vulnerable people with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Vulnerability encompasses poor glycemic control (HbA1c >7.5%) and at least one additional risk factor for poor diabetes outcomes such as low educational level, comorbidity, and risky lifestyle behavior. The interventions should be theoretically founded and include cognition- or emotion-focused elements. We systematically searched four databases for articles published between January 1995 and March 2018. Eighteen studies testing a variety of psychosocial interventions in 4,066 patients were included. We adhered to the Cochrane methodology and PRISMA guidelines. Review Manager 5.3 was used for data extraction and risk of bias assessment, and Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation for assessing the quality of the evidence. Data were pooled using the fixed or random effects method as appropriate. We investigated effects of individual vs group, intensive vs brief interventions, and interventions with and without motivational interviewing in subgroup analyses. To assess the robustness of effect estimates, sensitivity analyses excluding studies with high risk of bias and attrition >20% were conducted. We found low to moderate quality evidence for a significant small effect of psychosocial interventions on DD, and very low to moderate quality evidence for no effect on HbA1c, both outcomes assessed at 3, 6, 12, and 24 months follow-up. The effect on depression was small, while there was no effect on health-related quality of life. Exploratory subgroup analyses suggested that interventions using motivational interviewing and individual interventions were associated with incremental effects on DD. Likewise, intensive interventions were associated with significant reductions in both DD and HbA1c.

Possible early detection of coronary artery calcium progression in type 1 diabetes: A case-control study of normoalbuminuric type 1 diabetes patients and matched controls.

AIMS: Coronary artery calcium (CAC) is associated with cardiovascular (CV) disease and progression of CAC is an independent predictor of mortality. Type 1 diabetes is associated with increased CV risk, especially in persons with cardiovascular autonomic neuropathy (CAN). This study aimed to examine whether short-term progression of CAC is increased in persons with type 1 diabetes compared to matched controls and if CAN increases risk of CAC progression. METHODS: Fifty-three normoalbuminuric persons with long-term type 1 diabetes (20 with CAN) were matched in a 1:2 ratio with 106 controls without diabetes according to age, sex and baseline CAC. All were examined twice with cardiac computed tomography scans. Progression of CAC was defined as a value ≥2.5 between the square root-transformed values of follow-up and baseline CAC volume scores. RESULTS: The participants were examined median (interquartile range) of 25 (23-27) months (type 1 diabetes) and 29 (25-33) months (controls) apart. In multivariable logistic regression, participants with type 1 diabetes had an odds ratio of 3.3 (95% CI 1.3-8.2, p = 0.01) for CAC progression. CAN did not increase progression of CAC (p = 0.64). CONCLUSIONS: Progression of CAC was increased in well-treated, normoalbuminuric persons with type 1 diabetes compared to matched controls without diabetes, suggesting that type 1 diabetes is a risk factor for short-term progression. This finding could explain some of the increased morbidity and mortality observed in persons with type 1 diabetes, but it does not specifically explain the increased CV risk in persons with CAN.

Effect of Insulin Analogs on Frequency of Non-Severe Hypoglycemia in Patients with Type 1 Diabetes Prone to Severe Hypoglycemia: Much Higher Rates Detected by Continuous Glucose Monitoring than by Self-Monitoring of Blood Glucose-The HypoAna Trial.

BACKGROUND: Hypoglycemia is an increasingly important endpoint in clinical diabetes trials. The assessment of hypoglycemia should therefore be as complete as possible. Blinded continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) provides an improved opportunity to capture asymptomatic and nocturnal events. Here we report results from the HypoAna trial comparing all-analog-insulin therapy (aspart/detemir) with all-human-insulin therapy (neutral protamine Hagedorn/regular) on non-severe hypoglycemia (symptomatic and asymptomatic hypoglycemia) as assessed by blinded CGM and compared with data obtained by self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) in patients with type 1 diabetes and recurrent severe hypoglycemia. METHODS: Fifty-three patients completed a substudy of 4 × 3 days of blinded CGM. CGM traces were reviewed for hypoglycemic events lasting 15 min or longer. RESULTS: At the threshold ≤3.9 mmol/L, the per-protocol analysis demonstrated a 40% rate reduction (95% confidence interval [CI] 20%-60%; P = 0.002) in nocturnal non-severe hypoglycemia during analog treatment, mainly due to a 40% rate reduction (95% CI 0%-70%; P = 0.03) of nocturnal asymptomatic hypoglycemia. Similar nonsignificant trends were seen at the glucose threshold ≤3.0 mmol/L. Overall CGM-detected that nocturnal asymptomatic hypoglycemia ≤3.9 mmol/L was ∼17 times more frequent than SMBG-detected episodes (52 vs. 3 events/patient-year). This translates into a time needed to treat one patient with insulin analogs to prevent one episode that is 34 times shorter using CGM data than SMBG data (1.4 vs. 47 weeks). CONCLUSIONS: Capturing hypoglycemic events by the conventional method of SMBG in patients with impaired awareness reveals only a limited number of events. Blinded CGM can provide more complete data, particularly in terms of asymptomatic and nocturnal events.

The influence of diabetes distress on digital interventions for diabetes management in vulnerable people with type 2 diabetes: A qualitative study of patient perspectives.

BACKGROUND: Digital interventions for improving diabetes management in Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) are used universally. Digital interventions are defined as any intervention accessed and taking input from people with T2DM in the form of a web-based or mobile phone-based app to improve diabetes self-management. However, the current confidence in digital interventions threatens to augment social inequalities in health, also known as the "digital divide". To counteract dissemination of the digital divide, we aimed to assess the potential of a tailored digital intervention for improving diabetes management in vulnerable people with T2DM. METHODS: A qualitative design using semi-structured in-depth interviews to explore the perspectives of 12 vulnerable people with T2DM. Interviews were analyzed using inductive content analysis. Vulnerability was defined by the presence of one or more comorbidities, one or more lifestyle risk factors, poor diabetes management, low educational level and low health literacy. RESULTS: The main themes identified were: "Dealing with diabetes distress" characterized by psychological avoidance mechanisms; "Suffering informational confusion" dealing with inconsistent information; "Experiencing digital alienation" dealing with loss of freedom when technology invades the private sphere; and "Missing the human touch" preferring human interaction over digital contact. CONCLUSION: Vulnerable people with T2DM are unprepared for digital interventions for disease management. Experiencing diabetes distress may be an intermediate mechanism leading to nonadherence to digital interventions and the preference for human interaction in vulnerable people with T2DM. Future interventions could include a designated caregiver and an allocated buddy to provide support and assist uptake of digital interventions for diabetes management.

The potential for improvement of outcomes by personalized insulin treatment of type 1 diabetes as assessed by analysis of single-patient data from a randomized controlled cross-over insulin trial.

AIMS: The evidence for optimal insulin treatment in type 1 diabetes is mainly based on randomised controlled trials applying a parallel-group design. Such trials yield robust general results but crucial individual treatment effects cannot be extracted. We aimed to assess the potential for further improvement of outcomes by personalized insulin therapy by analyzing data from a cross-over trial at individual level. METHODS: Post hoc analysis of data from a two-year multicentre, prospective, randomised, open, blinded endpoint (PROBE) trial (the HypoAna trial). In a cross-over design 114 patients with type 1 diabetes and recurrent severe hypoglycemia were treated with basal-bolus therapy based on analog (detemir/aspart) or human (NPH/regular) insulin aiming at maintenance of baseline HbA1c levels. For each patient a superior outcome was defined as fewer events of severe hypoglycemia defined by need for third party treatment assistance or a more than 0.4% (4.4mmol/mol) lower HbA1c. RESULTS: Only one quarter had comparable outcome of the two treatments in terms of rate of severe hypoglycemia or HbA1c. Twice as many patients had superior outcome of analog-based as compared to human insulin-based insulin treatment. The rate of severe hypoglycemia with the superior treatment was lower compared to the rates obtained with analog insulin and with human insulin (0.67, 1.09, and 1.57 episode per patient-year, respectively (p<0.0001)). CONCLUSIONS: Personalized insulin treatment of type 1 diabetes based on single-patient evidence may improve outcomes significantly compared to a general treatment approach.

Nocturnal antihypertensive treatment in patients with type 1 diabetes with autonomic neuropathy and non-dipping: a randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind cross-over trial.

OBJECTIVES: Cardiovascular autonomic neuropathy (CAN) and abnormal circadian blood pressure (BP) rhythm are independent cardiovascular risk factors in patients with diabetes and associations between CAN, non-dipping of nocturnal BP and coronary artery disease have been demonstrated. We aimed to test if bedtime dosing (BD) versus morning dosing (MD) of the ACE inhibitor enalapril would affect the 24-hour BP profile in patients with type 1 diabetes (T1D), CAN and non-dipping. SETTING: Secondary healthcare unit in Copenhagen, Denmark. PARTICIPANTS: 24 normoalbuminuric patients with T1D with CAN and non-dipping were included, consisting of mixed gender and Caucasian origin. Mean±SD age, glycosylated haemoglobin and diabetes duration were 60±7 years, 7.9±0.7% (62±7 mmol/mol) and 36±11 years. INTERVENTIONS: In this randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind cross-over study, the patients were treated for 12 weeks with either MD (20 mg enalapril in the morning and placebo at bedtime) or BD (placebo in the morning and 20 mg enalapril at bedtime), followed by 12 weeks of switched treatment regimen. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcome was altered dipping of nocturnal BP. Secondary outcomes included a measurable effect on other cardiovascular risk factors than BP, including left ventricular function (LVF). RESULTS: Systolic BP dipping increased 2.4% (0.03-4.9%; p=0.048) with BD compared to MD of enalapril. There was no increase in mean arterial pressure dipping (2.2% (-0.1% to 4.5%; p=0.07)). No difference was found on measures of LVF (p≥0.15). No adverse events were registered during the study. CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrated that patients with T1D with CAN and non-dipping can be treated with an ACE inhibitor at night as BD as opposed to MD increased BP dipping, thereby diminishing the abnormal BP profile. The potentially beneficial effect on long-term cardiovascular risk remains to be determined. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: EudraCT2012-002136-90; Post-results.

Short-term cost-effectiveness of insulin detemir and insulin aspart in people with type 1 diabetes who are prone to recurrent severe hypoglycemia.

OBJECTIVE: Based on the data of the HypoAna trial (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00346996), a short-term cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted comparing an all insulin analogue regimen with an all human insulin regimen in people with type 1 diabetes who are prone to recurrent severe hypoglycemia. METHODS: Clinical data from the HypoAna trial and Danish cost data related to the treatment of severe hypoglycemia were used to populate a 1-year cost-effectiveness analysis. Hypoglycemia quality-of-life data were based on previously published utility values, used to calculate the quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) gained. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to test the robustness of the analysis. The main outcome measure was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). RESULTS: The insulin analogue regimen was associated with greater total costs compared with the human insulin regimen (20,418 DKK [1972 GBP] vs. 18,558 DKK [1793 GBP], respectively), primarily driven by the difference in insulin costs. Total costs for corrective actions for hypoglycemic events, however, were lower in the insulin analogue group (927 DKK [89 GBP]) compared with the human insulin group (1311 DKK [127 GBP]), primarily due to a lower event rate. QALYs were higher with insulin analogues vs. human insulin (difference 0.0672). The resulting ICER was 27,685 DKK (2674 GBP) per QALY gained, which is well below the generally accepted cost-effectiveness threshold. CONCLUSIONS: The analysis shows that treating people with type 1 diabetes who are prone to recurrent severe hypoglycemia with an insulin analogue regimen is cost-effective compared with a human insulin regimen.

Metformin versus placebo in combination with insulin analogues in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus-the randomised, blinded Copenhagen Insulin and Metformin Therapy (CIMT) trial.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the effect of metformin versus placebo both in combination with insulin analogue treatment on changes in carotid intima-media thickness (IMT) in patients with type 2 diabetes. DESIGN AND SETTING: Investigator-initiated, randomised, placebo-controlled trial with a 2 × 3 factorial design conducted at eight hospitals in Denmark. PARTICIPANTS AND INTERVENTIONS: 412 participants with type 2 diabetes (glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) ≥ 7.5% (≥ 58 mmol/mol); body mass index >25 kg/m2) were in addition to open-labelled insulin treatment randomly assigned 1:1 to 18 months blinded metformin (1 g twice daily) versus placebo, aiming at an HbA1c ≤ 7.0% (≤ 53 mmol/mol). OUTCOMES: The primary outcome was change in the mean carotid IMT (a marker of subclinical cardiovascular disease). HbA1c, insulin dose, weight and hypoglycaemic and serious adverse events were other prespecified outcomes. RESULTS: Change in the mean carotid IMT did not differ significantly between the groups (between-group difference 0.012 mm (95% CI -0.003 to 0.026), p=0.11). HbA1c was more reduced in the metformin group (between-group difference -0.42% (95% CI -0.62% to -0.23%), p<0.001)), despite the significantly lower insulin dose at end of trial in the metformin group (1.04 IU/kg (95% CI 0.94 to 1.15)) compared with placebo (1.36 IU/kg (95% CI 1.23 to 1.51), p<0.001). The metformin group gained less weight (between-group difference -2.6 kg (95% CI -3.3 to -1.8), p<0.001). The groups did not differ with regard to number of patients with severe or non-severe hypoglycaemic or other serious adverse events, but the metformin group had more non-severe hypoglycaemic episodes (4347 vs 3161, p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Metformin in combination with insulin did not reduce carotid IMT despite larger reduction in HbA1c, less weight gain, and smaller insulin dose compared with placebo plus insulin. However, the trial only reached 46% of the planned sample size and lack of power may therefore have affected our results. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT00657943; Results.

Effects of biphasic, basal-bolus or basal insulin analogue treatments on carotid intima-media thickness in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: the randomised Copenhagen Insulin and Metformin Therapy (CIMT) trial.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the effect of 3 insulin analogue regimens on change in carotid intima-media thickness (IMT) in patients with type 2 diabetes. DESIGN AND SETTING: Investigator-initiated, randomised, placebo-controlled trial with a 2 × 3 factorial design, conducted at 8 hospitals in Denmark. PARTICIPANTS AND INTERVENTIONS: Participants with type 2 diabetes (glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) ≥ 7.5% (≥ 58 mmol/mol), body mass index >25 kg/m(2)) were, in addition to metformin versus placebo, randomised to 18 months open-label biphasic insulin aspart 1-3 times daily (n=137) versus insulin aspart 3 times daily in combination with insulin detemir once daily (n=138) versus insulin detemir alone once daily (n=137), aiming at HbA1c ≤ 7.0% (≤ 53 mmol/mol). OUTCOMES: Primary outcome was change in mean carotid IMT (a marker of subclinical cardiovascular disease). HbA1c, insulin dose, weight, and hypoglycaemic and serious adverse events were other prespecified outcomes. RESULTS: Carotid IMT change did not differ between groups (biphasic -0.009 mm (95% CI -0.022 to 0.004), aspart+detemir 0.000 mm (95% CI -0.013 to 0.013), detemir -0.012 mm (95% CI -0.025 to 0.000)). HbA1c was more reduced with biphasic (-1.0% (95% CI -1.2 to -0.8)) compared with the aspart+detemir (-0.4% (95% CI -0.6 to -0.3)) and detemir (-0.3% (95% CI -0.4 to -0.1)) groups (p<0.001). Weight gain was higher in the biphasic (3.3 kg (95% CI 2.7 to 4.0) and aspart+detemir (3.2 kg (95% CI 2.6 to 3.9)) compared with the detemir group (1.9 kg (95% CI 1.3 to 2.6)). Insulin dose was higher with detemir (1.6 IU/kg/day (95% CI 1.4 to 1.8)) compared with biphasic (1.0 IU/kg/day (95% CI 0.9 to 1.1)) and aspart+detemir (1.1 IU/kg/day (95% CI 1.0 to 1.3)) (p<0.001). Number of participants with severe hypoglycaemia and serious adverse events did not differ. CONCLUSIONS: Carotid IMT change did not differ between 3 insulin regimens despite differences in HbA1c, weight gain and insulin doses. The trial only reached 46% of planned sample size and lack of power may therefore have affected our results. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT00657943.

Safety and Efficacy of Liraglutide in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes and End-Stage Renal Disease: An Investigator-Initiated, Placebo-Controlled, Double-Blind, Parallel-Group, Randomized Trial.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate parameters related to safety and efficacy of liraglutide in patients with type 2 diabetes and dialysis-dependent end-stage renal disease (ESRD). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Twenty-four patients with type 2 diabetes and ESRD and 23 control subjects with type 2 diabetes and normal kidney function were randomly allocated to 12 weeks of double-blind liraglutide (titrated to a maximum dose of 1.8 mg) or placebo treatment (1:1) injected subcutaneously once daily as add on to ongoing antidiabetic treatment. Dose-corrected plasma trough liraglutide concentration was evaluated at the final trial visit as the primary outcome measure using a linear mixed model. RESULTS: Twenty patients with ESRD (1:1 for liraglutide vs. placebo) and 20 control subjects (1:1) completed the study period. Dose-corrected plasma trough liraglutide concentration at the final visit was increased by 49% (95% CI 6-109, P = 0.02) in the group with ESRD compared with the control group. Initial and temporary nausea and vomiting occurred more frequently among liraglutide-treated patients with ESRD compared with control subjects (P < 0.04). Glycemic control tended to improve during the study period in both liraglutide-treated groups as assessed by daily blood glucose measurements (P < 0.01), and dose of baseline insulin was reduced in parallel (P < 0.04). Body weight was reduced in both liraglutide-treated groups (-2.4 ± 0.8 kg [mean ± SE] in the group with ESRD, P = 0.22; -2.9 ± 1.0 kg in the control group, P = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: Plasma liraglutide concentrations increased during treatment in patients with type 2 diabetes and ESRD, who experienced more gastrointestinal side effects. Reduced treatment doses and prolonged titration period may be advisable.

Efficacy and safety of liraglutide for overweight adult patients with type 1 diabetes and insufficient glycaemic control (Lira-1): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The combination of insulin and glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonist therapy improves glycaemic control, induces weight loss, and reduces insulin dose needed in type 2 diabetes. We assessed the efficacy and safety of the GLP-1 receptor agonist liraglutide as an add-on therapy to insulin for overweight adult patients with type 1 diabetes. METHODS: We did a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial at Steno Diabetes Center (Gentofte, Denmark). Patients aged 18 years or older with type 1 diabetes, insufficient glycaemic control (HbA1c >8% [64 mmol/mol]), and overweight (BMI >25 kg/m(2)) were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive insulin treatment plus either liraglutide or placebo (saline solution) by subcutaneous injection once per day. Randomisation was done in blocks of four. Treatment assignment was masked to investigators and patients. Treatment lasted 24 weeks and liraglutide was started at a dose of 0·6 mg per day, escalated to 1·2 mg per day after 1 week, and then again to 1·8 mg per day after another week. Intervals between dose increments could be extended at the discretion of the investigator. The primary endpoint was change in HbA1c from baseline to week 24. Secondary endpoints were changes in hypoglycaemic events, glycaemic variability, glycaemic excursions, insulin dose, bodyweight, postprandial plasma concentrations of glucagon and GLP-1, gastric emptying, blood pressure, heart rate, patient-reported outcome measures, time spent in hypoglycaemia, near-normoglycaemia, and hyperglycaemia, plasma fasting glucose, mean glucose, and cholesterol. Efficacy analyses were calculated by use of a mixed model, whereby a patient's data are used as long as the patient is in the study. The safety analyses were done in the intention-to-treat population, which consisted of all patients who received at least one dose of their randomly assigned study drug. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01612468. FINDINGS: Between July 10, 2012, and May 30, 2014, we enrolled 100 patients with type 1 diabetes, with 50 patients allocated liraglutide and 50 to placebo. Four patients from the liraglutide group and six patients from the placebo group discontinued treatment before 24 weeks. At the end of treatment, change in HbA1c from baseline did not differ between groups (-0·5%, 95% CI -0·8 to -0·4 [-6·0 mmol/mol, 95% CI -8·7 to -4·4] with liraglutide vs -0·3%, -0·6 to -0·2 [-4·0 mmol/mol, -6·6 to -2·3] with placebo; between-group difference -0·2% [-0·5 to 0·1; 2·2 mmol/mol, -5·5 to 1·1], p=0·1833). The number of hypoglycaemic events was reduced with liraglutide, with an incident rate ratio of 0·82 (95% CI 0·74 to 0·90). However, we detected no changes in glycaemic variability (continuous overall net glycaemic action per 60 min from 10·3 [95% CI 9·8 to 10·8] to 9·9 [9·2 to 10·6] in the liraglutide treated patients vs 10·2 [9·7 to 10·7] to 9·7 [9·1 to 10·3] in the placebo treated patients). Both bolus insulin (difference -5·8 IU, 95% CI -10·7 to -0·8, p=0·0227) and bodyweight (difference -6·8 kg, 95% CI -12·2 to -1·4, p=0·0145) decreased with liraglutide treatment compared with placebo. Heart rate increased with liraglutide, with a difference between groups of 7·5 bpm (95% CI 2·8-12·2, p=0·0019). Postprandial plasma glucagon and GLP-1 concentrations did not differ between groups (difference between groups at end of treatment: -408 mmol/L per 240 min [95% CI -941 to 125, p=0·1309] for glucagon and -266 mmol/L per 240 min [-1034 to 501, p=0·4899] for GLP-1). Gastric emptying was delayed after 3 weeks of treatment with liraglutide (19·9 min, 95% CI 0·8 to 39·0, p=0·0412), but we detected no difference after 24 weeks of treatment (-1·5 min, -20·5 to 17·6, p=0·8793). Patient-reported outcome measures differed between groups only with respect to perceived frequency of hypoglycaemia, which was higher with placebo, with a difference between groups of -0·6 (95% CI -1·1 to -0·07, p=0·0257). Liraglutide was associated with more frequent nausea (29 [58%] patients with liraglutide vs five [10%] with placebo), dyspepsia (11 [22%] patients with liraglutide vs one [2%] with placebo), diarrhoea (ten [20%] patients with liraglutide vs one [2%] with placebo), decreased appetite (seven patients [14%] with liraglutide vs none with placebo), and vomiting (seven [14%] patients with liraglutide vs one [2%] with placebo). INTERPRETATION: In patients with type 1 diabetes, overweight, and insufficient glycaemic control, the reduction in HbA1c did not differ between insulin plus placebo and insulin plus liraglutide treatment. Liraglutide was associated with reductions in hypoglycaemic events, bolus and total insulin dose, and bodyweight, and increased heart rate. FUNDING: Novo Nordisk.