ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: This prospective single-center study recruited insulin-resistant continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) therapy-naive patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) using insulin analog-based multiple daily injections (MDI) therapy and metformin. METHODS: A total of 23 individuals with T2D (70% male), aged a mean ± standard deviation 57.2 ± 8.03 years, with body mass index of 36.2 ± 7.02 kg/m2, diabetes duration of 13.3 ± 4.64 years, and HbA1c of 10.0% ± 1.05% were randomly assigned to a CSII arm or an MDI continuation arm to explore glucose control, weight loss, total daily insulin dose (TDD), and insulin resistance. Insulin dosing was optimized over a 2-month run-in period. RESULTS: At 6 months, patients assigned to the CSII arm achieved a significant mean HbA1c reduction of -0.9% (95% confidence interval [CI] = -1.6, -0.1), while reducing their TDD by -29.8 ± 28.41 U/day (33% of baseline [92.1 ± 20.35 U/day]) and achieving body mass (BM) reduction of -0.8 ± 5.61 kg (0.98% of baseline [104.8 ± 16.15 kg]). MDI patients demonstrated a nonsignificant HbA1c reduction of -0.3% (95% CI = -0.8, 0.1) with a TDD reduction of 5% from baseline (99.0 ± 25.25 U/day to 94.3 ± 21.25 U/day), and a BM reduction of -1.0 ± 2.03 kg (0.99% of baseline [108.9 ± 20.55 kg]). After 6 months, the MDI arm crossed over to CSII therapy. At 12 months, patients continuing CSII demonstrated an additional mean 0.7% HbA1c reduction with 54.6% achieving HbA1c<8%. The final TDD reduction was -9.7 U/day in comparison to baseline; BM increased by 1.1 ± 6.5 kg from baseline. The MDI patients that crossed to CSII showed an HbA1c reduction of -0.5% ± 1.04%, HbA1c response rate of 27.3%, a TDD reduction of -17.4 ± 21.06 U/day, and a BM reduction of -0.3 ± 3.39 kg. Diabetic ketoacidosis or severe hypoglycemia did not occur in either arm. CONCLUSION: CSII therapy safely and significantly improved metabolic control with less insulin usage, with no sustainable reduction of BM, blood pressure, and lipid profile, in insulin-resistant T2D patients. Treatment adherence and satisfaction in these patients were excellent.
Subject(s)
Body Mass Index , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/drug therapy , Glycated Hemoglobin/analysis , Hypoglycemic Agents/therapeutic use , Insulin Infusion Systems , Insulin/therapeutic use , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/blood , Female , Humans , Hypoglycemic Agents/administration & dosage , Insulin/administration & dosage , Male , Prospective Studies , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
This analysis investigated factors associated with the decrease in HbA1c in patients receiving continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) in the OpT2mise randomized trial. In this study, patients with type 2 diabetes and HbA1c >8% following multiple daily injections (MDI) optimization were randomized to receive CSII (n = 168) or MDI (n = 163) for 6 months. Patient-related and treatment-related factors associated with decreased HbA1c in the CSII arm were identified by univariate and multivariate analyses. CSII produced a significantly greater reduction in HbA1c than MDI, and the treatment difference increased with baseline HbA1c. In the CSII arm, the only factors significantly associated with decreased HbA1c were higher baseline HbA1c (P < .001), geographical region (P < .001), higher educational level (P = .012), higher total cholesterol level (P = .002), lower variability of baseline glucose values on continuous glucose monitoring (P < .001) and the decrease in average fasting self-monitored blood glucose at 6 months (P < .001). These findings suggest that CSII offers an option to improve glycemic control in a broad range of patients with type 2 diabetes in whom control cannot be achieved with MDI. OpT2mise ClinicalTrials.gov number: NCT01182493 (https://clinicaltrials.gov/).
Subject(s)
Blood Glucose/metabolism , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/blood , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/drug therapy , Insulin Infusion Systems , Insulin/administration & dosage , Adult , Aged , Blood Glucose/drug effects , Blood Glucose Self-Monitoring , Female , Humans , Injections, Subcutaneous , Male , Middle Aged , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The OpT2mise randomized trial was designed to compare the effects of continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) and multiple daily injections (MDI) on glucose profiles in patients with type 2 diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Patients with glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) levels of ≥8% (64 mmol/mol) and ≤12% (108 mmol/mol) despite insulin doses of 0.7-1.8 U/kg/day via MDI were randomized to CSII (n=168) or continued MDI (n=163). Changes in glucose profiles were evaluated using continuous glucose monitoring data collected over 6-day periods before and 6 months after randomization. RESULTS: After 6 months, reductions in HbA1c levels were significantly greater with CSII (-1.1±1.2% [-12.0±13.1 mmol/mol]) than with MDI (-0.4±1.1% [-4.4±12.0 mmol/mol]) (P<0.001). Similarly, compared with patients receiving MDI, those receiving CSII showed significantly greater reductions in 24-h mean sensor glucose (SG) (treatment difference, -17.1 mg/dL; P=0.0023), less exposure to SG >180 mg/dL (-12.4%; P=0.0004) and SG >250 mg/dL (-5.5%; P=0.0153), and more time in the SG range of 70-180 mg/dL (12.3%; P=0.0002), with no differences in exposure to SG<70 mg/dL or in glucose variability. Changes in postprandial (4-h) glucose area under the curve >180 mg/dL were significantly greater with CSII than with MDI after breakfast (-775.9±1,441.2 mg/dL/min vs. -160.7±1,074.1 mg/dL/min; P=0.0015) and after dinner (-731.4±1,580.7 mg/dL/min vs. -71.1±1,083.5 mg/dL/min; P=0.0014). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with suboptimally controlled type 2 diabetes, CSII significantly improves selected glucometrics, compared with MDI, without increasing the risk of hypoglycemia.
Subject(s)
Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/drug therapy , Glycated Hemoglobin/analysis , Hypoglycemic Agents/administration & dosage , Insulin Infusion Systems , Insulin/administration & dosage , Aged , Blood Glucose/analysis , Blood Glucose Self-Monitoring , Breakfast , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/blood , Drug Administration Schedule , Female , Humans , Hypoglycemia/chemically induced , Injections, Subcutaneous , Male , Meals , Middle Aged , Postprandial PeriodABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Many patients with advanced type 2 diabetes do not meet their glycated haemoglobin targets and randomised controlled studies comparing the efficacy of pump treatment and multiple daily injections for lowering glucose in insulin-treated patients have yielded inconclusive results. We aimed to resolve this uncertainty with a randomised controlled trial (OpT2mise). METHODS: We did this multicentre, controlled trial at 36 hospitals, tertiary care centres, and referal centres in Canada, Europe, Israel, South Africa, and the USA. Patients with type 2 diabetes who had poor glycaemic control despite multiple daily injections with insulin analogues were enrolled into a 2-month dose-optimisation run-in period. After the run-in period, patients with glycated haemoglobin of 8·0-12·0% (64-108 mmol/mol) were randomly assigned (1:1) by a computer-generated randomisation sequence (block size 2 with probability 0·75 and size 4 with probability 0·25) to pump treatment or to continue with multiple daily injections. Neither patients nor investigators were masked to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was change in mean glycated haemoglobin between baseline and end of the randomised phase for the intention-to-treat population. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01182493. FINDINGS: 495 of 590 screened patients entered the run-in phase and 331 were randomised (168 to pump treatment, 163 to multiple daily injections). Mean glycated haemoglobin at baseline was 9% (75 mmol/mol) in both groups. At 6 months, mean glycated haemoglobin had decreased by 1·1% (SD 1·2; 12 mmol/mol, SD 13) in the pump treatment group and 0·4% (SD 1·1; 4 mmol/mol, SD 12) in the multiple daily injection group, resulting in a between-group treatment difference of -0·7% (95% CI -0·9 to -0·4; -8 mmol/mol, 95% CI -10 to -4, p<0·0001). At the end of the study, the mean total daily insulin dose was 97 units (SD 56) with pump treatment versus 122 units (SD 68) for multiple daily injections (p<0·0001), with no significant difference in bodyweight change between the two groups (1·5 kg [SD 3·5] vs 1·1 kg [3·6], p=0·322). Two diabetes-related serious adverse events (hyperglycaemia or ketosis without acidosis) resulting in hospital admission occurred in the pump treatment group compared with one in the multiple daily injection group. No ketoacidosis occurred in either group and one episode of severe hypoglycaemia occurred in the multiple daily injection group. INTERPRETATION: In patients with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes despite using multiple daily injections of insulin, pump treatment can be considered as a safe and valuable treatment option. FUNDING: Medtronic.
Subject(s)
Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/drug therapy , Hypoglycemic Agents/administration & dosage , Insulin Infusion Systems , Insulin/administration & dosage , Adult , Aged , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/blood , Drug Administration Schedule , Female , Glycated Hemoglobin/metabolism , Humans , Hypoglycemic Agents/therapeutic use , Injections, Subcutaneous , Insulin/therapeutic use , Male , Middle AgedABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: In insulin-requiring type 2 diabetes patients, current insulin therapy approaches such as basal-alone or basal-bolus multiple daily injections (MDI) have not consistently provided achievement of optimal glycemic control. Previous studies have suggested a potential benefit of continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) in these patients. The OpT2mise study is a multicenter, randomized, trial comparing CSII with MDI in a large cohort of subjects with evidence of persistent hyperglycemia despite previous MDI therapy. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Subjects were enrolled into a run-in period for optimization of their MDI insulin regimen. Subjects showing persistent hyperglycemia (glycated hemoglobin [HbA1c] ≥8% and ≤12%) were then randomly assigned to CSII or continuing an MDI regimen for a 6-month phase followed by a single crossover of the MDI arm, switching to CSII. The primary end point is the between-group difference in mean change in HbA1c from baseline to 6 months. Secondary end points include change in mean 24-h glucose values, area under the curve and time spent in hypoglycemia and hyperglycemia, measures of glycemic excursions, change in postprandial hyperglycemia, and evaluation of treatment satisfaction. Safety end points include hypoglycemia, hospital admissions, and emergency room visits. RESULTS: When subject enrollment was completed in May 2013, 495 subjects had been enrolled in the study. The study completion for the primary end point is expected in January 2014. CONCLUSIONS: OpT2mise will represent the largest studied homogeneous cohort of type 2 diabetes patients with persistent hyperglycemia despite optimized MDI therapy. OpT2mise will help define the role of CSII in insulin intensification and define its safety, rate of hypoglycemia, patient adherence, and patient satisfaction.