Efficacy and safety evaluation of insulin degludec and insulin glargine U100 in the treatment for type 2 diabetes mellitus
10.3760/cma.j.cn114015-20230706-00505
- VernacularTitle:德谷胰岛素与甘精胰岛素U100治疗2型糖尿病的疗效与安全性评价
- Author:
Xinyu WANG
1
;
Yundi ZHANG
;
Yue LI
;
Huiying ZONG
;
Wenqian HAN
;
Lun LIU
;
Qian WANG
;
Lubo GUO
;
Huifeng DI
;
Xiaohui ZHEN
;
Deqing SUN
;
Ying SU
;
Zonglin ZHANG
;
Jing PENG
;
Xiaofu CAO
;
Ning LIU
;
Jian LIU
;
Cuicui LU
;
Li WANG
;
Tao GENG
;
Rongji LI
;
Guodong SUN
;
Fan ZHANG
;
Lin ZHANG
;
Chuanjiang MA
;
Siyuan TAN
;
Dongfang QIAN
;
Yan LI
Author Information
1. 山东第一医科大学（山东省医学科学院）药学院（药物研究所），济南 250117
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
Type 2 diabetes mellitus;
Insulin degludec;
Insulin glargine;
Safety;
Blood glucose;
Multicenter study;
Cohort studies
- From:
Adverse Drug Reactions Journal
2023;25(11):649-655
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective:To compare the efficacy and safety of insulin degludec and insulin glargine U100 in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.Methods:This study was a retrospective cohort study. The subjects were patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus who were hospitalized in 13 3A-level general hospitals in Shandong Province from September 2018 to December 2021. According to the type of basal insulin used, the patients were divided into insulin degludec group and insulin glargine U100 group. The basic information and laboratory test results in patients in the 2 groups were collected, the differences of fasting blood glucose level and incidence of hypoglycemia between the 2 groups were compared. The patients with complete blood glucose monitoring data in the 2 groups were selected and their blood glucose fluctuations were compared.Results:A total of 1 152 patients were entered in the study, including 552 patients in the insulin degludec group and 600 patients in the insulin glargine U100 group. The difference in the basic conditions in patients in the 2 groups was not statistically significant (all P>0.05). After treatment, the fasting blood glucose levels in patients in the 2 groups were lower than those before treatment, with statistically significant differences [10.2 (8.8, 12.5) mmol/L vs. 7.5 (6.6, 8.7) mmol/L, Z=-19.443, P<0.001; 10.0 (8.6, 11.7) mmol/L vs. 7.8 (6.6, 9.0) mmol/L, Z=-15.449, P<0.001], but the difference in fasting blood glucose levels between the 2 groups after treatment was not statistically significant ( Z=-1.427, P>0.05). The incidence of hypoglycemia in the insulin degludec group was lower than that in the insulin glargine U100 group [1.09% (6/552) vs. 2.83% (17/600), Z=4.481, P=0.032]. The intraday blood glucose standard deviation, maximum blood glucose fluctuation range, postprandial blood glucose fluctuation range, and average blood glucose fluctuation range in patients with complete blood glucose monitoring data in the insulin degludec group were significantly lower than those in the insulin glargine U100 group [(1.7±0.6) mmol/L vs. (2.4±1.0) mmol/L, (4.5±1.6) mmol/L vs. (6.7±2.9) mmol/L, (1.8±1.0) mmol/L vs. (3.3±1.2) mmol/L, (2.9±1.3) mmol/L vs. (4.6±2.1) mmol/L; all P<0.001]. Conclusion:The efficacy of insulin degludec in the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus is equivalent to that of insulin glargine U100, but the risk of hypoglycemia and blood glucose fluctuation is lower.
