Abstract
We aimed to assess the comparative efficacy and safety of second-generation basal insulins (glargine U300 and degludec U100) vs. neutral protamine Hagedorn (NPH) and first-generation basal insulins (glargine U100 and detemir) in type 1 diabetes (T1D) adults.
PubMed, the Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Google Scholar (until January 2021) were systematically searched. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with ≥ 12 weeks of follow-up comparing efficacy (HbA1c) or safety (hypoglycemia and weight gain) between second-generation basal insulins vs. other basal insulins in T1D adults were included. Bayesian network meta-analyses were used to estimate risk ratio, hazard ratio, and mean difference. Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) was used to appraise evidence certainty.
Eighteen RCTs (≥ 24 weeks of follow-up) involving 7283 randomized participants were included for main analysis. Moderate to high certainty evidence suggested that second-generation basal insulins showed equivalent HbA1c reduction compared with NPH and first-generation basal insulins. Compared with second-generation basal insulins, low to high certainty evidence suggested that NPH was associated with a higher risk of patients experiencing severe hypoglycemia; NPH and first-generation basal insulins were associated with a higher rate of nocturnal confirmed hypoglycemic events. For the weight gain, glargine U300 was comparable to detemir (low certainty), but degludec U100 was greater than detemir (moderate certainty).
In conclusion, second-generation basal insulins maintained equivalent efficacy of glycemic control (moderate to high certainty), with differences in safety (low to high certainty) compared with NPH and first-generation basal insulins during ≥ 24 weeks of follow-up in T1D adults.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Data availability
The datasets used in this research are published in Supplemental Material (Table S6) which can be found in this published article.
Change history
19 August 2021
A Correction to this paper has been published: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00210-021-02143-w
Abbreviations
- ADA:
-
American Diabetes Association
- BHM:
-
Bayesian hierarchical model
- CINeMA:
-
Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis
- CrI:
-
Credible interval
- GRADE:
-
Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation
- NICE:
-
National Institute for Health and Care Excellence
- HR:
-
Hazard ratio
- MCMC:
-
Markov Chain Monte Carlo
- MD:
-
Mean difference
- NPH:
-
Neutral protamine Hagedorn
- RR:
-
Risk ratio
- T1D:
-
Type 1 diabetes
References
Alcolado J, Poole CD, Peters JR, Currie CJ (2008) Potential flaws and biases in a randomized controlled trial (RCT) of insulin determir vs. insulin glargine by Pieber and colleagues. Diabet Med 25:115–116. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-5491.2007.02335.x
Bain S, Feher M, Fisher M et al (2020) A review of the NG17 recommendations for the use of basal insulin in type 1 diabetes. Diabet Med 37:219–228. https://doi.org/10.1111/dme.14180
Becker RHA, Dahmen R, Bergmann K et al (2014) New Insulin Glargine 300 units·mL-1 provides a more even activity profile and prolonged glycemic control at steady state compared with Insulin Glargine 100 units·mL-1. Diabetes Care 38:637–643. https://doi.org/10.2337/dc14-0006
Brod M, Kongsø JH, Lessard S, Christensen TL (2009) Psychological insulin resistance: patient beliefs and implications for diabetes management. Qual Life Res 18:23. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-008-9419-1
Chaimani A, Salanti G (2012) Using network meta-analysis to evaluate the existence of small-study effects in a network of interventions. Res Synth Methods 3:161–176. https://doi.org/10.1002/jrsm.57
Cryer PE (2008) The barrier of hypoglycemia in diabetes. Diabetes 57:3169–3176. https://doi.org/10.2337/db08-1084
Dawoud D, O’Mahony R, Wonderling D et al (2018) Basal insulin regimens for adults with type 1 diabetes mellitus: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. Value Heal 21:176–184. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2017.04.024
Dias S, Sutton AJ, Ades AE, Welton NJ (2013a) Evidence synthesis for decision making 2: a generalized linear modeling framework for pairwise and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Med Decis Mak 33:607–617. https://doi.org/10.1177/0272989X12458724
Dias S, Welton NJ, Sutton AJ et al (2013b) Evidence synthesis for decision making 4: inconsistency in networks of evidence based on randomized controlled trials. Med Decis Mak 33:641–656. https://doi.org/10.1177/0272989X12455847
Díez-Fernández A, Cavero-Redondo I, Moreno-Fernández J et al (2019) Effectiveness of insulin glargine U-300 versus insulin glargine U-100 on nocturnal hypoglycemia and glycemic control in type 1 and type 2 diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Acta Diabetol 56:355–364. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00592-018-1258-0
DiMeglio LA, Evans-Molina C, Oram RA (2018) Type 1 diabetes. Lancet 391:2449–2462. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(18)31320-5
Egger M, Smith GD, Schneider M, Minder C (1997) Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test. Br Med J 315:629–634. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.315.7109.629
Heise T, Hermanski L, Nosek L et al (2012) Insulin degludec: four times lower pharmacodynamic variability than insulin glargine under steady-state conditions in type 1 diabetes. Diabetes, Obes Metab 14:859–864. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1463-1326.2012.01627.x
Higgins J, Li T, Deeks J (2019a) Chapter 6: choosing effect measures and computing estimates of effect. In: Higgins J, Thomas J, Chandler J, et al. (eds) Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions version 6.0. Cochrane. Available at: https://training.cochrane.org/handbook/current/chapter-06
Higgins J, Savović J, Page M, et al (2019b) Chapter 8: Assessing risk of bias in a randomized trial. In: Higgins J, Thomas J, Chandler J, et al. (eds) Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions version 6.0. Cochrane. Available at: https://training.cochrane.org/handbook/current/chapter-06
Higgins JPT, Jackson D, Barrett JK et al (2012) Consistency and inconsistency in network meta-analysis: concepts and models for multi-arm studies. Res Synth Methods 3:98–110. https://doi.org/10.1002/jrsm.1044
Hirsch IB, Bode B, Courreges JP et al (2012) Insulin degludec/insulin aspart administered once daily at any meal, with insulin aspart at other meals versus a standard basal-bolus regimen in patients with type 1 diabetes: A 26-week, phase 3, randomized, open-label, treat-to-target trial. Diabetes Care 35:2174–2181. https://doi.org/10.2337/dc11-2503
Hirsch IB, Franek E, Mersebach H et al (2017) Safety and efficacy of insulin degludec/insulin aspart with bolus mealtime insulin aspart compared with standard basal–bolus treatment in people with Type 1 diabetes: 1–year results from a randomized clinical trial (BOOST® T1). Diabet Med 34:167–173. https://doi.org/10.1111/dme.13068
Hutton B, Salanti G, Caldwell DM et al (2015) The PRISMA extension statement for reporting of systematic reviews incorporating network meta-analyses of health care interventions: checklist and explanations. Ann Intern Med 162:777. https://doi.org/10.7326/M14-2385
International Hypoglycaemia Study Group (2017) Glucose concentrations of less than 3.0 mmol/l (54 mg/dl) should be reported in clinical trials: a joint position statement of the American Diabetes Association and the Europian Association for the Study of Diabetes. Diabetologia 60:3–6. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00125-016-4146-6
Laranjeira FO, de Andrade KRC, Figueiredo ACMG, et al (2018) Long-acting insulin analogues for type 1 diabetes: an overview of systematic reviews and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. PLoS One 13. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0194801
Liu W, Yang X, Huang J (2018) Efficacy and safety of insulin degludec versus insulin glargine: a systematic review and meta-analysis of fifteen clinical trials. Int J Endocrinol 2018:1–10. https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/8726046
Mathieu C, Gillard P, Benhalima K (2017) Insulin analogues in type 1 diabetes mellitus: getting better all the time. Nat Rev Endocrinol 13:385–399. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrendo.2017.39
Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG (2009) Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Med 6:e1000097. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097
NICE (National Institute for Health and Care Excellence) (2015) Type 1 diabetes in adults: diagnosis and management (NICE guideline). In: NICE Guidel. [NG17]. Available at: https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ng17/resources/type-1-diabetes-in-adults-diagnosis-and-management-pdf-1837276469701
Nikolakopoulou A, Higgins JPT, Papakonstantinou T et al (2020) CINeMA: an approach for assessing confidence in the results of a network meta-analysis. PLOS Med 17:e1003082. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1003082
Pieber TR, Treichel H-C, Hompesch B et al (2007) Comparison of insulin detemir and insulin glargine in subjects with Type 1 diabetes using intensive insulin therapy. Diabet Med 24:635–642. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-5491.2007.02113.x
Puhan MA, Schunemann HJ, Murad MH et al (2014) A GRADE Working Group approach for rating the quality of treatment effect estimates from network meta-analysis. BMJ 349:g5630–g5630. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.g5630
Purnell JQ, Hokanson JE, Marcovina SM et al (1998) Effect of excessive weight gain with intensive therapy of type 1 diabetes on lipid levels and blood pressure: results from the DCCT. JAMA 280:140–146. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.280.2.140
Ratner RE, Gough SCL, Mathieu C et al (2013) Hypoglycaemia risk with insulin degludec compared with insulin glargine in type 2 and type 1 diabetes: a pre-planned meta-analysis of phase 3 trials. Diabetes, Obes Metab 15:175–184. https://doi.org/10.1111/dom.12032
Russell-Jones D, Khan R (2007) Insulin-associated weight gain in diabetes – causes, effects and coping strategies. Diabetes, Obes Metab 9:799–812. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1463-1326.2006.00686.x
Shea BJ, Reeves BC, Wells G et al (2017) AMSTAR 2: a critical appraisal tool for systematic reviews that include randomised or non-randomised studies of healthcare interventions, or both. BMJ 358:j4008. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.j4008
Tricco AC, Ashoor HM, Antony J et al (2021) Comparative efficacy and safety of ultra-long-Acting, long-acting, Intermediate-acting, and biosimilar insulins for type 1 diabetes mellitus: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. J Gen Intern Med. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-021-06642-7
van Valkenhoef G et al (2014) Modeling inconsistency as heterogeneity in network meta-analysis. Available at: http://drugis.org/files/valkenhoef-pres-srsm2013.pdf
van Valkenhoef G, Tervonen T, de Brock B, Hillege H (2012) Algorithmic parameterization of mixed treatment comparisons. Stat Comput 22:1099–1111. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11222-011-9281-9
Vora J, Christensen T, Rana A, Bain SC (2014) Insulin degludec versus insulin glargine in type 1 and type 2 diabetes mellitus: a meta-analysis of endpoints in phase 3a trials. Diabetes Ther 5:435–446. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13300-014-0076-9
Acknowledgements
We would like to thank Dr. Mitsuyoshi Takahara (Department of Diabetes Care Medicine, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine) and Prof. Iichiro Shimomura (Department of Metabolic Medicine, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine) for their comments.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
M conceived and conceptualized the study. M and YZ designed the methodology and contributed to data curation, data analysis, interpretation of the results, discussion, and drafted the manuscript. YST contributed to data analysis and discussion. YST and TT reviewed the manuscript. All authors revised and approved the final manuscript. The authors declare that all data were generated in-house and that no paper mill was used.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Ethics approval and consent to participate
Not applicable.
Consent for publication
Not applicable.
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing interests.
Additional information
Publisher's note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Martin and Yi Zhou are first author
Supplementary Information
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Martin, Zhou, Y., Takagi, T. et al. Efficacy and safety among second-generation and other basal insulins in adult patients with type 1 diabetes: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's Arch Pharmacol 394, 2091–2101 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00210-021-02128-9
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00210-021-02128-9