Efficacy and safety of oral insulin compared to subcutaneous insulin: a systematic review and meta-analysis
- 311 Downloads
A systematic review and meta-analysis of interventional studies was conducted to compare the efficacy and safety of oral insulin versus subcutaneous (SC) insulin in diabetic patients.
Medline, Scopus, ISI Web of Knowledge and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched. Two independent reviewers evaluated studies for eligibility and quality and extracted the data. The primary outcomes were fasting blood glucose (FBG), 1h and 2h postprandial blood glucose, HbA1c, AUC of insulin, Cmax and Tmax of insulin, and Tmax of glucose infusion rate. Secondary outcomes were adverse events.
Eleven studies (n = 373) met the inclusion criteria. Meta-analyses showed that there is no significant difference between oral and SC insulin in controlling HbA1c, FBG, 1 and 2 h postprandial blood glucose and producing Cmax of insulin (P > 0.05); however oral insulin had faster action as indicated by the shorter Tmax, compared to SC insulin (P < 0.05). The most included studies were varied in their methodological quality.
This systematic review and meta-analysis showed that oral insulin is comparable to SC insulin with regard to glycemic efficacy and safety. However, is necessary to conduct additional studies in which oral insulin administered to large number of patients for long enough periods of time.
KeywordsOral insulin Subcutaneous insulin Efficacy Safety
- 2.Ginter E, Simko V (2013) Type 2 diabetes mellitus, pandemic in 21st century. Diabetes. Springer, New York, pp 42–50Google Scholar
- 3.http://www.idf.org/diabetesatlas. Accessed 7 Apr 2015
- 4.Kaul K et al (2013) Introduction to diabetes mellitus. Diabetes. Springer, New York, pp 1–11Google Scholar
- 7.Marble A, Renold A (1949) Atrophy and hypertrophy of subcutaneous fat due to insulin. Trans Assoc Am Physicians 62:219Google Scholar
- 20.Schwartz S et al. (2008) A two-week randomized active comparator study of two HDV-insulin routes (SC and oral) and SC human insulin in patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus (417-P). In: Poster session presented at: 68th annual American diabetes association meetingGoogle Scholar
- 23.Higgins JP, Altman DJ, Sterne JA (2011) Assessing risk of bias in included studies. In: Higgins JP, Green S (eds) Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions. Wiley, England, pp 8.1–8.54Google Scholar
- 24.Lipsey MW, Wilson DB (2001) Practical meta-analysis. SAGE Publications, LondonGoogle Scholar
- 26.Harris R et al (2008) Metan: fixed- and random-effects meta-analysis. Stata J 8(1):3–28Google Scholar
- 31.Cho YW, Hsu FL (2000) Reactivating glyburide in a group of sulfonylurea tolerating and non-responding type 2 diabetics with the iso-oral insulin and isoglysulin. Chin Pharm J 52(6):313–324Google Scholar
- 32.Ergun-Longmire B et al. (2004) Oral insulin therapy to prevent progression of immune-mediated (Type 1) diabetes. Ann N Y Acad Sci 1029:260–277Google Scholar
- 39.Grigor’ev A et al (2005) To the question of the possibility of oral insulin administration. Klin Med 83(1):32Google Scholar
- 40.Annabestani Z et al (2010) Insulin buccal spray (Oral-Lyn) efficacy in Type 1 diabetes. Iranian J Diabetes Lipid Disord 9:1–4Google Scholar
- 43.Generex Oral-lyn™ (2013) Results in more rapid reductions of HbA1c in Shreya’s phase III study of type 2 diabetes in India. Available from: http://investor.generex.com/releasedetail.cfm?ReleaseID=776114. Accessed 22 Aug 2014
- 46.Khalili N et al (2010) Investigation of effect of oral insulin prepared from SPH and SPHC polymers in diabetic patients type I. J Diabetes Metab Disord 10(1):55–66Google Scholar
- 50.Perriello G et al (1995) Estimation of glucose-alanine-lactate-glutamine cycles in postabsorptive humans: role of skeletal muscle. Am J Physiol-Endocrinol Metabol 32(3):E443Google Scholar