Search

OBJECTIVE To evaluate efficacy and tolerability of a co-formulation of insulin degludec and insulin aspart (IDegAsp) with insulin aspart (IAsp) at other meals compared with basal-bolus therapy using insulin detemir (IDet) and IAsp. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS Adults (n = 548) with type 1 diabetes (A1C 7.0–10.0%; BMI ≤35.0 kg/m2) were randomized 2:1 in a 26-week, multinational, parallel-group, treat-to-target trial to IDegAsp or IDet. IDegAsp was given with a meal, and IDet was given in the evening, with a second (breakfast) dose added if needed. RESULTS Non-inferiority for IDegAsp versus IDet was confirmed; A1C improved by 0.75% with IDegAsp and 0.70% with IDet to 7.6% in both groups (estimated treatment difference IDegAsp − IDet: –0.05% [95% CI –0.18 to 0.08]). There was no statistically significant difference between IDegAsp and IDet in the rates of severe hypoglycemia (0.33 and 0.42 episodes/patient-year, respectively) or overall confirmed (plasma glucose CONCLUSIONS IDegAsp in basal-bolus therapy with IAsp at additional mealtimes improves overall glycemic control and was non-inferior to IDet, with a reduced risk of nocturnal hypoglycemia and fewer injections in comparison with IDet + IAsp basal-bolus therapy.

OBJECTIVE Insulin degludec/insulin aspart (IDegAsp) is a soluble coformulation of the novel basal analog insulin degludec (IDeg: 70%) and insulin aspart (IAsp: 30%). We compared the safety and efficacy of IDegAsp, an alternative formulation (AF) (55% IDeg and 45% IAsp), and insulin glargine (IGlar) in insulin-naïve subjects with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled with oral antidiabetic drugs. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS In this 16-week, open-label trial, subjects (mean age 59.1 years, A1C 8.5%, BMI 30.3 kg/m2) were randomized to once-daily IDegAsp (n = 59), AF (n = 59), or IGlar (n = 60), all in combination with metformin. Insulin was administered before the evening meal and dose-titrated to a fasting plasma glucose (FPG) target of 4.0–6.0 mmol/L. RESULTS After 16 weeks, mean A1C decreased in all groups to comparable levels (IDegAsp: 7.0%; AF: 7.2%; IGlar: 7.1%). A similar proportion of subjects achieved A1C CONCLUSIONS In this proof-of-concept trial, once-daily IDegAsp was safe, well tolerated, and provided comparable overall glycemic control to IGlar at similar low rates of hypoglycemia, but better postdinner plasma glucose control.

Item does not contain fulltext PURPOSE: Insulin degludec coformulated with insulin aspart (as IDegAsp) can cover 24 h basal insulin and postprandial insulin requirements after a main meal with one injection. We compared glycemic stability following IDegAsp or insulin glargine (IGlar) given before the evening meal in patients with type 2 diabetes. METHODS: A subset of 112 insulin-naive type 2 diabetes patients from a randomized, parallel-group trial (IDegAsp versus IGlar, each added to metformin) underwent 72 h continuous interstitial glucose (IG) monitoring after 16 weeks of treatment. End points included mean IG concentrations, 2 h postprandial IG increments and postprandial peak, IG fluctuation (summed area above and below mean IG), within-subject coefficient of variation (day-to-day variation) in mean nocturnal IG, and episodes of low (10 mmol/liter) IG. Values were derived for the entire 72 h, with the nocturnal interval (0001-0559 h) also assessed. RESULTS: The postdinner IG increment observed with IGlar did not occur with IDegAsp [IDegAsp - IGlar, -1.42 (-2.15, -0.70) mmol/liter]. Nocturnal IG fluctuation was 21% lower with IDegAsp [IDegAsp/IGlar, 0.79 (0.66, 0.96) mmol/liter], with 48% fewer nocturnal high IG episodes [ratio IDegAsp/IGlar, 0.52 (0.32, 0.87)]. CONCLUSIONS: IDegAsp given with the evening meal reduces postdinner glucose excursion and provides more stable nocturnal glycemia as compared with IGlar.

OBJECTIVE Insulin degludec/insulin aspart (IDegAsp) is a soluble coformulation of the novel basal analog insulin degludec (IDeg: 70%) and insulin aspart (IAsp: 30%). We compared the safety and efficacy of IDegAsp, an alternative formulation (AF) (55% IDeg and 45% IAsp), and insulin glargine (IGlar) in insulin-naïve subjects with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled with oral antidiabetic drugs. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS In this 16-week, open-label trial, subjects (mean age 59.1 years, A1C 8.5%, BMI 30.3 kg/m2) were randomized to once-daily IDegAsp (n = 59), AF (n = 59), or IGlar (n = 60), all in combination with metformin. Insulin was administered before the evening meal and dose-titrated to a fasting plasma glucose (FPG) target of 4.0–6.0 mmol/L. RESULTS After 16 weeks, mean A1C decreased in all groups to comparable levels (IDegAsp: 7.0%; AF: 7.2%; IGlar: 7.1%). A similar proportion of subjects achieved A1C

Introduction L’IDegAsp est un compose soluble comprenant 70 %, d’Insuline Degludec (IDeg), un nouvel analogue de l’insuline qui forme des multi-hexameres solubles apres injection sous-cutanee (SC), et 30 % d’insuline aspart (IAsp). Materiels et methodes Essai ouvert de phase 2, Treat to Target, de 16 semaines, randomise, en groupes paralleles, portant sur l’efficacite et l’innocuite de l’IDegAsp chez des diabetiques de type 2 naifs en insuline et non controles par les antidiabetiques oraux. Ils ont recu en association avec la metformine de l’IDegAsp une fois par jour (n = 59), de l’insuline Glargine (IGlar ; n = 60) ou une formulation alternative (donnees non montrees), en SC avant le repas du soir pour atteindre une glycemie a jeun entre 0,72 et 1,08 g/l. Resultats L’âge moyen etait de 59,1 ans, l’HbA1c a 8,5 %, et la GAJ a 2,09 g/l. A 16 semaines, l’HbA1c a diminue dans les 2 groupes (IDegAsp : − 1,31 % versus IGlar: − 1,29 %) pour atteindre des valeurs comparables (7,0 % et 7,1 % respectivement). Une proportion similaire de sujets a atteint un niveau d’HbA1c Conclusion Cet essai montre que l’IDegAsp, administree une fois par jour permettait d’obtenir un controle glycemique comparable a l’IGlar, sans que le risque d’hypoglycemie soit augmente, mais avec un meilleur controle post prandial apres diner.

Background: Multiple sensitizations in early age have been reported to be a risk for development of asthma. This study evaluates the emergence and evolution of IgE to aeroallergens among a cohort of children with physician-diagnosed atopic dermatitis and/or showing food allergy symptoms and to examine the relation to asthma development. Methods: Three-hundred and four children (median age 13.4 months at entry) with food allergy symptoms and/or atopic dermatitis without asthma at inclusion were analysed for IgE antibodies against food-, indoor- and outdoor-allergens and pet allergen components and correlated to the individuals’ outcome on asthma inception. Results: At 2 years of follow-up, physician-diagnosed asthma was 19.7% (n = 49) and asthma diagnosed any time was 24% (n = 67). History of persistent cough and asthma of father, combination of milk- and wheat-allergy symptoms and dual sensitization to house dust mite and Japanese cedar were independent risk factors for asthma. Sensitization to dog was the most prevalent inhalant allergen at entry. Asthma children had a higher proportion of sensitization to dog, cat and horse allergens at entry compared with non-asthma children. Being sensitized to both food, house dust mite and pet allergens was strongly associated with asthma (p = 0.0006). Component resolved diagnosis for dog and cat allergens showed that IgE antibodies to Can f 1 and Fel d 1 was common even at very young age. Conclusions: Early sensitization to inhalant allergens increases the risk of developing asthma as well as having milk and wheat allergy symptoms. Sensitization to dog, was common at an early age despite dog ownership. Sensitization to secretoglobin and lipocalins and less to serum albumins explained the pet sensitization.