Search

Objective: To determine whether insulin delivered via a 4-mm × 32-gauge pen needle (PN) provides equivalent glycemic control as 8-mm × 31-gauge and 12.7-mm × 29-gauge PNs in obese (body mass index ≥30) patients with diabetes., Patients and Methods: This prospective, multicenter, randomized, open-label, 2-period, crossover, equivalence, home-based study was conducted from October 26, 2010, through May 31, 2012. After a 3-week wash-in period, eligible patients aged 18 to 80 years with a hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) level of 5.5% to 9.5% (37-80 mmol/mol) were randomized to compare either 4- vs 8-mm PNs or 4- vs 12.7-mm PNs, using each of the 2 assigned PNs for 12 weeks in random order. The primary outcome was change in HbA1c level, with equivalence limits of ±0.4%., Results: The 274 patients randomized (mean ± SD age, 56.7±11.0 years) had a mean ± SD body mass index of 37.0±6.1 (range, 29.1-59.9) and took up to 350 U of insulin daily; 226 patients were included in the modified intention-to-treat analysis. Mean (95% CI) changes in HbA1c levels with the 4-mm PN were -0.08% (-0.21 to 0.06) and -0.10% (-0.19 to 0.00) vs the 8- and 12.7-mm PNs, respectively, within equivalence margins. The 4-mm PN was less painful than the larger PNs (P<.05), with similar leakage rates reported (4.1%-4.3%). Patients preferred the 4-mm PN over the 12.7-mm PN (P<.05) but not significantly vs the 8-mm PN. There were no differences between PNs in insulin doses and hypoglycemic or hyperglycemic adverse event rates., Conclusion: The 4-mm × 32-gauge PN provides equivalent glycemic control as 8- and 12.7-mm PNs in obese patients with diabetes, with less pain and no increase in leakage. Shorter PNs should be considered in all insulin-requiring patients with diabetes, including those who are obese., Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01231984., (Copyright © 2015 Mayo Foundation for Medical Education and Research. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: The study's purpose was to identify the antihyperglycemic affects of colesevelam-HCl (C-HCl) by characterizing the diurnal and postprandial glucose patterns in type 2 diabetic subjects treated concomitantly with metformin, sulfonylurea, or a combination of metformin/sulfonylurea. A secondary aim was to determine whether C-HCl significantly increased the risk of hypoglycemia., Methods: A prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover study employing continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) with ambulatory glucose profile (AGP) analysis was undertaken. Fifteen males and 6 females, age 60 ± 8 years, treated with metformin (n = 8), sulfonylurea (n = 2), or combination (n = 11) participated., Results: Treatment with C-HCl led to reductions in glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) (7.5 ± 0.3 to 7.0 ± 0.4% P<.0001), LDL (90.9 ± 18.6 to 68.9 ± 15.2 mg/dL, P<.0007) and total cholesterol (169.2 ± 24.4 to 147.8 ± 21.5 mg/dL, P<.001). Significantly lower normalized diurnal (21 mg/dL/hour, P = .0006), nocturnal (19 mg/dL/hour, P = .0005), and daytime (22 mg/dL/hour, P = .0008) glucose exposure was detected immediately upon C-HCl administration. Additionally, there was a significant (P<.004) decline in postprandial glucose excursions (averaging 15% or -36 mg/dL/hour) pronounced at dinner following C-HCl administration. There was a nonsignificant increase in the incidence of hypoglycemia (0.4-1%), with no difference due to antihyperglycemic medications., Conclusions: AGP analysis of CGM visually and quantitatively showed immediate and midterm impacts of C-HCl on basal and postprandial glucose patterns. This suggests a multifactorial glucose-lowering mechanism for C-HCl affecting both meal-related and basal glucose levels.

Underutilization of glucose data and lack of easy and standardized glucose data collection, analysis, visualization, and guided clinical decision making are key contributors to poor glycemic control among individuals with type 1 diabetes mellitus. An expert panel of diabetes specialists, facilitated by the International Diabetes Center and sponsored by the Helmsley Charitable Trust, met in 2012 to discuss recommendations for standardizing the analysis and presentation of glucose monitoring data, with the initial focus on data derived from continuous glucose monitoring systems. The panel members were introduced to a universal software report, the Ambulatory Glucose Profile, and asked to provide feedback on its content and functionality, both as a research tool and in clinical settings. This article provides a summary of the topics and issues discussed during the meeting and presents recommendations from the expert panel regarding the need to standardize glucose profile summary metrics and the value of a uniform glucose report to aid clinicians, researchers, and patients., (© 2013 Diabetes Technology Society.)