Cargando…
Safety, effectiveness, and cost effectiveness of long acting versus intermediate acting insulin for patients with type 1 diabetes: systematic review and network meta-analysis
Objective To examine the safety, effectiveness, and cost effectiveness of long acting insulin for type 1 diabetes. Design Systematic review and network meta-analysis. Data sources Medline, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Embase, and grey literature were searched through January 2013....
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BMJ Publishing Group Ltd.
2014
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4199252/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25274009 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.g5459 |
_version_ | 1782339876659658752 |
---|---|
author | Tricco, Andrea C Ashoor, Huda M Antony, Jesmin Beyene, Joseph Veroniki, Areti Angeliki Isaranuwatchai, Wanrudee Harrington, Alana Wilson, Charlotte Tsouros, Sophia Soobiah, Charlene Yu, Catherine H Hutton, Brian Hoch, Jeffrey S Hemmelgarn, Brenda R Moher, David Majumdar, Sumit R Straus, Sharon E |
author_facet | Tricco, Andrea C Ashoor, Huda M Antony, Jesmin Beyene, Joseph Veroniki, Areti Angeliki Isaranuwatchai, Wanrudee Harrington, Alana Wilson, Charlotte Tsouros, Sophia Soobiah, Charlene Yu, Catherine H Hutton, Brian Hoch, Jeffrey S Hemmelgarn, Brenda R Moher, David Majumdar, Sumit R Straus, Sharon E |
author_sort | Tricco, Andrea C |
collection | PubMed |
description | Objective To examine the safety, effectiveness, and cost effectiveness of long acting insulin for type 1 diabetes. Design Systematic review and network meta-analysis. Data sources Medline, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Embase, and grey literature were searched through January 2013. Study selection Randomized controlled trials or non-randomized studies of long acting (glargine, detemir) and intermediate acting (neutral protamine Hagedorn (NPH), lente) insulin for adults with type 1 diabetes were included. Results 39 studies (27 randomized controlled trials including 7496 patients) were included after screening of 6501 titles/abstracts and 190 full text articles. Glargine once daily, detemir once daily, and detemir once/twice daily significantly reduced hemoglobin A(1c) compared with NPH once daily in network meta-analysis (26 randomized controlled trials, mean difference −0.39%, 95% confidence interval −0.59% to −0.19%; −0.26%, −0.48% to −0.03%; and −0.36%, −0.65% to −0.08%; respectively). Differences in network meta-analysis were observed between long acting and intermediate acting insulin for severe hypoglycemia (16 randomized controlled trials; detemir once/twice daily versus NPH once/twice daily: odds ratio 0.62, 95% confidence interval 0.42 to 0.91) and weight gain (13 randomized controlled trials; detemir once daily versus NPH once/twice daily: mean difference 4.04 kg, 3.06 to 5.02 kg; detemir once/twice daily versus NPH once daily: −5.51 kg, −6.56 to −4.46 kg; glargine once daily versus NPH once daily: −5.14 kg, −6.07 to −4.21). Compared with NPH, detemir was less costly and more effective in 3/14 cost effectiveness analyses and glargine was less costly and more effective in 2/8 cost effectiveness analyses. The remaining cost effectiveness analyses found that detemir and glargine were more costly but more effective than NPH. Glargine was not cost effective compared with detemir in 2/2 cost effectiveness analyses. Conclusions Long acting insulin analogs are probably superior to intermediate acting insulin analogs, although the difference is small for hemoglobin A(1c). Patients and their physicians should tailor their choice of insulin according to preference, cost, and accessibility. Systematic review registration PROSPERO CRD42013003610. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4199252 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2014 |
publisher | BMJ Publishing Group Ltd. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-41992522014-10-17 Safety, effectiveness, and cost effectiveness of long acting versus intermediate acting insulin for patients with type 1 diabetes: systematic review and network meta-analysis Tricco, Andrea C Ashoor, Huda M Antony, Jesmin Beyene, Joseph Veroniki, Areti Angeliki Isaranuwatchai, Wanrudee Harrington, Alana Wilson, Charlotte Tsouros, Sophia Soobiah, Charlene Yu, Catherine H Hutton, Brian Hoch, Jeffrey S Hemmelgarn, Brenda R Moher, David Majumdar, Sumit R Straus, Sharon E BMJ Research Objective To examine the safety, effectiveness, and cost effectiveness of long acting insulin for type 1 diabetes. Design Systematic review and network meta-analysis. Data sources Medline, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Embase, and grey literature were searched through January 2013. Study selection Randomized controlled trials or non-randomized studies of long acting (glargine, detemir) and intermediate acting (neutral protamine Hagedorn (NPH), lente) insulin for adults with type 1 diabetes were included. Results 39 studies (27 randomized controlled trials including 7496 patients) were included after screening of 6501 titles/abstracts and 190 full text articles. Glargine once daily, detemir once daily, and detemir once/twice daily significantly reduced hemoglobin A(1c) compared with NPH once daily in network meta-analysis (26 randomized controlled trials, mean difference −0.39%, 95% confidence interval −0.59% to −0.19%; −0.26%, −0.48% to −0.03%; and −0.36%, −0.65% to −0.08%; respectively). Differences in network meta-analysis were observed between long acting and intermediate acting insulin for severe hypoglycemia (16 randomized controlled trials; detemir once/twice daily versus NPH once/twice daily: odds ratio 0.62, 95% confidence interval 0.42 to 0.91) and weight gain (13 randomized controlled trials; detemir once daily versus NPH once/twice daily: mean difference 4.04 kg, 3.06 to 5.02 kg; detemir once/twice daily versus NPH once daily: −5.51 kg, −6.56 to −4.46 kg; glargine once daily versus NPH once daily: −5.14 kg, −6.07 to −4.21). Compared with NPH, detemir was less costly and more effective in 3/14 cost effectiveness analyses and glargine was less costly and more effective in 2/8 cost effectiveness analyses. The remaining cost effectiveness analyses found that detemir and glargine were more costly but more effective than NPH. Glargine was not cost effective compared with detemir in 2/2 cost effectiveness analyses. Conclusions Long acting insulin analogs are probably superior to intermediate acting insulin analogs, although the difference is small for hemoglobin A(1c). Patients and their physicians should tailor their choice of insulin according to preference, cost, and accessibility. Systematic review registration PROSPERO CRD42013003610. BMJ Publishing Group Ltd. 2014-10-01 /pmc/articles/PMC4199252/ /pubmed/25274009 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.g5459 Text en © Tricco et al 2014 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 3.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/. |
spellingShingle | Research Tricco, Andrea C Ashoor, Huda M Antony, Jesmin Beyene, Joseph Veroniki, Areti Angeliki Isaranuwatchai, Wanrudee Harrington, Alana Wilson, Charlotte Tsouros, Sophia Soobiah, Charlene Yu, Catherine H Hutton, Brian Hoch, Jeffrey S Hemmelgarn, Brenda R Moher, David Majumdar, Sumit R Straus, Sharon E Safety, effectiveness, and cost effectiveness of long acting versus intermediate acting insulin for patients with type 1 diabetes: systematic review and network meta-analysis |
title | Safety, effectiveness, and cost effectiveness of long acting versus intermediate acting insulin for patients with type 1 diabetes: systematic review and network meta-analysis |
title_full | Safety, effectiveness, and cost effectiveness of long acting versus intermediate acting insulin for patients with type 1 diabetes: systematic review and network meta-analysis |
title_fullStr | Safety, effectiveness, and cost effectiveness of long acting versus intermediate acting insulin for patients with type 1 diabetes: systematic review and network meta-analysis |
title_full_unstemmed | Safety, effectiveness, and cost effectiveness of long acting versus intermediate acting insulin for patients with type 1 diabetes: systematic review and network meta-analysis |
title_short | Safety, effectiveness, and cost effectiveness of long acting versus intermediate acting insulin for patients with type 1 diabetes: systematic review and network meta-analysis |
title_sort | safety, effectiveness, and cost effectiveness of long acting versus intermediate acting insulin for patients with type 1 diabetes: systematic review and network meta-analysis |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4199252/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25274009 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.g5459 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT triccoandreac safetyeffectivenessandcosteffectivenessoflongactingversusintermediateactinginsulinforpatientswithtype1diabetessystematicreviewandnetworkmetaanalysis AT ashoorhudam safetyeffectivenessandcosteffectivenessoflongactingversusintermediateactinginsulinforpatientswithtype1diabetessystematicreviewandnetworkmetaanalysis AT antonyjesmin safetyeffectivenessandcosteffectivenessoflongactingversusintermediateactinginsulinforpatientswithtype1diabetessystematicreviewandnetworkmetaanalysis AT beyenejoseph safetyeffectivenessandcosteffectivenessoflongactingversusintermediateactinginsulinforpatientswithtype1diabetessystematicreviewandnetworkmetaanalysis AT veronikiaretiangeliki safetyeffectivenessandcosteffectivenessoflongactingversusintermediateactinginsulinforpatientswithtype1diabetessystematicreviewandnetworkmetaanalysis AT isaranuwatchaiwanrudee safetyeffectivenessandcosteffectivenessoflongactingversusintermediateactinginsulinforpatientswithtype1diabetessystematicreviewandnetworkmetaanalysis AT harringtonalana safetyeffectivenessandcosteffectivenessoflongactingversusintermediateactinginsulinforpatientswithtype1diabetessystematicreviewandnetworkmetaanalysis AT wilsoncharlotte safetyeffectivenessandcosteffectivenessoflongactingversusintermediateactinginsulinforpatientswithtype1diabetessystematicreviewandnetworkmetaanalysis AT tsourossophia safetyeffectivenessandcosteffectivenessoflongactingversusintermediateactinginsulinforpatientswithtype1diabetessystematicreviewandnetworkmetaanalysis AT soobiahcharlene safetyeffectivenessandcosteffectivenessoflongactingversusintermediateactinginsulinforpatientswithtype1diabetessystematicreviewandnetworkmetaanalysis AT yucatherineh safetyeffectivenessandcosteffectivenessoflongactingversusintermediateactinginsulinforpatientswithtype1diabetessystematicreviewandnetworkmetaanalysis AT huttonbrian safetyeffectivenessandcosteffectivenessoflongactingversusintermediateactinginsulinforpatientswithtype1diabetessystematicreviewandnetworkmetaanalysis AT hochjeffreys safetyeffectivenessandcosteffectivenessoflongactingversusintermediateactinginsulinforpatientswithtype1diabetessystematicreviewandnetworkmetaanalysis AT hemmelgarnbrendar safetyeffectivenessandcosteffectivenessoflongactingversusintermediateactinginsulinforpatientswithtype1diabetessystematicreviewandnetworkmetaanalysis AT moherdavid safetyeffectivenessandcosteffectivenessoflongactingversusintermediateactinginsulinforpatientswithtype1diabetessystematicreviewandnetworkmetaanalysis AT majumdarsumitr safetyeffectivenessandcosteffectivenessoflongactingversusintermediateactinginsulinforpatientswithtype1diabetessystematicreviewandnetworkmetaanalysis AT straussharone safetyeffectivenessandcosteffectivenessoflongactingversusintermediateactinginsulinforpatientswithtype1diabetessystematicreviewandnetworkmetaanalysis |