Cargando…
Efficacy, safety and cost-effectiveness comparison between U-100 human regular insulin and rapid acting insulin when delivered by V-Go wearable insulin delivery device in type 2 diabetes
INTRODUCTION: We compared the efficacy and safety of human regular insulin (HRI) versus rapid-acting insulin (RAI) in a type 2 diabetes population already using the V-Go insulin delivery device. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: This was a 14-week, multicenter, randomized, open-label, parallel-group, pha...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BMJ Publishing Group
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7678232/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33214190 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjdrc-2020-001832 |
_version_ | 1783612114304237568 |
---|---|
author | Mora, Pablo F Sutton, David R Gore, Ashwini Baliga, Bantwal Goldfaden, Rebecca F Nikkel, Carla Sink II, John Adams-Huet, Beverley |
author_facet | Mora, Pablo F Sutton, David R Gore, Ashwini Baliga, Bantwal Goldfaden, Rebecca F Nikkel, Carla Sink II, John Adams-Huet, Beverley |
author_sort | Mora, Pablo F |
collection | PubMed |
description | INTRODUCTION: We compared the efficacy and safety of human regular insulin (HRI) versus rapid-acting insulin (RAI) in a type 2 diabetes population already using the V-Go insulin delivery device. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: This was a 14-week, multicenter, randomized, open-label, parallel-group, phase IV, non-inferiority study. Patients ≥21years of age, with inadequately controlled type 2 diabetes who were currently using the V-Go insulin delivery system with RAI, with glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) ≥6.5% (≥48 mmol/L) to ≤12.5% (≤108 mmol/L) were randomized 1:1 to RAI continuation or switch to HRI. The primary outcome was estimated treatment difference (ETD) in HbA1c least-squares mean change from baseline at 14 weeks (prespecified non-inferiority hypothesis with 95% CI upper limit <0.4%). Primary analysis was by per protocol (PP); safety analysis was by intention to treat. RESULTS: We randomized 136 patients to continued RAI treatment (n=67) or HRI (n=69); 113 patients were included in the PP analysis (RAI, n=54; HRI, n=59). Mean change in HbA1c from baseline to study end was −0.60±1.1% (95% CI −0.90 to –0.29); −6.6±12.0 mmol/mol (95% CI −9.8 to −3.2) with HRI treatment and −0.38±1.3% (95% CI −0.70 to –0.05); −4.2±14.2 mmol/mol (95% CI −7.7 to −0.5) with RAI treatment, with ETD of −0.22% (95% CI −0.67 to 0.22); −2.4 mmol/mol (95% CI −7.3 to 2.4), p=0.007, confirming non-inferiority of HRI to RAI. No between-group differences in changes in total daily insulin doses, number of hypoglycemic values (≤70 mg/dL (≤39 mmol/L) or body weight were observed. No severe hypoglycemic events were reported. Direct pharmacy cost savings (−US$265.85; 95% CI −US$288.60 to −US$243.11; p<0.0001) were observed with HRI treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Individuals with type 2 diabetes requiring insulin can be treated with V-Go wearable insulin delivery device using HRI, safely and effectively, and potentially at a much lower cost compared with RAI, which can lead to improved access to insulin therapy for these individuals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03495908. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7678232 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | BMJ Publishing Group |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-76782322020-11-30 Efficacy, safety and cost-effectiveness comparison between U-100 human regular insulin and rapid acting insulin when delivered by V-Go wearable insulin delivery device in type 2 diabetes Mora, Pablo F Sutton, David R Gore, Ashwini Baliga, Bantwal Goldfaden, Rebecca F Nikkel, Carla Sink II, John Adams-Huet, Beverley BMJ Open Diabetes Res Care Emerging Technologies, Pharmacology and Therapeutics INTRODUCTION: We compared the efficacy and safety of human regular insulin (HRI) versus rapid-acting insulin (RAI) in a type 2 diabetes population already using the V-Go insulin delivery device. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: This was a 14-week, multicenter, randomized, open-label, parallel-group, phase IV, non-inferiority study. Patients ≥21years of age, with inadequately controlled type 2 diabetes who were currently using the V-Go insulin delivery system with RAI, with glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) ≥6.5% (≥48 mmol/L) to ≤12.5% (≤108 mmol/L) were randomized 1:1 to RAI continuation or switch to HRI. The primary outcome was estimated treatment difference (ETD) in HbA1c least-squares mean change from baseline at 14 weeks (prespecified non-inferiority hypothesis with 95% CI upper limit <0.4%). Primary analysis was by per protocol (PP); safety analysis was by intention to treat. RESULTS: We randomized 136 patients to continued RAI treatment (n=67) or HRI (n=69); 113 patients were included in the PP analysis (RAI, n=54; HRI, n=59). Mean change in HbA1c from baseline to study end was −0.60±1.1% (95% CI −0.90 to –0.29); −6.6±12.0 mmol/mol (95% CI −9.8 to −3.2) with HRI treatment and −0.38±1.3% (95% CI −0.70 to –0.05); −4.2±14.2 mmol/mol (95% CI −7.7 to −0.5) with RAI treatment, with ETD of −0.22% (95% CI −0.67 to 0.22); −2.4 mmol/mol (95% CI −7.3 to 2.4), p=0.007, confirming non-inferiority of HRI to RAI. No between-group differences in changes in total daily insulin doses, number of hypoglycemic values (≤70 mg/dL (≤39 mmol/L) or body weight were observed. No severe hypoglycemic events were reported. Direct pharmacy cost savings (−US$265.85; 95% CI −US$288.60 to −US$243.11; p<0.0001) were observed with HRI treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Individuals with type 2 diabetes requiring insulin can be treated with V-Go wearable insulin delivery device using HRI, safely and effectively, and potentially at a much lower cost compared with RAI, which can lead to improved access to insulin therapy for these individuals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03495908. BMJ Publishing Group 2020-11-19 /pmc/articles/PMC7678232/ /pubmed/33214190 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjdrc-2020-001832 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) 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, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/. |
spellingShingle | Emerging Technologies, Pharmacology and Therapeutics Mora, Pablo F Sutton, David R Gore, Ashwini Baliga, Bantwal Goldfaden, Rebecca F Nikkel, Carla Sink II, John Adams-Huet, Beverley Efficacy, safety and cost-effectiveness comparison between U-100 human regular insulin and rapid acting insulin when delivered by V-Go wearable insulin delivery device in type 2 diabetes |
title | Efficacy, safety and cost-effectiveness comparison between U-100 human regular insulin and rapid acting insulin when delivered by V-Go wearable insulin delivery device in type 2 diabetes |
title_full | Efficacy, safety and cost-effectiveness comparison between U-100 human regular insulin and rapid acting insulin when delivered by V-Go wearable insulin delivery device in type 2 diabetes |
title_fullStr | Efficacy, safety and cost-effectiveness comparison between U-100 human regular insulin and rapid acting insulin when delivered by V-Go wearable insulin delivery device in type 2 diabetes |
title_full_unstemmed | Efficacy, safety and cost-effectiveness comparison between U-100 human regular insulin and rapid acting insulin when delivered by V-Go wearable insulin delivery device in type 2 diabetes |
title_short | Efficacy, safety and cost-effectiveness comparison between U-100 human regular insulin and rapid acting insulin when delivered by V-Go wearable insulin delivery device in type 2 diabetes |
title_sort | efficacy, safety and cost-effectiveness comparison between u-100 human regular insulin and rapid acting insulin when delivered by v-go wearable insulin delivery device in type 2 diabetes |
topic | Emerging Technologies, Pharmacology and Therapeutics |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7678232/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33214190 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjdrc-2020-001832 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT morapablof efficacysafetyandcosteffectivenesscomparisonbetweenu100humanregularinsulinandrapidactinginsulinwhendeliveredbyvgowearableinsulindeliverydeviceintype2diabetes AT suttondavidr efficacysafetyandcosteffectivenesscomparisonbetweenu100humanregularinsulinandrapidactinginsulinwhendeliveredbyvgowearableinsulindeliverydeviceintype2diabetes AT goreashwini efficacysafetyandcosteffectivenesscomparisonbetweenu100humanregularinsulinandrapidactinginsulinwhendeliveredbyvgowearableinsulindeliverydeviceintype2diabetes AT baligabantwal efficacysafetyandcosteffectivenesscomparisonbetweenu100humanregularinsulinandrapidactinginsulinwhendeliveredbyvgowearableinsulindeliverydeviceintype2diabetes AT goldfadenrebeccaf efficacysafetyandcosteffectivenesscomparisonbetweenu100humanregularinsulinandrapidactinginsulinwhendeliveredbyvgowearableinsulindeliverydeviceintype2diabetes AT nikkelcarla efficacysafetyandcosteffectivenesscomparisonbetweenu100humanregularinsulinandrapidactinginsulinwhendeliveredbyvgowearableinsulindeliverydeviceintype2diabetes AT sinkiijohn efficacysafetyandcosteffectivenesscomparisonbetweenu100humanregularinsulinandrapidactinginsulinwhendeliveredbyvgowearableinsulindeliverydeviceintype2diabetes AT adamshuetbeverley efficacysafetyandcosteffectivenesscomparisonbetweenu100humanregularinsulinandrapidactinginsulinwhendeliveredbyvgowearableinsulindeliverydeviceintype2diabetes |