Background: The GoBolus study investigated the real-world effectiveness of faster aspart in patients with type 1 diabetes (T1D) using intermittent-scanning continuous glucose monitoring (iscCGM) systems. Methods: This 24-week, multicenter, single-arm, noninterventional study investigated adults with T1D (HbA 1c , 7.5%-9.5%) receiving multiple daily injections (MDI) of insulin and using iscCGM within local healthcare settings for ‡6 months before switching to faster aspart at study start (week 0; baseline). Primary endpoint was HbA 1c change from baseline to week 24. Exploratory endpoint was change in iscCGM metrics from baseline to week 24. Results: Overall, 243 patients were included (55.6% male), with mean age/diabetes duration, 49.9/18.8 years; mean HbA 1c , 8.1%. By week 24, HbA 1c had decreased by 0.19% (-2.1 mmol/mol, P < 0.0001) with no mean change in insulin doses or basal/bolus insulin ratios. For patients with sufficient available iscCGM data (n = 92): ''time in range'' (TIR; 3.9-10.0 mmol/L) increased from 46.9% to 50.1% (P = 0.01), corresponding to an increase of 46.1 min/day; time in hyperglycemia decreased from 49.1% to 46.1% (>10.0 mmol/L, P = 0.026) and 20.4% to 17.9% (>13.9 mmol/L, P = 0.013), corresponding to 43.5 (P = 0.024) and 35.6 (P = 0.015) fewer minutes per day on average spent in these ranges, respectively; no change for time in hypoglycemia (<3.9 and <3.0 mmol/L). Mean interstitial and postprandial glucose improved from 10.4 to 10.1 mmol/L (P = 0.035) and 11.9 to 11.0 mmol/L (P = 0.002), respectively. Conclusion: Real-world switching to faster aspart in adults with T1D on MDI improved HbA 1c , increased TIR, and decreased time in hyperglycemia without affecting time in hypoglycemia. The GoBolus study: NCT03450863.
Objective: Matrix metalloproteinases (MMPs) substantially contribute to the development of chronicity in wounds. Thus, MMP-inhibiting dressings may support healing. A systematic review was performed to determine the existing evidence base for the treatment of hard-to-heal wounds with these dressings. Methods: A systematic literature search in databases and clinical trial registers was conducted to identify randomised controlled trials (RCTs) investigating the efficacy of MMP-inhibiting dressings. Studies were analysed regarding their quality and clinical evidence. Results: Of 721 hits, 16 relevant studies were assessed. There were 13 studies performed with collagen and three with technology lipido-colloid nano oligosaccharide factor (TLC-NOSF) dressings. Indications included diabetic foot ulcers, venous leg ulcers, pressure ulcers or wounds of mixed origin. Patient-relevant endpoints comprised wound size reduction, complete wound closure, healing time and rate. Considerable differences in the quality and subsequent clinical evidence exist between the studies identified. Substantial evidence for significant improvement in healing was identified only for some dressings. Conclusion: Evidence for the superiority of some MMP-inhibiting wound dressings exists regarding wound closure, wound size reduction, healing time and healing rate. More research is required to substantiate the existing evidence for different types of hard-to-heal wounds and to generate evidence for some of the different types of MMP-inhibiting wound dressings.
After stopping oral antidiabetic drugs in type 2 diabetes mellitus, insulin aspart in comparison to human regular insulin decreased effectively HbA1c levels without significant difference. Moreover, insulin aspart in comparison to human regular insulin does not have any substantial benefits concerning metabolic effects and adipocytokines in type 2 diabetes mellitus over a 24 months treatment period.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.