A Randomized Trial Comparing Continuous Subcutaneous Insulin Infusion of Insulin Aspart Versus Insulin Lispro in Children and Adolescents With Type 1 Diabetes

Weinzimer, Stuart A.; Ternand, Christine; Howard, Craig D.; Chang, Cheng‐Tao; Becker, Dorothy J.; Laffel, Lori

doi:10.2337/dc07-1378

Cited by 49 publications

(32 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Superiority in improvement of glycemic control and reduction of frequency hypoglycemia in our patients after using GLU as compared with previous Caucasian studies has some possible explanations. First, Japanese meals are known to traditionally have a higher carbohydrate energy ratio and a lower fat energy ratio than meals in Western countries.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 38%

Efficacy and safety of switching to insulin glulisine from other rapid‐acting insulin analogs in children with type 1 diabetes

Urakami

Kuwabara

Habu

et al. 2014

J of Diabetes Invest

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We investigated the efficacy and safety of switching to insulin glulisine (GLU) from other rapid-acting insulin analogs (Ra) in children with type 1 diabetes treated with multiple daily injections of insulin or continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion. A total of 26 children with type 1 diabetes were included. Ra in all of these patients was changed to GLU, and they were observed for a 6-month period after having previously finished treatment with other Ra. The mean glycated hemoglobin value decreased from 7.6 ± 1.0 to 7.4 ± 0.9% (P = 0.0034), and mean plasma glucose values after breakfast and supper also improved from 183 ± 50 to 153 ± 32 mg/dL (P = 0.0035), and from 203 ± 29 to 164 ± 23 mg/dL (P < 0.0001), respectively. Furthermore, the mean frequency of hypoglycemia was reduced from 7 ± 6 to 4 ± 4/month (P = 0.0004), while insulin doses and obesity degree were stable with statistically non-significant differences. In conclusion, switching to GLU might be a good treatment option for improving glycemic control in children with type 1 diabetes.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 38%

Efficacy and safety of switching to insulin glulisine from other rapid‐acting insulin analogs in children with type 1 diabetes

Urakami

Kuwabara

Habu

et al. 2014

J of Diabetes Invest

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Since the inception of continuous insulin infusion by insulin pumps (CSII) in the 1970s, the popularity of CSII has been increasing (2). CSII is intensive insulin therapy which attempts to mimic physiological insulin release by administration of 24-hour adjustable basal rates and flexible mealtime bolus doses (3). Many studies have been done comparing CSII with multiple daily insulin (MDI) injections as regards to its efficacy and safety.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Long-term Efficacy of Insulin Pump Therapy in Children with Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus

Batajoo¹,

Messina²,

Wilson³

2012

Jcrpe

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: Insulin pumps have been well established for insulin delivery. However, questions about long-term efficacy of insulin pump therapy still remain. We evaluated the long-term efficacy of continuous insulin infusion pump therapy (CSII) in pediatric patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM).Methods: This was a retrospective observational study which included 131 patients with T1DM who transitioned to an insulin pump from multiple daily insulin (MDI) injections between 1999 and 2009 and were followed by one endocrinologist. Data were collected from 6 months prior to switching to CSII to 30 months after initiation of CSII and included glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) and insulin requirement. Of the 131 patients, 45 had complete data consisting of a visit and HbA1c every 6 months for 30 months after transition to CSII and were included for analysis. Results: Mean HbA1c prior to starting the CSII was 8.0 +0.9 %, 7.7 +1.0 % at 6 months and 7.8+1.2 % at 1 yr post initiation of CSII. However, at 30 months, HbA1c increased to 8.0+1.3%. A trend in transient improvement in HbA1c was limited only to those patients >11 yr of age and those requiring >0.75 u/kg/day of insulin at transition and was not seen in those <11 yr of age or those requiring <0.75 u/kg/day and did not persist beyond 1 year. Conclusions: There was no long-term significant difference in glycemic control in patients with CSII as compared to MDI. Conflict of interest:None declared.

show abstract

“…Interestingly, Weinzimer et al recently randomised almost 300 children and adolescents to 16 weeks of CSII therapy with insulin lispro or aspart. 20 Although a numerically greater reduction in HbA 1c with aspart did not reach statistical significance, more patients treated with aspart (59.7%) achieved target HbA 1c levels compared with patients treated with lispro (43.8%; p=0.04).…”

Section: Glycaemic Controlmentioning

confidence: 77%

Review: The pros and cons of continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) therapy in the paediatric population and practical considerations when choosing and initiating CSII in children

Campbell

2008

Diabetes & Vascular Disease

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

C SII (continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion), has the potential to improve long-term glycaemic control in many patients with type 1 diabetes. CSII may also reduce the incidence of hypoglycaemic episodes, especially in patients prone to hypoglycaemia, and may reduce glycaemic variability. A pivotal advantage of CSII over MDIs (multiple daily injection), especially in children, is its superior convenience and flexibility. Programmable basal rates are delivered automatically and with unprecedented precision, while bolus doses can easily be used to titrate insulin exposure around meals and activities and to correct hyperglycaemia. The subcutaneous cannula needs to be re-sited only once every 2-3 days. In light of these advantages, CSII is generally preferred by children and parents. Careful patient selection is crucial, however, as CSII users and their carers must be willing and able to use the equipment correctly, as well as to perform general aspects of intensive self-care. Accordingly, CSII should be initiated only by a specialist, multidisciplinary team and in conjunction with a structured, ongoing educational and monitoring programme. Factors affecting the selection of a particular pump include the size and weight of the device, ease of use, range of dose modes and increments, cost, warranty and customer services. Br J Diabetes Vasc Dis 2008; 8(Suppl 1): S6-10

show abstract

A Randomized Trial Comparing Continuous Subcutaneous Insulin Infusion of Insulin Aspart Versus Insulin Lispro in Children and Adolescents With Type 1 Diabetes

Cited by 49 publications

References 21 publications

Efficacy and safety of switching to insulin glulisine from other rapid‐acting insulin analogs in children with type 1 diabetes

Efficacy and safety of switching to insulin glulisine from other rapid‐acting insulin analogs in children with type 1 diabetes

Long-term Efficacy of Insulin Pump Therapy in Children with Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus

Review: The pros and cons of continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) therapy in the paediatric population and practical considerations when choosing and initiating CSII in children

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About