Evidence mapPaperPMID 24957785Full record

Trial reportDiabetes, obesity & metabolism2015

Modulation of insulin dose titration using a hypoglycaemia-sensitive algorithm: insulin glargine versus neutral protamine Hagedorn insulin in insulin-naïve people with type 2 diabetes.

P D Home, G B Bolli, C Mathieu, C Deerochanawong, W Landgraf, C Candelas, V Pilorget, M-P Dain, M C Riddle

Open access · hybridAbstract readComparative StudyMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Diabetes, obesity & metabolism, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 14% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Guideline
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Review
  6. The Comparative Dosing and Glycemic Control of Intermediate and Long-Acting Insulins in Adult Patients With Type 1 and 2 Diabetes Mellitus.The Journal of pharmacy technology : jPT : official publication of the Association of Pharmacy Technicians · 2022
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 7 institutions in 7 countries.

P D HomeInstitute for Cellular Medicine - Diabetes, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.
G B Bolli
C Mathieu
C Deerochanawong
W Landgraf
C Candelas
V Pilorget
M-P Dain
M C Riddle
Sanofi (France) · FRNewcastle University · GBOregon Health & Science University · USRangsit University · THSanofi (Germany) · DEUniversitair Ziekenhuis Leuven · BEUniversity of Perugia · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimsTo examine whether insulin glargine can lead to better control of glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) than that achieved by neutral protamine Hagedorn (NPH) insulin, using a protocol designed to limit nocturnal hypoglycaemia.

methodsThe present study, the Least One Oral Antidiabetic Drug Treatment (LANCELOT) Study, was a 36-week, randomized, open-label, parallel-arm study conducted in Europe, Asia, the Middle East and South America. Participants were randomized (1:1) to begin glargine or NPH, on background of metformin with glimepiride. Weekly insulin titration aimed to achieve median prebreakfast and nocturnal plasma glucose levels ≤5.5 mmol/l, while limiting values ≤4.4 mmol/l.

resultsThe efficacy population (n = 701) had a mean age of 57 years, a mean body mass index of 29.8 kg/m², a mean duration of diabetes of 9.2 years and a mean HbA1c level of 8.2% (66 mmol/mol). At treatment end, HbA1c values and the proportion of participants with HbA1c <7.0 % (<53 mmol/mol) were not significantly different for glargine [7.1 % (54 mmol/mol) and 50.3%] versus NPH [7.2 % (55 mmol/mol) and 44.3%]. The rate of symptomatic nocturnal hypoglycaemia, confirmed by plasma glucose ≤3.9 or ≤3.1 mmol/l, was 29 and 48% less with glargine than with NPH insulin. Other outcomes were similar between the groups.

conclusionInsulin glargine was not superior to NPH insulin in improving glycaemic control. The insulin dosing algorithm was not sufficient to equalize nocturnal hypoglycaemia between the two insulins. This study confirms, in a globally heterogeneous population, the reduction achieved in nocturnal hypoglycaemia while attaining good glycaemic control with insulin glargine compared with NPH, even when titrating basal insulin to prevent nocturnal hypoglycaemia rather than treating according to normal fasting glucose levels.

Indexed as

Drug ResistanceAgedAsiaBlood Glucose Self-MonitoringCircadian RhythmDiabetes Mellitus, Type 2Drug Dosage CalculationsDrug Therapy, CombinationEuropeFemaleGlycated HemoglobinHumansHyperglycemiaHypoglycemiaHypoglycemic AgentsInsulin GlargineglimepirideGlycated Hemoglobinhemoglobin A1c protein, humanHypoglycemic AgentsInsulin GlargineInsulin, IsophaneInsulin, Long-ActingMetforminSulfonylurea Compoundshypoglycaemia-sensitive algorithminsulin glargineNPH insulin

Identifiers

PMID24957785
PMCPMC4282751
OpenAlexW2059616065

What Socratic holds

Texttitle and abstract
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.