Evidence mapPaperPMID 25683037Full record

Trial reportPediatric diabetes2015

Insulin degludec in combination with bolus insulin aspart is safe and effective in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes.

Nandu Thalange, Larry Deeb, Violeta Iotova, Tomoyuki Kawamura, Georgeanna Klingensmith, Areti Philotheou, Janet Silverstein, Stefano Tumini, Ann-Marie Ocampo Francisco, Ona Kinduryte and 1 more

Registry-linked trialOpen access · hybridAbstract readComparative StudyMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Pediatric diabetes, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01513473 (A 26-week, Multinational, Multi-centre, Open-Labelled, Randomised, Parallel, Efficacy and Safety Comparison of Insulin Degludec and Insulin Detemir in Children and Adolescents 1 to Less Than 18 Years With Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus on a Basal-bolus Regimen With Insulin Aspart as Bolus Insulin, Followed by a 26-week Extension Investigating Long Term Safety), which is not on this map. Cited by 26 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
8.3field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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.

NCT01513473 phase3completednot on this map

A 26-week, Multinational, Multi-centre, Open-Labelled, Randomised, Parallel, Efficacy and Safety Comparison of Insulin Degludec and Insulin Detemir in Children and Adolescents 1 to Less Than 18 Years With Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus on a Basal-bolus Regimen With Insulin Aspart as Bolus Insulin, Followed by a 26-week Extension Investigating Long Term Safety (BEGIN™: Young 1)

TypeinterventionalSponsorNovo Nordisk A/SRan2012 to 2013Enrolled350ConditionsDiabetes, Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1Armsinsulin degludec, insulin detemir, insulin aspart
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

26 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 91 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. American Association of Clinical Endocrinology Clinical Practice Guideline: Developing a Diabetes Mellitus Comprehensive Care Plan-2022 Update.Endocrine practice : official journal of the American College of Endocrinology and the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists · 2022
    Guideline
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. In-Hospital Management of Hyperglycemia: The Role of Insulin Degludec.Diabetes therapy : research, treatment and education of diabetes and related disorders · 2025
    Review
  8. Observational
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Clinical Use of Degludec in Children and Adolescents with T1D: A Narrative Review with Fictionalized Case Reports.Diabetes therapy : research, treatment and education of diabetes and related disorders · 2019
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Pharmacotherapy of type1 diabetes in children and adolescents: more than insulin?Therapeutic advances in endocrinology and metabolism · 2018
    Review
  19. Article
  20. 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

11 authors at 10 institutions in 8 countries.

Nandu ThalangeJenny Lind Children's Department, Norfolk & Norwich University Hospital, Norwich, UK.
Larry Deeb
Violeta Iotova
Tomoyuki Kawamura
Georgeanna Klingensmith
Areti Philotheou
Janet Silverstein
Stefano Tumini
Ann-Marie Ocampo Francisco
Ona Kinduryte
Thomas Danne
Novo Nordisk (Denmark) · DKFlorida Department of Education · USKinderkrankenhaus auf der Bult · DENorfolk and Norwich University Hospital · GBOsaka City University · JPOspedale SS. Annunziata · ITResearch ICT Africa · ZAUniversity Hospital St. Marina · BGUniversity of California, Davis · USUniversity of Florida Health · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Insulin degludec (IDeg) once-daily was compared with insulin detemir (IDet) once- or twice-daily, with prandial insulin aspart in a treat-to-target, randomized controlled trial in children 1-17 yr with type 1 diabetes, for 26 wk (n = 350), followed by a 26-wk extension (n = 280). Participants were randomized to receive either IDeg once daily at the same time each day or IDet given once or twice daily according to local labeling. Aspart was titrated according to a sliding scale or in accordance with an insulin:carbohydrate ratio and a plasma glucose correction factor. Randomization was age-stratified: 85 subjects 1-5 yr. (IDeg: 43), 138 6-11 yr (IDeg: 70) and 127 12-17 yr (IDeg: 61) were included. Baseline characteristics were generally similar between groups overall and within each stratification. Non-inferiority of IDeg vs. IDet was confirmed for HbA1c at 26 wk; estimated treatment difference (ETD) 0.15% [-0.03; 0.32]95% CI . At 52 wk, HbA1c was 7.9% (IDeg) vs. 7.8% (IDet), NS; change in mean FPG was -1.29 mmol/L (IDeg) vs. +1.10 mmol/L (IDet) (ETD -1.62 mmol/L [-2.84; -0.41]95% CI , p = 0.0090) and mean basal insulin dose was 0.38 U/kg (IDeg) vs. 0.55 U/kg (IDet). The majority of IDet treated patients (64%) required twice-daily administration to achieve glycemic targets. Hypoglycemia rates did not differ significantly between IDeg and IDet, but confirmed and severe hypoglycemia rates were numerically higher with IDeg (57.7 vs. 54.1 patient-years of exposure (PYE) [NS] and 0.51 vs. 0.33, PYE [NS], respectively) although nocturnal hypoglycemia rates were numerically lower (6.0 vs. 7.6 PYE, NS). Rates of hyperglycemia with ketosis were significantly lower for IDeg vs. IDet [0.7 vs. 1.1 PYE, treatment ratio 0.41 (0.22; 0.78)95% CI , p = 0.0066]. Both treatments were well tolerated with comparable rates of adverse events. IDeg achieved equivalent long-term glycemic control, as measured by HbA1c with a significant FPG reduction at a 30% lower basal insulin dose when compared with IDet. Rates of hypoglycemia did not differ significantly between the two treatment groups; however, hyperglycemia with ketosis was significantly reduced in those treated with IDeg.

Indexed as

AdolescentChildChild, PreschoolDiabetes Mellitus, Type 1Diabetic KetoacidosisDrug Therapy, CombinationGlycated HemoglobinHumansHypoglycemiaHypoglycemic AgentsInfantInsulin AspartInsulin DetemirInsulin, Long-ActingGlycated Hemoglobinhemoglobin A1c protein, humanHypoglycemic AgentsInsulin Aspartinsulin degludecInsulin DetemirInsulin, Long-Actingadolescentschildreninsulin degludectype 1 diabetes

Identifiers

PMID25683037
PMCPMC4413367
OpenAlexW1914544081

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

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.