ArticleAdvances in therapy2019
A Propensity Score Matched Comparison of Brand and Biosimilar Basal Insulin in Non-Critical Hospitalized Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus.
Article in Advances in therapy, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionComparisons between brand and biosimilar basal insulin in hospitalized patients are lacking. We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of brand insulin glargine vs. biosimilar insulin glargine in non-critical hospitalized patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM).
methodsThis retrospective study was conducted using the electronic medical records of 194,006 patients at the Qingdao Endocrine and Diabetes Hospital between January 2006 and December 2017. A total of 476 patients diagnosed with T2DM, hospitalized, and treated with subcutaneous insulin glargine were included. After propensity score matching (1:3), patients who received biosimilar insulin glargine (Basalin) (n = 34) were compared to a matched group of patients who received brand insulin glargine (Lantus) (n = 101). Outcome measures were changes in fasting blood glucose (FBG), the incidence of hypoglycemia, and insulin dose.
resultsCompared to patients who received Basalin, patients who received Lantus achieved more reduction in FBG during insulin treatment (- 1.24 mmol/L vs. - 2.20 mmol/L; p = 0.04) and had a lower mean FBG at the end of treatment (8.20 mmol/L vs. 7.26 mmol/L; p = 0.12). Patients in Basalin and Lantus groups had a comparable mean daily dose of basal insulin at initiation (0.19 vs. 0.18 IU/kg; p = 0.30) and end of treatment (0.21 vs. 0.21 IU/kg; p = 0.99), and a similar duration of basal insulin treatment (16.4 vs. 15.3 days; p = 0.74). Hypoglycemia was infrequent in both Basalin and Lantus treatment (one vs. four patients, respectively; p = 1.00) and no severe hypoglycemic events were reported.
conclusionIn a non-critical hospital setting, subcutaneous treatment with Lantus brought significant FBG improvement without increased hypoglycemic risk.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
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.