ArticleDiabetes therapy : research, treatment and education of diabetes and related disorders2021
Effectiveness and Safety of Insulin Glargine 300 U/ml in Comparison with Insulin Degludec 100 U/ml Evaluated with Continuous Glucose Monitoring in Adults with Type 1 Diabetes and Suboptimal Glycemic Control in Routine Clinical Practice: The OneCARE Study.
Article in Diabetes therapy : research, treatment and education of diabetes and related disorders, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Continuous glucose monitoring-based time-in-range using insulin glargine 300 units/ml versus insulin degludec 100 units/ml in type 1 diabetes: The head-to-head randomized controlled InRange trial.Diabetes, obesity & metabolism · 2023Trial
- Advancing Type 1 Diabetes Management: Integrating Novel Therapies, Technologies, and Adjunctive Approaches.Diabetes care · 2026Review
- Safety and Effectiveness of Glargine 300 U/ml After Switching from Basal Insulins in Patients with Type 1 Diabetes: COMET-T Study.Diabetes therapy : research, treatment and education of diabetes and related disorders · 2025Article
- Effectiveness of switching from first-generation basal insulin to Glargine 300 U/mL in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes: results from the ISPED CARD database.Acta diabetologica · 2024Observational
- Impact of Continuous Glucose Monitoring and its Glucometrics in Clinical Practice in Spain and Future Perspectives: A Narrative Review.Advances in therapy · 2024Review
- Insulin Glargine in Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus: A Review of Clinical Trials and Real-world Evidence Across Two Decades.Current diabetes reviews · 2024Review
- Use of Second-Generation Basal Insulin Gla-300 in Special Populations: A Narrative Mini-Review.Current diabetes reviews · 2023Review
- Insulin Glargine 300 U/mL Therapy in Children and Adolescents with Type 1 Diabetes.Paediatric drugs · 2022Review
- Controlling glycemic variability in people living with type 1 diabetes receiving insulin glargine 300 U/mL (Gla-300).BMJ open diabetes research & care · 2022Review
- Diurnal Variation of Real-Life Insulin Sensitivity Factor Among Children and Adolescents With Type 1 Diabetes Using Ultra-Long-Acting Basal Insulin Analogs.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionData regarding efficacy of second-generation basal insulins (BI) using continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) come from clinical trials. We evaluated the effectiveness of insulin glargine 300 U/ml (Gla-300) compared to insulin degludec 100 U/ml (IDeg-100) in terms of percentage of time in range (TIR); 70-180 mg/dl was obtained from CGM in sub-optimally controlled patients with type 1 diabetes (T1D) in routine clinical practice.
methodsThis observational, multicenter, cross-sectional study included patients with T1D (> 3 years diabetes duration, HbA
resultsOne hundred ninety-nine people with T1D were included [42.6 ± 13.4 (mean ± SD) years, 18.4 ± 10.4 years diabetes duration]; 104 received Gla-300, 95 IDeg-100. TIR 70-180 throughout whole day was similar in both groups, 52.4 ± 14.0 vs. 49.3 ± 13.9% Gla-300/IDeg-100, respectively. At night, TIR 70-180 and TIR 70-140 were significantly higher in the Gla-300 group compared to the IDeg-100 (52.4 vs. 46.2 and 31.8 vs. 26.9%, respectively, p = 0.0209 and p = 0.0182), and time above range (180) was significantly lower in the Gla-300 group (40.1% vs. 47.2%, p = 0.0199). Additional CGM glucometric data were comparable in both groups. Patient treatment satisfaction score assessed through the Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire (DTSQ) was high and similar for both insulins.
conclusionThis real-world study shows the effectiveness and safety of Gla-300 are more similar to than different from IDeg-100, with a slightly better nocturnal glucose profile, in sub-optimally controlled T1D patients switching from a first-generation BI.
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.