Comparative efficacy and safety of Gla‐300 versus insulin degludec/aspart (IDegAsp) in insulin‐naïve people with type 2 diabetes mellitus uncontrolled on oral anti‐diabetics
Pooled result · Change in HbA1c (%) from baselineResult — go to the resultMean difference 0.10 % 95% CI −0.20 to 0.39Authors' conclusion
In insulin-naïve patients with T2D inadequately controlled on OADs, commencing Gla-300 shows a comparable HbA1c reduction, but with significantly less weight gain and a lower incidence of any and confirmed hypoglycaemia compared with commencing IDegAsp.
Study context
- Population
- Insulin-naïve adults with T2D inadequately controlled (HbA1c ≥7.0%) on OADs4 trials
- Comparison
- Gla-300 once daily vs IDegAsp once daily
- Outcome
- Change in HbA1c (%) from baseline
- Follow-up
- 24-28 weeks
Methodological detailsmeta-analysis
- Meta-analysis
Pooled result
As reported in the abstract
Mean difference
0.10 %
95% CI −0.20 to 0.39
P = 0.52
Gla-300vs IDegAsp
mean difference 0.10 % (95% CI −0.20 to 0.39); P = 0.52
Further pooled results
| Outcome | Mean difference (kg) (95% CI) | P value | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Change in body weight from baseline · 24-28 weeks | −1.31 (−1.97 to −0.65) | P < 0.05 | |
| −2−101Difference, kg (linear scale) |
Insulin dose
- No significant differences for insulin dose
Safety
| Outcome | OR (95% CI) | P value | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Incidence of any hypoglycaemia · 24-28 weeks | 0.62 (0.41–0.93) | P < 0.05 | |
| Incidence of anytime confirmed hypoglycaemia (plasma glucose <3.0-3.1 mmol/L) · 24-28 weeks | 0.47 (0.25–0.87) | P < 0.05 | |
| 0.20.5125Odds ratio (log scale) |
Adverse events
- No significant differences for adverse events
Original publication
Comparative efficacy and safety of Gla‐300 versus IDegAsp in insulin‐naïve people with type 2 diabetes mellitus uncontrolled on oral anti‐diabetics. Diabetes Obes Metab. Published 13 June 2023. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →