4.4 Article

A comparison of clinical efficacy and economic value in Basalin- and Lantus-treated patients with type 2 diabetes using continuous glucose monitoring system

Journal

JOURNAL OF ENDOCRINOLOGICAL INVESTIGATION
Volume 41, Issue 2, Pages 179-184

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s40618-017-0712-0

Keywords

Glargine; CGMS; Glycemic excursion; T2DM

Funding

  1. fund of Scientific and Technological Development Program of Jiangsu Province of China [BL2014010]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Aim To determine the clinical non-inferiority of recombinant glargine-Basalin vs glargine-Lantus, in treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) using continuous glucose monitoring system (CGMS). Methods One hundred patients with T2DM were recruited. They were either regularly taking Basalin (Basalin group) or Lantus (Lantus group) (n = 50 each). CGMS was employed to real-time monitor blood glucose profile for 4 days (from day 1 to day 5). To exclude the effect of patient background, the study design was to have a blinded crossover from glargine-Basalin to glargine-Lantus on day 3, and vice versa. 24-hour mean blood glucose (24hMBG), 24-hour standard deviation of blood glucose (24hSDBG), 24-hour mean amplitude of glycemic excursion (24hMAGE), and number of glycemic excursion (NGE) every 24 h (24hNGE) were calculated for each glargine from 100 patients. Results No significant difference of 24hMBG, 24hSDBG, 24hMAGE, and 24hNGE (p > 0.05 for all) was found between Basalin and Lantus treatments. The glucose area under the curve and time when blood glucose was below 3.9 mmol/L, between 3.9 and 10.0 mmol/L, or above 10.0 mmol/L were similar between Basalin and Lantus treatment. The frequency of hypoglycemic episodes was also similar. However, the mean cost of Basalin was only 72% of Lantus's in one treatment course. Conclusion Glargine-Basalin is non-inferior in clinical efficacy compared to glargine-Lantus. In view of the large difference in the cost of glargine-Basalin, it would be much more cost-effective for our patients.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available