z-logo
Premium
A randomized trial comparing the rate of hypoglycemia—assessed using continuous glucose monitoring—in 125 preschool children with type 1 diabetes treated with insulin glargine or NPH insulin (the PRESCHOOL study)
Author(s) -
Danne Thomas,
Philotheou Areti,
Goldman David,
Guo Xiang,
Ping Lin,
Cali Anna,
Johnston Peter
Publication year - 2013
Publication title -
pediatric diabetes
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.678
H-Index - 75
eISSN - 1399-5448
pISSN - 1399-543X
DOI - 10.1111/pedi.12051
Subject(s) - medicine , insulin glargine , hypoglycemia , nph insulin , glycemic , clinical endpoint , type 1 diabetes , type 2 diabetes , diabetes mellitus , insulin , randomized controlled trial , endocrinology , pediatrics
Background Avoidance of hypoglycemia is a key consideration in treating young children with type 1 diabetes ( T1DM ). Key Objective To evaluate hypoglycemia with insulin glargine vs. neutral protamine Hagedorn ( NPH ) insulin in young children, using continuous glucose monitoring ( CGM ). Subjects Children of 1 to <6 yr treated with once‐daily glargine vs. once‐ or twice‐daily NPH , with bolus insulin lispro/regular human insulin provided to all. Methods Twenty‐four week, multicenter, randomized, open‐label study. Primary endpoint was event rate of composite hypoglycemia [symptomatic hypoglycemia, low CGM excursions (<3.9 mmol/L) or low fingerstick blood glucose ( FSBG ; <3.9 mmol/L)]. Noninferiority of glargine vs. NPH was assessed for the primary endpoint. Results One hundred and twenty‐five patients (mean age, 4.2 yr) were randomized to treatment (glargine, n = 61; NPH , n = 64). At baseline, mean HbA1c was 8.0 and 8.2% with glargine and NPH , respectively. Composite hypoglycemia episodes/100 patient‐yr was 1.93 for glargine and 1.69 for NPH ; glargine noninferiority was not met. Events/100 patient‐yr of symptomatic hypoglycemia were 0.26 for glargine vs. 0.33 for NPH ; low CGM excursions 0.75 vs. 0.72; and low FSBG 1.93 vs.1.68. There was a slight difference in between‐group severe/nocturnal/severe nocturnal hypoglycemia and glycemic control. All glargine‐treated patients received once‐daily injections; on most study days NPH ‐treated patients received twice‐daily injections. Conclusions While glargine noninferiority was not achieved, in young children with T1DM , there was a slight difference in hypoglycemia outcomes and glycemic control between glargine and NPH . Once‐daily glargine may therefore be a feasible alternative basal insulin in young populations, in whom administering injections can be problematic.

This content is not available in your region!

Continue researching here.

Having issues? You can contact us here