A comparison of multiple daily insulin therapy with continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion therapy in adolescents with type 1 diabetes mellitus: a single-center experience from Turkey

Comparison of Continuous Subcutaneous Insulin Infusion and Multiple Daily Injections in Pediatric Type 1 Diabetes: A Meta-Analysis and Prospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

The incidence of pediatric type 1 diabetes (T1D) is increasing worldwide, and the appropriate choice of therapy regimens is important for children, especially in developing countries with inadequate resources.

METHODS

We conducted a design combining meta-analysis and prospective cohort study. In meta-analysis, 14 studies involving 69,085 TID cases reported glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA_1c) levels, including 48,363 multiple daily insulin injections therapy (MIT) and 20,722 continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII). In our prospective cohort study, TID cases were recruited from a tertiary children's hospital, and randomly divided into Group MIT and Group CSII. After the 4-year follow-up, the effects of MDI (n = 112) and CSII (n = 76) therapy on glycemic control, long-term complications, as well as the growth and pubertal development were explored.

RESULTS

Compared to CSII in TID, HbA_1c levels in MDI (WMD = 0.21, 95% CI: 0.20 to 0.23) were increased significantly in meta-analysis. Among 188 clinical cases, mean age at recruitment was 7.55 (SD 2.91) years. Duration of TID was 4.23 (SD 2.61) years. 50.53% (n = 95) of them were boys. The 4-year follow-up showed that children's HbA_1c was 0.67 (95% CI -1.28, -0.05) % lower in children with CSII compared to children with MDI in multivariable regression models with adjustment for potential confounders (children's age at follow-up, duration of TID, gender, birthweight, parity, and delivery method). CSII was associated with 2.31 kg higher in children's weight (95% CI 0.59, 4.04) in the adjusted model. No difference was found in peripheral nerve and fundus consequences as well as the status of obesity and thin and pubertal development between CSII and MIT.

CONCLUSION

CSII might be associated with better glycemic control and better effect for children growth development. No higher risks of long-term complications and delayed pubertal development were observed in CSII. Our findings provided evidence for a better therapy regimen for T1D in children, nevertheless, they need to be validated by a larger sample size study.

Clinical Outcome and Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of CSII Versus MDI in Children and Adolescent With Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus in a Public Health Care System of China

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the clinical and economic consequences of continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) vs. multiple daily injections (MDI) in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) from a public health care system in developed areas of developing country, considering changes in glycemic Control, daily insulin requirements, lipid profile, body mass index (BMI), frequency of severe hypoglycemia and Diabetic Ketoacidosis (DKA) and diabetic complications.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study of children and adolescents with T1DM. Data were collected at baseline and the end of every year including glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c), insulin dose, lipid profile, blood pressure, and adverse events (severe hypoglycemia and DKA). The Cost-effectiveness analysis was performed using the IQVIA CORE Diabetes Model (CDM) to simulate diabetes progression by utilizing the clinical data obtained from the two groups. The main outcome measures were Life Expectancy, Quality adjusted life years (QALYs), Total Costs and Incremental Costs and Effectiveness Ratio (ICER) of CSII compared with MDI in Chinese pediatric patients with T1DM in Qingdao City (60 years).

RESULTS

Mean HbA1c values and daily insulin doses were significantly lower in those receiving CSII therapy throughout follow-up. Mean direct lifetime costs were ¥ 67,137 higher with CSII treatment than with MDI for pediatric patients. Treatment with CSII was associated with an improvement in life expectancy of 0.41 years for pediatric patients compared with MDI based on CORE diabetes model simulation. The corresponding gains in QALYs were 0.42. These data produced corresponding ICER is ¥ 161,815 per QALY for pediatric T1DM patients in Qingdao. Sensitivity analyses suggested that our base-case assumptions were mostly robust.

CONCLUSIONS

CSII is associated with improved long-term clinical outcomes compared with MDI. Based on this model analysis, CSII appears to be more cost-effective for the Qingdao TIDM pediatric population and health care system.

20 Years of insulin lispro in pediatric type 1 diabetes: a review of available evidence

BACKGROUND

Insulin lispro, the first rapid-acting insulin analog, was developed 20 years ago and has been studied in multiple situations and various populations.

OBJECTIVE

To review the literature on the use of insulin lispro in children, adolescents, and young adults.

PATIENTS

Children, adolescents, and young adults with type-1-diabetes.

METHODS

One hundred and twenty-two relevant publications, identified by a systematic (MEDLINE) and manual literature search, were reviewed.

RESULTS

Multiple daily injection (MDI) treatment with insulin lispro or other rapid-acting insulins, mainly using neutral protamine Hagedorn (NPH) insulin as the basal component, was associated with reduced postprandial glucose excursions, similar or improved HbA1c levels, and similar or reduced risks of severe hypoglycemia when compared with regular human insulin across all age-groups. Continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII)-treatment with insulin lispro also showed similar or improved glycemic control vs. MDI- or other CSII-regimens across all age-groups, without increasing the rate of severe hypoglycemia. The other two more recently developed rapid-acting insulins (aspart, glulisine) demonstrated non-inferiority to lispro on HbA1c. Long-term observational studies and real-life experience indicate that the increasing use of optimized MDI- and CSII-regimens with insulin lispro was associated with improvements in overall glycemic control.

CONCLUSIONS

For almost 20 years, rapid-acting insulins, in particular insulin lispro as the first-in-class, have contributed to broadening the treatment options for the unique needs of pediatric patients with type-1-diabetes across all age-groups, and have enabled more physiological insulin administration. Now widely used, they have allowed pediatric patients to safely reach better glycemic control, with more flexibility in their daily lives.

Insulin resistance, role of metformin and other non-insulin therapies in pediatric type 1 diabetes

Type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) in youth is a challenging chronic medical condition. Its management should address not only the glycemic control but also insulin resistance and cardiovascular disease risk factors which are increasingly recognized to be present in youth with TID. Current knowledge on the mechanisms of insulin resistance in T1DM is reviewed. The use of adjunctive therapies that are beneficial to achieve adequate glycemic control while mitigating the effects of insulin resistance are discussed with a focus on metformin therapy and an overview of other new pharmacologic agents.

Differences in parental involvement in the care of children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes mellitus on multiple daily insulin injections versus continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion

BACKGROUND

Assessing the degree of involvement of caregivers for children with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) in their diabetes care, differences in the degree of involvement based on the method of insulin administration (multiple daily injections: MDI/continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion: CSII), and its effect on glycemic control.

METHODS

This was a cross-sectional study with T1DM patients, ages 6-13 years using a six question survey derived from the Diabetes Family Responsibility Questionnaire (DFRQ). All caregivers (n=140) and participants between ages 11 and 13 (n=60) completed the survey.

RESULTS

Significant differences between MDI and CSII caregiver responses were found for responsibility for giving insulin boluses, as well as for rotation of infusion/injection sites (p<0.001 and p=0.03, respectively). A sub-analysis of caregiver responses for caregiver versus child responsibility for giving infusion boluses (excluding shared responsibility) showed that 36% of children in the CSII group had primary responsibility for giving insulin boluses, compared to 17% in the MDI group (p<0.001). The median agreement for all questions combined between participants and caregivers for ages 11-13 (n=60 pairs) was "poor" (κ=0.18). No significant effect of parental involvement on last 2-year average HbA1C was found for CSII or MDI groups (p>0.20).

CONCLUSIONS

Caregiver reported diabetes care responsibility (mostly parent, mostly child, shared between parent and child) varies for certain aspects of diabetes related care for children ages 6-13, depending upon the mode of insulin administration. Based on the reported degree of parental collaboration, HbA1C did not differ significantly. However, long-term effects are yet to be determined in longitudinal studies.

[Continuous insulin therapy versus multiple insulin injections in the management of type 1 diabetes: a longitutinal study]

OBJECTIVE

To compare multiple doses of insulin and continuous insulin infusion therapy as treatment for type 1 diabetes melito.

METHODS

40 patients with type 1 diabetes melito (21 female) with ages between 10 and 20 years (mean=14.2) and mean duration of diabetes of 7 years used multiple doses of insulin for at least 6 months and after that, continuous insulin infusion therapy for at least 6 months. Each one of the patients has used multiple doses of insulin and continuous insulin infusion therapy. For analysis of HbA1c, mean glycated hemoglobin levels (mHbA1c) were obtained during each treatment period (multiple doses of insulin and continuous insulin infusion therapy period).

RESULTS

Although mHbA1c levels were lower during continuous insulin infusion therapy the difference was not statistically significant. During multiple doses of insulin, 14.2% had mHbA1c values below 7.5% vs. 35.71% while on continuous insulin infusion therapy; demonstrating better glycemic control with the use of continuous insulin infusion therapy. During multiple doses of insulin, 15-40 patients have severe hypoglycemic events versus 5-40 continuous insulin infusion therapy. No episodes of ketoacidosis events were recorded.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first study with this design comparing multiple doses of insulin and continuous insulin infusion therapy in Brazil showing no significant difference in HbA1c; hypoglycemic events were less frequent during continuous insulin infusion therapy than during multiple doses of insulin and the percentage of patients who achieved a HbA1c less than 7.5% was greater during continuous insulin infusion therapy than multiple doses of insulin therapy.

[Continuous insulin therapy versus multiple insulin injections in the management of type 1 diabetes: a longitutinal study]

OBJECTIVE

To compare multiple doses of insulin and continuous insulin infusion therapy as treatment for type 1 diabetes melito.

METHODS

40 patients with type 1 diabetes melito (21 female) with ages between 10 and 20 years (mean=14.2) and mean duration of diabetes of 7 years used multiple doses of insulin for at least 6 months and after that, continuous insulin infusion therapy for at least 6 months. Each one of the patients has used multiple doses of insulin and continuous insulin infusion therapy. For analysis of HbA1c, mean glycated hemoglobin levels (mHbA1c) were obtained during each treatment period (multiple doses of insulin and continuous insulin infusion therapy period).

RESULTS

Although mHbA1c levels were lower during continuous insulin infusion therapy the difference was not statistically significant. During multiple doses of insulin, 14.2% had mHbA1c values below 7.5% vs. 35.71% while on continuous insulin infusion therapy; demonstrating better glycemic control with the use of continuous insulin infusion therapy. During multiple doses of insulin, 15-40 patients have severe hypoglycemic events versus 5-40 continuous insulin infusion therapy. No episodes of ketoacidosis events were recorded.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first study with this design comparing multiple doses of insulin and continuous insulin infusion therapy in Brazil showing no significant difference in HbA1c; hypoglycemic events were less frequent during continuous insulin infusion therapy than during multiple doses of insulin and the percentage of patients who achieved a HbA1c less than 7.5% was greater during continuous insulin infusion therapy than multiple doses of insulin therapy.