insulin--isophane and Neoplasms

Recent epidemiological studies suggest that treatment with insulin glargine (A21Gly,B31Arg,B32Arg human insulin) may promote cancer growth. The present meta-analysis was performed to assess the risk of cancer during treatment with insulin detemir (B29Lys(epsilon-tetradecanoyl),desB30 human insulin), another long-acting insulin analogue.. This meta-analysis was performed in a population of 8,693 patients with type 1 or type 2 diabetes, who were included in Novo Nordisk-sponsored, randomised and controlled diabetes trials of at least 12 weeks in duration that compared insulin detemir with NPH insulin or insulin glargine. In a blinded manner, the adverse events with suspected treatment-emergent malignant tumours were obtained from these studies under three system-organ classes: 'Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (including cysts and polyps)', 'Neoplasm' and 'Surgical and medical procedures'. Conditional ORs were estimated applying both the Mantel-Haenzel and Peto methods to ensure robustness of results.. Separate analyses were performed for trials comparing insulin detemir with NPH insulin and insulin detemir with insulin glargine. In the first analysis, 16 studies were included with a total of 3,983 patients treated with insulin detemir and 2,661 patients treated with NPH insulin. In the second analysis, five studies were included with a total of 1,219 patients treated with insulin detemir and 830 patients treated with insulin glargine. The estimated OR for a cancer diagnosis between NPH insulin and insulin detemir was statistically significantly >1, with the ratio favouring insulin detemir. There was a more than twofold higher cancer occurrence in the NPH insulin-treated population. For the insulin detemir comparison with insulin glargine, there was a non-significant difference in ORs in favour of insulin detemir.. In these randomised controlled diabetes trials, patients treated with insulin detemir had a lower or similar occurrence of a cancer diagnosis compared with patients treated with NPH insulin or insulin glargine, respectively.

Topics: Adult; Aged; Body Mass Index; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Female; Humans; Hypoglycemic Agents; Incidence; Insulin; Insulin Detemir; Insulin, Isophane; Insulin, Long-Acting; Male; Middle Aged; Neoplasms; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic

To compare two subcutaneous insulin strategies for glycemic management of hyperglycemia in non-critically ill hospitalized patients with diabetes during enteral nutrition therapy (ENT).. Fifty inpatients were prospectively randomized to receive sliding-scale regular insulin (SSRI) alone (n = 25) or in combination with insulin glargine (n = 25). NPH insulin was added for persistent hyperglycemia in the SSRI group (glucose >10 mmol/l).. Glycemic control was similar in the SSRI and glargine groups (mean +/- SD study glucose 8.9 +/- 1.6 vs. 9.2 +/- 1.6 mmol/l, respectively; P = 0.71). NPH insulin was added in 48% of the SSRI group subjects. There were no group differences in frequency of hypoglycemia (1.3 +/- 4.1 vs. 1.1 +/- 1.8%; P = 0.35), total adverse events, or length of stay.. Both insulin strategies (SSRI with the addition of NPH for persistent hyperglycemia and glargine) demonstrated similar efficacy and safety in non-critically ill hospitalized patients with type 2 diabetes during ENT.

Topics: Aged; Blood Glucose; Diabetes Complications; Diabetes Mellitus; Dose-Response Relationship, Drug; Drug Therapy, Combination; Female; Humans; Hyperglycemia; Hypoglycemia; Hypoglycemic Agents; Inpatients; Insulin; Insulin Glargine; Insulin, Isophane; Insulin, Long-Acting; Male; Middle Aged; Neoplasms; Severity of Illness Index

Topics: Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Diabetic Retinopathy; Humans; Hypoglycemic Agents; Insulin; Insulin Glargine; Insulin, Isophane; Insulin, Long-Acting; Neoplasms; Risk Factors

Insulin therapy in type 2 diabetes may increase mortality and cancer incidence, but the impact of different types of basal insulins on these endpoints is unclear. Compared to the traditional NPH insulin, the newer, longer-acting insulin analogues detemir and glargine have shown benefits in randomized controlled trials. Whether these advantages translate into lower mortality among users in real life is unknown.. To estimate the differences in all-cause and cause-specific mortality rates between new users of basal insulins in a population-based study in Finland.. 23 751 individuals aged ≥40 with type 2 diabetes, who initiated basal insulin therapy in 2006-2009 were identified from national registers, with comprehensive data for mortality, causes of death, and background variables. Propensity score matching was performed on characteristics. Follow-up time was up to 4 years (median 1.7 years).. 2078 deaths incurred. With NPH as reference, the adjusted HRs for all-cause mortality were 0.39 (95% CI, 0.30-0.50) for detemir, and 0.55 (95% CI, 0.44-0.69) for glargine. As compared to glargine, the HR was 0.71 (95% CI, 0.54-0.93) among detemir users. Compared to NPH, the mortality risk for both cardiovascular causes as well as cancer were also significantly lower for glargine, and especially for detemir in adjusted analysis. Furthermore, the results were robust in various sensitivity analyses.. In real clinical practice, mortality was substantially higher among users of NPH insulin as compared to insulins detemir or glargine. Considering the large number of patients who require insulin therapy, this difference in risk may have major clinical and public health implications. Due to limitations of the observational study design, further investigation using an interventional study design is warranted.

Topics: Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Cardiovascular Diseases; Cause of Death; Cohort Studies; Databases, Factual; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Female; Finland; Gastrointestinal Diseases; Humans; Hypoglycemic Agents; Insulin Glargine; Insulin, Isophane; Insulin, Long-Acting; Male; Middle Aged; Neoplasms; Risk

Recent studies suggested that insulin glargine use could be associated with increased risk of cancer. We compared the incidence of cancer in new users of glargine versus new users of NPH in a longitudinal clinical cohort with diabetes for up to 6 years.. From all patients who had been regularly followed at Massachusetts General Hospital from 1/01/2005 to 12/31/2010, 3,680 patients who had a medication record for glargine or NPH usage were obtained from the electronic medical record (EMR). From those we selected 539 new glargine users (age: 60.1±13.6 years, BMI: 32.7±7.5 kg/m2) and 343 new NPH users (61.5±14.1 years, 32.7±8.3 kg/m2) who had no prevalent cancer during 19 months prior to glargine or NPH initiation. All incident cancer cases were ascertained from the EMR requiring at least 2 ICD-9 codes within a 2 month period. Insulin exposure time and cumulative dose were validated. The statistical analysis compared the rates of cancer in new glargine vs. new NPH users while on treatment, adjusted for the propensity to receive one or the other insulin. There were 26 and 28 new cancer cases in new glargine and new NPH users for 1559 and 1126 person-years follow-up, respectively. There were no differences in the propensity-adjusted clinical characteristics between groups. The adjusted hazard ratio for the cancer incidence comparing glargine vs. NPH use was 0.65 (95% CI: 0.36-1.19).. Insulin glargine is not associated with development of cancers when compared with NPH in this longitudinal and carefully retrieved EMR data.

Topics: Diabetes Mellitus; Disease-Free Survival; Electronic Health Records; Female; Humans; Incidence; Insulin Glargine; Insulin, Isophane; Insulin, Long-Acting; Male; Middle Aged; Neoplasms; Time Factors

To add to the evidence on comparative long-term effects of insulin analog glargine versus human NPH insulin on the risk for cancer.. We identified cohorts of initiators of glargine and human NPH without an insulin prescription during the prior 19 months among patients covered by the Inovalon Medical Outcomes Research for Effectiveness and Economics Registry (MORE2 Registry) between January 2003 and December 2010. Patients were required to have a second prescription of the same insulin within 180 days and to be free of cancer. We balanced cohorts on risk factors for cancer outcomes based on comorbidities, comedication, and health care use during the prior 12 months using inverse probability of treatment weighting. Incident cancer was defined as having two claims for cancer (any cancer) or the same cancer (breast, prostate, colon) within 2 months. We estimated adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) and their 95% CI using weighted Cox models censoring for stopping, switching, or augmenting insulin treatment, end of enrollment, and mortality.. More patients initiated glargine (43,306) than NPH (9,147). Initiators of glargine (NPH) were followed for 1.2 (1.1) years and 50,548 (10,011) person-years; 993 (178) developed cancer. The overall HR was 1.12 (95% CI 0.95-1.32). Results were consistent for breast cancer, prostate cancer, and colon cancer; various durations of treatment; and sensitivity analyses.. Patients initiating insulin glargine rather than NPH do not seem to be at an increased risk for cancer. While our study contributes significantly to our evidence base for long-term effects, this evidence is very limited mainly based on actual dynamics in insulin prescribing.

Topics: Adult; Aged; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Female; Humans; Hypoglycemic Agents; Incidence; Insulin Glargine; Insulin, Isophane; Insulin, Long-Acting; Insulin, Regular, Human; Isophane Insulin, Human; Male; Middle Aged; Neoplasms; Probability; Proportional Hazards Models; Registries; Risk Factors

Recent publications of data extracted from population registries have suggested a possible relationship between treatment with insulin glargine and increased incidence of cancer/breast cancer. The aim of the present study was investigate this possible relationship using data from the manufacturer's (sanofi-aventis) pharmacovigilance database.. We analysed the manufacturer's (sanofi-aventis) pharmacovigilance database for all randomised clinical trials (RCTs; Phase 2-4) comparing insulin glargine with any comparator in type 1 or type 2 diabetes. We identified all serious adverse events coded under the System Organ Class of 'neoplasms, benign, malignant and unspecified'. Treatment-emergent neoplasms judged to be malignant were included in this analysis.. The database included 31 studies, 12 in type 1 diabetes and 19 in type 2 diabetes. Twenty compared insulin glargine with NPH insulin, 29 were parallel-group studies and two had a crossover design. Studies were generally of 6 months' duration, except for trial reference number 4016 (n = 1,017), which had a duration of 5 years. Overall, 10,880 people were included in the analysis (insulin glargine, 5,657; comparator, 5,223). Forty-five people (0.8%) vs 46 people (0.9%) reported 52 and 48 cases of malignant cancer in the insulin glargine and comparator groups, respectively (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.60-1.36). Skin (12 people with 16 events vs six people with seven events, RR 1.85, 95% CI 0.69-4.92), colon and rectum (six vs ten people, RR 0.55, 95% CI 0.20-1.52), breast (four vs six people, RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.17-2.18) and gastrointestinal tract (six vs four people, RR 1.38, 95% CI 0.39-4.90) were the most commonly reported sites.. In these 31 RCTs, insulin glargine was not associated with an increased incidence of cancer, including breast cancer, compared with the comparator group.

Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Child; Databases, Factual; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Female; Humans; Hypoglycemic Agents; Incidence; Insulin; Insulin Glargine; Insulin, Isophane; Insulin, Long-Acting; Male; Middle Aged; Neoplasms; Random Allocation; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic