Insulin degludec, an ultra-longacting basal insulin, versus insulin glargine in basal-bolus treatment with mealtime insulin aspart in type 1 diabetes (BEGIN Basal-Bolus Type 1): A phase 3, randomised, open-label, treat-to-target non-inferiority trial

333Citations
Citations of this article
177Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Background Intensive basal-bolus insulin therapy has been shown to improve glycaemic control and reduce the risk of long-term complications that are associated with type 1 diabetes mellitus. Insulin degludec is a new, ultra-longacting basal insulin. We therefore compared the efficacy and safety of insulin degludec and insulin glargine, both administered once daily with mealtime insulin aspart, in basal-bolus therapy for type 1 diabetes. Methods In an open-label, treat-to-target, non-inferiority trial, undertaken at 79 sites (hospitals and centres) in six countries, adults (aged =18 years) with type 1 diabetes (glycated haemoglobin [HbA1c] =10% [86 mmol/mol]), who had been treated with basal-bolus insulin for at least 1 year, were randomly assigned in a 3:1 ratio, with a computergenerated blocked allocation sequence, to insulin degludec or insulin glargine without stratification by use of a central interactive response system. The primary outcome was non-inferiority of degludec to glargine, assessed as a reduction in HbA1c after 52 weeks, with the intention-to-treat analysis. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00982228. Findings Of 629 participants, 472 were randomly assigned to insulin degludec and 157 to insulin glargine; all were analysed in their respective treatment groups. At 1 year, HbA1c had fallen by 0•40% points (SE 0•03) and 0•39% points (0•07), respectively, with insulin degludec and insulin glargine (estimated treatment diff erence -0•01% points [95% CI -0•14 to 0•11]; p<0•0001 for non-inferiority testing) and 188 (40%) and 67 (43%) participants achieved a target HbA1c of less than 7% (<53 mmol/mol). Rates of overall confirmed hypoglycaemia (plasma glucose <3•1 mmol/L or severe) were similar in the insulin degludec and insulin glargine groups (42•54 vs 40•18 episodes per patient-year of exposure; estimated rate ratio [degludec to glargine] 1•07 [0•89 to 1•28]; p=0•48). The rate of nocturnal confirmed hypoglycaemia was 25% lower with degludec than with glargine (4•41 vs 5•86 episodes per patient-year of exposure; 0•75 [0•59 to 0•96]; p=0•021). Overall serious adverse event rates (14 vs 16 events per 100 patient-years of exposure) were similar for the insulin degludec and insulin glargine groups. Interpretation Insulin degludec might be a useful basal insulin for patients with type 1 diabetes because it provides eff ective glycaemic control while lowering the risk of nocturnal hypoglycaemia, which is a major limitation of insulin therapy.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Heller, S., Buse, J., Fisher, M., Garg, S., Marre, M., Merker, L., … Bode, B. (2012). Insulin degludec, an ultra-longacting basal insulin, versus insulin glargine in basal-bolus treatment with mealtime insulin aspart in type 1 diabetes (BEGIN Basal-Bolus Type 1): A phase 3, randomised, open-label, treat-to-target non-inferiority trial. The Lancet, 379(9825), 1489–1497. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(12)60204-9

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free