SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2007
Long-acting insulin analogues versus NPH insulin (human isophane insulin) for type 2 diabetes mellitus.
Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 126 papers, 14 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
126 citing papers in PubMed, 14 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 365 citations in OpenAlex.
- (Ultra-)long-acting insulin analogues versus NPH insulin (human isophane insulin) for adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2020Pooled it
- Antihyperglycemic agent therapy for adult patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus 2017: a position statement of the Korean Diabetes Association.The Korean journal of internal medicine · 2017Guideline
- Insulin therapy for adult patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: a position statement of the Korean Diabetes Association, 2017.The Korean journal of internal medicine · 2017Guideline
- Different insulin types and regimens for pregnant women with pre-existing diabetes.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2017Pooled it
- Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials comparing efficacy and safety outcomes of insulin glargine with NPH insulin, premixed insulin preparations or with insulin detemir in type 2 diabetes mellitus.Acta diabetologica · 2015Pooled it
- Pooled it
- A comparison of health-related quality of life (health utility) between insulin degludec and insulin glargine: a meta-analysis of phase 3 trials.Diabetes, obesity & metabolism · 2013Pooled it
- Hypoglycaemia risk with insulin degludec compared with insulin glargine in type 2 and type 1 diabetes: a pre-planned meta-analysis of phase 3 trials.Diabetes, obesity & metabolism · 2013Pooled it
- Insulin degludec improves health-related quality of life (SF-36® ) compared with insulin glargine in people with Type 2 diabetes starting on basal insulin: a meta-analysis of phase 3a trials.Diabetic medicine : a journal of the British Diabetic Association · 2013Pooled it
- Basal supplementation of insulin lispro protamine suspension versus insulin glargine and detemir for type 2 diabetes: meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Diabetes care · 2012Pooled it
- Insulin detemir versus insulin glargine for type 2 diabetes mellitus.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2011Pooled it
- Efficacy and safety of insulin analogues for the management of diabetes mellitus: a meta-analysis.CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2009Pooled it
- Medical management of hyperglycemia in type 2 diabetes: a consensus algorithm for the initiation and adjustment of therapy: a consensus statement of the American Diabetes Association and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes.Diabetes care · 2009 · on this mapGuideline
- Intermediate acting versus long acting insulin for type 1 diabetes mellitus.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2008Pooled it
- Basal insulin peglispro versus insulin glargine in insulin-naïve type 2 diabetes: IMAGINE 2 randomized trial.Diabetes, obesity & metabolism · 2016Trial
- Comparative study between two recombinant human NPH insulin formulations for the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus.Archives of endocrinology and metabolism · 2016Trial
- Trial
- Reduced risk of hypoglycemia with once-daily glargine versus twice-daily NPH and number needed to harm with NPH to demonstrate the risk of one additional hypoglycemic event in type 2 diabetes: Evidence from a long-term controlled trial.Journal of diabetes and its complicationsTrial
- Comparative cardiovascular efficacy of antidiabetic therapies in type 2 diabetes: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized trials.Diabetology & metabolic syndrome · 2026Article
- Advancement of artificial intelligence based treatment strategy in type 2 diabetes: A critical update.Journal of pharmaceutical analysis · 2025Review
66 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Updated by
Authors and funding
9 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDespite indications from epidemiological trials that higher blood glucose concentrations are associated with a higher risk for developing micro- and macrovascular complications, evidence for a beneficial effect of antihyperglycaemic therapy in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus is conflicting. Two large studies, the United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS) and the University Group Diabetes Program (UGDP), did not find a reduction of cardiovascular endpoints through improvement of metabolic control. The theoretical benefits of newer insulin analogues might result in fewer macrovascular and microvascular events.
objectivesTo assess the effects of long-term treatment with long-acting insulin analogues (insulin glargine and insulin detemir) compared to NPH insulin in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. SEARCH STRATEGY: Studies were obtained from computerised searches of MEDLINE, EMBASE, The Cochrane Library and communication with experts in the field as well as insulin producing companies. SELECTION CRITERIA: Studies were included if they were randomised controlled trials in adults with diabetes mellitus type 2 and had a trial duration of at least 24 weeks. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. Pooling of studies by means of random-effects meta-analyses was performed. MAIN
resultsSix studies comparing insulin glargine to NPH (Neutral Protamine Hagedorn) insulin and two studies comparing insulin detemir to NPH insulin were identified. In these trials, 1715 patients were randomised to insulin glargine and 578 patients to insulin detemir. Duration of the included trials ranged from 24 to 52 weeks. Metabolic control, measured by glycosylated haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) as a surrogate endpoint, and adverse effects did not differ in a clinical relevant way between treatment groups. While no statistically significant difference for severe hypoglycaemia rates was shown in any of the trials, the rate of symptomatic, overall and nocturnal hypoglycaemia was statistically significantly lower in patients treated with either insulin glargine or detemir. No evidence for a beneficial effect of long-acting analogues on patient-oriented outcomes like mortality, morbidity, quality of life or costs could be obtained. AUTHORS'
conclusionsOur analysis suggests, if at all only a minor clinical benefit of treatment with long-acting insulin analogues for patients with diabetes mellitus type 2 treated with "basal" insulin regarding symptomatic nocturnal hypoglycaemic events. Until long-term efficacy and safety data are available, we suggest a cautious approach to therapy with insulin glargine or detemir.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.