ArticleJournal of research in medical sciences : the official journal of Isfahan University of Medical Sciences2012
Cardioprotective role of insulin: Advantage analogues.
Article in Journal of research in medical sciences : the official journal of Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Review of Basal-Bolus Therapy Using Insulin Glargine and Insulin Lispro in the Management of Diabetes Mellitus.Diabetes therapy : research, treatment and education of diabetes and related disorders · 2018Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimType II diabetes mellitus (DM) increases the risk of cardiovascular disease. Treatment with insulin substantially reduces C - reactive protein (CRP) because of its anti-atherosclerotic action. This study was designed to explore and compare the cardio protective role of regular human insulin (RHI), aspart and lispro insulin in type II DM. MATERIALS AND
methodsA randomized, open, parallel group, comparative clinical study was conducted on 90 patients of type II DM. After baseline clinical assessment and investigations, RHI was prescribed to 30 patients, aspart insulin to 30 patients and lispro insulin to another 30 patients for 12 weeks. The efficacy variables were change in blood pressure, glycemic control, lipid profile, serum potassium, high-sensitivity CRP (hsCRP) and UKPDS 10-year CHD risk scoring over 12 weeks. At the end of the study, the patients were followed up and changes in variables from baseline were analyzed by statistical tools.
resultsSystolic blood pressure decreased significantly in aspart group (P = 0.008) whereas diastolic blood pressure was decreased significantly both in aspart (P < 0.001) and lispro group (P = 0.01). Fasting, postprandial blood glucose and HbA1c were decreased in all three groups significantly but change in aspart group was superior (P = 0.01). Triglyceride was significantly better controlled by lispro (P < 0.01) whereas aspart insulin was superior to decrease total cholesterol and LDL (P < 0.05). The extent of potassium loss was significantly more with RHI (P = 0.004) than others. CRP-lowering effect (P = 0.017) and decrease in UKPDS risk scoring (P = 0.019) in aspart and lispro group was superior to RHI group.
conclusionShort acting insulin analogues, especially aspart insulin have been found to have a better cardio protective role than RHI in type II DM.
Indexed as
Identifiers
23798924PMC3685780W1861496081What 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.