ArticleBritish journal of clinical pharmacology2018
Comparative risks of diabetes-related complications of basal insulins: a longitudinal population-based cohort of type 1 diabetes 1999-2013 in Taiwan.
Article in British journal of clinical pharmacology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Quality of reporting of drug exposure in pharmacoepidemiological studies.Pharmacoepidemiology and drug safety · 2020Pooled it
- Preventive measures significantly reduced the risk of nosocomial infection in elderly inpatients during the COVID-19 pandemic.Experimental and therapeutic medicine · 2022Article
- A nationwide cohort study for comparative vascular safety of long-acting insulin analogue versus intermediate-acting human insulin in type 2 diabetes.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- Association of insulin regimens with severe hypoglycaemia in patients with type 1 diabetes: A Danish case-control study.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2020Article
- Cost-effectiveness of long-acting insulin analogues vs intermediate/long-acting human insulin for type 1 diabetes: A population-based cohort followed over 10 years.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2020Article
- Comparative risks of diabetes-related complications of basal insulins: a longitudinal population-based cohort of type 1 diabetes 1999-2013 in Taiwan.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimWe compared the effects of two types of basal insulin: long-acting insulin analogues vs. intermediate/long-acting human insulin, on diabetes-related complications in type 1 diabetes.
methodsA total of 1188 patients with type 1 diabetes who had recently started on long-acting insulin analogues or intermediate/long-acting human insulin were identified in 2004-2008 and followed until death or the end of 2013. Clinical outcomes included acute (i.e. hyperglycaemia, hypoglycaemia) and chronic (i.e. nephropathy, retinopathy, neuropathy, cardiovascular diseases) complications. Diabetes-related complications were measured as a composite outcome which included acute and chronic complications. Cox proportional hazards models were used to assess the time to event hazard ratio. Three propensity score (PS) methods were applied to adjust for baseline imbalances between basal insulin groups, including the PS-matching approach (as the main analysis), standardized mortality ratio weighting (SMRW) and inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW).
resultsLong-acting insulin analogues vs. intermediate/long-acting human insulin had a lower risk for a composite of diabetes-related complications {adjusted hazards ratios [aHRs] [95% confidence interval (CI)] 0.782 [0.639, 0.956], 0.743 [0.598, 0.924] and 0.699 [0.577, 0.846] according to the PS-matching approach, SMRW and IPTW, respectively}. Compared with intermediate/long-acting human insulin, using long-acting insulin analogues had a lower hypoglycaemia risk: aHRs (95% CI) 0.681 (0.498, 0.930), 0.662 (0.466, 0.943) and 0.639 (0.471, 0.867) from the PS-matching approach, SMRW and IPTW, respectively. No statistical differences were found between two types of insulin on individual chronic complications.
conclusionA trend of lower diabetes-related complications associated with long-acting insulin analogues vs. intermediate/long-acting human insulin was observed. A reduced hypoglycaemia risk with long-acting insulin analogues was confirmed in this 'real-world' study.
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.