Trial reportDiabetes care2026
INHALE-1: A Multicenter Randomized Trial of Inhaled Technosphere Insulin in Children With Type 1 Diabetes.
Trial report in Diabetes care, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Inhaled Technosphere Insulin Reduces Postmeal Glucose Excursion in Youth Living with Type 1 Diabetes.Diabetes technology & therapeutics · 2026Trial
- AFREZZAPaediatric drugs · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
42 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate inhaled technosphere insulin (TI) in children with diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND
methodsA total of 230 youth 4-17 years old with type 1 (98%) or type 2 (2%) diabetes treated with multiple daily injections of insulin were randomly assigned 1:1 to TI or rapid-acting analog (RAA) insulin plus continuation of long-acting basal insulin and continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) for 26 weeks. The primary outcome was change in HbA1c, tested for noninferiority with margin of 0.4%.
resultsIn intent-to-treat analysis, mean HbA1c (% ± SD) was 8.22 ± 0.87 at baseline and 8.41 ± 1.38 at 26 weeks with TI and 8.21 ± 0.96 and 8.21 ± 1.10, respectively, with RAA (adjusted difference = 0.18; 95% CI -0.07, 0.43; noninferiority P = 0.091). CGM-measured time in range 70-180 mg/dL was not significantly different between groups (adjusted difference -2.2%; 95% CI -7.0, 2.7; P = 0.38). Two severe hypoglycemic events occurred in the TI group and one in the RAA group. Change in forced expiration volume in 1 s from baseline to 26 weeks did not differ comparing TI and RAA (P = 0.53). The TI group reported greater treatment satisfaction (P = 0.004) and had less gain in weight and BMI percentile (P = 0.009) than did the RAA group.
conclusionsThe primary analysis did not meet the prespecified criteria for HbA1c noninferiority. However, TI use was safe over 26 weeks without affecting pulmonary function and was associated with greater treatment satisfaction and less weight gain compared with RAA, supporting TI as a treatment option for some pediatric patients with type 1 diabetes.
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.