Endocrinology, diabetes & metabolism · 2025
Continuous Glucose Monitoring and Hypoglycaemia Metrics With Once-Weekly Basal Insulin Fc Versus Insulin Degludec: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
СтатьяСистематический обзорМетаанализСравнительное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Abunada Saaed, Bai Sheela, Kumari Usha, Nancy F N U, Khan Areeba, Bai Nikeeta, Shevani F N U, Bai Anusha, Dev Shah, Zain Ul Abiddin Noshad, Umer F N U, Manan Abdul, Bhutto Sadia Habib, Yusuf Salih Abdella
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: Once-weekly basal insulin Fc (BIF) offers a promising alternative to daily basal insulin by reducing injection burden while maintaining glycaemic control. However, comprehensive comparisons with insulin degludec regarding continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) metrics and hypoglycaemia outcomes remain limited. This meta-analysis evaluates these critical parameters.
METHODS: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing once-weekly BIF with once-daily insulin degludec in type 1 and type 2 diabetes. Outcomes included CGM-derived glycaemic variability, time in range, time above/below range and hypoglycaemia event rates. Data were pooled using random-effects models, with heterogeneity assessed via I2 statistics.
RESULTS: Five RCTs (n = 2427) were included. BIF demonstrated comparable glycaemic variability (within-day CV: MD = 0.06, p = 0.90; between-day CV: MD = -0.26, p = 0.30) and Time in range (MD = 0.56, p = 0.27) versus degludec. However, BIF increased time spent in the mild hypoglycaemia range (54-69 mg/dL) (MD = 0.30, p = 0.0004) and clinically significant hypoglycaemia event rates (rate ratio = 1.20, p < 0.00001). Severe hypoglycaemia event rates were higher with BIF (rate ratio = 3.34, p < 0.0001). Nocturnal hypoglycaemia and time above range (> 250 mg/dL) did not differ significantly.
CONCLUSION: Once-weekly BIF provides similar overall glycaemic control to insulin degludec but with increased time in mild hypoglycaemia and higher event rates of clinically significant and severe hypoglycaemia. These findings highlight the need for individualised dosing and monitoring when transitioning to weekly insulin regimens.
METHODS: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing once-weekly BIF with once-daily insulin degludec in type 1 and type 2 diabetes. Outcomes included CGM-derived glycaemic variability, time in range, time above/below range and hypoglycaemia event rates. Data were pooled using random-effects models, with heterogeneity assessed via I2 statistics.
RESULTS: Five RCTs (n = 2427) were included. BIF demonstrated comparable glycaemic variability (within-day CV: MD = 0.06, p = 0.90; between-day CV: MD = -0.26, p = 0.30) and Time in range (MD = 0.56, p = 0.27) versus degludec. However, BIF increased time spent in the mild hypoglycaemia range (54-69 mg/dL) (MD = 0.30, p = 0.0004) and clinically significant hypoglycaemia event rates (rate ratio = 1.20, p < 0.00001). Severe hypoglycaemia event rates were higher with BIF (rate ratio = 3.34, p < 0.0001). Nocturnal hypoglycaemia and time above range (> 250 mg/dL) did not differ significantly.
CONCLUSION: Once-weekly BIF provides similar overall glycaemic control to insulin degludec but with increased time in mild hypoglycaemia and higher event rates of clinically significant and severe hypoglycaemia. These findings highlight the need for individualised dosing and monitoring when transitioning to weekly insulin regimens.