Skip to content
Home
About Us
Resources
Profiles Metrics
Authors Directory
Institutions Directory
Top Authors
Top Institutions
Top Sponsors
AI Digest
Contact Us
Menu
Home
About Us
Resources
Profiles Metrics
Authors Directory
Institutions Directory
Top Authors
Top Institutions
Top Sponsors
AI Digest
Contact Us
Home
About Us
Resources
Profiles Metrics
Authors Directory
Institutions Directory
Top Authors
Top Institutions
Top Sponsors
AI Digest
Contact Us
Menu
Home
About Us
Resources
Profiles Metrics
Authors Directory
Institutions Directory
Top Authors
Top Institutions
Top Sponsors
AI Digest
Contact Us
Publication Details
AFRICAN RESEARCH NEXUS
SHINING A SPOTLIGHT ON AFRICAN RESEARCH
medicine
A randomized trial comparing the rate of hypoglycemia-assessed using continuous glucose monitoring-in 125 preschool children with type 1 diabetes treated with insulin glargine or NPH insulin (the PRESCHOOL study)
Pediatric Diabetes, Volume 14, No. 8, Year 2013
Notification
URL copied to clipboard!
Description
Background: Avoidance of hypoglycemia is a key consideration in treating young children with type 1 diabetes (T1DM). Key Objective: To evaluate hypoglycemia with insulin glargine vs. neutral protamine Hagedorn (NPH) insulin in young children, using continuous glucose monitoring (CGM). Subjects: Children of 1 to <6yr treated with once-daily glargine vs. once- or twice-daily NPH, with bolus insulin lispro/regular human insulin provided to all. Methods: Twenty-four week, multicenter, randomized, open-label study. Primary endpoint was event rate of composite hypoglycemia [symptomatic hypoglycemia, low CGM excursions (<3.9mmol/L) or low fingerstick blood glucose (FSBG; <3.9mmol/L)]. Noninferiority of glargine vs. NPH was assessed for the primary endpoint. Results: One hundred and twenty-five patients (mean age, 4.2yr) were randomized to treatment (glargine, n=61; NPH, n=64). At baseline, mean HbA1c was 8.0 and 8.2% with glargine and NPH, respectively. Composite hypoglycemia episodes/100 patient-yr was 1.93 for glargine and 1.69 for NPH; glargine noninferiority was not met. Events/100 patient-yr of symptomatic hypoglycemia were 0.26 for glargine vs. 0.33 for NPH; low CGM excursions 0.75 vs. 0.72; and low FSBG 1.93 vs.1.68. There was a slight difference in between-group severe/nocturnal/severe nocturnal hypoglycemia and glycemic control. All glargine-treated patients received once-daily injections; on most study days NPH-treated patients received twice-daily injections. Conclusions: While glargine noninferiority was not achieved, in young children with T1DM, there was a slight difference in hypoglycemia outcomes and glycemic control between glargine and NPH. Once-daily glargine may therefore be a feasible alternative basal insulin in young populations, in whom administering injections can be problematic. © 2013 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Authors & Co-Authors
Danne, Thomas Paul Arthur
Germany, Hannover
Kinder- Und Jugendkrankenhaus Auf Der Bult
Philotheou, Areti
South Africa, Observatory
Uct Private Academic Hospital
Goldman, David
France, Gentilly
Sanofi S.a.
Guo, Xiang
France, Gentilly
Sanofi S.a.
Ping, Lin
France, Gentilly
Sanofi S.a.
Calí, Anna M.G.
France, Gentilly
Sanofi S.a.
Johnston, Peter S.
France, Gentilly
Sanofi S.a.
Statistics
Citations: 7
Authors: 7
Affiliations: 3
Identifiers
Doi:
10.1111/pedi.12051
ISSN:
1399543X
e-ISSN:
13995448
Research Areas
Health System And Policy
Maternal And Child Health
Noncommunicable Diseases