Use of Inhaled Insulin in a Basal/Bolus Insulin Regimen in Type 1 Diabetic Subjects
A 6-month, randomized, comparative trial
- Jay S. Skyler, MD1,
- Ruth S. Weinstock, MD, PHD23,
- Philip Raskin, MD4,
- Jean-François Yale, MD5,
- Eugene Barrett, MD6,
- John E. Gerich, MD7,
- Hertzel C. Gerstein, MD, MSC8 and
- the Inhaled Insulin Phase III Type 1 Diabetes Study Group*
- 1University of Miami School of Medicine, Miami, Florida
- 2Joslin Diabetes Center, State University of New York Upstate Medical University, Syracuse, New York
- 3Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Syracuse, New York
- 4University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center at Dallas, Dallas, Texas
- 5McGill Nutrition and Food Science Centre, Royal Victoria Hospital, Montreal, Canada
- 6University of Virginia School of Medicine, Charlottesville, Virginia
- 7University of Rochester School of Medicine, Rochester, New York
- 8Division of Endocrinology and Metabolism, McMaster University, Ontario, Canada
- Address correspondencereprint requests to Jay S. Skyler, MD, University of Miami, 1450 NW 10th Ave., Suite 3054, Miami, FL 33136. E-mail: jskyler{at}miami.edu
Abstract
OBJECTIVE—Despite the demonstrated benefits of glycemic control, patient acceptance of basal/bolus insulin therapy for type 1 diabetes has been slow. We investigated whether a basal/bolus insulin regimen involving rapid-acting, dry powder, inhaled insulin could provide glycemic control comparable with a basal/bolus subcutaneous regimen.
RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS—Patients with type 1 diabetes (ages 12–65 years) received twice-daily subcutaneous NPH insulin and were randomized to premeal inhaled insulin (n = 163) or subcutaneous regular insulin (n = 165) for 6 months.
RESULTS—Mean glycosylated hemoglobin (A1C) decreased comparably from baseline in the inhaled and subcutaneous insulin groups (−0.3 and −0.1%, respectively; adjusted difference −0.16% [CI −0.34 to 0.01]), with a similar percentage of subjects achieving A1C <7%. Although 2-h postprandial glucose reductions were comparable between the groups, fasting plasma glucose levels declined more in the inhaled than in the subcutaneous insulin group (adjusted difference −39.5 mg/dl [CI −57.5 to −21.6]). Inhaled insulin was associated with a lower overall hypoglycemia rate but higher severe hypoglycemia rate. The overall hypoglycemia rate (episodes/patient-month) was 9.3 (inhaled) vs. 9.9 (subcutaneous) (risk ratio [RR] 0.94 [CI 0.91–0.97]), and the severe hypoglycemia rate (episodes/100 patient-months) was 6.5 vs. 3.3 (RR 2.00 [CI 1.28–3.12]). Increased insulin antibody serum binding without associated clinical manifestations occurred in the inhaled insulin group. Pulmonary function between the groups was comparable, except for a decline in carbon monoxide−diffusing capacity in the inhaled insulin group without any clinical correlates.
CONCLUSIONS—Inhaled insulin may provide an alternative for the management of type 1 diabetes as part of a basal/bolus strategy in patients who are unwilling or unable to use preprandial insulin injections.
Footnotes
- *
↵* A complete list of the Inhaled Insulin Phase III Type 1 Diabetes Study Group members can be found in the appendix.
-
J.-F.Y. has been a member of an advisory panel for, has received honoraria from, and has received grant/research support from Pfizer and Aventis.
Additional information for this article can be found in an online data supplement at http://care.diabetesjournals.org.
A table elsewhere in this issue shows conventional and Système International (SI) units and conversion factors for many substances.
-
- Accepted March 30, 2005.
- Received January 25, 2005.
- DIABETES CARE
