Biphasic insulin aspart 70/30 vs. insulin glargine in insulin naïve type 2 diabetes patients: modelling the long-term health economic implications in a Swedish setting

What Was Tested

This randomized controlled trial paper looks at Insulin Glargine and Insulin Aspart.

To evaluate the long-term clinical and economic outcomes of biphasic insulin aspart 70/30 (BIAsp 70/30) treatment vs. insulin glargine in insulin naïve, type 2 diabetes patients failing oral antidiabetic drugs in a Swedish setting.

Who Took Part

The abstract describes 2 patients taking part.

By PubMed's age tags, the people studied were middle-aged adults, both men and women.

A published and validated computer simulation model (the CORE Diabetes Model) was used to project life expectancy, quality-adjusted life expectancy (QALE) and costs over patient lifetimes.

How the Study Was Run

The researchers set it up as a randomized study.

The patients were allocated by chance, so the Insulin Glargine group and the comparison group should start out alike.

What Was Measured

The subject headings attached to it are Costs and Cost Analysis, Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2, Diabetic Angiopathies, Glycated Hemoglobin, Hypoglycemic Agents, Insulin and Insulin Aspart.

What This Means in Plain Language

The paper is a randomized study of Insulin Glargine and Insulin Aspart in 2 patients.

With fewer than 40 people, it is a small study, so it is better read as an early signal for further research than as a settled answer.

The abstract goes on to report its results in about 6 sentences; this page does not restate them, so read the paper for the findings and their limits.

The publication is from 2008 (International journal of clinical practice), a journal based in United States.

More context: the Insulin Glargine compound page and the Insulin Aspart compound page.