CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 818Diabetes Management and ResearchDiabetes Treatment and ManagementPancreatic function and diabetes

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 32 of the 32 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of subcutaneous injection of long-acting human insulin analog glargine, NPH insulin, and ultralente human insulin and continuous subcutaneous infusion of insulin lispro.

Open access
Lepore, M, Pampanelli, S, Fanelli, C, Porcellati, F, Bartocci, L, Di Vincenzo, A, Cordoni, C, Costa, E, Brunetti, P, Bolli, G B·2000·Diabetes
DOI 10.2337/diabetes.49.12.2142
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

To compare the pharmacokinetics/dynamics of the long-acting insulin analog glargine with NPH, ultralente, and continuous subcutaneous (SC) infusion of insulin lispro (continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion [CSII]), 20 C-peptide-negative type 1 diabetic patients were studied on four occasions during an isoglycemic 24-h clamp. Patients received SC injection of either 0.3 U/kg glargine or NPH insulin (random sequence, crossover design). On two subsequent occasions, they received either an SC injection of ultralente (0.3 U/kg) or CSII (0.3 U x kg(-1) x 24 h(-1)) (random sequence, crossover design). After SC insulin injection or CSII, intravenous (IV) insulin was tapered, and glucose was infused to clamp plasma glucose at 130 mg/dl for 24 h. Onset of action (defined as reduction of IV insulin >50%) was earlier with NPH (0.8 +/- 0.2 h), CSII (0.5 +/- 0.1 h), and ultralente (1 +/- 0.2 h) versus glargine (1.5 +/- 0.3 h) (P < 0.05) (mean +/- SE). End of action (defined as an increase in plasma glucose >150 mg/dl) occurred later with glargine (22 +/- 4 h) than with NPH (14 +/- 3 h) (P < 0.05) but was similar with ultralente (20 +/- 6 h). NPH and ultralente exhibited a peak concentration and action (at 4.5 +/- 0.5 and 10.1 +/- 1 h, respectively) followed by waning, whereas glargine had no peak but had a flat concentration/action profile mimicking CSII. Interindividual variability (calculated as differences in SD of plasma insulin concentrations and glucose infusion rates in different treatments) was lower with glargine than with NPH and ultralente (P < 0.05) but was similar with glargine and CSII (NS). In conclusion, NPH and ultralente are both peak insulins. Duration of action of ultralente is greater, but intersubject variability is also greater than that of NPH. Glargine is a peakless insulin, it lasts nearly 24 h, it has lower intersubject variability than NPH and ultralente, and it closely mimics CSII, the gold standard of basal insulin replacement.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2337/diabetes.49.12.2142

Cites

32 of 32 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 32 references

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Lepore, M., Pampanelli, S., Fanelli, C., Porcellati, F., Bartocci, L., Di Vincenzo, A., Cordoni, C., Costa, E., Brunetti, P., & Bolli, G. B.
Affiliations
  • University of Perugia (IT)
  • Department of Internal Medicine, University of Perugia, Italy.
ORCID
Venue
Diabetes
Publisher
American Diabetes Association
Published
2000-12-01
Volume
49
Issue
12
Pages
2142-2148
ISSN
  • 0012-1797 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-327X
DOI
10.2337/diabetes.49.12.2142
OpenAlex
W2158144637
Cited by
818
References
32
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 22 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 18 · 2019: 23 · 2018: 25 · 2017: 32 · 2016: 20 · 2015: 38 · 2014: 34 · 2013: 30 · 2012: 37
FWCI
21.91
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Diabetes (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Treatment and Management
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Pancreatic function and diabetes
Keywords
long-acting insulin, insulin glargine, NPH insulin, ultralente insulin, insulin lispro, insulin pump therapy, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, onset of action, duration of action, interindividual variability, type 1 diabetes, subcutaneous insulin injection, insulin analogues
MeSH terms
Insulin Glargine, Adult, Blood Glucose, Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1, Double-Blind Method, Humans, Hypoglycemic Agents, Injections, Subcutaneous, Insulin, Insulin, Isophane, Male, Osmolar Concentration, Cross-Over Studies, Insulin, Long-Acting, Insulin Lispro

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review