CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 148Diabetes Management and ResearchDiabetes Treatment and ManagementDiabetes Management and Education

Comparison of Insulin Aspart With Buffered Regular Insulin and Insulin Lispro in Continuous Subcutaneous Insulin Infusion

Bode, Bruce, Weinstein, Richard, Bell, David, McGill, Janet, Nadeau, Daniel, Raskin, Philip, Davidson, Jaime, Henry, Robert +2 more·2002·Diabetes Care
DOI 10.2337/diacare.25.3.439
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Objective To compare the safety and efficacy of insulin aspart (IAsp), buffered regular insulin (BR), and insulin lispro administered by continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) in patients with type 1 diabetes. Research design and methods After completing a 4-week run-in period with BR, 146 adult patients with type 1 diabetes (with pretrial CSII experience) were randomly assigned (2:2:1) to CSII treatment with IAsp, BR, or lispro for 16 weeks in a multicenter, open-label, randomized, parallel-group study. Bolus insulin doses were administered 30 min before meals (BR) or immediately before meals (IAsp or lispro). Results Treatment groups had similar baseline HbA(1c) (7.3% +/- 0.7 for IAsp, 7.5% +/- 0.8 for BR, and 7.3% +/- 0.7 for lispro). After 16 weeks of treatment, HbA1c values were relatively unchanged from baseline, and the mean changes in baseline HbA1c values were not significantly different between the three groups (0.00 +/- 0.51, 0.15 +/- 0.63, and 0.18 +/- 0.84 for the IAsp, BR, and lispro groups, respectively). The rates of hypoglycemic episodes (blood glucose Conclusions Insulin aspart in CSII was as efficacious and well tolerated as BR and lispro and is a suitable insulin for continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion using external pumps.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2337/diacare.25.3.439

Cites

26 of 26 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • In a 2001 study over a 24-week period, approximately 66% (38 of 58) subjects with type 1 diabetes using an insulin pump had an episode of hyperglycemia.

    “In one of the earliest studies of the frequency of insulin pump occlusion, reported in 2001, over a 24-week period, approximately 66% (38 of 58) subjects with type 1 diabetes using an insulin pump had an episode of hyperglycemia and 36% of the episodes were caused by an occlusion of the IIS.”

    From Insulin Pump Occlusions: For Patients Who Have Been Around the (Infusion) Block (2017) · cites this paper as [6]

  • In that 2001 study, there was no significant difference in the occlusion rate when patients used either insulin lispro (LIS) or buffered regular insulin (BRI).

    “There was no significant difference in the occlusion rate when these patients used either insulin lispro (LIS) or buffered regular insulin (BRI).6”

    From Insulin Pump Occlusions: For Patients Who Have Been Around the (Infusion) Block (2017) · cites this paper as [6]

  • In that 2001 study, 36% of the hyperglycemia episodes were caused by an occlusion of the IIS.

    “In one of the earliest studies of the frequency of insulin pump occlusion, reported in 2001, over a 24-week period, approximately 66% (38 of 58) subjects with type 1 diabetes using an insulin pump had an episode of hyperglycemia and 36% of the episodes were caused by an occlusion of the IIS.”

    From Insulin Pump Occlusions: For Patients Who Have Been Around the (Infusion) Block (2017) · cites this paper as [6]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Bode, B., Weinstein, R., Bell, D., McGill, J., Nadeau, D., Raskin, P., Davidson, J., Henry, R., Huang, W.-C., & Reinhardt, R. R.
Affiliations
  • Atlanta Diabetes Associates (US)
  • Diablo Clinical Research (US)
  • Kirklin Clinic (US)
  • Washington University in St. Louis (US)
  • Eastern Maine Medical Center (US)
  • The University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center (US)
  • Endocrine & Diabetes Associates, Dallas, Texas
  • VA San Diego Healthcare System (US)
  • Novo Nordisk Pharmaceuticals, Princeton, New Jersey
ORCID
Venue
Diabetes Care
Publisher
American Diabetes Association
Published
2002-03-01
Volume
25
Issue
3
Pages
439-444
ISSN
  • 0149-5992 (ISSN-L)
  • 1935-5548
DOI
10.2337/diacare.25.3.439
OpenAlex
W2091336973
Cited by
148
References
26
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 3 · 2020: 3 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 6
FWCI
6.65
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Diabetes Care (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Novo Nordisk
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 › Diabetes Management and Education
Keywords
insulin aspart, insulin lispro, insulin pump therapy, type 1 diabetes, bolus insulin, glycemic control, HbA1c, hypoglycemia, insulin analogues
MeSH terms
Adult, Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1, Female, Glycated Hemoglobin, Humans, Hypoglycemia, Hypoglycemic Agents, Insulin, Insulin Infusion Systems, Male, Safety, Body Mass Index, Insulin Aspart, 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