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 <6 yr 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 (<3.9 mmol/L) or low fingerstick blood glucose (FSBG; <3.9 mmol/L)]. Noninferiority of glargine vs. NPH was assessed for the primary endpoint.
Results: One hundred and twenty-five patients (mean age, 4.2 yr) 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.
Keywords: NPH insulin; children; glargine; hypoglycemia; preschool; type 1 diabetes mellitus.
© 2013 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.