TY - JOUR
T1 - Repaglinide versus insulin for newly diagnosed diabetes in patients with cystic fibrosis: a multicentre, open-label, randomised trial
AU - CFRD Study Group
AU - Ballmann, Manfred
AU - Hubert, Dominique
AU - Assael, Baroukh M.
AU - Staab, Doris
AU - Hebestreit, Alexandra
AU - Naehrlich, Lutz
AU - Nickolay, Tanja
AU - Prinz, Nicole
AU - Holl, Reinhard W.
AU - Staden, Ute
AU - Claßen, Martin
AU - Schuster, Antje
AU - Mellies, Uwe
AU - Posselt, Hans Georg
AU - Wiebel, Matthias
AU - Rietschel, Ernst
AU - Stern, Martin
AU - Teschler, Helmut
AU - Smaczny, Christina
AU - Köhnlein, Thomas
AU - Wienhausen-Wilke, Vera
AU - Claaß, Andreas
AU - Biedermann, Thomas
AU - Dockter, Gerd
AU - Köster, Holger
AU - Hebestreit, Helge
AU - Ballke, Ernst Hinrich
AU - Heuer, Hans Eberhard
AU - Kamin, Wolfgang
AU - Küster, Peter
AU - Szczepanski, Rüdiger
AU - Keller, Klaus Michael
AU - Generlich, Horst
AU - Bresser, Hans Georg
AU - Kopp, Matthias
AU - Herting, Egbert
AU - Feickert, Hans Joachim
AU - Hautz, Jürgen
AU - Schilling, Birgit
AU - Meyer, Egbert
AU - Mall, Marcus A.
AU - Wiebicke, Wolfram
AU - Tegtmeyer, Friedrich Karl
AU - Honer, Marguerite
AU - Mosnier-Pudar, Helen
AU - Lenoir, Gérard
AU - Robert, Jean Jacques
AU - Kessler, Laurence
AU - Weiss, Laurence
AU - Nove-Josserand, Raphaële
N1 - Funding Information:
The study was funded by Mukoviszidose eV, Vaincre la Mucoviscidose, and ABCF Association. NovoNordisk Germany provided financial support for the study and also provided the repaglinide and the human regular insulin and injection aids free of charge. Local support for study organisation was provided by Mukoviszidose Institut GmbH, Bonn, Germany and URC Necker Cochin, Paris, France. We thank all patients and the staff in all study centres for participating in this trial. We thank the members of the CFRD Study Group ( appendix ), who recruited participants and collected study data; Elisabeth Kohne, Department of Paediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, University Children's Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany, for performing centralised HbA 1c measurements; Katharina Fink, Institute of Epidemiology and Medical Biometry (ZIBMT), University of Ulm, Ulm, Germany, for data management and statistical analyses; and Sibylle Schmidt, Paediatric Clinic, University Medicine Rostock, Rostock, Germany, for assistance in editing the report. None of the individuals at the participating centres who contributed to the report supported the study as consultants or had financial investment in the funding sources.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2018 Elsevier Ltd
Copyright:
Copyright 2020 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.
PY - 2018/2
Y1 - 2018/2
N2 - Background: As survival among patients with cystic fibrosis has improved in recent decades, complications have become increasingly relevant. The most frequent complication is cystic-fibrosis-related diabetes. The recommended treatment is injected insulin, but some patients are treated with oral antidiabetic drugs to ease the treatment burden. We assessed the efficacy and safety of oral antidiabetic drugs. Methods: We did a multicentre, open-label, comparative, randomised trial in 49 centres in Austria, France, Germany, and Italy. Eligible patients had cystic fibrosis, were older than 10 years, and had newly diagnosed diabetes. We used a central randomisation schedule derived from a Geigy random number table to assign patients 1:1 to receive insulin or repaglinide, stratified by sex and age (10–15 years or >15 years). The primary outcome was glycaemic control assessed by mean change in HbA1c concentration from baseline after 24 months of treatment. Differences between groups were assessed by linear models. The primary and safety analyses were done in the modified intention-to-treat population (including patients who stopped treatment early because of lack of efficacy). This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00662714. Findings: We enrolled 34 patients in the repaglinide group and 41 in the insulin group, of whom 30 and 37, respectively, were included in the analyses. At 24 months, glycaemic control was similar in the repaglinide and insulin groups (mean change in HbA1c concentration from baseline 0·2% [SD 0·7%], 1·7 mmol/mol [8·1 mmol/mol] with repaglinide vs −0·2% [1·3%], −2·7 mmol/mol, [14·5 mmol/mol] with insulin; mean difference between groups −0·4%, (95% CI −1·1 to 0·2 [−4·4 mmol/mol, −11·5 to 2·7], p=0·15). The most frequent adverse events were pulmonary events (43 [40%] of 107 in the repaglinide group and 60 [45%] of 133 in the insulin group), and the most frequent serious adverse events were pulmonary events leading to hospital admission (five [50%] of ten and seven [54%] of 13, respectively). Interpretation: Repaglinide for glycaemic control in patients with cystic-fibrosis-related diabetes is as efficacious and safe as insulin. Funding: Mukoviszidose eV, Vaincre la Mucoviscidose, ABCF Association, and Novo Nordisk.
AB - Background: As survival among patients with cystic fibrosis has improved in recent decades, complications have become increasingly relevant. The most frequent complication is cystic-fibrosis-related diabetes. The recommended treatment is injected insulin, but some patients are treated with oral antidiabetic drugs to ease the treatment burden. We assessed the efficacy and safety of oral antidiabetic drugs. Methods: We did a multicentre, open-label, comparative, randomised trial in 49 centres in Austria, France, Germany, and Italy. Eligible patients had cystic fibrosis, were older than 10 years, and had newly diagnosed diabetes. We used a central randomisation schedule derived from a Geigy random number table to assign patients 1:1 to receive insulin or repaglinide, stratified by sex and age (10–15 years or >15 years). The primary outcome was glycaemic control assessed by mean change in HbA1c concentration from baseline after 24 months of treatment. Differences between groups were assessed by linear models. The primary and safety analyses were done in the modified intention-to-treat population (including patients who stopped treatment early because of lack of efficacy). This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00662714. Findings: We enrolled 34 patients in the repaglinide group and 41 in the insulin group, of whom 30 and 37, respectively, were included in the analyses. At 24 months, glycaemic control was similar in the repaglinide and insulin groups (mean change in HbA1c concentration from baseline 0·2% [SD 0·7%], 1·7 mmol/mol [8·1 mmol/mol] with repaglinide vs −0·2% [1·3%], −2·7 mmol/mol, [14·5 mmol/mol] with insulin; mean difference between groups −0·4%, (95% CI −1·1 to 0·2 [−4·4 mmol/mol, −11·5 to 2·7], p=0·15). The most frequent adverse events were pulmonary events (43 [40%] of 107 in the repaglinide group and 60 [45%] of 133 in the insulin group), and the most frequent serious adverse events were pulmonary events leading to hospital admission (five [50%] of ten and seven [54%] of 13, respectively). Interpretation: Repaglinide for glycaemic control in patients with cystic-fibrosis-related diabetes is as efficacious and safe as insulin. Funding: Mukoviszidose eV, Vaincre la Mucoviscidose, ABCF Association, and Novo Nordisk.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85035345718&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/S2213-8587(17)30400-X
DO - 10.1016/S2213-8587(17)30400-X
M3 - Journal articles
C2 - 29199116
AN - SCOPUS:85035345718
SN - 2213-8587
VL - 6
SP - 114
EP - 121
JO - The Lancet Diabetes and Endocrinology
JF - The Lancet Diabetes and Endocrinology
IS - 2
ER -