1 / 8

Kumamoto trial: study design

Kumamoto trial: study design. Patients with type 2 diabetes (n = 110). Primary prevention (n = 55). Secondary intervention (n = 55). Randomise. Randomise. Conventional insulin treatment (n = 27). Intensive insulin treatment (n = 28). Conventional insulin treatment (n = 28).

teal
Download Presentation

Kumamoto trial: study design

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Kumamoto trial: study design Patients with type 2 diabetes (n = 110) Primary prevention (n = 55) Secondary intervention (n = 55) Randomise Randomise Conventional insulin treatment (n = 27) Intensive insulin treatment (n = 28) Conventional insulin treatment (n = 28) Intensive insulin treatment (n = 27) Kumamoto trial: Diabetes Care 2000;23(suppl 2):B21–29

  2. Kumamoto trial: treatment conditions Conventional group • Aim: • no symptoms of hyper- or hypoglycaemia • FBG <140 mg/dL • 1 or 2 daily injections of intermediate-acting insulin Intensive group • Aim: • FBG close to <140 mg/dL • 2 hr PPG <200 mg/dL • HbA1c <7.0% • 1 bedtime injection of intermediate-acting insulin + meal-time short-acting insulin • Frequent self-monitoring • Clinic visits every 2 weeks Kumamoto trial: Diabetes Care 2000;23(suppl 2):B21–29

  3. Kumamoto trial: participant characteristics Kumamoto trial: Diabetes Care 2000;23(suppl 2):B21–29

  4. 12 Intensive Conventional 10 8 6 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Year of study Kumamoto trial: intensive therapy reduced HbA1c HbA1c (%) Adapted from: Diabetes Care 2000;23(suppl 2):B21–29

  5. Intensive Conventional 60 50 50 40 40 30 30 20 20 10 10 0 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Kumamoto trial: intensive therapy reduced microvascular complications Retinopathy: 68% risk reduction Nephropathy: 74% risk reduction Patients (%) Year of study Adapted from: Diabetes Care 2000;23(suppl 2):B21–29

  6. 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 Intensive Conventional Kumamoto trial: intensive therapy did not increase severe hypoglycaemia • No incidences of severe hypoglycaemia in either group • Mild hypoglycaemic events occurred only 1.6 times more often with intensive than with conventional treatment Mild hypoglycaemic events per 100 patient years Kumamoto trial: Diabetes Care 2000;23(suppl 2):B21–29

  7. Intensive 22 Conventional 21 20 19 0 Baseline Trial end Kumamoto trial: similar weight gain in both treatment groups BMI (kg/m2) Kumamoto trial: Diabetes Care 2000;23(suppl 2):B21–29

  8. Economic analysis - Kumamoto • “Our results show that multiple injection therapy (MIT) is more beneficial than conventional insulin injection therapy in both cost and effectiveness. MIT is recommended for the treatment of type 2 diabetic patients who require insulin therapy as early as possible from the perspective of both patients and health policy.” Wake N et al. Diab Res Clin Pract 2000;48:201–10

More Related