Open questions on basal insulin therapy in T2D: a Delphi consensus
-
Published:2024-05-20
Issue:
Volume:
Page:
-
ISSN:1432-5233
-
Container-title:Acta Diabetologica
-
language:en
-
Short-container-title:Acta Diabetol
Author:
, Alberto Aglialoro, Roberto Anichini, Angelo Avogaro, Cristiana Baggiore, Cesare Berra, Riccardo Bonadonna, Giuseppe Corrao Salvatore Maria, Andrea Da Porto, Lorenzo De Candia, Alessandro De Cosmo Salvatore, Graziano Di Cianni, Gloria Formoso, Gabriella Garrapa, Mariangela Ghiani, Francesco Giorgino, Giacomo Guaita, Ida Maiorino Maria, Stefano Masi, Monica Modugno, Nicola Morea, Lelio Morviducci, Nicola Napoli, Raffaele Napoli, Margherita Occhipinti, Emanuela Orsi, Gianluca Perseghin, Salvatore Piro, Giovanni Sartore, Giorgio Sesti, Francesco Tassone, Roberto Trevisan, Buzzetti Raffaella, Candido Riccardo, Esposito Katherine, Giaccari Andrea, Mannucci Edoardo, Nicolucci AntonioORCID, Russo Giuseppina T.
Abstract
Abstract
Aims
The revolution in the therapeutic approach to type 2 diabetes (T2D) requires a rethinking of the positioning of basal insulin (BI) therapy. Given the considerable number of open questions, a group of experts was convened with the aim of providing, through a Delphi consensus method, practical guidance for doctors.
Methods
A group of 6 experts developed a series of 29 statements on: the role of metabolic control in light of the most recent guidelines; BI intensification strategies: (1) add-on versus switch; (2) inertia in starting and titrating; (3) free versus fixed ratio combination; basal-bolus intensification and de-intensification strategies; second generation analogues of BI (2BI). A panel of 31 diabetologists, by accessing a dedicated website, assigned each statement a relevance score on a 9-point scale. The RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method was adopted to assess the existence of disagreement among participants.
Results
Panelists showed agreement for all 29 statements, of which 26 were considered relevant, one was considered not relevant and two were of uncertain relevance.
Panelists agreed that the availability of new classes of drugs often allows the postponement of BI and the simplification of therapy. It remains essential to promptly initiate and titrate BI when required. BI should always, unless contraindicated, be started in addition to, and not as a replacement, for ongoing treatments with cardiorenal benefits. 2BIs should be preferred for their pharmacological profile, greater ease of self-titration and flexibility of administration.
Conclusion
In a continuously evolving scenario, BI therapy still represents an important option in the management of T2D patients.
Funder
The project was funded by Sanofi S.r.l., Milan, Italy.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference52 articles.
1. ElSayed NA, Aleppo G, Aroda VR et al (2023) 9 Pharmacologic approaches to glycemic treatment: standards of care in diabetes-2023. Diabetes Care 46(Suppl 1):S140–S157 2. Davies MJ, Aroda VR, Collins BS et al (2022) Management of hyperglycemia in type 2 diabetes, 2022. A consensus report by the American Diabetes Association (ADA) and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes (EASD). Diabetes Care 45:2753–2786 3. Khunti K, Millar-Jones D (2017) Clinical inertia to insulin initiation and intensification in the UK: a focused literature review. Prim Care Diabetes 11:3–12 4. Candido R, Nicolucci A, Larosa M, Rossi MC, Napoli R; RESTORE-G (Retrospective analysis on the therapeutic approaches after GLP-1 RA treatment in type 2 diabetes patients) Study Group (2023) Treatment intensification following glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist treatment in type 2 diabetes: The RESTORE-G real-world study. Nutr Metab Cardiovasc Dis 33:2294–2305 5. Trial Investigators ORIGIN, Gerstein HC, Bosch J, Dagenais GR et al (2012) Basal insulin and cardiovascular and other outcomes in dysglycemia. N Engl J Med 367:319–328
|
|