Skip to main content
. 2018 Dec 17;2018(12):CD013228. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD013228
Trial ID Intervention(s) and comparator(s) Sex (female %) Age (mean years (SD)) HbA1c (mean % (SD)) BMI (mean kg/m² (SD)) Co‐medications, Co‐interventions (% of participants) Comorbidities (% of participants)
Altuntas 2003 I: insulin lispro 55 (34) 9.4 (1.5) 31 (‐)
C: RHI 55 (34) 9.6 (1.4)a 31 (‐)
Bastyr 2000 I: insulin lispro 43 55 (‐) 9.5 (1.9)b 28 (‐)
C: RHI 44 57 (‐) 9.6 (1.8)b 28 (‐)
Dailey 2004 I: insulin glulisine 44 59 (10) 7.6 (0.9) 35 (7)
C: RHI 50 58 (10) 7.5 (1.0) 35 (7)
Hermann 2013 I: insulin aspart 27 58 (12) 8.7 (1.6) 31.5 (5.8)
C: RHI 44 60 (9) 8.7 (1.6) 32.8 (4.8)
NCT01650129 I: biphasic insulin aspart 50 41 60 (11) 7.8 (1.2) 23 (3)
C: biphasic human insulin 50/50 20 60 (10) 7.5 (1.6) 23 (3)
Pfützner 2013 I1: insulin aspart 9 64 (9) 7.1 (0.6) 32 (5)
I2: insulin glulisine
C: RHI
Rayman 2007 I: insulin glulisine 52 60 (9) 7.6 (0.9) 32 (5)c Short‐acting insulin: 72 Basal insulin: 60 Mixture insulin: 11 OAD: 34
C: RHI 49 60 (10) 7.5 (0.9) 31 (5) Short‐acting insulin: 70 Basal insulin: 63 Mixture insulin: 13 OAD: 34
Ross 2001 I: insulin lispro 63 59 (8) 10.7 (1.7) 28 (8) Retinopathy: 11 Neuropathy: 32 Hypertension and peripheral vascular disease: 11
C: RHI 62 58 (9) 10.6 (1.6) 27 (9)
Z012 1997 I: insulin lispro 56 50 (‐) 8.7 (1.5) 29 (‐)
C: RHI 57 44 (‐) 8.8 (1.8) 28 (‐)
Z014 1997 I: insulin lispro 56 48 (‐) 8.8 (1.4) 28 (‐)
C: RHI 55 51 (‐) 9.0 (1.6) 29 (‐)
a Inconsistency in reporting of HbA1c value between table and text in publication b Measurement 2 weeks after randomisation c According to IQWIG 2005: 31(5), difference possibly due to rounding
—: denotes not reported
BMI: body mass index; C: comparator; HbA1c: glycosylated haemoglobin A1c; I: intervention; OAD: oral antidiabetic drugs; SD: standard deviation; SU: sulphonylurea drugs