Insulin Lispro Lowers Postprandial Glucose in Prepubertal Children With Diabetes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This study compared the glucose-lowering effect of insulin lispro, given before or after meals, with regular human insulin given before meals in prepubertal children with diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: A 3-way crossover, open-label study involving 61 prepubertal children (ages 2.9-11.4 years) with type 1 diabetes. The children were randomly assigned to receive regular human insulin 30 to 45 minutes before meals, insulin lispro within 15 minutes before or immediately after meals, combined with basal insulin. Each treatment lasted 3 months. Hemoglobin A(1c) levels and home glucose monitoring profiles were measured at the end of each treatment period. RESULTS: Treatment with insulin lispro before breakfast resulted in lower 2-hour postprandial glucose values than regular human insulin (11.7 +/- 4.4 mmol/L vs 15.0 +/- 5.4 mmol/L). Similarly, insulin lispro given before dinner resulted in lower blood glucose values 2 hours postprandially (8.8 +/- 5.0 mmol/L vs 10.8 +/- 5.4 mmol/L) than regular human insulin. When insulin lispro was administered after meals, the 2-hour glucose levels were between those seen with either insulin lispro or regular human insulin given before meals. The number and types of adverse events, the rates of hypoglycemia, and the HbA(1c) levels did not differ among the 3 therapies. CONCLUSIONS: In prepubertal children, insulin lispro given before meals is safe and significantly lowers postprandial glucose levels after breakfast and dinner compared with regular human insulin, and insulin lispro given after the meal provides similar benefits as regular human insulin before the meal.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".