1098-P: Treatment Satisfaction with Gla-300, IDeg-100, and Gla-100 in Insulin-Naïve T2DM: The BRIGHT and EDITION 3 Trials
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Long-acting insulin analogs have the potential to optimize glycemic control in type 2 diabetes, but the patients’ perspective is key for acceptance and treatment adherence. BRIGHT investigated safety and efficacy of initiating the second-generation basal insulin analogs insulin glargine 300 U/mL (Gla-300) vs. insulin degludec 100 U/mL (IDeg-100) in insulin-naïve people with T2DM. We report data on patient satisfaction from the BRIGHT trial and the EDITION 3 trial (Gla-300 vs. insulin glargine 100 U/mL [Gla-100]). BRIGHT and EDITION 3 were both multicenter, open-label, randomized, parallel-group trials with primary endpoint at 6 months. Randomized participants titrated to a fasting SMPG of 80-100 mg/dL (once-daily evening dosing). The Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire (DTSQ) was completed at baseline and 6 months. Overall, initiating basal insulin analogs was associated with improved treatment satisfaction (Table). There was a numerically greater decrease in perceived hyperglycemia frequency for Gla-300 and IDeg-100 vs. Gla-100 and only a very small increase in the perceived hypoglycemia frequency for all insulins. Similar treatment satisfaction improvement for all insulins was observed. In randomized controlled trials, initiating basal insulin analogs is associated with improved treatment satisfaction, with little increase in perceived hypoglycemia frequency. Disclosure L. Berard: Advisory Panel; Self; Eli Lilly and Company. Consultant; Self; Abbott, Ascensia Diabetes Care, AstraZeneca, Bayer AG, Becton, Dickinson and Company, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc., LifeScan Canada, Mylan, Novo Nordisk Inc., Sanofi. Research Support; Self; Montmed Inc. Speaker's Bureau; Self; Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Merck & Co., Inc. F.J. Snoek: Advisory Panel; Self; AstraZeneca, Lilly Diabetes, Novo Nordisk A/S, Roche Diabetes Care. Research Support; Self; Sanofi. Speaker's Bureau; Self; Lilly Diabetes. S.B. Harris: Advisory Panel; Self; AstraZeneca, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Lilly/Boehringer Ingelheim, Merck & Co., Inc., Novo Nordisk A/S, Sanofi. Consultant; Self; AstraZeneca, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Lilly/Boehringer Ingelheim, Merck & Co., Inc., Novo Nordisk Inc., Sanofi. Research Support; Self; Abbott, AstraZeneca, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Merck & Co., Inc., Novo Nordisk A/S, Sanofi. Other Relationship; Self; Canadian Diabetes Association, Canadian Institutes of Health Research, The Lawson Foundation. J. Westerbacka: Employee; Self; Sanofi. Stock/Shareholder; Self; Sanofi. Z. Bosnyak: Employee; Self; Sanofi. Stock/Shareholder; Self; Sanofi. L. Melas-Melt: Consultant; Self; Sanofi. K. Khunti: Advisory Panel; Self; Amgen Inc., AstraZeneca, Eli Lilly and Company, Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp., Novo Nordisk A/S, Sanofi. Consultant; Self; AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim International GmbH, Eli Lilly and Company, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp., Novartis AG, Novo Nordisk A/S, Pfizer Inc., Sanofi-Aventis, Servier, Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited. Research Support; Self; AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim International GmbH, Eli Lilly and Company, Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp., Novartis AG, Novo Nordisk A/S, Pfizer Inc., Sanofi-Aventis. Speaker's Bureau; Self; AstraZeneca, Berlin-Chemie AG, Boehringer Ingelheim International GmbH, Eli Lilly and Company, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Menarini Group, Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp., Novartis AG, Novo Nordisk A/S, Roche Pharma, Sanofi, Servier, Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited. Funding Sanofi (NCT02738151)
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".