Abstract:Background: Ultra-long-acting insulin analogs [insulin degludec (IDeg) and insulin glargine 300 units/mL (IGla-300)] offer a longer duration of action with less risk of hypoglycemia compared to other long-acting insulins. However, data about the comparative efficacy and safety are inconsistent. Methods: We searched CENTRAL, PubMed, Embase, ICTRP Search Portal, and ClinicalTrials.gov on 7 October 2022. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the safety and efficacy of IDeg (100 or 200 units/mL) and IGla-300 in patients with type 1 or type 2 diabetes were included. Three review authors independently selected trials, assessed the risk of bias, extracted data, and evaluated the overall certainty of the evidence using GRADE. The primary outcomes were the change in glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) and any hypoglycemia; the secondary outcomes were the change in fasting plasma glucose (FPG) and severe and nocturnal hypoglycemia. Results: Four open-label RCTs were included (2727 participants), 3 parallel and 1 cross-over. Overall, the risk of bias assessment yielded some concern or high risk. There was a comparable change in HbA1c from baseline to the end of treatment, a mean difference of 0.07% (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.06 – 0.19; p = 0.29; 3 trials; 2652 patients; very low-certainty evidence), and a comparable rate of any hypoglycemia, rate ratio 1.02 (95% CI 0.8 – 1.3; p = 0.87; 3 trials; 2881 patients; very low-certainty evidence). IDeg resulted in more reduction in FPG compared to IGla-300, mean difference of 10.27 mg/dL (95% CI 7.25 – 13.29; p < 0.001; 3 trials; 2668 patients; low-certainty evidence). Similar rates of nocturnal and severe hypoglycemia were observed, rate ratio of 1.13 (95% CI 0.72 – 1.78; p = 0.54; 3 trials; 2668 patients; very low-certainty evidence) and 1.4 (95% CI 0.41 – 4.73; p = 0.59; 2 trials; 1952 patients; very low-certainty evidence), respectively. Conclusion: There is no evidence of a difference between IDeg and IGla-300 in the mean change in HbA1c and the risk of anytime, nocturnal, and severe hypoglycemia. IDeg appeared to cause a higher reduction in FPG compared to IGla-300. However, this finding should be interpreted with caution due to the small number of trials included and their high risk of bias. Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42022364891, identifier CRD42022364891.

The Efficacy and Safety of Insulin Degludec Versus Insulin Glargine in Insulin-Naive Subjects with Type 2 Diabetes: Results of a Chinese Cohort from a Multinational Randomized Controlled Trial

Efficacy and safety of insulin degludec biosimilar B01411 versus originator insulin degludec in Chinese patients with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled on oral antidiabetic drugs: a multicenter, randomized, open-label, phase 3 study

Efficacy and Safety of Insulin Degludec/insulin Aspart Versus Biphasic Insulin Aspart 30 in Chinese Adults with Type 2 Diabetes: A Phase III, Open‐label, 2:1 Randomized, Treat‐to‐target Trial

DUAL II China: Superior HbA1c reductions and weight loss with insulin degludec/liraglutide (IDegLira) versus insulin degludec in a randomized trial of Chinese people with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled on basal insulin

Initiation of Insulin Degludec in Chinese Hospitalized Patients with Type 2 Diabetes - A Single Center's Experience

Efficacy, safety and treatment satisfaction of transition to a regimen of insulin degludec/aspart: A pilot study

Efficacy and Safety of LY2963016 Insulin Glargine Versus Insulin Glargine (lantus) in Chinese Adults with Type 2 Diabetes: A Phase III, Randomized, Open-Label, Controlled Trial

Insulin Degludec in People with Type 2 Diabetes in China: A Non-interventional, Retrospective Chart Review Study (CN-TREAT)

Efficacy and Safety of Additional Basal Insulin or Oral Antidiabetic Drug in Type 2 Diabetes Poorly Controlled with One Oral Antidiabetic Drug

Efficacy and Tolerability of Insulin Degludec Versus Other Long-acting Basal Insulin Analogues in the Treatment of Type 1 and Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Efficacy and safety of insulin glargine 300 units/mL vs insulin degludec in patients with type 1 and type 2 diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Efficacy and safety of insulin degludec U100 and insulin glargine U100 in combination with meal-time bolus insulin in hospitalized patients with type 2 diabetes: an open-label, randomized controlled study.

PDB45 EVALUATING THE SHORT-TERM COST-UTILITY OF INSULIN DEGLUDEC VERSUS INSULIN GLARGINE U100 IN BASAL-BOLUS REGIMENS FOR TYPE 2 DIABETES IN CHINA

Efficacy and Safety of Insulin Degludec in a Flexible Dosing Regimen vs Insulin Glargine in Patients With Type 1 Diabetes (BEGIN: Flex T1): A 26-Week Randomized, Treat-to-Target Trial With a 26-Week Extension

Efficacy and Safety of Insulin Degludec/Insulin Aspart versus Biphasic Insulin Aspart 30 in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Comparison of treatment with insulin degludec and glargine U100 in patients with type 1 diabetes prone to nocturnal severe hypoglycaemia: The HypoDeg randomized, controlled, open-label, crossover trial

Efficacy and safety of fixed-ratio combination insulin degludec/liraglutide in type 2 diabetes: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

A phase-I randomized euglycemic clamp study to demonstrate the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic equivalence of an insulin degludec biosimilar (B01411) with the reference product in healthy Chinese volunteers

A Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing the Efficacy and Safety of IDegLira Versus Basal-Bolus in Patients With Poorly Controlled Type 2 Diabetes and Very High HbA1c ≥9-15%: DUAL HIGH Trial.

Efficacy and safety of insulin glargine 300 U/mL in people with type 2 diabetes in China: The INITIATION study