Translations:Insulin analog/18/en

In 2007, Germany's Institute for Quality and Cost Effectiveness in the Health Care Sector (IQWiG) report, concluded that there is currently "no evidence" available of the superiority of rapid-acting insulin analogs over synthetic human insulins in the treatment of adult patients with type 1 diabetes. Many of the studies reviewed by IQWiG were either too small to be considered statistically reliable and, perhaps most significantly, none of the studies included in their widespread review were blinded, the gold-standard methodology for conducting clinical research. However, IQWiG's terms of reference explicitly disregard any issues which cannot be tested in double-blind studies, for example a comparison of radically different treatment regimes. IQWiG is regarded with skepticism by some doctors in Germany, being seen merely as a mechanism to reduce costs. But the lack of study blinding does increase the risk of bias in these studies. The reason this is important is because patients, if they know they are using a different type of insulin, might behave differently (such as testing blood glucose levels more frequently, for example), which leads to bias in the study results, rendering the results inapplicable to the diabetes population at large. Numerous studies have concluded that any increase in testing of blood glucose levels is likely to yield improvements in glycemic control, which raises questions as to whether any improvements observed in the clinical trials for insulin analogues were the result of more frequent testing or due to the drug undergoing trials.