***TASK*** the task is to summarize an input biomedical literature in six sentences 
    ***INPUT*** the input is a biomedical literature 
    ***OUTPUT*** the output is the summary of an input biomedical literature in six sentences 
    ***DOCUMENTATION*** 
    ***EXAMPLES*** 
    Input: Abbreviations ACCORD Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes ADVANCE Action in Diabetes and Vascular Disease : Preterax and Diamicron Modified-Release Controlled Evaluation AGI α-Glucosidase inhibitor  CAD Coronary artery disease CKD Chronic kidney disease CVD Cardiovascular disease DPP-4 Dipeptidyl peptidase IV GIP Glucose-dependent insulinotropic peptide GLP-1 Glucagon-like peptide 1 NPH Neutral protamine Hagedorn TZD Thiazolidinedione UKPDS UK Prospect i ve Diabetes Study VADT Veterans Affairs Diabetes Aim : Type II diabetes mellitus ( DM ) increases the risk of cardiovascular disease . Treatment with insulin substantially reduces C - reactive protein ( CRP ) because of its anti-atherosclerotic action . This study was design ed to explore and compare the cardio protective role of regular human insulin ( RHI ) , aspart and lispro insulin in type II DM . Material s and Methods : A r and omized , open , parallel group , comparative clinical study was conducted on 90 patients of type II DM . After baseline clinical assessment and investigations , RHI was prescribed to 30 patients , aspart insulin to 30 patients and lispro insulin to another 30 patients for 12 weeks . The efficacy variables were change in blood pressure , glycemic control , lipid profile , serum potassium , high-sensitivity CRP ( hsCRP ) and UKPDS 10-year CHD risk scoring over 12 weeks . At the end of the study , the patients were followed up and changes in variables from baseline were analyzed by statistical tools . Results : Systolic blood pressure decreased significantly in aspart group ( P = 0.008 ) whereas diastolic blood pressure was decreased significantly both in aspart ( P < 0.001 ) and lispro group ( P = 0.01 ) . Fasting , postpr and ial blood glucose and HbA1c were decreased in all three groups significantly but change in aspart group was superior ( P = 0.01 ) . Triglyceride was significantly better controlled by lispro ( P < 0.01 ) whereas aspart insulin was superior to decrease total cholesterol and LDL ( P < 0.05 ) . The extent of potassium loss was significantly more with RHI ( P = 0.004 ) than others . CRP-lowering effect ( P = 0.017 ) and decrease in UKPDS risk scoring ( P = 0.019 ) in aspart and lispro group was superior to RHI group . Conclusion : Short acting insulin analogues , especially aspart insulin have been found to have a better cardio protective role than RHI in type II DM OBJECTIVE Because there are limited data on the comparison of insulin aspart and mixed insulin in type 2 diabetes , this trial was performed to compare the efficacy and safety of prepr and ial insulin aspart with human soluble insulin ( HI ) and human premix ( 70 % NPH/30 % regular ) insulin ( MIX ) . RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS A total of 231 type 2 diabetic patients were r and omized to insulin aspart ( n = 75 ) , HI ( n = 80 ) , or MIX ( n = 76 ) for 3 months . Insulin aspart and HI were administered with or without bedtime NPH insulin . A total of 204 patients completed the trial according to protocol . HbA1c , 7-point blood glucose , insulin dosage , and hypoglycemic episodes were recorded . The primary end point was " change of HbA1c " from baseline to last visit . Analysis for equivalence was performed by t tests with three subtests . RESULTS HbA1c decreased 0.91 + /- 1.00 for insulin aspart , 0.73 + /- 0.87 for HI , and 0.65 + /- 1.10 for MIX with the following confidence intervals : insulin aspart HI ( -0.21 to 0.57 , P = 0.025 ) , insulin aspart MIX ( -0.17 to 0.69 , P = 0.092 ) , and HI-MIX ( -0.33 to 0.48 , P = 0.006 ) . Postpr and ial blood glucose decreased in the insulin aspart group : 0.44 mmol/l to > 1.67 mmol/l compared with HI and 1.1 mmol/l to > 1.67 mmol/l compared with MIX . Prepr and ial insulin doses were similar in the insulin aspart and HI groups ( 10 - 14.5 U ) . Hypoglycemic events per month were 0.56 HI , 0.40 insulin aspart , and 0.19 MIX . CONCLUSIONS Statistically , insulin aspart was not equivalent to another treatment in terms of HbA1c reduction .  Insulin aspart treatment result ed in improved HbA1c and postpr and ial blood glucose . The application of insulin aspart was safe and well tolerated OBJECTIVE To compare the safety and efficacy of insulin aspart ( IAsp ) , buffered regular insulin ( BR ) , and insulin lispro administered by continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion ( CSII ) in patients with type 1 diabetes . RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS After completing a 4-week run-in period with BR , 146 adult patients with type 1 diabetes ( with pretrial CSII experience ) were r and omly assigned ( 2:2:1 ) to CSII treatment with IAsp , BR , or lispro for 16 weeks in a multicenter , open-label , r and omized , parallel-group study . Bolus insulin doses were administered 30 min before meals ( BR ) or immediately before meals ( IAsp or lispro ) . RESULTS Treatment groups had similar baseline HbA(1c ) ( 7.3 % + /- 0.7 for IAsp , 7.5 % + /- 0.8 for BR , and 7.3 % + /- 0.7 for lispro ) . After 16 weeks of treatment , HbA1c values were relatively unchanged from baseline , and the mean changes in baseline HbA1c values were not significantly different between the three groups ( 0.00 + /- 0.51 , 0.15 + /- 0.63 , and 0.18 + /- 0.84 for the IAsp , BR , and lispro groups , respectively ) . The rates of hypoglycemic episodes ( blood glucose < 50 mg/dl ) per patient per month were similar ( 3.7 , 4.8 , and 4.4 for the IAsp , BR , and lispro groups , respectively ) . Clogs/blockages in pumps or infusion sets were infrequent ; most subjects ( 76 , 83 , and 75 % in the IAsp , BR , and lispro groups , respectively ) had < or = 1 clog or blockage per 4 weeks during the trial . CONCLUSIONS Insulin aspart in CSII was as efficacious and well tolerated as BR and lispro and is a suitable insulin for continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion using external pumps BACKGROUND Severe hypoglycemia may increase the risk of a poor outcome in patients with type 2 diabetes assigned to an intensive glucose-lowering intervention .  We analyzed data from a large study of intensive glucose lowering to explore the relationship between severe hypoglycemia and adverse clinical outcomes . METHODS We examined the associations between severe hypoglycemia and the risks of macrovascular or microvascular events and death among 11,140 patients with type 2 diabetes , using Cox proportional-hazards models with adjustment for covariates measured at baseline and after r and omization . RESULTS During a median follow-up period of 5 years , 231 patients ( 2.1 % ) had at least one severe hypoglycemic episode ; 150 had been assigned to intensive glucose control ( 2.7 % of the 5571 patients in that group ) , and 81 had been assigned to st and ard glucose control ( 1.5 % of the 5569 patients in that group ) . The median times from the onset of severe hypoglycemia to the first major macrovascular event , the first major microvascular event , and death were 1.56 years ( interquartile range , 0.84 to 2.41 ) , 0.99 years ( interquartile range , 0.40 to 2.17 ) , and 1.05 years ( interquartile range , 0.34 to 2.41 ) , respectively . During follow-up , severe hypoglycemia was associated with a significant increase in the adjusted risks of major macrovascular events ( hazard ratio , 2.88 ; 95 % confidence interval [ CI ] , 2.01 to 4.12 ) , major microvascular events ( hazard ratio , 1.81 ; 95 % CI , 1.19 to 2.74 ) , death from a cardiovascular cause ( hazard ratio , 2.68 ; 95 % CI , 1.72 to 4.19 ) , and death from any cause ( hazard ratio , 2.69 ; 95 % CI , 1.97 to 3.67 ) ( P<0.001 for all comparisons ) . Similar associations were apparent for a range of nonvascular outcomes , including respiratory , digestive , and skin conditions ( P<0.01 for all comparisons ) . No relationship was found between repeated episodes of severe hypoglycemia and vascular outcomes or death . CONCLUSIONS Severe hypoglycemia was strongly associated with increased risks of a range of adverse clinical outcomes . It is possible that severe hypoglycemia contributes to adverse outcomes , but these analyses indicate that hypoglycemia is just as likely to be a marker of vulnerability to such events . ( Funded by Servier and the National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia ; Clinical Trials.gov number , NCT00145925 . ) This r and omized , open-label , cross-over study compares the efficacy of mealtime rapid-acting analog insulin aspart with human insulin , in combination with metformin . A total of 30 patients with type 2 diabetes , inadequately controlled ( HbA(1c)>7.5 % ) with oral hypoglycemic agents ( OHAs ) , were assigned to human insulin 30 min before meals or aspart immediately before meals , both with metformin 500 mg t.i.d . for 90 days . Patients then switched to the alternate insulin . At 90 and 180 days , blood glucose and lipids were measured at baseline and every 30 min after test meals , for 3h . HbA(1c ) and hypoglycemic events were also assessed . After 3 months , HbA(1c ) was significantly reduced with aspart , but not human insulin ( -0.4+/-0.7 % versus + 0.1+/-0.7 % , p<0.05 ) . During meal tests , blood glucose area under the curve ( AUC ) was significantly lower with aspart than human insulin ( 1240+/-476 min/mmol/l versus 1588+/-766 min/mmol/l , p<0.01 ) . AUCs for lipids were similar for both treatments . Neither group experienced serious hypoglycemic events . These results encourage treatment with mealtime insulin aspart plus metformin , in type 2 diabetes patients with postpr and ial hyperglycemia inadequately controlled by OHAs alone Insulin aspart ( IAsp ) , is a rapid-acting analogue of human insulin ( HI ) , for use in the meal related treatment of diabetes mellitus . The degree of glycaemic control achieved by IAsp in comparison with HI after algorithm-driven dose optimisation was tested over 3 months . The prospect i ve , multicentre , r and omised , open-label study with parallel groups was performed in 48 centres in 11 countries and included 423 basal-bolus treated patients with Type 1 diabetes . Main outcome measures were blood glucose control assessed by HbA1c , nine-point self-monitored blood glucose profiles , insulin dose , quality of life , hypoglycaemia and adverse events . An algorithm-driven increase occurred in the dose and number of daily injections of basal insulin , particularly in the IAsp group . After 12 weeks of treatment , HbA1c was significantly lower in IAsp compared to HI treated subjects by 0.17 ( 95 % CI 0.30 - 0.04 ) ( P<0.05 ) . Comparison of the blood glucose profiles showed lower blood glucose levels with IAsp after breakfast ( mean 8.4 vs 10.1 mmol/l ; P<0.0001 ) and dinner ( 8.2 vs 9.3 mmol/l ; P<0.01 ) . There were no differences between treatments in the incidence of hypoglycaemic episodes or in the adverse event profiles . The WHO Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Question naire score for perceived hyperglycaemia was lower with Iasp ( P=0.005 ) , and patients found the insulin aspart treatment more flexible ( P=0.022 ) . The current study underlines the need for optimising the basal 
    Output:
    
The risk of overall hypoglycemia and severe adverse effects was comparable between the groups .
CONCLUSIONS IAsp provides better glycemic control when compared with RHI in patients with T1DM and T2DM .
Fewer T1DM patients treated with IAsp experienced nocturnal hypoglycemia , while both interventions showed a comparable risk of severe hypoglycemic events in both types of diabetes