A comparison of the effects of human and animal insulin as well as of the adverse reaction profile did not show clinically relevant differences. Many patient-oriented outcomes like health-related quality of life or diabetes complications and mortality were never investigated in high-quality randomised clinical trials. The story of the introduction of human insulin might be repeated by contemporary launching campaigns to introduce pharmaceutical and technological innovations that are not backed up by sufficient proof of their advantages and safety.
A fifteen-month double-blind cross-over study of the efficacy and antigenicity of human and pork insulins.
The antigenicity and efficacy of semi-synthetic human and pancreatic pork insulins have been compared in a double-blind double cross-over study in 96 insulin-treated diabetic patients. Transfer from pork to human insulin was associated with a 1.2 +/- 0.5 mmol/l deterioration (p less than 0.05) in the fasting blood glucose level, while the opposite change caused a 1.1 +/- 0.5 mmol/l improvement (p less than 0.05). After 4 months treatment, glycosylated haemoglobin levels were lower on pork (11.1 +/- 0.3%) than on human (11.7 +/- 0.3% p less than 0.01) insulin. The incidence of hypoglycaemia was similar with the two insulins. IgG insulin antibody levels were identical after human insulin treatment (5.7 +/- 0.4 micrograms/l) compared to pork insulin treatment (5.9 +/- 0.5 micrograms/l). Patients with high levels of antibodies (greater than 10 micrograms/l) showed a similar reduction in level when switched to either species of highly purified insulin. The deterioration in fasting blood glucose control is consistent with similar reports for biosynthetic human insulin and suggests, in the absence of changes in insulin antibody levels, a small but clinically significant pharmacokinetic difference between human and pork insulin.