This page shows what was measured, who it was measured in, and what that does not settle.
What Insulin aspart does in the body
Insulin aspart has one building block swapped for a negatively charged one, and the resulting electrical repulsion stops the six sticking together.
Ordinary insulin injected under the skin does not stay as single molecules. Six of them lock together around a zinc atom, and that clump has to break apart before anything can be absorbed, which takes half an hour or more. The molecules go into the bloodstream faster, act on the same receptor as ordinary insulin, and are gone sooner.
Why people take it. Diabetes — the fast insulin taken around meals
What happened in people
A 1.18 mmol/L reduction in the one-hour post-meal glucose increment for the accelerated formulation against conventional aspart in 1,290 participants
✎ Source-linked record
Where this came from
A person wrote this into the record with the study named beside it. No reviewer has signed it off.
The recorded finding that sits closest to something a person would notice. Written into the record, not signed off, and it carries no population or interval.
Home PD, Hallgren P, Usadel KH et al. Pre-meal insulin aspart compared with pre-meal soluble human insulin in type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Res Clin Pract 2006;7… · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
That rapid-acting analogues reduce severe hypoglycaemia — the pooled odds ratio is 0.89 with a confidence interval from 0.71 to 1.12
Where it acts
Subcutaneous depot, then insulin receptors on skeletal muscle, fat and liver cells
Kind of result
A number that stands in for health
Supervision
Professional supervision is normally required. A regulator classifies this substance in a way that restricts how it is supplied.
What the registries record it as
The substance registry classes this as protein.
FDA substance registry · D933668QVX · read 2026-08-29
Its recorded molecular formula is C256H381N65O79S6, weighing 5825.8 Da.
US prescribing information · 19888a44-b330-462a-864d-338c5893dd63 · read 2026-08-30
Where each sentence above came from
A person wrote this explanation into the record, with the studies named in the path below.
The recorded use, written for a reader without medical training. Not signed off.
A limit recorded against this substance. Not signed off as a reviewed claim.
The four opening statements run to 111 words.
Words this page uses
Four words worth knowing first
Chosen from what this page shows, with each one explained before the word it depends on.
Stand-in result
A stand-in result is a number measured because the real result takes too long.
A picture of it, and where the picture fails
It is like judging a journey by the speedometer rather than by arriving.
Where that stops being true. Speed does predict arrival. Many stand-in results do not predict the real one.
What people get wrong. A stand-in result is often reported as the result itself.
A surrogate endpoint substituted for a clinical endpoint, valid only where the substitution has been shown to hold.
Randomisation
Randomisation means chance decides who gets which treatment.
A picture of it, and where the picture fails
It is like a coin toss deciding the groups.
Where that stops being true. A coin toss is fair once. Fairness here comes from doing it for everyone.
What people get wrong. It is thought to make groups identical. It makes them similar on average, including on things nobody measured.
Allocation of participants to arms by a chance process, so that unmeasured factors are balanced in expectation.
Confidence interval
A confidence interval is the range the true answer is likely to sit in.
A picture of it, and where the picture fails
It is like a weather forecast giving a range rather than one number.
Where that stops being true. A forecast range covers tomorrow. This one covers what the study could resolve.
What people get wrong. The middle number is read as the answer. A range crossing zero means no change is still possible.
An interval estimate that would contain the true parameter in a stated proportion of repeated studies.
Pathway
A pathway is a chain of steps inside a cell, each one setting off the next.
A picture of it, and where the picture fails
A pathway is like a row of dominoes.
Where that stops being true. Dominoes fall one way. Pathways loop back and can switch themselves off.
What people get wrong. Changing one step is read as changing the outcome. Other steps often absorb it.
An ordered series of molecular interactions producing a defined cellular change.
What happened in people◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
What was measured, goal by goal
One row for each goal a registered study measured something for. One column for each kind of thing that could be measured.
Registered studies list 40 outcome measures that RNAWiki could read. A registered study says what someone planned to measure. It does not say what they found. 0 of the matched studies tested this substance, and 0 posted a result.
There is no single score. A strong test result and a weak life result are different facts.
Goals down the side, kinds of measurement across the top. Each cell says what kind of thing was registered, not what was found.
Goal
Life outcome
What a body can do
How a person feels
A test result
A step in the body
Harms
How long
Who was studied
Blood sugar
∅Nothing in the sources checkedNo registered study lists a life outcome for this goal.
∅Nothing in the sources checkedNo registered study lists a performance measure for this goal.
∅Nothing in the sources checkedNo registered study lists a symptom measure for this goal.
△Only a number moved10 registered test measure.
∅Nothing in the sources checkedNo registered study lists a body-step measure for this goal.
—Not recordedHarms were not a registered measure for this goal.
—Not recordedNo finished study window is recorded.
…Waiting for a reviewerWho was studied is listed further down the page.
Energy
∅Nothing in the sources checkedNo registered study lists a life outcome for this goal.
∅Nothing in the sources checkedNo registered study lists a performance measure for this goal.
∅Nothing in the sources checkedNo registered study lists a symptom measure for this goal.
∅Nothing in the sources checkedNo registered study lists a test result for this goal.
∅Nothing in the sources checkedNo registered study lists a body-step measure for this goal.
—Not recordedHarms were not a registered measure for this goal.
—Not recordedNo finished study window is recorded.
…Waiting for a reviewerWho was studied is listed further down the page.
Body weight
∅Nothing in the sources checkedNo registered study lists a life outcome for this goal.
∅Nothing in the sources checkedNo registered study lists a performance measure for this goal.
∅Nothing in the sources checkedNo registered study lists a symptom measure for this goal.
△Only a number moved1 registered test measure.
∅Nothing in the sources checkedNo registered study lists a body-step measure for this goal.
—Not recordedHarms were not a registered measure for this goal.
—Not recordedNo finished study window is recorded.
…Waiting for a reviewerWho was studied is listed further down the page.
Which registered measures put each goal on this table
Blood sugar
hba1c; hba1c following two years of treatment; hba1c at month 12; hba1c at month 36; treatment difference in hba1c; insulin detemir human insulin cross reacting antibodies; metabolic control measured as hba1c; glucose infusion rate
Energy
total energy expenditure double labelled water method; total energy expenditure dietary record method
Body weight
body weight loss
Sorted by fixed word lists, version v1. A name the rules do not recognise stays unsorted rather than moving to the nearest column.
What each mark on this table means
∅ Nothing in the sources checked
No registered study lists a life outcome for this goal.
△ Only a number moved
10 registered test measure.
— Not recorded
Harms were not a registered measure for this goal.
… Waiting for a reviewer
Who was studied is listed further down the page.
What happened in people◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
What happened in people
Each card is one study: the exact question it asked, who was in it, and whether it showed what it set out to show.
Baseline-adjusted difference in HbA1c at six months
✓ The study showed what it set out to show
Who was studied
Home 2000 registration trial, insulin aspart versus soluble human insulin
Home PD, Hallgren P, Usadel KH et al. Pre-meal insulin aspart compared with pre-meal soluble human insulin in type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Res Clin Pract 2006;7… · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
Home PD, Hallgren P, Usadel KH et al. Pre-meal insulin aspart compared with pre-meal soluble human insulin in type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Res Clin Pract 2006;7… · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
Home PD, Hallgren P, Usadel KH et al. Pre-meal insulin aspart compared with pre-meal soluble human insulin in type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Res Clin Pract 2006;7… · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
HbA1c, proportion reaching 6.5% or less, hypoglycaemia rate and weight gain across three insulin regimens
✗ The study did not show it
Who was studied
4-T, prandial insulin aspart arm (ISRCTN51125379)
How many people
708
Study design
Open-label randomised three-arm trial, 3 years
Compared against
Not recorded for this study
Kind of result
A number that stands in for health
What was found
P = 0.28 for the HbA1c comparison across arms; P < 0.001 for the difference in hypoglycaemia rates
Repeated elsewhere
Unreplicated
What this does not prove. A study that did not show an effect does not show that no effect exists anywhere.
The limits of this study, and where it came from
Main limit. The prandial aspart arm recorded 5.7 hypoglycaemic episodes per patient per year against 1.7 in the basal arm, and the greatest weight gain of the three regimens.
How far it carries. This study is recorded from the curated record, not from the registry match.
Form and route. Subcutaneous injection by pen, vial and syringe, or insulin pump; also given intravenously under supervision
Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.
Home PD, Hallgren P, Usadel KH et al. Pre-meal insulin aspart compared with pre-meal soluble human insulin in type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Res Clin Pract 2006;7… · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
HbA1c and severe hypoglycaemia against regular human insulin, with patient-relevant outcomes as co-primary
✗ The study did not show it
Who was studied
Cochrane pooling of short-acting analogues in adults with type 1 diabetes
How many people
2693
Study design
Systematic review and meta-analysis of nine randomised trials, 24 to 52 weeks
Compared against
Not recorded for this study
Kind of result
A number that stands in for health
What was found
P < 0.00001 for an HbA1c mean difference of -0.15 percentage points; P = 0.31 for severe hypoglycaemia (OR 0.89, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.12)
Repeated elsewhere
Partially Replicated
What this does not prove. A study that did not show an effect does not show that no effect exists anywhere.
The limits of this study, and where it came from
Main limit. No included trial reported mortality, microvascular complications or health-related quality of life over the long term. The reviewers graded the HbA1c evidence low quality.
How far it carries. This study is recorded from the curated record, not from the registry match.
Form and route. Subcutaneous injection by pen, vial and syringe, or insulin pump; also given intravenously under supervision
Interval reported. 95% CI 0
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.
Home PD, Hallgren P, Usadel KH et al. Pre-meal insulin aspart compared with pre-meal soluble human insulin in type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Res Clin Pract 2006;7… · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
RNAWiki holds 5 written-up human studies for this substance, each with the question it asked.
How we know it
Each card names the study, the number of people and what the study set out to measure.
What this does not prove
These summaries were written by a person and have not been signed off as reviewed claims.
Why it matters
A study that failed is as informative as one that worked, and both are here.
What we still do not know
No reviewed claim exists, so no exact population, effect size or interval is published yet.
What happened in people◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
How close this is to real life
The top step is something a person would feel or care about. The bottom is a guess from software. Filled steps are where evidence exists for this substance.
■Living longer, or avoiding a major eventEvidence recorded. Death, a heart attack, a stroke, a hospital stay.4 registered measures of this kind. No reviewed result.
□What a body can do day to dayNo evidence recorded. Walking, dressing, breathing, recovering.No registered study measures this.
□Measured performanceNo evidence recorded. How much was lifted, how far was run, how fast.No registered study measures this.
□Symptoms and quality of lifeNo evidence recorded. Pain, tiredness, mood, sleep, as the person rated it.No registered study measures this.
■A number that stands in for healthEvidence recorded. Cholesterol, blood sugar, bone density. A stand-in, not the thing itself.16 registered measures of this kind.
■A step measured inside a personEvidence recorded. Something measured in human tissue or human cells.A human record sits on the stored organism ladder.
■AnimalsEvidence recorded. Mice, rats, dogs. Useful for ideas, not proof about people.Stored records in C. elegans (roundworm). A result in animals says what to test next. It does not say what happens in people.
□Cells in a dishNo evidence recorded. Cells or chemistry on a bench, far from a whole body.No cell or bench record is stored.
□A guess from softwareNo evidence recorded. Nobody measured it. RNAWiki never publishes one as a finding.RNAWiki stores no prediction for this record. Software can suggest a link. RNAWiki does not publish one as a finding.
Higher on these steps means closer to something a person would feel. It does not mean better done.
What it changes in the body◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
The path through the body
From what a person takes to what changes. A solid line is a step measured in people. A dashed line is a step nobody has measured that way.
Where a source records it acting
Muscle: Lowers blood glucose by stimulating peripheral glucose uptake, especially by skeletal muscle and fat
US prescribing information · 13891e5a-e57a-46e8-911c-2f680352b52b · read 2026-08-27
Liver: Lowers blood glucose by inhibiting hepatic glucose production
US prescribing information · 13891e5a-e57a-46e8-911c-2f680352b52b · read 2026-08-27
Start
Insulin aspart
What a person takes: Subcutaneous injection by pen, vial and syringe, or insulin pump; also given intravenously under supervision.
The measurement behind this step
Supplied as a clear solution stabilised with zinc and phenolic preservatives, and as a premixed suspension with protamine-crystallised insulin aspart in a fixed 70:30 ratio. The premix cannot be adjusted for basal and mealtime needs independently, which is why its label carries that as an explicit limitation.
Getting in
Injected under the skin as a six-molecule cluster
What comes out of the pen is not single insulin molecules. They are packed in sixes around zinc atoms, which is how the liquid stays stable in a vial for weeks.
╌╌Described, with no measurement named. No measurement is named for this step, so it is drawn as an unconfirmed link.
The measurement behind this step
The formulation contains zinc and phenolic preservatives that hold insulin in the R-state hexamer. Hexamerisation is a storage-stability requirement, not a pharmacological one: the hexamer cannot cross the capillary endothelium and is pharmacologically inert until it dissociates.
Home PD, Hallgren P, Usadel KH et al. Pre-meal insulin aspart compared with pre-meal soluble human insulin in type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Res Clin Pract 2006;7… · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
One swapped building block makes the cluster fall apart faster
In insulin aspart, one of the 51 building blocks carries a negative charge that the original did not. Like charges push apart, so the cluster of six breaks up sooner than it would otherwise.
╌╌Described, with no measurement named. No measurement is named for this step, so it is drawn as an unconfirmed link.
The measurement behind this step
Proline at position B28 is replaced by aspartic acid. The carboxylate sits at the dimer-forming interface and introduces electrostatic repulsion between monomers, shifting the hexamer-dimer-monomer equilibrium toward monomer. Nothing else in the 51-residue sequence is changed.
Home PD, Hallgren P, Usadel KH et al. Pre-meal insulin aspart compared with pre-meal soluble human insulin in type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Res Clin Pract 2006;7… · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
Monomers cross into the blood and reach the receptor
Single molecules are small enough to pass out of the tissue fluid into the bloodstream. From there they travel to muscle, fat and liver.
──Measured in people. Written by a person from the study named beside the step. Not signed off as a reviewed claim.
The measurement behind this step
Only the monomer and, to a lesser extent, the dimer are absorbed across the subcutaneous capillary endothelium. The faster dissociation shortens time to maximum plasma concentration relative to soluble human insulin; the receptor the molecule then meets is the same one, with essentially unchanged affinity.
Home PD, Hallgren P, Usadel KH et al. Pre-meal insulin aspart compared with pre-meal soluble human insulin in type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Res Clin Pract 2006;7… · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
The receptor switches on the machinery that pulls sugar out of the blood
Insulin binding flips a switch on the cell surface. Inside, a relay of signals moves glucose transporters to the membrane, where they start taking sugar in.
──Measured in people. Written by a person from the study named beside the step. Not signed off as a reviewed claim.
The measurement behind this step
Binding to the alpha subunits triggers autophosphorylation of the beta-subunit tyrosine kinase, which phosphorylates insulin receptor substrate proteins and activates the PI3K-AKT pathway. AKT drives translocation of GLUT4 vesicles to the plasma membrane in muscle and adipose tissue, and suppresses hepatic gluconeogenesis and lipolysis.
Home PD, Hallgren P, Usadel KH et al. Pre-meal insulin aspart compared with pre-meal soluble human insulin in type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Res Clin Pract 2006;7… · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
The post-meal spike is blunted, and the tail is shorter
Blood sugar after a meal rises less, and the insulin is gone sooner, so there is less left over to cause a low hours later. Average blood sugar moves by roughly a tenth of a percentage point.
╌╌Described, with no measurement named. No measurement is named for this step, so it is drawn as an unconfirmed link.
The measurement behind this step
In onset 1 the one-hour post-prandial glucose increment fell by 1.18 mmol/L against conventional aspart, and in the registration trial post-prandial glucose was lower while pre-prandial glucose was higher. The HbA1c consequence is small and consistent: 0.12 points in the registration trial, 0.15 points in the Cochrane pooling, 0.15 points in onset 1.
Home PD, Hallgren P, Usadel KH et al. Pre-meal insulin aspart compared with pre-meal soluble human insulin in type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Res Clin Pract 2006;7… · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
No suggested links are held for this record, so nothing is hidden from this path.
What we know
The record describes 5 steps from taking it to an effect in a person.
How we know it
Each step names the study behind it in the technical detail beside it.
What this does not prove
A change inside the body is a reason to look. It is not a result in a person.
Why it matters
A reader can see exactly where the chain stops being measured in people.
What we still do not know
No reviewed claim binds any of these steps to a named population.
What it would be like to take◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
Felt, measured, or meaningful
Three different things that get called the same word. Registered studies measured all three, and mixing them is how a blood test becomes a health claim.
Felt
Things a person could notice without a test.
No registered study measured anything of this kind.
Measured
Things only a test, a scale or a device shows.
hba1c
glcosylated hemoglobin
hba1c following two years of treatment
hba1c at month 12
hba1c at month 36
treatment difference in hba1c
achieving glycosylated hemoglobin a1c 7 0 at week 60
glycosylated haemoglobin a1c
insulin detemir human insulin cross reacting antibodies
glycosylated haemoglobin for full analysis set at gw 36
and 6 more.
Meaningful
Things that change how a life goes, not only a number.
remission rate
1 year overall survival rate
overall survival
progression free survival
A registered study says what someone planned to measure. It does not say what they found. A number moving is not the same as a life going better. The two are shown apart here.
Felt, but not shown to help. A person notices a change. No study showed it leads anywhere good.
Measured, but not felt. A number moves. The person notices nothing. Both can be true.
Measured, but not shown to matter. A number moves in the good direction. Nobody showed that lives went better.
Matters, but takes years. The result that counts may take longer than anyone would keep watching.
Names that fit none of the three (20)
postprandial glycemic control
variation in morning fpg
relative risk of major maternal hypoglycaemia
glycemic stability
glycemic control 24 to 100 hours after line change
total energy expenditure double labelled water method
total energy expenditure dietary record method
auc gir 360 720 min
fmri measure of hippocampal activation
am bg
hospital length of stay
carotid intima media thickness
incidence of major hypoglycaemic events reported
incidence of aes
incidence of saes
incidence of major hypoglycaemic episodes
effectiveness of closed loop diabetes control
rate of major and minor hypoglycaemic episodes
rate of nocturnal major and minor hypoglycaemic episodes
extension trial rate of confirmed hypoglycaemic episodes
These are harms, study-process measures, or names the rules did not recognise. They are shown rather than dropped.
What it would be like to take◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
How long anything takes
Nine different lengths of time that get confused with each other. None of them is worked out from another.
Before anything is noticed.RNAWiki does not store this separately, and never works it out from another figure on this page.
Before a test result moves.RNAWiki does not store this separately, and never works it out from another figure on this page.
Before performance moves.RNAWiki does not store this separately, and never works it out from another figure on this page.
How long the result was watched.No finished study window is recorded for a study that tested this substance.
How long people took it.How long people actually took it is not stored. The study window is not the same thing.
How long people were followed.Follow-up length is not stored separately. It is never read off the study window, which would be a different thing.
How fast the body clears it. 81 minutes minutes
Read from the label, which states: “After subcutaneous administration in normal male volunteers (n=24), NOVOLOG was eliminated with an average apparent half-life of 81 minutes.”
How long effects linger.RNAWiki does not store this separately, and never works it out from another figure on this page.
Beyond the studies. Nothing is recorded about the long term.
The longest finished study sets the edge of what anyone measured.
A study window is not how long people took it, and neither is how long they were followed. Where RNAWiki holds only one of the three, it shows one.
What is missing or unclear◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
Were people like you studied?
RNAWiki cannot tell whether a study fits you. It can show who was in it, and where the result stops carrying.
Who was studied
People similar to this profile were included.
Everyone with type 1 diabetes who eats, and people with type 2 diabetes whose basal insulin no longer covers meals. It is one of the most-dispensed insulins in the world and is on the WHO Model List of Essential Medicines.
Who is missing from the studies
Which groups were under-represented in the studies has not been recorded for this substance. Pregnancy, breastfeeding, children, older adults, and people with liver or kidney conditions are commonly excluded from trials; nothing here says whether they were.
What the label states about particular groups
On pediatric, the label states: “Safety and effectiveness of NOVOLOG MIX 70/30 have not been established in pediatric patients with diabetes mellitus.”
US prescribing information · 19888a44-b330-462a-864d-338c5893dd63 · read 2026-08-30
On older people, the label states: “Clinical studies of NOVOLOG MIX 70/30 did not include sufficient numbers of patients aged 65 and over to determine whether they respond differently than younger adult patients.”
US prescribing information · 19888a44-b330-462a-864d-338c5893dd63 · read 2026-08-30
On people who are pregnant, the label states: “Risk Summary There are no available data with NOVOLOG MIX 70/30 in pregnant women to inform a drug-associated risk for major birth defects and miscarriage.”
US prescribing information · 19888a44-b330-462a-864d-338c5893dd63 · read 2026-08-30
On people who are breastfeeding, the label states: “Risk Summary There are no data on the presence of NOVOLOG MIX 70/30 in human milk, the effects on the breastfed infant, or the effect on milk production.”
US prescribing information · 19888a44-b330-462a-864d-338c5893dd63 · read 2026-08-30
On people with reduced liver function, the label states: “The effect of hepatic impairment on the pharmacokinetics of NOVOLOG MIX 70/30 has not been studied.”
US prescribing information · 19888a44-b330-462a-864d-338c5893dd63 · read 2026-08-30
On people with reduced kidney function, the label states: “The effect of renal impairment on the pharmacokinetics of NOVOLOG MIX 70/30 has not been studied.”
US prescribing information · 19888a44-b330-462a-864d-338c5893dd63 · read 2026-08-30
Where the result stopped carrying
In 4-T, the prandial aspart regimen produced 5.7 hypoglycaemic episodes per patient per year against 1.7 on basal insulin, and the most weight gain of the three arms, for no HbA1c advantage at three years
Pre-prandial glucose was consistently higher on aspart than on human insulin in the registration trial, a trade the single HbA1c number conceals
This is a scope explorer, not a diagnosis engine.
It shows who was studied so you can see whether people similar to you were included.
RNAWiki cannot tell whether a study fits you. It can show who was in it.
What it would be like to take◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
Why it might seem to do nothing
A real effect and a noticed effect are different things. These are the recorded reasons the two come apart.
It was studied for a different goal
The studies measured something else entirely.
On this record: Some registered studies measured things that match no goal on this page.
It was studied in different people
The people in the studies were not much like the reader.
On this record: Which groups were under-represented in the studies has not been recorded for this substance. Pregnancy, breastfeeding, children, older adults, and people with liver or kidney conditions are commonly excluded from trials; nothing here says whether they were.
The evidence may simply be wrong
Small early studies often do not hold up.
On this record: RNAWiki has not yet published a reviewed conclusion for this use.
Other reasons RNAWiki checked and found nothing for (10)
A different form was studied
The studied form is not the form on the shelf. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
There was nothing to correct
Where a level is already normal, topping it up may change nothing. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
Something else had to happen too
In the studies it was paired with training, a diet or another treatment. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
The change is too small to feel
A real change can still sit below what a person notices. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
Day-to-day swing hides it
Sleep, food, stress and time of day move most numbers more than this would. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
Not enough time yet
The studies ran longer than the person has waited. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
It was not taken as studied
Missed days change the result, and studies count them. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
Something else changed at the same time
Two changes at once cannot be told apart afterwards. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
The product may not be what it says
Contents of a sold product are not always what the label states. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
No recorded reason
RNAWiki has nothing stored that would explain it. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
None of these is a reason to take more. Taking more is not a step this page ever suggests.
What it would be like to take◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
What taking it involves
The recorded facts about getting hold of it and using it. Nothing here is a suggestion about what you should do.
How it is supplied
Given by a clinician
❝ Quoted from a source
Where this came from
Copied from a source RNAWiki stored, with the source named.
Read from the recorded approval status.
No source is stored against this line.
Form and route
Subcutaneous injection by pen, vial and syringe, or insulin pump; also given intravenously under supervision
✎ Source-linked record
Where this came from
A person wrote this into the record with the study named beside it. No reviewer has signed it off.
The form and route recorded on this substance.
No source is stored against this line.
Who oversees it
Professional supervision is normally required. A regulator classifies this substance in a way that restricts how it is supplied.
❝ Quoted from a source
Where this came from
Copied from a source RNAWiki stored, with the source named.
Suppression classes recorded: S9.
No source is stored against this line.
What is in the pack
Supplied as a clear solution stabilised with zinc and phenolic preservatives, and as a premixed suspension with protamine-crystallised insulin aspart in a fixed 70:30 ratio. The premix cannot be adjusted for basal and mealtime needs independently, which is why its label carries that as an explicit limitation.
✎ Source-linked record
Where this came from
A person wrote this into the record with the study named beside it. No reviewer has signed it off.
Recorded notes on how this is sold and what that means for what is in the pack.
No source is stored against this line.
Where it is registered
Regulatory records are listed in the technical disclosure at the foot of this page.
# Counted from records
Where this came from
A count of rows RNAWiki holds. It describes our records, not your body.
Register entries are stored per jurisdiction and shown with their dates.
No source is stored against this line.
Why people stop
Not recorded.
∅ Nothing recorded
Where this came from
RNAWiki holds nothing here and says so rather than guessing.
No record of why people stopped taking it is stored for this substance.
No source is stored against this line.
What it would be like to take◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
What can go wrong
Sorted by where each line came from. A regulator's label and a report somebody sent in are not the same kind of fact.
·Worth asking a clinician aboutWritten into the record from the studies named on this page
Hypoglycaemia is the commonest and most serious adverse effect of every insulin, and it is dose-related rather than analogue-specific. Hypokalaemia can follow any insulin dose. Injection-site reactions, lipodystrophy and weight gain occur. Hypersensitivity reactions including anaphylaxis are rare. The premixed products are not recommended for diabetic ketoacidosis. Concentration and product names are close enough that dispensing errors between insulin products are a recognised hazard.
Nobody counted how many people took this and were fine, so this cannot be turned into a rate.
Home PD, Hallgren P, Usadel KH et al. Pre-meal insulin aspart compared with pre-meal soluble human insulin in type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Res Clin Pract 2006;7… · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
These are reports people sent to a regulator. They do not show the medicine caused the reaction.
Nobody counted how many people took the medicine and reported nothing.
The same event can be reported more than once, and many reports are incomplete.
News coverage, lawsuits and new warnings change how often people report.
A count is not a rate and not a risk.
Insulin aspart appears in spontaneous reports to regulators. Across the 10 most-reported reaction terms, 8757 reaction mentions were counted. One report can name several reactions.
The recorded terms (10)
hypoglycaemia — 2582 reaction mentions
blood glucose increased — 2359 reaction mentions
diabetic ketoacidosis — 756 reaction mentions
blood glucose decreased — 618 reaction mentions
hyperglycaemia — 564 reaction mentions
loss of consciousness — 416 reaction mentions
premature baby — 410 reaction mentions
diabetes mellitus inadequate control — 397 reaction mentions
open-targets-adr · recorded 2026-06-24 · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
Over a long time. No completed tested study window is recorded, so long-term effects are not established by the registry record.
Groups the studies covered thinly. Which groups were under-represented in the studies has not been recorded for this substance. Pregnancy, breastfeeding, children, older adults, and people with liver or kidney conditions are commonly excluded from trials; nothing here says whether they were.
What is missing or unclear◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
Does the exact form matter?
Evidence belongs to the exact thing that was tested. A different salt, a different mixture or a different preparation is a different question.
The form that was studied
Subcutaneous injection by pen, vial and syringe, or insulin pump; also given intravenously under supervision
✎ Source-linked record
Where this came from
A person wrote this into the record with the study named beside it. No reviewer has signed it off.
The form used in the studies cited on this page.
No source is stored against this line.
What is sold
The premix cannot be adjusted for basal and mealtime needs independently, which is why its label carries that as an explicit limitation.
✎ Source-linked record
Where this came from
A person wrote this into the record with the study named beside it. No reviewer has signed it off.
Recorded notes on which forms are sold and how they compare.
No source is stored against this line.
What is recorded as being sold
41 products list this as an active ingredient in the United States drug directory. 41 of them contain it and nothing else.
FDA National Drug Code directory · 0169-2101 · read 2026-08-29
They are sold as crystal, injection, solution, injection, suspension and powder, taken intravenous and subcutaneous.
FDA National Drug Code directory · 0169-2101 · read 2026-08-29
The regulator's established pharmacologic class for it is insulin analog [epc] and insulin [cs].
FDA National Drug Code directory · 0169-2101 · read 2026-08-29
17 published labels name it as an active ingredient. 14 of them describe this substance alone, which is where its own label text on this page comes from.
US prescribing information · 19888a44-b330-462a-864d-338c5893dd63 · read 2026-08-29
Those labels are classed as human prescription drug.
US prescribing information · 19888a44-b330-462a-864d-338c5893dd63 · read 2026-08-29
901 marketed supplement labels list this ingredient, classed as botanical, non-nutrient/non-botanical and other combinations.
Those labels carry all other and structure/function claims. A claim of that kind is written by the manufacturer and is not assessed by any regulator, so its presence says nothing about whether it is true.
NOVOLOG is injection: clear and colorless solution (multiple-dose vial, penfill prefilled cartridge, flexpen and flextouch prefilled pens) at Injection: 100 units/mL (U-100), recorded as prescription product; fda label in effect 2023-12-15 in the United States.
US prescribing information · 13891e5a-e57a-46e8-911c-2f680352b52b · read 2026-08-27
Recorded price in US: 6.95482 USD per one millilitre, for the one priced product, as of 2026-08-26, paid by retail pharmacies buying the product, as surveyed by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. It is not a list price, an insurance price, or what anyone pays at a counter..
Recorded source · 2026-08-26 · read 2026-08-28
Evidence carries across two names for one substance. It does not carry across a salt, a mirror form or a mixture.
What it would be like to take◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
What you could measure
This one is decided with a clinician, so this section holds questions to ask rather than a plan to run.
Self-experiment planning is not offered for a prescription or clinician-supervised medicine. The questions below are for a clinician or pharmacist.
Questions worth asking
Which of the trials of Insulin aspart studied people like me?
What was measured, and for how long?
Was the result a laboratory value or a health outcome?
What would we watch for, and when would we stop?
Tracking can show whether something changed for you. It cannot show what caused it.
RNAWiki records evidence. It does not say whether this substance is right for you.
What is missing or unclear◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
Claims that go past the evidence
Things said about this substance that sound reasonable, and the exact step that is missing between the evidence and the claim.
✗Goes past the evidence
That rapid-acting analogues reduce severe hypoglycaemia — the pooled odds ratio is 0.89 with a confidence interval from 0.71 to 1.12
Why it sounds right. It follows from something real on this page: a body step, an animal result or a related finding.
The missing step. Nobody measured this in people for this use, or the study that did measure it did not show it.
What would change this
A study in people, for this exact use, measuring this exact thing, that a reviewer signs off.
RNAWiki has not yet published a reviewed conclusion for this use.
✗Goes past the evidence
That the HbA1c advantage translates into fewer amputations, less blindness, less kidney failure or fewer deaths — no trial of insulin aspart has measured any of those
Why it sounds right. It follows from something real on this page: a body step, an animal result or a related finding.
The missing step. Nobody measured this in people for this use, or the study that did measure it did not show it.
What would change this
A study in people, for this exact use, measuring this exact thing, that a reviewer signs off.
RNAWiki has not yet published a reviewed conclusion for this use.
✗Goes past the evidence
That a faster onset makes meal timing flexible in ordinary use; the trials that produced these numbers ran under trial-grade supervision and structured titration
Why it sounds right. It follows from something real on this page: a body step, an animal result or a related finding.
The missing step. Nobody measured this in people for this use, or the study that did measure it did not show it.
What would change this
A study in people, for this exact use, measuring this exact thing, that a reviewer signs off.
RNAWiki has not yet published a reviewed conclusion for this use.
What is missing or unclear◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
What nobody knows yet
Open questions, each with why it is open and what would close it.
Missing populations
Which groups were under-represented in the studies has not been recorded.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
Missing long-term data
No completed tested study window is recorded.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
No reviewed conclusion
RNAWiki has not yet published a reviewed conclusion for this use.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
Missing interaction studies
No interaction was found in the registers checked. Not finding one is not the same as showing there is none.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
Formulation uncertainty
Several salts, forms or products of Insulin aspart are recorded. Results from one form may not transfer to another.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
Mechanism not reviewed
No reviewed mechanism story exists for this substance.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
What happened in people◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
Check any of this yourself
Every line above traced back to the study it came from. This is the technical layer, and the vocabulary changes here.
Every line above can be traced to the study named beside it. Follow the link and read it.
The registration trial gained 0.12 percentage points of HbA1c in 1,070 adults
In plain words
The trial that established insulin aspart randomised just over a thousand adults with type 1 diabetes for six months. The improvement in average blood sugar over the human insulin it replaced was about a tenth of a percentage point.
What was measured
Baseline-adjusted difference in HbA1c at six months, and relative risk of major hypoglycaemia
Effect estimate
No reviewed effect estimate exists for this record.
Limits
See the technical detail.
From the source
Home and colleagues randomised 1,070 adults with type 1 diabetes 2:1 to pre-meal insulin aspart or pre-meal soluble human insulin in a six-month multinational open-label trial. The baseline-adjusted difference in HbA1c was 0.12 percentage points (95% CI 0.03 to 0.22, p<0.02) in favour of aspart. Post-prandial glucose was lower after meals on aspart and pre-prandial glucose was higher. The relative risk of a major hypoglycaemic episode was 0.83 (95% CI 0.59 to 1.18, not significant); nocturnal episodes requiring treatment were reduced. Treatment satisfaction scores improved significantly.
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim
The whole class gains a seventh of a point and does not reduce severe hypoglycaemia
In plain words
Pooling every randomised trial of fast analogues against ordinary human insulin in adults with type 1 diabetes gives an HbA1c advantage of 0.15 percentage points, on evidence the reviewers graded low quality, and no reduction in the severe lows the class is usually sold on preventing.
What was measured
That rapid-acting analogues prevent severe hypoglycaemia relative to human insulin — the pooled odds ratio crosses 1 and the confidence interval is compatible with no effect in either direction
Effect estimate
No reviewed effect estimate exists for this record.
Limits
See the technical detail.
From the source
Fullerton and colleagues included nine randomised controlled trials with 2,693 participants and 24 to 52 weeks of intervention in a Cochrane review searched to April 2015. The mean difference in HbA1c was -0.15 percentage points (95% CI -0.2 to -0.1, p<0.00001), graded low quality. The odds ratio for severe hypoglycaemia was 0.89 (95% CI 0.71 to 1.12, p=0.31). The authors concluded the evidence demonstrated only minor benefits and that long-term efficacy and safety data on patient-relevant outcomes were needed. No trial in the pooling measured mortality, and none measured microvascular complications.
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim
In 4-T, the prandial aspart arm had the most hypoglycaemia and the most weight gain of the three
In plain words
A three-year trial compared three ways of adding insulin to tablets in type 2 diabetes. The mealtime insulin aspart arm ended at the same average blood sugar as the others but with more than three times the rate of hypoglycaemia of the basal arm, and the most weight gain.
What was measured
Median hypoglycaemia episodes per patient per year and mean weight gain at three years, by insulin regimen
Effect estimate
No reviewed effect estimate exists for this record.
Limits
This entry records a failure.
From the source
The Treating to Target in Type 2 Diabetes (4-T) trial randomised 708 patients with suboptimal HbA1c on metformin and sulfonylurea to biphasic insulin aspart twice daily, prandial insulin aspart three times daily, or basal insulin detemir once or twice daily, open-label, for three years. Median HbA1c was similar across the three arms — biphasic 7.1%, prandial 6.8%, basal 6.9% (p=0.28). Median rates of hypoglycaemia per patient per year were 1.7 in the basal group, 3.0 in the biphasic group and 5.7 in the prandial group (p<0.001 for the overall comparison). Mean weight gain was higher in the prandial group than in either the biphasic or the basal group. At one year the same trial had already shown biphasic and prandial regimens achieving better control than basal, but with greater hypoglycaemia and weight gain.
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim
Faster aspart beat ordinary aspart on post-meal glucose, and by the same 0.15 points
In plain words
Reformulating the identical molecule with two absorption-accelerating additives measurably flattened the one-hour post-meal glucose rise. The average blood sugar advantage was the same tenth of a point the class always produces.
What was measured
Estimated treatment difference in HbA1c at 26 weeks and post-prandial glucose increment at 1 and 2 hours
Effect estimate
No reviewed effect estimate exists for this record.
Limits
See the technical detail.
From the source
onset 1 (NCT01831765) randomised 1,290 adults with type 1 diabetes, after an 8-week run-in, to mealtime faster aspart (n=381), conventional insulin aspart (n=380) or post-meal faster aspart (n=382), each with insulin detemir, in a 26-week treat-to-target trial. Mealtime faster aspart was superior to conventional aspart on HbA1c with an estimated treatment difference of -0.15 percentage points (95% CI -0.23 to -0.07, p=0.0003). The post-prandial glucose increment was lower by 1.18 mmol/L at one hour (95% CI -1.65 to -0.71) and by 0.67 mmol/L at two hours (95% CI -1.29 to -0.04, p=0.0375). Hypoglycaemia rates and overall safety profiles were comparable between arms.
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim
The molecule became affordable only when the patents ran out, not when trials asked
In plain words
For a quarter of a century this was a patented product with no generic, and a quarter of patients at one American clinic were using less of it than prescribed because of the price. Interchangeable biosimilars arrived in 2025.
What was measured
Proportion of surveyed patients reporting cost-related insulin underuse, and the associated odds of HbA1c at or above 9%
Effect estimate
No reviewed effect estimate exists for this record.
Limits
See the technical detail.
From the source
NovoLog was approved on 7 June 2000 under BLA 020986. No interchangeable competitor existed in the United States until Kirsty (Biocon Biologics, BLA 761188) was submitted in July 2025, followed by Merilog (Sanofi, BLA 761325) and Garzulys (Emerge Bioscience, BLA 761497). During that period Herkert and colleagues surveyed 199 patients at a single Yale clinic and found 51 (25.5%) reporting cost-related insulin underuse in the preceding year, with an odds ratio of 2.96 for an HbA1c of 9% or more (95% CI 1.14 to 8.16, p=0.03). The clinical literature on insulin aspart contains no trial in which price was a randomised variable, and the pooled evidence separating analogues from human insulin — 0.15 HbA1c percentage points, no severe hypoglycaemia benefit — was available throughout.
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim
The advantage held for thirty months, and minor hypoglycaemia rose with it
In plain words
Following the original trial participants for two and a half years, the small blood sugar advantage persisted. So did a 24% higher rate of minor hypoglycaemic episodes.
What was measured
Baseline-adjusted HbA1c difference and relative risk of major and minor hypoglycaemia at 30 months
Effect estimate
No reviewed effect estimate exists for this record.
Limits
See the technical detail.
From the source
The 30-month extension of the registration trial followed 753 of the original participants. The baseline-adjusted HbA1c difference was -0.16 percentage points (95% CI -0.32 to -0.01, p=0.035) in favour of insulin aspart. Major hypoglycaemia was unchanged, with a relative risk of 1.00 (95% CI 0.72 to 1.39). Minor hypoglycaemic episodes were more frequent on aspart, relative risk 1.24 (95% CI 1.09 to 1.39, p=0.024). The authors described the drug as well tolerated and effective in long-term treatment, and the minor-hypoglycaemia signal sits in the same abstract.
This order is fixed in code and does not count clicks or time on the page.
What is not here
3 questions this page could not answer
These sections were prepared and left out because there was nothing to put in them. They are listed rather than hidden, so the gaps in this record are visible.
What it may clash with — found nothing in the sources checked.
Other ways to the same goal — found nothing in the sources checked.
What changed on this page — found nothing in the sources checked.
The record as stored
The full record, for auditing
Everything above is built from what is below. This layer keeps the technical vocabulary, record identifiers and every stored row, so a reader who wants to check the page can.
The older medicine-wide conclusion held in this record
Written for a clinical reader, and about the medicine as a whole rather than about one indication, population and set of trials. RNAWiki does not treat it as a programme conclusion and no reviewer has signed it off in that form. It is here word for word because it is what the record holds.
Human insulin with proline at position 28 of the B chain replaced by aspartic acid so the molecule stops clumping and is absorbed faster — a change that lowered HbA1c by 0.12 percentage points against soluble human insulin in 1,070 randomised adults, and that a Cochrane review of nine trials and 2,693 people scored at -0.15 percentage points with no reduction in severe hypoglycaemia at all.
Recorded evidence blocks (11)
Q2
What did Insulin aspart's largest trial (66726 people) and its longest (16 years) measure?
66726 people in Insulin aspart's largest registered study, 16 years in its longest registered window, measuring Area Under the Concentration-time Curve for Serum Insulin From Time 0 to 60 Minutes (AUC0-60). ClinicalTrials.gov · 2026-09-01
76 phase4, 75 phase3, 61 phase1, 24 na, 24 na or unstated, 17 phase2, 3 early phase1; NCT00410033; 2006-05; no ageing endpoint recorded. Last human test completed 2026, NCT07560150.
Interpretation These counts include studies where Insulin aspart was a comparison treatment, a background treatment or an exposure in an observational study, and the longest window may be a planned end date. Trial roles have not yet been classified for this record.
Show the evidence
phase4
76
phase3
75
phase1
61
na
24
na or unstated
24
phase2
17
2 more recorded rows
early phase1
3
Last recorded human testNCT07560150
2026-06-25
recorded 2026-09-01 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q3
From C. elegans to human: where has Insulin aspart shown lifespan?
Area Under the Concentration-time Curve for Serum Insulin From Time 0 to 60 Minutes (AUC0-60) — the recorded outcome words.
Show the evidence
C. elegans
lifespan
humanNCT00979875
biomarker; Area Under the Concentration-time Curve for Serum Insulin From Time 0 to 60 Minutes (AUC0-60); 273
recorded 2026-09-01 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q4
18 of Insulin aspart's trials stopped: futility/efficacy, accrual/recruitment, funding/business, other?
futility/efficacy (1), accrual/recruitment (5), funding/business (3) and other (9): Insulin aspart's stop wording, clustered. ClinicalTrials.gov · 2026-09-01
"This trial was terminated due to low recruitment"; 18 of 273 registered studies
Show the evidence
Trial
NCT00267683
terminated; "This trial was terminated due to low recruitment"
NCT00322257
terminated; "See termination reason in detailed description"
NCT00331604
terminated; "See termination reason in detailed description"
NCT00428207
terminated; "Treatment differences not detected with 7 point fingerstick monitoring"
NCT00472953
terminated; "See termination reason in detailed description"
NCT00500240
terminated; "Terminated early due to futility."
12 further recorded trials
NCT00509925
terminated; "See detailed description"
NCT00523042
terminated; "See termination reason in detailed description"
NCT00849316
withdrawn; "Due to company decision to focus resources on the finalisation of three ongoing studies in the region"
NCT00850161
withdrawn; "Business purposes."
NCT01196104
terminated; "For Business Reasons"
NCT01486966
terminated; "Trial terminated prematurely due to slow recruitment."
NCT01648218
terminated; "Poor enrollment"
NCT02680054
terminated; "No eligible participants left to approach/ recruit"
NCT03262116
terminated; "Devices are not available"
NCT03511521
terminated; "Unable to recruit sufficient number of patients"
NCT03660553
terminated; "PI left University of Miami"
NCT04416269
terminated; "The study was suspended and during this time recruitment and study activities were halted. The study was ultimately terminated in April 2026 without having re-opened for recruitment additional participants."
recorded 2026-09-01 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q5
Human studies of Insulin aspart used NovoLog, 20 IU — over how long?
Insulin aspart's half-life is 81 minutes — which schedules were studied?
81 minutes, the half-life Insulin aspart's label states. openfda-label · 66da64f7-ca50-47d2-95fa-de37005eef85 · 2026-08-27
Show the evidence
half life
81 minutes minutes; After subcutaneous administration in normal male volunteers (n=24), NOVOLOG was eliminated with an average apparent half-life of 81 minutes.
bioavailability
Absorption and Bioavailability The 30% insulin aspart in the soluble component of NOVOLOG MIX 70/30 is absorbed rapidly from the subcutaneous layer.
metabolism
12 CLINICAL PHARMACOLOGY 12.1 Mechanism of Action The primary activity of insulin, including NOVOLOG MIX 70/30 is the regulation of glucose metabolism.
recorded 2026-08-27 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q7
Which of 1 year overall survival rate, achieving glycosylated hemoglobin a1c 7 0 at week 60 and am bg did Insulin aspart's trials measure?
1 year overall survival rate, achieving glycosylated hemoglobin a1c 7 0 at week 60 and am bg lead 40 outcome terms across Insulin aspart's trials. ClinicalTrials.gov · 2026-09-01
hba1c following two years of treatment, hba1c at month 12, hba1c at month 36, variation in morning fpg, treatment difference in hba1c and relative risk of major maternal hypoglycaemia follow.
Show the evidence
postprandial glycemic control
1
hba1c
1
glcosylated hemoglobin
1
hba1c following two years of treatment
1
hba1c at month 12
1
hba1c at month 36
1
14 more recorded rows
variation in morning fpg
1
treatment difference in hba1c
1
relative risk of major maternal hypoglycaemia
1
achieving glycosylated hemoglobin a1c 7 0 at week 60
1
glycemic stability
1
glycosylated haemoglobin a1c
1
insulin detemir human insulin cross reacting antibodies
1
glycemic control 24 to 100 hours after line change
1
glycosylated haemoglobin for full analysis set at gw 36
1
remission rate
1
1 year overall survival rate
1
overall survival
1
progression free survival
1
body weight loss
1
recorded 2026-09-01 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q8
Which of Insulin aspart's 8 ongoing trials reports first?
Determination of the variability of HbA1c (by measurement of standard deviation of HbA1c) between the 2 diabetes treatment thresholds; The proportion of subjects achieving HbA1c <7.0%, no weight increase (≤0 kg), and no hypoglycemia (blood glucose ≤3.9 mmol/L or severe hypoglycemia) after 8 weeks of treatment.; latest 2028-06-01
Show the evidence
Trial
NCT02879409
"HbA1c Variability in Type II Diabetes"; n 150; "Determination of the variability of HbA1c (by measurement of standard deviation of HbA1c) between the 2 diabetes treatment thresholds"; 2026-10-01
NCT03987308
"Comparing the Efficacy and Safety Between Continuous Subcutaneous Beinaglutide and CSII for Newly Diagnosed T2DM Patients"; n 115; "The proportion of subjects achieving HbA1c <7.0%, no weight increase (≤0 kg), and no hypoglycemia (blood glucose ≤3.9 mmol/L or severe hypoglycemia) after 8 weeks of treatment."; 2025-12
NCT05221359
"Pilot Study Evaluating Safety of ExOlin® in Patients With Poorly Controlled Type 1 Diabetes"; n 8; "Safety: Percentage of patients who will experience at least one relevant adverse event (AE) judged by the investigator as probably or highly probably related to ExOlin® for the duration of mandatory phases of the study"; 2027-04
NCT05946785
"Oxidative Stress in Microvascular Dysfunction Following Gestational Diabetes"; n 28; "microvascular acetylcholine-mediated dilation"; 2027-06-01
NCT05946798
"Role of NADPH Oxidase in Microvascular Dysfunction Following GDM"; n 40; "microvascular acetylcholine-mediated dilation"; 2028-06-01
NCT06532461
"A Trial of Three- and Seven-days Insulin Infusions Set"; n 80; "Occurence of hyperchogenicity at last two positions for infusions sets"; 2026-12-31
2 further recorded trials
NCT06547619
"Role of ET-1, Physical Activity, and Sedentary Behavior in Microvascular Dysfunction Following GDM"; n 40; "amount of microvascular insulin-mediated dilation"; 2027-05
NCT07076199
"A Research Study to See How a Weekly Insulin, Insulin Icodec, Helps in Reducing the Blood Sugar Compared to Daily Insulin Glargine, Both in Combination With Insulin Aspart, in Adults With Type 1 Diabetes"; n 877; "Change in glycosylated haemoglobin (HbA1c)"; 2027-03-01
recorded 2026-09-01 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q9
Which 144 trials of Insulin aspart posted no result?
Posted no result
144 of 144 completed trials
Registrations
NCT01520831, NCT01707134, NCT00513643, NCT00676819, NCT01486940 and NCT01698697, and 138 more
Completion dates
oldest 2000-05; newest 2024-02-12
Show the evidence
Trial
NCT01520831
2000-05
NCT01707134
2000-05
NCT00513643
2002-06
NCT00676819
2002-07-19
NCT01486940
2002-10
NCT01698697
2002-10-18
14 further recorded trials
NCT01697657
2002-11
NCT00832182
2002-11-25
NCT00597233
2002-12
NCT01486914
2003-02-24
NCT00312104
2003-03
NCT01697631
2003-04-24
NCT00312156
2003-08
NCT01649570
2003-08
NCT01467141
2003-10-15
NCT00065130
2003-12
NCT00604656
2004-01-29
NCT00572806
2004-02-02
NCT00071448
2004-06
NCT00600626
2004-07
Q10
At the median, Insulin aspart's trials enrolled 75 people — anything larger?
Median enrolment
75
Largest enrolment
66726
Registered trials counted
273
Q11
What do 8757 spontaneous reports say about Insulin aspart — and not say?
These are reports people sent to a regulator. They do not show the medicine caused the reaction. Nobody counted how many people took the medicine and reported nothing. The same event can be reported more than once, and many reports are incomplete. News coverage, lawsuits and new warnings change how often people report. A count is not a rate and not a risk.
Insulin aspart appears in spontaneous reports to regulators. Across the 10 most-reported reaction terms, 8757 reaction mentions were counted: hypoglycaemia 2582; blood glucose increased 2359; diabetic ketoacidosis 756; blood glucose decreased 618. open-targets-adr · CHEMBL1201496 · 2026-06-24
Show the evidence
hypoglycaemia
2582
blood glucose increased
2359
diabetic ketoacidosis
756
blood glucose decreased
618
hyperglycaemia
564
loss of consciousness
416
4 more recorded rows
premature baby
410
diabetes mellitus inadequate control
397
glycosylated haemoglobin increased
351
hypoglycaemic coma
304
recorded 2026-06-24 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q12
Was Insulin aspart studied with fasting and exercise?
fasting and exercise are named in Insulin aspart's label sentences: "Glycaemic control: fasting blood glucose (FBG) Based on extremely low-certainty evidence from four studies with 2737 participants, we are uncertain about the effects of aspart and FIAsp compared to RHI (MD: FIAsp 0.69 mmol/L, 95% CI -0.31 mmol/L to 1.69 mmol/L; aspart 0.80 mmol/L, 95% CI -0.01…" openfda-label+europepmc · 2026-06-19
2 recorded statements; fasting, exercise
Show the evidence
fasting
Glycaemic control: fasting blood glucose (FBG) Based on extremely low-certainty evidence from four studies with 2737 participants, we are uncertain about the effects of aspart and FIAsp compared to RHI (MD: FIAsp 0.69 mmol/L, 95% CI -0.31 mmol/L to 1.69 mmol/L; aspart 0.80 mmol/L, 95% CI -0.01 mmol/L to 1.61 mmol/L).
exercise
<b><i>Background:</i></b> This study compared glucose control with fast-acting insulin aspart (FiAsp) versus insulin aspart following moderate-intensity exercise (MIE) and high-intensity exercise (HIE) using a second-generation closed-loop (CL) system in people with type 1 diabetes. <b><i>Materials and Methods:</i></b> This randomized crossover study compared FiAsp versus insulin aspart over four…
recorded 2026-06-19 · last checked 2026-09-04
Where it is registeredIdentifiers, relations and other names
ChEMBL ATC CC BY-SA · ClinicalTrials.gov — US Government work · Europe PMC — metadata only, under the recorded legal gate · Open Targets 26.06 — CC0 · derived from this page's own recorded fields; no external licence · mixed register set; per-register licences in docs/specs/corpus-20k-sources.md · openFDA / DailyMed — US Government work
✗ required summary fields resolved: 5 required field(s) not terminal: Why people use it, Best-supported result, Most important common problem, Biggest unanswered question, Human evidence
✓ public claims reviewed: 0 reviewed claim(s); drafts are never rendered
✓ source coverage passed: 9 source rows
✓ no critical contamination: no quarantine open
✓ canonical metadata passed: slug and display name present
✓ no raw internal fields: enforced by the copy-contract test over the rendered page
This is a record of evidence. It is not medical advice, and it does not say this substance suits you. Nothing here says any substance on RNAWiki is appropriate for a child.