This page shows what was measured, who it was measured in, and what that does not settle.
What Insulin Detemir does in the body
Diabetes — the background insulin that works through the day
Background insulin has to last. The older way of making it last was to crystallise insulin so it dissolves slowly, which produces a hump of activity in the middle of the night. Insulin detemir does it differently: a fatty acid tail is attached to the molecule, and that tail sticks to albumin, the most abundant protein in blood. Almost all of the injected drug is held on albumin at any moment, and only the small unbound fraction can reach a receptor. The reservoir empties gradually instead of in a wave.
What happened in people
Non-inferiority to NPH insulin on HbA1c at 36 gestational weeks in 310 pregnant women, with significantly lower fasting plasma glucose
✎ 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.
That insulin detemir has a weight-sparing property independent of dose — the advantage over glargine was concentrated in the once-daily completers, who were taking half the units of the twice-daily group
Where it acts
Subcutaneous depot and the albumin pool of the bloodstream, then insulin receptors on liver, muscle and fat
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 · 4FT78T86XV · read 2026-08-29
Its recorded molecular formula is C267H402O76N64S6, weighing 5.917 kDa.
US prescribing information · d38d65c1-25bf-401d-9c7e-a2c3222da8af · read 2026-08-30
Where each sentence above came from
No recorded sentence describes the change this makes in a way that stands on its own. The page opens with what it is taken for instead, and the recorded explanation follows below.
Shown as the opening line on this page.
A limit recorded against this substance. Not signed off as a reviewed claim.
The four opening statements run to 121 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 moved9 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.
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 moved5 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.
Which registered measures put each goal on this table
Blood sugar
hba1c; hba1c at month 12; hba1c at month 36; fasting plasma glucose; treatment difference in hba1c; hba1c recorded; glycaemic control as measured by hba1c; metabolic control measured as hba1c
Body weight
body weight loss; body weight change; weight change; trunk fat mass; changes in total fat mass
Energy
total energy expenditure double labelled water method; total energy expenditure dietary record method
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
9 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.
HbA1c at 24 weeks, with hypoglycaemia risk and body weight as outcomes
✓ The study showed what it set out to show
Who was studied
Hermansen 2006 treat-to-target trial, detemir versus NPH added to oral therapy
HbA1c difference not significant; P < 0.001 for a 47% lower risk of all hypoglycaemia and for weight gain of 1.2 kg against 2.8 kg
Repeated elsewhere
Replicated
What this does not prove. Meeting one endpoint in one population does not carry to other goals or other people.
The limits of this study, and where it came from
Main limit. The proportion reaching HbA1c 7.0% or less without hypoglycaemia was 34% against 25% and did not reach significance (p=0.052) — a trend the drug is often described as having demonstrated.
How far it carries. This study is recorded from the curated record, not from the registry match.
Form and route. Subcutaneous injection by vial and syringe or prefilled pen; once or twice daily
Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.
HbA1c 7.2% against 7.1%, not significant; P = 0.01 for weight gain of 3.0 kg against 3.9 kg in completers
Repeated elsewhere
Unreplicated
What this does not prove. Meeting one endpoint in one population does not carry to other goals or other people.
The limits of this study, and where it came from
Main limit. Non-inferiority was achieved using a mean 0.78 U/kg per day against 0.44 IU/kg of glargine, with 55% of the detemir arm on twice-daily injections; the comparator was barred by its label from a second daily dose. Injection-site reactions were 4.5% against 1.4%.
How far it carries. This study is recorded from the curated record, not from the registry match.
Form and route. Subcutaneous injection by vial and syringe or prefilled pen; once or twice daily
Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.
HbA1c, hypoglycaemia, mortality, morbidity, quality of life and costs against NPH insulin
✗ The study did not show it
Who was studied
Cochrane pooling of long-acting analogues versus NPH in type 2 diabetes
How many people
2293
Study design
Systematic review of eight randomised trials, 24 to 52 weeks
Compared against
Not recorded for this study
Kind of result
Living longer, or avoiding a major event
What was found
No clinically relevant HbA1c difference; symptomatic, overall and nocturnal hypoglycaemia statistically significantly lower; severe hypoglycaemia statistically similar
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 supplied evidence on mortality, morbidity, quality of life or costs. The reviewers described the class benefit as minor.
How far it carries. This study is recorded from the curated record, not from the registry match.
Form and route. Subcutaneous injection by vial and syringe or prefilled pen; once or twice daily
Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.
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 eventNo evidence recorded. Death, a heart attack, a stroke, a hospital stay.No registered study measures this.
□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.18 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 dishEvidence recorded. Cells or chemistry on a bench, far from a whole body.Stored mechanism abstracts describe steps measured in cells or tissue.
□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.
Start
Insulin Detemir
What a person takes: Subcutaneous injection by vial and syringe or prefilled pen; once or twice daily.
The measurement behind this step
A clear neutral-pH solution, so it does not require resuspension before use — a practical difference from NPH insulin that is separate from any pharmacological one. In the 52-week head-to-head against glargine, 55% of participants finished on twice-daily rather than once-daily dosing.
Getting in
Injected as a clear solution, not a suspension
Unlike the older background insulin, this one is a clear liquid that does not need to be rolled or shaken before use. Nothing has to settle out and be stirred back in.
╌╌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
Insulin detemir is soluble at neutral pH and is formulated as a clear solution with zinc and phenol, in contrast to NPH, which is a protamine-crystallised suspension whose delivered dose depends on how well it was resuspended before drawing up.
A fatty tail makes it stick to the blood protein albumin
A 14-carbon fatty acid is attached to the insulin molecule. Fatty acids stick to albumin, the carrier protein that fills the bloodstream, and so does this one.
╌╌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 myristoyl group on the epsilon-amine of lysine B29 occupies a fatty-acid binding site on serum albumin. More than 98% of circulating drug is albumin-bound at any moment. The bond is reversible, so bound and free are in continuous equilibrium.
Insulin held on albumin cannot leave the bloodstream or dock onto a cell. As the free molecules are used up, more come off the albumin to replace them, which is what makes the effect steady.
──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
Albumin binding buffers the plasma concentration and delays distribution into peripheral tissue, flattening the concentration-time profile relative to NPH. The same buffering is also present in the subcutaneous depot, where the acylated molecule self-associates into di-hexamers before absorption.
At the receptor it does exactly what human insulin does
Once a free molecule reaches a cell it works through the same switch as any other insulin, moving glucose transporters to the surface and telling the liver to stop making sugar.
──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
Receptor autophosphorylation, IRS phosphorylation, PI3K-AKT signalling and GLUT4 translocation are unchanged. Detemir binds the insulin receptor with lower affinity than human insulin, which is why the unit count is not interchangeable with other basal insulins: the trial mean was 0.78 U/kg against 0.44 IU/kg for glargine.
Fasting glucose flattens, with fewer overnight lows
Without the middle-of-the-night hump the older insulin produces, overnight low-sugar episodes fall — by 55% against NPH in the registration trial — and weight gain is about half as much.
──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
In the 476-participant treat-to-target trial, all hypoglycaemia fell 47% and nocturnal hypoglycaemia 55% against NPH at equal HbA1c, with weight gain of 1.2 kg against 2.8 kg. The pooled Cochrane analysis of the basal analogue class confirms lower symptomatic, overall and nocturnal hypoglycaemia and no difference in severe hypoglycaemia.
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
hba1c at month 12
hba1c at month 36
fasting plasma glucose
treatment difference in hba1c
hba1c recorded
glycosylated haemoglobin a1c
glycosylated haemoglobin for full analysis set at gw 36
body weight loss
hemoglobin a1c
and 8 more.
Meaningful
Things that change how a life goes, not only a number.
No registered study measured anything of this kind.
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 (22)
episodes of hypoglycemia
total energy expenditure double labelled water method
total energy expenditure dietary record method
c peptide area under the curve
am bg
hospital length of stay
laser doppler blood flow
blood sugar
efficacy
carotid intima media thickness
weight
calories consumed after fast
treatment satisfaction
incidence of adverse events
incidence of major hypoglycaemic events reported
endothelial progenitor cell count
incidence of serious adverse drug reactions
incidence of major hypoglycaemic episodes
rate of major and minor hypoglycaemic episodes
rate of nocturnal major and minor 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. 5 to 7 hours hours
Read from the label, which states: “Elimination After subcutaneous administration in patients with type 1 diabetes, insulin detemir has a terminal half-life of 5 to 7 hours depending on dose.”
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.
People with type 1 diabetes as the background half of a basal-bolus regimen, and people with type 2 diabetes whose tablets are no longer enough. It was widely used in pregnancy, where it has a randomised trial NPH does not.
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: “The safety and effectiveness of LEVEMIR to improve glycemic control in pediatric patients with diabetes mellitus have been established.”
US prescribing information · d38d65c1-25bf-401d-9c7e-a2c3222da8af · read 2026-08-30
On older people, the label states: “In clinical trials of LEVEMIR, 64 of 1624 patients (4%) in the type 1 diabetes trials and 309 of 1082 patients (29%) in the type 2 diabetes trials were 65 years or older.”
US prescribing information · d38d65c1-25bf-401d-9c7e-a2c3222da8af · read 2026-08-30
On people who are pregnant, the label states: “Risk Summary Available data from published studies and postmarketing case reports with LEVEMIR use in pregnant women have not identified a drug-associated risk of major birth defects, miscarriage, or adverse maternal or fetal outcomes.”
US prescribing information · d38d65c1-25bf-401d-9c7e-a2c3222da8af · read 2026-08-30
On people who are breastfeeding, the label states: “Risk Summary Available data from published literature demonstrate that exogenous human insulin products, including biosynthetic insulins such as insulin detemir, are transferred into human milk.”
US prescribing information · d38d65c1-25bf-401d-9c7e-a2c3222da8af · read 2026-08-30
On people with reduced liver function, the label states: “Non-diabetic patients with severe hepatic impairment had lower systemic exposures to insulin detemir compared to healthy volunteers.”
US prescribing information · d38d65c1-25bf-401d-9c7e-a2c3222da8af · read 2026-08-30
On people with reduced kidney function, the label states: “No difference was observed in the pharmacokinetics of LEVEMIR between non-diabetic patients with kidney impairment and healthy volunteers.”
US prescribing information · d38d65c1-25bf-401d-9c7e-a2c3222da8af · read 2026-08-30
Where the result stopped carrying
The proportion reaching HbA1c 7.0% or less without hypoglycaemia missed significance in the registration trial, 34% against 25%, p=0.052
In 4-T, 81.6% of the basal detemir arm needed a second type of insulin added within three years, the highest of the three regimens
More than half of participants in the head-to-head against glargine finished on twice-daily injections, undoing the once-daily convenience the class was sold on
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 vial and syringe or prefilled pen; once or twice daily
✎ 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
A clear neutral-pH solution, so it does not require resuspension before use — a practical difference from NPH insulin that is separate from any pharmacological one. In the 52-week head-to-head against glargine, 55% of participants finished on twice-daily rather than once-daily dosing.
✎ 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 any insulin. Injection-site reactions were more frequent than with insulin glargine, 4.5% against 1.4%, in the head-to-head trial. Hypokalaemia, lipodystrophy and weight gain occur, though weight gain was consistently less than with NPH. Not recommended for diabetic ketoacidosis. Unit counts are not interchangeable with other basal insulins.
Nobody counted how many people took this and were fine, so this cannot be turned into a rate.
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 vial and syringe or prefilled pen; once or twice daily
✎ 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
In the 52-week head-to-head against glargine, 55% of participants finished on twice-daily rather than once-daily dosing.
✎ 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
7 products list this as an active ingredient in the United States drug directory. 7 of them contain it and nothing else.
FDA National Drug Code directory · 0420-9003 · read 2026-08-29
They are sold as crystal, injection, solution and powder, taken subcutaneous.
FDA National Drug Code directory · 0420-9003 · read 2026-08-29
The regulator's established pharmacologic class for it is insulin analog [epc] and insulin [chemical/ingredient].
FDA National Drug Code directory · 0420-9003 · read 2026-08-29
2 published labels name it as an active ingredient. 2 of them describe this substance alone, which is where its own label text on this page comes from.
US prescribing information · d38d65c1-25bf-401d-9c7e-a2c3222da8af · read 2026-08-29
Those labels are classed as human prescription drug.
US prescribing information · d38d65c1-25bf-401d-9c7e-a2c3222da8af · 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.
Levemir is subcutaneous at 3 DOSAGE FORMS AND STRENGTHS Injection: 100 units/mL (U-100), is a clear, colorless, solution available as: • 3 mL single-patient-use FlexPen prefilled pen • 10 mL multiple-dose vial Injection: 100 units/mL (U-100) of i…, recorded as fda label in effect 2022-12-08 in the United States.
US prescribing information · d38d65c1-25bf-401d-9c7e-a2c3222da8af · read 2026-08-30
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 Detemir 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 insulin detemir has a weight-sparing property independent of dose — the advantage over glargine was concentrated in the once-daily completers, who were taking half the units of the twice-daily group
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 lower symptomatic and nocturnal hypoglycaemia translates into fewer deaths, fewer complications or better quality of life — the Cochrane reviewers found no evidence bearing on 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 basal insulins convert unit-for-unit between products; the head-to-head trial mean doses differed by nearly a factor of two
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.
How much did people take in the studies?
The sources RNAWiki checked hold nothing for this field.
Why it matters. A result belongs to an amount. Without the amount the result floats free.
What would answer it
A stored source that records 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 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 Detemir 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.
47% less hypoglycaemia and half the weight gain of NPH, at the same HbA1c
In plain words
In a 476-person trial adding background insulin to tablets, detemir and the older NPH insulin reached the same average blood sugar. Detemir got there with 47% fewer low-sugar episodes and 1.6 kg less weight gain.
What was measured
Relative risk of all and nocturnal hypoglycaemia, and mean weight gain, at 24 weeks against NPH insulin
Effect estimate
No reviewed effect estimate exists for this record.
Limits
See the technical detail.
From the source
Hermansen and colleagues randomised 476 people with type 2 diabetes and HbA1c of 7.5 to 10.0% to twice-daily insulin detemir or NPH insulin added to oral therapy, titrated over 24 weeks to a pre-breakfast and pre-dinner plasma glucose target of 6.0 mmol/L or less. HbA1c fell by 1.8 points on detemir (8.6% to 6.8%) and 1.9 points on NPH (8.5% to 6.6%), not significantly different; 70% of each group reached 7.0% or less. The risk of all hypoglycaemia was 47% lower on detemir (p<0.001) and nocturnal hypoglycaemia 55% lower (p<0.001). Mean weight gain was 1.2 kg on detemir against 2.8 kg on NPH (p<0.001), with a baseline-adjusted final weight difference of -1.58 kg (p<0.001). The proportion reaching target without hypoglycaemia was 34% against 25%, which did not reach significance (p=0.052).
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim
The weight advantage belongs to the people who took less insulin
In plain words
Detemir is sold on causing less weight gain than other insulins. In the head-to-head against glargine, that advantage came mainly from the 45% of participants who managed on one injection a day, and the other 55% needed twice as many units.
What was measured
That insulin detemir has a weight-sparing pharmacological property — an effect concentrated in the subgroup taking the fewest units, in a trial where the comparator arm was barred by its own label from a second daily dose
Effect estimate
No reviewed effect estimate exists for this record.
Limits
See the technical detail.
From the source
Rosenstock and colleagues randomised 582 insulin-naive adults with type 2 diabetes to detemir or glargine added to oral therapy for 52 weeks. HbA1c fell from 8.6% to 7.2% and 7.1% respectively (not significant), with no difference in the relative risk of overall or nocturnal hypoglycaemia and no difference in within-participant variability of fasting or pre-dinner glucose. Weight gain was 3.0 kg on detemir against 3.9 kg on glargine in completers (p=0.01) and 2.7 kg against 3.5 kg in the intention-to-treat population (p=0.03) — and the authors state the difference was "primarily related to completers on once-daily detemir". Mean daily detemir dose was 0.78 U/kg (0.52 with once-daily dosing, 1.00 U/kg with twice-daily) against 0.44 IU/kg for glargine, and 55% of the detemir group finished on twice-daily injections. Injection-site reactions were more frequent with detemir, 4.5% against 1.4%. No mechanism for a weight-sparing effect independent of dose was demonstrated in this trial.
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim
Basal insulin alone did not hold: four in five needed a second insulin within 3 years
In plain words
In the 4-T trial, the arm started on detemir alone had the fewest hypoglycaemic episodes and the least weight gain. It also had the highest proportion of people who ended up needing a second type of insulin as well.
What was measured
Proportion of each arm requiring the addition of a second type of insulin over three years
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 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, and followed them for three years. Median HbA1c was 7.1%, 6.8% and 6.9% across the three arms (p=0.28). The basal detemir arm had the lowest median hypoglycaemia rate, 1.7 episodes per patient per year against 3.0 and 5.7, and the lowest weight gain. It also had the highest proportion adding a second type of insulin: 81.6%, against 67.7% in the biphasic arm and 73.6% in the prandial arm (p=0.002). Detemir monotherapy on top of oral agents was, for most participants, a starting point rather than a regimen.
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim
The Cochrane review found the basal analogue class buys only a minor clinical benefit
In plain words
Pooling every trial of long-acting analogues against NPH insulin in type 2 diabetes found no meaningful difference in average blood sugar, no difference in severe hypoglycaemia, and no evidence at all on death, complications or quality of life.
What was measured
That the fall in nocturnal and symptomatic hypoglycaemia translates into fewer deaths, fewer complications or better quality of life — the reviewers found no evidence bearing on any of the three
Effect estimate
No reviewed effect estimate exists for this record.
Limits
See the technical detail.
From the source
Horvath and colleagues pooled six trials comparing insulin glargine with NPH (1,715 patients) and two comparing insulin detemir with NPH (578 patients), of 24 to 52 weeks. HbA1c and adverse effects showed no clinically relevant differences. Rates of symptomatic, overall and nocturnal hypoglycaemia were statistically significantly lower with the analogues; rates of severe hypoglycaemia were statistically similar. The reviewers found no evidence of benefit for mortality, morbidity, quality of life or costs, concluded the analogues offer "only a minor clinical benefit" in basal insulin therapy, and recommended caution until long-term data on patient-relevant outcomes became available. Those data have not arrived for insulin detemir.
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim
The one basal insulin with a randomised trial in pregnancy
In plain words
A 310-woman randomised trial in pregnancy with type 1 diabetes compared detemir with NPH insulin. Average blood sugar at 36 weeks was equivalent, and fasting glucose was significantly lower on detemir.
What was measured
Estimated HbA1c difference at 36 gestational weeks and fasting plasma glucose at 24 and 36 weeks
Effect estimate
No reviewed effect estimate exists for this record.
Limits
See the technical detail.
From the source
Mathiesen and colleagues randomised 310 pregnant women with type 1 diabetes to insulin detemir (n=152) or NPH insulin (n=158), both with prandial insulin aspart, in a non-inferiority trial with a 0.4 percentage-point margin. Estimated HbA1c at 36 gestational weeks was 6.27% on detemir and 6.33% on NPH, a difference of -0.06 percentage points (95% CI -0.21 to 0.08) in the full analysis set. Fasting plasma glucose was significantly lower on detemir at 24 gestational weeks (96.8 against 113.8 mg/dL, p=0.012) and at 36 weeks (85.7 against 97.4 mg/dL, p=0.017). Hypoglycaemia rates were comparable between arms. This is a maternal-outcome trial: it establishes glycaemic non-inferiority and lower fasting glucose, not a reduction in any neonatal or obstetric outcome.
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim
Withdrawn from the market it was approved for, presentation by presentation
In plain words
Nothing was found wrong with this insulin. Its manufacturer brought out a longer-acting successor, and the older product has been taken off the American market one delivery device at a time.
What was measured
That a drug remaining on a label means it remains available — market presence is a commercial fact and is decided separately from the evidence
Effect estimate
No reviewed effect estimate exists for this record.
Limits
See the technical detail.
From the source
Levemir was approved under BLA 021536 on 16 June 2005. Drugs@FDA now lists the Levemir FlexPen, Levemir PenFill and Levemir InnoLet presentations with a marketing status of Discontinued, while the vial and Levemir FlexTouch remain listed as prescription products. No safety finding, label restriction or withdrawal action underlies that change: the same manufacturer licensed insulin degludec in 2015 with a longer duration and, subsequently, a completed cardiovascular outcome trial. No biosimilar insulin detemir has been licensed in the United States, so the evidence base described on this page — including the only randomised basal-insulin trial conducted in pregnancy — is attached to a product a reader may no longer be able to obtain.
Source
openFDA Drugs@FDA record for BLA 021536 (LEVEMIR, Novo Nordisk Inc.), product marketing statuses retrieved August 2026
Role in the trial
Not matched to a registered study
Identity check
no open identity hold
Audit mark
contested
Review state
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim
How many documents were read
2 documents were read for this substance.
RNAWiki source record
2 of them state the same halfLife, and they agree.
RNAWiki source record
2 of them state the same bioavailability, and they agree.
RNAWiki source record
2 of them state the same volumeOfDistribution, and they agree.
RNAWiki source record
Where else this substance is registered
FDA substance identifier (UNII)
4FT78T86XV
RxNorm concept
484322
Checks this page had to pass
✓ Passed
Identity resolved
no open identity hold
✓ Passed
No unresolved merge across substance families
no quarantine open
✓ Passed
Every public sentence names a source
The opening statement carries the origin: Written into the record, not signed off.
✗ Not passed
Trial roles classified for highlighted evidence
No registered study is classified as testing this substance.
✓ Passed
No internal keys in reader text
enforced by the copy-contract test over the rendered page
✓ Passed
Safety mode resolved
Suppression classes recorded: S9.
✓ Passed
Canonical metadata present
slug and display name present
What is missing or unclear◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
How this medicine reached us
Kept near the foot of the page. A historical event moves up only when it changes something about this substance today.
What the approval register records
1 approved application covers products containing this substance. The earliest was BLA021878, approved 20051019 to NOVO NORDISK.
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 the last B-chain residue removed and a 14-carbon fatty acid attached so the molecule binds albumin and is released slowly — a design that matched NPH insulin on HbA1c in 476 randomised adults while cutting all hypoglycaemia by 47% and halving the weight gain to 1.2 kg against 2.8 kg, and that Novo Nordisk has since withdrawn presentation by presentation from the United States market.
Recorded evidence blocks (10)
Q2
What did Insulin Detemir's largest trial (66726 people) and its longest (18 years) measure?
66726 people in Insulin Detemir's largest registered study, 18 years in its longest registered window, measuring The difference between plasma glucose concentrations immediately pre-exercise and the minimum plasma glucose concentrations (nadir) in the period 0-150 min following exercise. ClinicalTrials.gov · 2026-09-01
47 na or unstated, 45 phase3, 41 phase4, 17 phase1, 14 na, 5 phase2; NCT01239550; 2028-12; no ageing endpoint recorded. Last human test completed 2026, NCT06685185.
Interpretation These counts include studies where Insulin Detemir 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
na or unstated
47
phase3
45
phase4
41
phase1
17
na
14
phase2
5
1 more recorded row
Last recorded human testNCT06685185
2026-03-18
recorded 2026-09-01 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q3
From C. elegans to human: where has Insulin Detemir shown lifespan?
The difference between plasma glucose concentrations immediately pre-exercise and the minimum plasma glucose concentrations (nadir) in the period 0-150 min… — the recorded outcome words.
Show the evidence
C. elegans
lifespan
humanNCT00313742
biomarker; The difference between plasma glucose concentrations immediately pre-exercise and the minimum plasma glucose concentrations (nadir) in the period 0-150 min following exercise; 168
recorded 2026-09-01 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q4
9 of Insulin Detemir's trials stopped: accrual/recruitment, other?
"See termination reason in detailed description"; 9 of 168 registered studies
Show the evidence
Trial
NCT00322257
terminated; "See termination reason in detailed description"
NCT00331604
terminated; "See termination reason in detailed description"
NCT00467246
withdrawn; "Ethics approval denied"
NCT00506662
terminated; "See termination reason in detailed description"
NCT00509925
terminated; "See detailed description"
NCT00564018
terminated; "Presumed loss of clinical equipoise between the agents being investigated"
3 further recorded trials
NCT00639626
terminated; "PI left the institution"
NCT01486966
terminated; "Trial terminated prematurely due to slow recruitment."
NCT02048189
terminated; "recruitment difficulties"
recorded 2026-09-01 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q5
Insulin Detemir's half-life is 5 to 7 hours — which schedules were studied?
5 to 7 hours, the half-life Insulin Detemir's label states. openfda-label · 82192527-99aa-4b53-8ce9-9173668d309c · 2026-08-30
bioavailability 60% %.
Show the evidence
half life
5 to 7 hours hours; Elimination After subcutaneous administration in patients with type 1 diabetes, insulin detemir has a terminal half-life of 5 to 7 hours depending on dose.
bioavailability
60% %; The absolute bioavailability of insulin detemir is approximately 60%.
metabolism
12 CLINICAL PHARMACOLOGY 12.1 Mechanism of Action The primary activity of insulin, including LEVEMIR, is regulation of glucose metabolism.
recorded 2026-08-30 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q6
Which of am bg, blood sugar and body weight change did Insulin Detemir's trials measure?
am bg, blood sugar and body weight change lead 40 outcome terms across Insulin Detemir's trials. ClinicalTrials.gov · 2026-09-01
fasting plasma glucose, treatment difference in hba1c, hba1c recorded, episodes of hypoglycemia, glycosylated haemoglobin a1c and glycosylated haemoglobin for full analysis set at gw 36 follow.
Show the evidence
hba1c
1
hba1c at month 12
1
hba1c at month 36
1
fasting plasma glucose
1
treatment difference in hba1c
1
hba1c recorded
1
14 more recorded rows
episodes of hypoglycemia
1
glycosylated haemoglobin a1c
1
glycosylated haemoglobin for full analysis set at gw 36
1
body weight loss
1
total energy expenditure double labelled water method
1
total energy expenditure dietary record method
1
hemoglobin a1c
1
c peptide area under the curve
1
am bg
1
hospital length of stay
1
laser doppler blood flow
1
blood sugar
1
efficacy
1
carotid intima media thickness
1
recorded 2026-09-01 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q7
Which of Insulin Detemir's 4 ongoing trials reports first?
Low dose basal insulin detemir will potentiate weight loss in obese patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus undergoing a hypocaloric diet intervention by improving dopamine…; Neonatal Hypoglycemia; latest 2028-12
Show the evidence
Trial
NCT01239550
"Insulin Detemir in Obesity Management"; n 240; "Low dose basal insulin detemir will potentiate weight loss in obese patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus undergoing a hypocaloric diet intervention by improving dopamine signaling"; 2028-12
NCT05124457
"DETERMINE: Detemir vs NPH"; n 336; "Neonatal Hypoglycemia"; 2025-06
NCT06419777
"Strict Versus Permissive Thresholds for Initiation of Pharmacotherapy in Gestational Diabetes"; n 430; "Neonatal Composite Outcome"; 2026-05
NCT06419803
"Strict Versus Permissive Thresholds for Initiation of Pharmacotherapy in Gestational Diabetes (START 2)"; n 430; "Neonatal Composite Outcome"; 2026-05
recorded 2026-09-01 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q8
Which 109 trials of Insulin Detemir posted no result?
Posted no result
109 of 109 completed trials
Registrations
NCT02162407, NCT03220425, NCT01486940, NCT01697657, NCT01542450 and NCT00312104, and 103 more
Completion dates
oldest 1999-12; newest 2023-02
Show the evidence
Trial
NCT02162407
1999-12
NCT03220425
2001-11-12
NCT01486940
2002-10
NCT01697657
2002-11
NCT01542450
2003-02
NCT00312104
2003-03
14 further recorded trials
NCT01497561
2003-06
NCT00312156
2003-08
NCT00604396
2004-01
NCT01497600
2004-08
NCT00595374
2004-10-07
NCT01497535
2004-10-31
NCT00283751
2004-11
NCT00592527
2004-12
NCT00604344
2005-03
NCT00605020
2005-03-03
NCT00605137
2005-04-23
NCT00566124
2005-05
NCT00604253
2005-05
NCT00760448
2005-10
Q9
At the median, Insulin Detemir's trials enrolled 330 people — anything larger?
Median enrolment
330
Largest enrolment
66726
Registered trials counted
167
Q10
Was Insulin Detemir studied with fasting and exercise?
fasting and exercise are named in Insulin Detemir's label sentences: "Insulin-naive subjects with type 2 diabetes suboptimally controlled on oral glucose-lowering drugs (OGLDs) (including at least metformin) were randomized to 24-week treatment with either insulin glargine once-daily or insulin detemir twice-daily, titrated to obtain fasting plasma glucose <100 mg/dL." openfda-label+europepmc · 2009-11-01
2 recorded statements; fasting, exercise
Show the evidence
fasting
Insulin-naive subjects with type 2 diabetes suboptimally controlled on oral glucose-lowering drugs (OGLDs) (including at least metformin) were randomized to 24-week treatment with either insulin glargine once-daily or insulin detemir twice-daily, titrated to obtain fasting plasma glucose <100 mg/dL.
exercise
During 30 min exercise, five (11%) participants on insulin detemir developed minor hypoglycaemia, six (12%) for NPH and 18 (38%) for glargine.
recorded 2009-11-01 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q11
What is recorded about Insulin Detemir and IGF-1?
"Comparison of the concentration-dependent effects in HEL-299 cells showed that IGF-1 and insulin glargine were more potent (EC(50), 3 and 6 nM) and more effective (maximum increase, by 135-150%) than insulin and insulin detemir (EC(50), 22 and 110 nM; maximum increase: by 80%)." — where Insulin Detemir and IGF-1 appear together. Europe PMC · pathway abstract search · 2010-10-06
IGF-1; PMID 20924562
Show the evidence
IGF-1PMID 20924562
"Comparison of the concentration-dependent effects in HEL-299 cells showed that IGF-1 and insulin glargine were more potent (EC(50), 3 and 6 nM) and more effective (maximum increase, by 135-150%) than insulin and insulin detemir (EC(50), 22 and 110 nM; maximum increase: by 80%)."
recorded 2010-10-06 · last checked 2026-09-04
Where it is registeredIdentifiers, relations and other names
ClinicalTrials.gov — US Government work · Europe PMC — metadata only, under the recorded legal gate · 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: 4 required field(s) not terminal: Why people use it, Best-supported result, Biggest unanswered question, Human evidence
✓ public claims reviewed: 0 reviewed claim(s); drafts are never rendered
✓ source coverage passed: 8 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.