Aims: Published studies have challenged the cost-effectiveness of insulin glargine versus NPH insulins in Brazil with limited evidence of increased effectiveness despite considerably higher acquisition costs. However, still a controversy. Consequently, a need to address this. Methods: Retrospective cohort study of type 1 diabetes patients receiving insulin glargine in Brazil following NPH insulin who met the criteria. Results: 580 patients were enrolled. HbA1c varied from 8.80 ± 1.98% in NPH insulin users to 8.54 ± 1.88% after insulin glargine for six months, which is not clinically significant. Frequency of glycemic control varied from 22.6% with NPH insulin to 26.2% with insulin glargine. No statistically significant difference was observed between controlled and still uncontrolled groups for all analyzed factors including type and frequency of insulin use and carbohydrate counting. Conclusions: Limited differences between NPH insulins and insulin analogues in routine clinical care does not justify an appreciable cost difference
