Weekly somapacitan had no adverse effects on glucose metabolism in adults with growth hormone deficiency.

PURPOSE: The long-term effects of long-acting growth hormone (LAGH) analogues on glucose metabolism in adult growth hormone deficiency (AGHD) are not known. We investigated the impact of LAGH somapacitan, administered once-weekly, on glucose metabolism in patients with AGHD. METHODS: In post hoc-defined analyses, we compared the effects of somapacitan with daily growth hormone (GH) and placebo on fasting plasma glucose (FPG), glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c), fasting insulin, homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance (HOMA-IR) and beta-cell function (HOMA-ß) in patients with AGHD across a unique data set from three phase 3 randomized controlled trials (REAL 1, REAL 2 and REAL Japan). RESULTS: No new cases of diabetes mellitus were reported with somapacitan. Among GH-naïve patients (n = 120 somapacitan, n = 119 daily GH), higher changes from baseline in FPG, HOMA-IR and fasting insulin levels were observed with daily GH versus somapacitan at 34 weeks, but not at 86 weeks. HbA1c and HOMA-ß did not differ between groups at either timepoint. Among treatment-naïve patients, sex, age, fasting insulin, glucose tolerance status and body mass index did not influence changes in glucose metabolism. In previously treated patients (REAL 1 extension: n = 51 somapacitan, n = 52 daily GH; REAL 2: n = 61 and n = 31, respectively; REAL Japan: n = 46 and n = 16, respectively), the difference in changes from baseline were not statistically significant between somapacitan and daily GH for any glucose metabolism parameters. CONCLUSIONS: Somapacitan, compared with daily GH, did not adversely affect glucose metabolism up to 86 weeks in a large cohort of treatment-naïve or previously treated patients with AGHD. Trial registrations (date of registration): NCT02229851 (2 September 2014), NCT02382939 (3 March 2015), NCT03075644 (7 March 2017).

Pregnancy outcomes in women receiving growth hormone replacement therapy enrolled in the NordiNet® International Outcome Study (IOS) and the American Norditropin® Studies: Web-Enabled Research (ANSWER) Program.

PURPOSE: Data on the safety of growth hormone (GH) replacement therapy during pregnancy are limited. We report a combined analysis of data from pregnant women treated with GH while enrolled in two non-interventional, multicenter studies: NordiNet® International Outcome Study (IOS) and the American Norditropin® Studies: Web-Enabled Research (ANSWER) Program. METHODS: Pregnancy data were pooled from NordiNet® IOS and the ANSWER Program. Data were collected during routine clinic visits by participating physicians using a web-based system. Patients exposed to GH replacement therapy during pregnancy were included in the analysis. RESULTS: The study population included 40 female patients with typical causes of adult GH deficiency (GHD). Overall, there were 54 pregnancies. Of these, 47 were exposed to GH between conception and delivery. In 48.9% of pregnancies exposed to GH, the dose was > 0.6 mg/day. GH was continued past conception and then stopped during the first, second, and third trimester, in 27.7%, 17.0%, and 2.1% of pregnancies, respectively. In 29.8%, GH was continued throughout pregnancy, with an unchanged dose in most cases. Of the 47 GH-exposed pregnancies, 37 (78.7%) progressed to normal delivery. There were three adverse events reported in two pregnancies. CONCLUSION: These real-world data suggest that there were no new safety signals related to GH exposure in women with GHD during pregnancy. These results are consistent with findings from previous studies reporting data in pregnancies exposed to GH at conception or throughout pregnancy. This observational study in additional pregnancies provides further evidence that GH exposure does not adversely affect pregnancy outcome. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00960128 (date of registration: August 13, 2009) and NCT01009905 (date of registration: November 5, 2009).

Long-term Effectiveness and Safety of GH Replacement Therapy in Adults ≥60 Years: Data From NordiNet® IOS and ANSWER.

Context: Effectiveness and safety data on GH replacement therapy (GHRT) in older adults with adult GH deficiency (AGHD) are limited. Objective: To compare GHRT safety and clinical outcomes in older (≥60 years and, for some outcomes, ≥75 years) and middle-aged (35-<60 years) patients with AGHD. Design/setting: Ten-year follow-up, real-world data from 2 large noninterventional studies-NordiNet® International Outcome Study (IOS) and the American Norditropin® Studies: Web-Enabled Research (ANSWER) Program-were analyzed. Patients: GH-naïve and non-naïve patients with AGHD. Intervention: Norditropin® (somatropin). Main outcome measures: Outcomes included GH exposure, IGF-I standard deviation scores (SDS), body mass index (BMI), glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c), serious and nonserious adverse reactions (SARs and NSARs, respectively), and serious adverse events (SAEs). Adverse reactions were events with possible/probable causal relationship to GHRT. Results: The effectiveness analysis set comprised 545 middle-aged and 214 older patients (19 aged ≥75 years) from NordiNet® IOS. The full analysis set comprised 1696 middle-aged and 652 older patients (59 aged ≥75 years) from both studies. Mean GH doses were higher in middle-aged vs older patients. For both age groups and sexes, mean IGF-I SDS increased following GHRT, while BMI and HbA1c changes were similar and small.Incidence rate ratios (IRRs) did not differ statistically between older and middle-aged patients for NSARs [IRR (mean, 95% confidence interval) 1.05 (.60; 1.83)] or SARs [.40 (.12; 1.32)]. SAEs were more frequent in older than middle-aged patients [IRR 1.84 (1.29; 2.62)]. Conclusion: Clinical outcomes of GHRT in AGHD were similar in middle-aged and older patients, with no significantly increased risk of GHRT-related adverse reactions in older patients.

Reduced CV risk with long-term GH replacement in AGHD: data from two large observational studies.

Adult growth hormone deficiency (AGHD) is associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular (CV) disease. Long-term growth hormone (GH) treatment could improve CV outcomes. The objective of this study was to evaluate CV disease risk in patients with AGHD who received GH replacement therapy for up to 10 years as part of NordiNet® IOS (NCT00960128) and the ANSWER Program (NCT01009905). The studies were observational, non-interventional and multicentre, monitoring long-term effectiveness and safety of GH treatment. NordiNet® IOS involved 23 countries (469 sites) across Europe and the Middle East. The ANSWER Program was conducted in the USA (207 sites). This analysis included patients aged 18-75 years who were GH naïve at study entry, who had ≤10 years of GH treatment data and who could be assessed for CV risk for at least 1 follow-up year. The main outcome measure was risk of CV disease by age 75 years, as calculated with the Multinational Cardiovascular Risk Consortium model (Brunner score) using non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol adjusted for age, sex and CV risk factors. The results of this analysis showed that CV risk decreased gradually over the 10-year period for GH-treated patients. The risk was lower for patients treated for 2 and 7 years vs age- and sex-matched control groups (not yet started treatment) (14.51% vs 16.15%; P = 0.0105 and 13.53% vs 16.81%; P = 0.0001, respectively). This suggests that GH treatment in people with AGHD may reduce the risk of CV disease by age 75 years compared with matched controls.

The role of growth hormone device optimization in patient-reported outcomes: real-world evidence from South Korea.

BACKGROUND: Growth hormone (GH) treatment preference and adherence are affected by delivery device convenience, injection-site pain, confidence in correct dose administration, and device satisfaction. This survey investigated if switching device to NordiFlex® improved treatment experience in pediatric patients in South Korea. DESIGN AND METHODS: Patients aged 4-≤18 years were surveyed. Participants were NordiFlex® users who previously used NordiLet®/other devices. Participants compared preference, self-reported adherence, satisfaction, perceived ease of use, and device subjective benefits (across four domains: ease of use, self-efficacy, minimal disruption of daily life, positive feelings about injections) of NordiFlex® vs. previous device. RESULTS: Ninety-four patients were enrolled, of which 91.5% previously used NordiLet®. Significantly more patients preferred, and were more satisfied with NordiFlex® vs. previous device; mean score: 0.65 (95% confidence interval [CI]:0.41;0.88) and 0.61 (95% CI:0.36;0.85), respectively. Participants reported greater perceived ease of use (0.49 [95% CI:0.26;0.72]) and fewer missed injections (0.20 [95% CI:0.06;0.34], with NordiFlex® vs. previous device. Bivariate analysis showed significant associations between preference for NordiFlex® and higher scores on self-efficacy, ease of use, minimal disruption of daily life, and positive feelings about injection (all p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: These results suggest that improvements in device features could be associated with improved treatment experience.

Shared Decision-Making in Growth Hormone Therapy-Implications for Patient Care.

Several studies have shown that adherence to growth hormone therapy (GHT) is not optimal. There are several reasons why patients may not fully adhere to their treatment regimen and this may have implications on treatment success, patient outcomes and healthcare spending and resourcing. A change in healthcare practices, from a physician paternalistic to a more patient autonomous approach to healthcare, has encouraged a greater onus on a shared decision-making (SDM) process whereby patients are actively encouraged to participate in their own healthcare decisions. There is growing evidence to suggest that SDM may facilitate patient adherence to GHT. Improved adherence to therapy in this way may consequently positively impact treatment outcomes for patients. Whilst SDM is widely regarded as a healthcare imperative, there is little guidance on how it should be best implemented. Despite this, there are many opportunities for the implementation of SDM during the treatment journey of a patient with a GH-related disorder. Barriers to the successful practice of SDM within the clinic may include poor patient education surrounding their condition and treatment options, limited healthcare professional time, lack of support from clinics to use SDM, and healthcare resourcing restrictions. Here we discuss the opportunities for the implementation of SDM and the barriers that challenge its effective use within the clinic. We also review some of the potential solutions to overcome these challenges that may prove key to effective patient participation in treatment decisions. Encouraging a sense of empowerment for patients will ultimately enhance treatment adherence and improve clinical outcomes in GHT.