Liraglutide hospital discharge trial: A randomized controlled trial comparing the safety and efficacy of liraglutide versus insulin glargine for the management of patients with type 2 diabetes after hospital discharge.

AIM: To compare a glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist with basal insulin at hospital discharge in patients with uncontrolled type 2 diabetes in a randomized clinical trial. METHODS: A total of 273 patients with glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) 7%-10% (53-86 mol/mol) were randomized to liraglutide (n = 136) or insulin glargine (n = 137) at hospital discharge. The primary endpoint was difference in HbA1c at 12 and 26 weeks. Secondary endpoints included hypoglycaemia, changes in body weight, and achievement of HbA1c <7% (53 mmol/mol) without hypoglycaemia or weight gain. RESULTS: The between-group difference in HbA1c at 12 weeks and 26 weeks was -0.28% (95% CI -0.64, 0.09), and at 26 weeks it was -0.55%, (95% CI -1.01, -0.09) in favour of liraglutide. Liraglutide treatment resulted in a lower frequency of hypoglycaemia <3.9 mmol/L (13% vs 23%; P = 0.04), but there was no difference in the rate of clinically significant hypoglycaemia <3.0 mmol/L. Compared to insulin glargine, liraglutide treatment was associated with greater weight loss at 26 weeks (-4.7 ± 7.7 kg vs -0.6 ± 11.5 kg; P < 0.001), and the proportion of patients with HbA1c <7% (53 mmol/mol) without hypoglycaemia was 48% versus 33% (P = 0.05) at 12 weeks and 45% versus 33% (P = 0.14) at 26 weeks in liraglutide versus insulin glargine. The proportion of patients with HbA1c <7% (53 mmol/mol) without hypoglycaemia and no weight gain was higher with liraglutide at 12 (41% vs 24%, P = 0.005) and 26 weeks (39% vs 22%; P = 0.014). The incidence of gastrointestinal adverse events was higher with liraglutide than with insulin glargine (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Compared to insulin glargine, treatment with liraglutide at hospital discharge resulted in better glycaemic control and greater weight loss, but increased gastrointestinal adverse events.

Quality of life is significantly impaired in both secretory and non-functioning pituitary adenomas.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the quality of life (QoL) in patients with pituitary adenomas in comparison with healthy Mexican population QoL scores. DESIGN & MEASUREMENTS: Cross-sectional study using the short form 36 questionnaire (SF-36) in 175 patients with pituitary adenomas grouped by adenoma subtype and disease activity, and compared them with the healthy Mexican population normative QoL scores. PATIENTS: A total of 44 patients with non-functioning pituitary adenomas (NFPA), 48 with acromegaly, 53 with prolactinomas and 30 with Cushing disease (CD) were enrolled in this study. RESULTS: Mental and physical components scores (MCS & PCS) of SF-36 questionnaire were lower in patients with active disease in all adenoma subtypes (P < 0.03). A significant negative relationship between prolactin levels and MCS (r = -0.30, P < 0.01) and PCS (r = -0.41, P < 0.01) were found in prolactinomas. Patients with CD showed 24 hours urine-free cortisol levels negatively correlated with MCS (r = -0.43, P < 0.01) but not with PCS. No significant correlation was found between IGF-1 ULN and QoL scores in acromegaly. NFPA patients had lower QoL scores than patients with controlled CD, acromegaly or prolactinoma (P < 0.02). Active CD and prolactinoma have lower QoL scores in comparison of NFPA (P < 0.05). Having an adenoma, secretory or non-functioning, decrease QoL scores in comparison of results in the healthy Mexican population register. Using an adjusted-multivariate model, we confirmed that disease activity in all secretory adenomas is an independent risk factor, reducing SF-36 scores significantly. CONCLUSION: Activity in all secretory pituitary adenomas' patients decrease mental and physical QoL. However, independently of disease activity, secretory and NFPA significantly decrease QoL in comparison with healthy Mexican population QoL register.