EFFECTS OF LIRAGLUTIDE 3.0 MG ON WEIGHT AND RISK FACTORS IN HISPANIC VERSUS NON-HIPANIC POPULATIONS: SUBGROUP ANALYSIS FROM SCALE RANDOMIZED TRIALS.

OBJECTIVE: Scarce data exist on pharmacotherapy for obesity in Hispanic individuals. This post hoc analysis of pooled data from 4 phase 3a trials compared the efficacy and safety of liraglutide 3.0 mg versus placebo, as adjunct to a reduced-calorie diet and physical activity, in Hispanic versus non-Hispanic subgroups. METHODS: We conducted the double-blind randomized, placebo-controlled trials in adults with a minimum body mass index (BMI) of 27 kg/m2 with at least 1 comorbidity, or a minimum BMI of 30 kg/m2, at clinical research sites worldwide. In this analysis, we investigated possible differences in treatment effects between 534 Hispanics (10.4% of the population) and 4,597 non-Hispanics (89.6%) through statistical tests of interaction between subgroups and treatment. Variables examined included mean and categorical weight change, cardiovascular risk markers, and safety data. RESULTS: Both subgroups achieved clinically significant mean weight loss at end-of-treatment with liraglutide 3.0 mg versus placebo: Hispanics 7.0% versus 1.5%, treatment difference -5.1% (95% CI, -6.2 to -4.0); non-Hispanics 7.5% versus 2.3%, -5.2% (95% CI, -5.5 to -4.8). More individuals in both subgroups lost ≥5%, >10%, and >15% of their baseline weight with liraglutide 3.0 mg than with placebo. Efficacy endpoints generally did not vary with ethnicity (P>.05). Adverse events were comparable between ethnic subgroups, with more gastrointestinal disorders reported with liraglutide 3.0 mg than placebo. CONCLUSION: Efficacy and safety were largely similar between Hispanic and non-Hispanic subgroups. Results support that liraglutide 3.0 mg, used with a reduced-calorie diet and physical activity, can facilitate weight loss in Hispanic individuals. ABBREVIATIONS: A1c = glycated hemoglobin BMI = body mass index CI = confidence interval FPG = fasting plasma glucose GLP-1 = glucagon-like peptide-1 hsCRP = high-sensitivity C-reactive protein SCALE = Satiety and Clinical Adiposity - Liraglutide Evidence in individuals with and without diabetes T2DM = type 2 diabetes mellitus.

Liraglutide 3.0 mg for weight management: weight-loss dependent and independent effects.

OBJECTIVE: As an adjunct to a reduced-calorie diet and increased physical activity, treatment with liraglutide 3.0 mg for weight management provides a statistically significant and clinically meaningful weight loss of 5.7%-8.0% compared to 1.6%-2.6% with placebo. The objective of this post hoc analysis was to quantify the relative contribution of weight loss to the treatment effects of liraglutide 3.0 mg on key efficacy endpoints. METHODS: The analysis utilized data from 4725 participants across three randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trials that evaluated the efficacy and safety of liraglutide 3.0 mg versus placebo, as an adjunct to a reduced-calorie diet and increased physical activity (ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers: NCT01272219, NCT01272232 and NCT01557166). The duration of two of the trials was 56 weeks; one trial was of 32 weeks' duration. A mediation analysis was performed, which ranked the relative contribution of weight loss to the treatment effects of liraglutide 3.0 mg on key cardiometabolic efficacy endpoints, Apnea-Hypopnea Index (AHI) and health-related quality of life (QoL). A limitation of this type of analysis is that it cannot conclusively prove a causal relationship. RESULTS: In individuals without type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), endpoints predominantly driven by liraglutide-induced weight loss included waist circumference, diastolic blood pressure, triglycerides, high density lipoprotein cholesterol, AHI, and Impact of Weight on Quality of Life-Lite total and physical function scores. Endpoints predominantly independent of weight loss included the glycemic endpoints hemoglobin A1c and fasting plasma glucose in individuals with and without T2DM. Regardless of the degree of dependence on weight loss according to the mediation analysis, greater weight loss was associated with greater improvement in all endpoints. CONCLUSION: Treatment with liraglutide 3.0 mg contributes to improved cardiometabolic parameters, AHI and health-related QoL through both weight-loss dependent and weight-loss independent mechanisms.

Early Weight Loss with Liraglutide 3.0 mg Predicts 1-Year Weight Loss and is Associated with Improvements in Clinical Markers.

OBJECTIVE: To identify an early response criterion for predicting ≥5% weight loss with liraglutide 3.0 mg at week 56 and to compare efficacy outcomes in early responders (ERs) and early nonresponders (ENRs). METHODS: Using pooled data from the SCALE Obesity and Prediabetes and SCALE Diabetes trials, weight loss of ≥4% at 16 weeks best predicted ≥5% weight loss after 56 weeks. Weight loss and changes in cardiometabolic risk factors and health-related quality of life were evaluated in ERs (≥4% weight loss at week 16) and ENRs (<4% weight loss at week 16) completing 56 weeks' treatment. RESULTS: Proportions of ERs/ENRs to liraglutide 3.0 mg were 77.3%/22.7% (individuals without type 2 diabetes, T2D) and 62.7%/37.3% (those with T2D). Greater mean weight loss was observed in ERs versus ENRs: 10.8% versus 3.0% (without T2D) and 8.5% versus 3.1% (T2D). In both trials, greater proportions of ERs versus ENRs achieved ≥5%, >10%, and >15% weight loss at week 56 with liraglutide 3.0 mg. Greater improvements in cardiometabolic risk factors and health-related quality of life scores were observed in ERs versus ENRs. CONCLUSIONS: The early response criterion was clinically useful to identify individuals who would achieve clinically meaningful weight loss at 56 weeks.

Effect of asthma compliance enhancement training on asthma control in patients on combination therapy with salmeterol/fluticasone propionate: a randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: We investigated if a higher proportion of adults with previously uncontrolled asthma can achieve total control when given salmeterol/fluticasone propionate (50/250 microg) bid and compliance enhancement training (CET) compared to those given medication alone. METHODS: Open comparison of stable, but uncontrolled, adult asthmatics. After a 12-week treatment period on salmeterol/fluticasone propionate (period 1), patients who failed to achieve control were randomised to continuing treatment with or without CET for 12 weeks (period 2). The primary end point was the proportion achieving total control of their asthma in 7 of the last 8 consecutive weeks of period 2. RESULTS: A total of 361 subjects (50.4% males, mean age 40.0 +/- 14.4 years) in 29 centres were included, of whom 75.9% were randomised into treatment period 2 (n = 140 in the intervention group). The proportion of subjects achieving total asthma control was 8.8% and 7.6%, respectively, in the intervention and control group [not significant (NS)]. Mean morning peak flow, forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV(1)), asthma symptom score and quality of life improved significantly over the study period in both treatment groups. Furthermore, proportion of days with use of rescue medication declined from 59.7% +/- 34.6% (55.7% +/- 35.3%) during screening to 20.3% +/- 29.2% (19.4% +/- 30.9%) during treatment period 2 (NS). CONCLUSION: CET failed to increase the likelihood of achieving total control in asthmatics on salmeterol/fluticasone propionate compared to subjects receiving medication only. However, both groups had a significant improvement in asthma control. (Clinical Trials.gov number, NCT00351143)