Triple-Hormone-Receptor Agonist Retatrutide for Obesity - A Phase 2 Trial.

BACKGROUND: Retatrutide (LY3437943) is an agonist of the glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide, glucagon-like peptide 1, and glucagon receptors. Its dose-response relationships with respect to side effects, safety, and efficacy for the treatment of obesity are not known. METHODS: We conducted a phase 2, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial involving adults who had a body-mass index (BMI, the weight in kilograms divided by the square of the height in meters) of 30 or higher or who had a BMI of 27 to less than 30 plus at least one weight-related condition. Participants were randomly assigned in a 2:1:1:1:1:2:2 ratio to receive subcutaneous retatrutide (1 mg, 4 mg [initial dose, 2 mg], 4 mg [initial dose, 4 mg], 8 mg [initial dose, 2 mg], 8 mg [initial dose, 4 mg], or 12 mg [initial dose, 2 mg]) or placebo once weekly for 48 weeks. The primary end point was the percentage change in body weight from baseline to 24 weeks. Secondary end points included the percentage change in body weight from baseline to 48 weeks and a weight reduction of 5% or more, 10% or more, or 15% or more. Safety was also assessed. RESULTS: We enrolled 338 adults, 51.8% of whom were men. The least-squares mean percentage change in body weight at 24 weeks in the retatrutide groups was -7.2% in the 1-mg group, -12.9% in the combined 4-mg group, -17.3% in the combined 8-mg group, and -17.5% in the 12-mg group, as compared with -1.6% in the placebo group. At 48 weeks, the least-squares mean percentage change in the retatrutide groups was -8.7% in the 1-mg group, -17.1% in the combined 4-mg group, -22.8% in the combined 8-mg group, and -24.2% in the 12-mg group, as compared with -2.1% in the placebo group. At 48 weeks, a weight reduction of 5% or more, 10% or more, and 15% or more had occurred in 92%, 75%, and 60%, respectively, of the participants who received 4 mg of retatrutide; 100%, 91%, and 75% of those who received 8 mg; 100%, 93%, and 83% of those who received 12 mg; and 27%, 9%, and 2% of those who received placebo. The most common adverse events in the retatrutide groups were gastrointestinal; these events were dose-related, were mostly mild to moderate in severity, and were partially mitigated with a lower starting dose (2 mg vs. 4 mg). Dose-dependent increases in heart rate peaked at 24 weeks and declined thereafter. CONCLUSIONS: In adults with obesity, retatrutide treatment for 48 weeks resulted in substantial reductions in body weight. (Funded by Eli Lilly; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04881760.).

Daily Oral GLP-1 Receptor Agonist Orforglipron for Adults with Obesity.

BACKGROUND: Obesity is a major risk factor for many leading causes of illness and death worldwide. Data are needed regarding the efficacy and safety of the nonpeptide glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonist orforglipron as a once-daily oral therapy for weight reduction in adults with obesity. METHODS: In this phase 2, randomized, double-blind trial, we enrolled adults with obesity, or with overweight plus at least one weight-related coexisting condition, and without diabetes. Participants were randomly assigned to receive orforglipron at one of four doses (12, 24, 36, or 45 mg) or placebo once daily for 36 weeks. The percentage change from baseline in body weight was assessed at week 26 (primary end point) and at week 36 (secondary end point). RESULTS: A total of 272 participants underwent randomization. At baseline, the mean body weight was 108.7 kg, and the mean body-mass index (the weight in kilograms divided by the square of the height in meters) was 37.9. At week 26, the mean change from baseline in body weight ranged from -8.6% to -12.6% across the orforglipron dose cohorts and was -2.0% in the placebo group. At week 36, the mean change ranged from -9.4% to -14.7% with orforglipron and was -2.3% with placebo. A weight reduction of at least 10% by week 36 occurred in 46 to 75% of the participants who received orforglipron, as compared with 9% who received placebo. The use of orforglipron led to improvement in all prespecified weight-related and cardiometabolic measures. The most common adverse events reported with orforglipron were gastrointestinal events, which were mild to moderate, occurred primarily during dose escalation, and led to discontinuation of orforglipron in 10 to 17% of participants across dose cohorts. The safety profile of orforglipron was consistent with that of the GLP-1 receptor agonist class. CONCLUSIONS: Daily oral orforglipron, a nonpeptide GLP-1 receptor agonist, was associated with weight reduction. Adverse events reported with orforglipron were similar to those with injectable GLP-1 receptor agonists. (Funded by Eli Lilly; GZGI ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT05051579.).

Once-Weekly Semaglutide in Adolescents with Obesity.

BACKGROUND: A once-weekly, 2.4-mg dose of subcutaneous semaglutide, a glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist, is used to treat obesity in adults, but assessment of the drug in adolescents has been lacking. METHODS: In this double-blind, parallel-group, randomized, placebo-controlled trial, we enrolled adolescents (12 to <18 years of age) with obesity (a body-mass index [BMI] in the 95th percentile or higher) or with overweight (a BMI in the 85th percentile or higher) and at least one weight-related coexisting condition. Participants were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to receive once-weekly subcutaneous semaglutide (at a dose of 2.4 mg) or placebo for 68 weeks, plus lifestyle intervention. The primary end point was the percentage change in BMI from baseline to week 68; the secondary confirmatory end point was weight loss of at least 5% at week 68. RESULTS: A total of 201 participants underwent randomization, and 180 (90%) completed treatment. All but one of the participants had obesity. The mean change in BMI from baseline to week 68 was -16.1% with semaglutide and 0.6% with placebo (estimated difference, -16.7 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], -20.3 to -13.2; P<0.001). At week 68, a total of 95 of 131 participants (73%) in the semaglutide group had weight loss of 5% or more, as compared with 11 of 62 participants (18%) in the placebo group (estimated odds ratio, 14.0; 95% CI, 6.3 to 31.0; P<0.001). Reductions in body weight and improvement with respect to cardiometabolic risk factors (waist circumference and levels of glycated hemoglobin, lipids [except high-density lipoprotein cholesterol], and alanine aminotransferase) were greater with semaglutide than with placebo. The incidence of gastrointestinal adverse events was greater with semaglutide than with placebo (62% vs. 42%). Five participants (4%) in the semaglutide group and no participants in the placebo group had cholelithiasis. Serious adverse events were reported in 15 of 133 participants (11%) in the semaglutide group and in 6 of 67 participants (9%) in the placebo group. CONCLUSIONS: Among adolescents with obesity, once-weekly treatment with a 2.4-mg dose of semaglutide plus lifestyle intervention resulted in a greater reduction in BMI than lifestyle intervention alone. (Funded by Novo Nordisk; STEP TEENS ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04102189.).

Anti-obesity pharmacotherapy in adults with chronic kidney disease.

Obesity is a leading risk factor for the development and progression of kidney disease and a major barrier to optimal management of patients with chronic kidney disease. While in the past anti-obesity drugs offered only modest weight loss efficacy in exchange for various safety and tolerability risks, a wave of safer, more tolerable, and more effective treatment options is transforming the management of obesity. This review evaluates current and future pharmacologic anti-obesity therapy in adults through a kidney-oriented lens. It also explores the goals of anti-obesity treatment, describes the underlying putative mechanisms of action, and raises important scientific questions that deserve further exploration in people with chronic kidney disease.

Healthy Weight Loss Maintenance with Exercise, Liraglutide, or Both Combined.

BACKGROUND: Weight regain after weight loss is a major problem in the treatment of persons with obesity. METHODS: In a randomized, head-to-head, placebo-controlled trial, we enrolled adults with obesity (body-mass index [the weight in kilograms divided by the square of the height in meters], 32 to 43) who did not have diabetes. After an 8-week low-calorie diet, participants were randomly assigned for 1 year to one of four strategies: a moderate-to-vigorous-intensity exercise program plus placebo (exercise group); treatment with liraglutide (3.0 mg per day) plus usual activity (liraglutide group); exercise program plus liraglutide therapy (combination group); or placebo plus usual activity (placebo group). End points with prespecified hypotheses were the change in body weight (primary end point) and the change in body-fat percentage (secondary end point) from randomization to the end of the treatment period in the intention-to-treat population. Prespecified metabolic health-related end points and safety were also assessed. RESULTS: After the 8-week low-calorie diet, 195 participants had a mean decrease in body weight of 13.1 kg. At 1 year, all the active-treatment strategies led to greater weight loss than placebo: difference in the exercise group, -4.1 kg (95% confidence interval [CI], -7.8 to -0.4; P = 0.03); in the liraglutide group, -6.8 kg (95% CI, -10.4 to -3.1; P<0.001); and in the combination group, -9.5 kg (95% CI, -13.1 to -5.9; P<0.001). The combination strategy led to greater weight loss than exercise (difference, -5.4 kg; 95% CI, -9.0 to -1.7; P = 0.004) but not liraglutide (-2.7 kg; 95% CI, -6.3 to 0.8; P = 0.13). The combination strategy decreased body-fat percentage by 3.9 percentage points, which was approximately twice the decrease in the exercise group (-1.7 percentage points; 95% CI, -3.2 to -0.2; P = 0.02) and the liraglutide group (-1.9 percentage points; 95% CI, -3.3 to -0.5; P = 0.009). Only the combination strategy was associated with improvements in the glycated hemoglobin level, insulin sensitivity, and cardiorespiratory fitness. Increased heart rate and cholelithiasis were observed more often in the liraglutide group than in the combination group. CONCLUSIONS: A strategy combining exercise and liraglutide therapy improved healthy weight loss maintenance more than either treatment alone. (Funded by the Novo Nordisk Foundation and others; EudraCT number, 2015-005585-32; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04122716.).

Once-Weekly Semaglutide in Adults with Overweight or Obesity.

BACKGROUND: Obesity is a global health challenge with few pharmacologic options. Whether adults with obesity can achieve weight loss with once-weekly semaglutide at a dose of 2.4 mg as an adjunct to lifestyle intervention has not been confirmed. METHODS: In this double-blind trial, we enrolled 1961 adults with a body-mass index (the weight in kilograms divided by the square of the height in meters) of 30 or greater (≥27 in persons with ≥1 weight-related coexisting condition), who did not have diabetes, and randomly assigned them, in a 2:1 ratio, to 68 weeks of treatment with once-weekly subcutaneous semaglutide (at a dose of 2.4 mg) or placebo, plus lifestyle intervention. The coprimary end points were the percentage change in body weight and weight reduction of at least 5%. The primary estimand (a precise description of the treatment effect reflecting the objective of the clinical trial) assessed effects regardless of treatment discontinuation or rescue interventions. RESULTS: The mean change in body weight from baseline to week 68 was -14.9% in the semaglutide group as compared with -2.4% with placebo, for an estimated treatment difference of -12.4 percentage points (95% confidence interval [CI], -13.4 to -11.5; P<0.001). More participants in the semaglutide group than in the placebo group achieved weight reductions of 5% or more (1047 participants [86.4%] vs. 182 [31.5%]), 10% or more (838 [69.1%] vs. 69 [12.0%]), and 15% or more (612 [50.5%] vs. 28 [4.9%]) at week 68 (P<0.001 for all three comparisons of odds). The change in body weight from baseline to week 68 was -15.3 kg in the semaglutide group as compared with -2.6 kg in the placebo group (estimated treatment difference, -12.7 kg; 95% CI, -13.7 to -11.7). Participants who received semaglutide had a greater improvement with respect to cardiometabolic risk factors and a greater increase in participant-reported physical functioning from baseline than those who received placebo. Nausea and diarrhea were the most common adverse events with semaglutide; they were typically transient and mild-to-moderate in severity and subsided with time. More participants in the semaglutide group than in the placebo group discontinued treatment owing to gastrointestinal events (59 [4.5%] vs. 5 [0.8%]). CONCLUSIONS: In participants with overweight or obesity, 2.4 mg of semaglutide once weekly plus lifestyle intervention was associated with sustained, clinically relevant reduction in body weight. (Funded by Novo Nordisk; STEP 1 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03548935).

The association between previous use of anti-obesity medication and semaglutide weight loss outcomes.

AIMS: To compare weight loss outcomes between patients starting semaglutide who had previously been on another anti-obesity medication (AOM) compared to those who were AOM-naïve. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a retrospective study in patients with overweight or obesity taking semaglutide for weight loss for a duration of 3 to 12 months. Our primary endpoint was assessment of percentage of total body weight loss (TBWL) in patients who started semaglutide as their first AOM (AOM-naïve) compared to those who started semaglutide and had previously taken another AOM (non-AOM-naïve). The secondary outcome was a comparison of the proportions of patients achieving ≥5%, ≥10%, ≥15% and ≥20% TBWL between the groups. Our endpoints were analysed using independent t-tests and ANOVA/ANCOVA for continuous variables and Pearson's test for categorical variables. RESULTS: This study included 305 patients. Outcomes of semaglutide treatment were superior in AOM-naïve patients (n = 231) compared to non-AOM-naïve patients (n = 74) at 3 (6.3% vs. 3.8%), 6 (10.6% vs. 6.7%), 9 (14.0% vs. 9.1%) and 12 months (14.3% vs. 10.6%; p < 0.0001 at 3, 6 and 9 months, and p = 0.01 at 12 months). A greater proportion of patients in the AOM-naïve group achieved a TBWL ≥ 15% (48% vs 21%; p = 0.02) and ≥20% (27% vs 4% p < 0.01) at 12 months. CONCLUSION: The use of semaglutide in patients with previous intake of other AOMs was associated with inferior weight loss outcomes in comparison to patients who were AOM-naïve.

Assessment of the Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS) for Phentermine-Topiramate to Prevent Exposure During Pregnancy.

BACKGROUND: The U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved phentermine-topiramate for obesity in 2012 and required a Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS) to prevent prenatal exposure. No such requirement was introduced for topiramate. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the rate of prenatal exposure, contraceptive use, and pregnancy testing among patients with phentermine-topiramate compared with topiramate or other antiobesity medications (AOMs). DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Nationwide health insurance claims database. PARTICIPANTS: Females aged 12 to 55 years with no infertility diagnosis or sterilization procedure. Patients with other indications for topiramate were excluded to identify a cohort that was likely treated for obesity. MEASUREMENTS: Patients initiated use of phentermine-topiramate, topiramate, or an AOM (liraglutide, lorcaserin, or bupropion-naltrexone). Pregnancy at treatment initiation, conception during treatment, contraceptive use, and pregnancy testing outcomes were ascertained. Measurable confounders were adjusted for, and extensive sensitivity analyses were done. RESULTS: A total of 156 280 treatment episodes were observed. Adjusted prevalence of pregnancy at treatment initiation was 0.9 versus 1.6 per 1000 episodes (prevalence ratio, 0.54 [95% CI, 0.31 to 0.95]) for phentermine-topiramate versus topiramate. The incidence rate of conception during treatment was 9.1 versus 15.0 per 1000 person-years (rate ratio, 0.61 [CI, 0.40 to 0.91]) for phentermine-topiramate versus topiramate. Both outcomes were similarly lower for phentermine-topiramate compared with AOM. Prenatal exposure was marginally lower in topiramate users compared with AOM users. Approximately 20% of patients in all cohorts had at least 50% of treatment days covered by contraceptives. Few patients had pregnancy tests before treatment (≤5%), but this was more common among phentermine-topiramate users. LIMITATIONS: Outcome misclassification; unmeasured confounding due to lack of prescriber data to account for possible clustering and spillover effects. CONCLUSION: Prenatal exposure seemed to be significantly lower among phentermine-topiramate users under the REMS. Pregnancy testing and contraceptive use appeared to be inadequate for all groups, which deserves attention to prevent the remaining potential exposures. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: None.

Continued Treatment With Tirzepatide for Maintenance of Weight Reduction in Adults With Obesity: The SURMOUNT-4 Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: The effect of continued treatment with tirzepatide on maintaining initial weight reduction is unknown. Objective: To assess the effect of tirzepatide, with diet and physical activity, on the maintenance of weight reduction. Design, Setting, and Participants: This phase 3, randomized withdrawal clinical trial conducted at 70 sites in 4 countries with a 36-week, open-label tirzepatide lead-in period followed by a 52-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled period included adults with a body mass index greater than or equal to 30 or greater than or equal to 27 and a weight-related complication, excluding diabetes. Interventions: Participants (n = 783) enrolled in an open-label lead-in period received once-weekly subcutaneous maximum tolerated dose (10 or 15 mg) of tirzepatide for 36 weeks. At week 36, a total of 670 participants were randomized (1:1) to continue receiving tirzepatide (n = 335) or switch to placebo (n = 335) for 52 weeks. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was the mean percent change in weight from week 36 (randomization) to week 88. Key secondary end points included the proportion of participants at week 88 who maintained at least 80% of the weight loss during the lead-in period. Results: Participants (n = 670; mean age, 48 years; 473 [71%] women; mean weight, 107.3 kg) who completed the 36-week lead-in period experienced a mean weight reduction of 20.9%. The mean percent weight change from week 36 to week 88 was -5.5% with tirzepatide vs 14.0% with placebo (difference, -19.4% [95% CI, -21.2% to -17.7%]; P < .001). Overall, 300 participants (89.5%) receiving tirzepatide at 88 weeks maintained at least 80% of the weight loss during the lead-in period compared with 16.6% receiving placebo (P < .001). The overall mean weight reduction from week 0 to 88 was 25.3% for tirzepatide and 9.9% for placebo. The most common adverse events were mostly mild to moderate gastrointestinal events, which occurred more commonly with tirzepatide vs placebo. Conclusions and Relevance: In participants with obesity or overweight, withdrawing tirzepatide led to substantial regain of lost weight, whereas continued treatment maintained and augmented initial weight reduction. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04660643.

Pharmacotherapy for adults with overweight and obesity: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: Pharmacotherapy provides an option for adults with overweight and obesity to reduce their bodyweight if lifestyle modifications fail. We summarised the latest evidence for the benefits and harms of weight-lowering drugs. METHODS: This systematic review and network meta-analysis included searches of PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library (CENTRAL) from inception to March 23, 2021, for randomised controlled trials of weight-lowering drugs in adults with overweight and obesity. We performed frequentist random-effect network meta-analyses to summarise the evidence and applied the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation frameworks to rate the certainty of evidence, calculate the absolute effects, categorise interventions, and present the findings. The study was registered with PROSPERO, CRD 42021245678. FINDINGS: 14 605 citations were identified by our search, of which 143 eligible trials enrolled 49 810 participants. Except for levocarnitine, all drugs lowered bodyweight compared with lifestyle modification alone; all subsequent numbers refer to comparisons with lifestyle modification. High to moderate certainty evidence established phentermine-topiramate as the most effective in lowering weight (odds ratio [OR] of ≥5% weight reduction 8·02, 95% CI 5·24 to 12·27; mean difference [MD] of percentage bodyweight change -7·97, 95% CI -9·28 to -6·66) followed by GLP-1 receptor agonists (OR 6·33, 95% CI 5·00 to 8·00; MD -5·76, 95% CI -6·30 to -5·21). Naltrexone-bupropion (OR 2·69, 95% CI 2·11 to 3·43), phentermine-topiramate (2·40, 1·69 to 3·42), GLP-1 receptor agonists (2·17, 1·71 to 2·77), and orlistat (1·72, 1·44 to 2·05) were associated with increased adverse events leading to drug discontinuation. In a post-hoc analysis, semaglutide, a GLP-1 receptor agonist, showed substantially larger benefits than other drugs with a similar risk of adverse events as other drugs for both likelihood of weight loss of 5% or more (OR 9·82, 95% CI 7·09 to 13·61) and percentage bodyweight change (MD -11·41, 95% CI -12·54 to -10·27). INTERPRETATION: In adults with overweight and obesity, phentermine-topiramate and GLP-1 receptor agonists proved the best drugs in reducing weight; of the GLP-1 agonists, semaglutide might be the most effective. FUNDING: 1.3.5 Project for Disciplines of Excellence, West China Hospital, Sichuan University.

AGA Clinical Practice Guideline on Pharmacological Interventions for Adults With Obesity.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Pharmacological management of obesity improves outcomes and decreases the risk of obesity-related complications. This American Gastroenterological Association guideline is intended to support practitioners in decisions about pharmacological interventions for overweight and obesity. METHODS: A multidisciplinary panel of content experts and guideline methodologists used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework to prioritize clinical questions, identify patient-centered outcomes, and conduct an evidence synthesis of the following agents: semaglutide 2.4 mg, liraglutide 3.0 mg, phentermine-topiramate extended-release (ER), naltrexone-bupropion ER, orlistat, phentermine, diethylpropion, and Gelesis100 oral superabsorbent hydrogel. The guideline panel used the evidence-to-decision framework to develop recommendations for the pharmacological management of obesity and provided implementation considerations for clinical practice. RESULTS: The guideline panel made 9 recommendations. The panel strongly recommended the use of pharmacotherapy in addition to lifestyle intervention in adults with overweight and obesity (body mass index ≥30 kg/m2, or ≥27 kg/m2 with weight-related complications) who have an inadequate response to lifestyle interventions. The panel suggested the use of semaglutide 2.4 mg, liraglutide 3.0 mg, phentermine-topiramate ER, and naltrexone-bupropion ER (based on moderate certainty evidence), and phentermine and diethylpropion (based on low certainty evidence), for long-term management of overweight and obesity. The guideline panel suggested against the use of orlistat. The panel identified the use of Gelesis100 oral superabsorbent hydrogel as a knowledge gap. CONCLUSIONS: In adults with overweight and obesity who have an inadequate response to lifestyle interventions alone, long-term pharmacological therapy is recommended, with multiple effective and safe treatment options.

Efficacy and safety of tirzepatide for treatment of overweight or obesity. A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Recent studies suggest that tirzepatide, a dual glucose-dependent insulinotropic-peptide (GIP) and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1 RA), has significant weight loss effects. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to assess the efficacy and safety of tirzepatide for weight loss in patients with overweight or obesity. METHODS: Medline, Embase and Cochrane CENTRAL were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on tirzepatide's weight loss efficacy for these patients. A single arm meta-analysis of proportions estimated primary outcomes, ≥5%, ≥10%, and ≥15% weight loss, and adverse events (AEs); while meta-analysis of means estimated secondary outcomes. Comparative meta-analysis was conducted between tirzepatide and control arms where mean differences and odds ratios were estimated for continuous and dichotomous outcomes respectively. RESULTS: RCTs included in this study revealed that among 5800 patients, 78.22% (95% CI: 72.15% to 83.73%), 55.60% (95% CI: 46.54% to 64.47%), 32.28% (95% CI: 23.17% to 42.12%) achieved ≥5%, ≥10%, and ≥15% weight loss, respectively. Tirzepatide 5 mg demonstrated weight loss superiority relative to placebo (MD: -12.47 kg, 95% CI: -13.94 kg to -11.00 kg) and semaglutide (n = 1409, MD: -1.90 kg, 95% CI: -2.97 kg to -0.83 kg) with dose-dependent increase for 10 mg and 15 mg doses. The comparison between tirzepatide and semaglutide was examined in the SURPASS-2 trial that was included in this systematic review. For AEs, there was increase odds of experiencing gastrointestinal AEs with tirzepatide compared to placebo, but no significant difference with semaglutide. CONCLUSION: Tirzepatide has significant potential as a weight loss drug in patients with overweight and obesity, with little increase in AEs compared to other weight loss drugs. With its ability to concurrently target multiple aspects of metabolic syndrome, it should be considered as the next helm of weight loss therapies.

Orlistat mouth rinse: Using the tongue to deliver antiobesity medication in a double-blind randomized crossover pilot trial.

AIM: To investigate the effects of an orlistat mouth rinse on the intake of a high-fat meal. METHODS: A double-blind, balanced order, crossover study was conducted in participants (n = 10, body mass index 25-30 kg/m2 ) assigned to receive placebo or orlistat (24 mg/mL) prior to a high-fat meal. Participants were divided into low- or high-fat consumers based on calories consumed from fat following placebo administration. RESULTS: The orlistat mouth rinse decreased total and fat calories consumed during the high-fat meal in high-fat consumers, and did not alter calories consumed in low-fat consumers (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Orlistat decreases long-chain fatty acid (LCFA) absorption by inhibiting lipases that breakdown triglycerides. Orlistat mouth rinse decreased fat intake in high-fat consumers, suggesting that orlistat inhibited the detection of LCFAs from the high-fat test meal. Lingual delivery of orlistat is predicted to eliminate the risk of oil incontinence and promote weight loss in individuals who prefer fat.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of five anti-obesity medications from a US payer's perspective.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: To determine the cost-effectiveness of anti-obesity medications (AOM): tirzepatide, semaglutide, liraglutide, phentermine plus topiramate (PpT), and naltrexone plus bupropion (NpB). METHODS AND RESULTS: From a U.S. perspective we developed a Markov model to simulate weight change over a 40-year time horizon using results from clinical studies. According to the body mass index (BMI), cardiovascular diseases, diabetes and mortality risk were the health states considered in the model, being mutually exclusive. Costs of AOM, adverse events, cardiovascular events, and diabetes were included. We applied a 3% per-year discount rate and calculated the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) of cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses incorporated uncertainty in input parameters. A deterministic analysis was conducted to determine the robustness of the model. The model included a cohort of 78.2% females with a mean age of 45 years and BMI of 37.1 (SD 4.9) for females and 36.8 (SD 4.9) for males. NpB and PpT were the least costly medications and, all medications differed no more than 0.5 QALYs. Tirzepatide ICER was $355,616 per QALY. Liraglutide and semaglutide options were dominated by PpT. CONCLUSION: Compared to other AOM, PpT was lowest cost treatment with nearly identical QALYs with other agents.

Anti-obesity therapy for cardiovascular disease prevention: potential expected roles of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists.

Obesity is characterized by visceral fat accumulation and various metabolic disturbances that cause metabolic syndrome and obesity-related cardiovascular diseases (ORCVDs). Hence, treatments targeting obesity should also prevent ORCVDs. Nonetheless, lifestyle modification therapy alone is still insufficient to reduce the risk of ORCVDs, although most cardiovascular guidelines still list it as the only treatment for obesity. Additionally, conventional anti-obesity drugs, such as orlistat, phentermine-topiramate, and naltrexone-bupropion, can reduce body weight but have not demonstrated a clear reduction in the risk of ORCVDs. To overcome this unmet clinical need, newer anti-obesity drugs must exhibit not only sufficient and long-lasting weight loss but also obvious cardiovascular benefits. Given recent clinical findings and evidences, in this context glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist is currently available as a candidate that is clinically positioned as a first-line anti-obesity agent for the effective prevention of ORCVDs in people with obesity.

The Antiobesity Effect and Safety of GLP-1 Receptor Agonist in Overweight/Obese Patients Without Diabetes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Aim To determine the antiobesity effect and safety of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1RA) including liraglutide, exenatide and semaglutide treatment in overweight/obese patients without diabetes. The random-effect model was used to pool data extracted from included literatures. The weighted mean difference (WMD), odds ratio and 95% confidence interval (CI) were used to present the meta-analysis results (PROSPERO registration number: CRD 42020173199). The sources of intertrial heterogeneity, bias and the robustness of results were evaluated by subgroup analysis, sensitivity analysis and regression analysis, respectively. A total of 24 RCTs were recruited in the present analysis which included 5867 patients. The results showed that the treatment of overweight/obese patients without diabetes with GLP-1RAs including liraglutide, exenatide and semaglutide significantly achieved greater weight loss than placebo [WMD=-5.39, 95% CI (-6.82, -3.96)] and metformin [WMD=-5.46, 95% CI (-5.87, -5.05)]. The subgroup analysis showed that semaglutide displayed the most obvious antiobesity effect in terms of weight loss, the reduction of body mass index (BMI) and waist circumference (WC). However, GLP-1RAs treatments had more gastrointestinal adverse events (such as nausea and vomiting) than placebo and Met. The subgroup analysis also represented that semaglutide displayed the lowest risk of gastrointestinal adverse events among three kinds of GLP-1RAs. Our meta-analysis demonstrated that GLP-1RA had a superior antiobesity effect than placebo/Met in overweight/obese patients without diabetes in terms of body weight, BMI, and WC, especially for semaglutide, which had more obvious antiobesity effect and lower GI adverse events than liraglutide and exenatide.

Pharmacological Management of Obesity: A Century of Expert Opinions in Cecil Textbook of Medicine.

BACKGROUND: Innovations in drug therapy for obesity have had a limited impact on the body mass index, prevalence of medical complications, quality of life, and work potential of a substantial majority of affected persons. STUDY QUESTION: What are the milestones of the changes in the expert approach to the pharmacological management of obesity in the past century? STUDY DESIGN: To determine the changes in the experts' approach to the management of obesity, as presented in a widely used textbook in the United States. DATA SOURCES: The primary sources were chapters describing the management of obesity in the 26 editions of Cecil Textbook of Medicine published from 1927 through 2020. Secondary sources were publications retrieved from Medline that clarified technical issues related to the development, regulatory approval, and use of the drugs mentioned in the Cecil Textbook of Medicine. RESULTS: Pharmacological interventions aimed at increasing caloric expenditures through thermogenesis were recommended from 1927 through 1943. Thyroid extracts were prescribed even in the absence of demonstrated hypothyroidism or decreased basal metabolic rate throughout this period. Dinitrophenol was mentioned in 1937, but was banned soon thereafter. Appetite suppression with amphetamine was considered useful from 1943 through 1988, after which the drug was replaced with other centrally acting molecules, such as fenfluramine in 1988, sibutramine in 2000, and rimonabant in 2008, which were in turn withdrawn because of major adverse effects. In the past decade, obesity has been treated with the appetite suppressants phentermine-topiramate, bupropion-naltrexone, lorcaserin, and liraglutide, and with orlistat, a drug promoting fat malabsorption. The change in weight produced by these drugs is generally modest and transient. CONCLUSIONS: The pharmacological management of obesity has remained frustratingly inefficient. The reasons for the relative lack of success may reside in the ever-growing access to dense, palatable, and relatively inexpensive food, coupled with the decrease in energy expenditure created by a sedentary lifestyle.