Potential preventive properties of GLP-1 receptor agonists against prostate cancer: a nationwide cohort study.

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) have been suggested to possess antineoplastic properties against prostate cancer. We examined the association between GLP-1RA use and prostate cancer risk in a real-world setting. METHODS: We performed a nationwide register-based cohort study using an active-comparator, new-user design. We included all men in Denmark aged ≥50 years who commenced use of GLP-1RAs or basal insulin during 2007-2019. HRs and 95% CIs for incident prostate cancer were estimated using multivariable Cox regression in 'intention-to-treat' (ITT)- and 'per-protocol'-like analyses. RESULTS: Among 14,206 initiators of GLP-1RAs and 21,756 initiators of basal insulin, we identified 697 patients with prostate cancer during a mean follow-up period of about 5 years from initiation of the study drugs. In comparison with basal insulin use, GLP-1RA use was associated with an adjusted HR of 0.91 (95% CI 0.73, 1.14) in the 'ITT' analysis and 0.80 (95% CI 0.64, 1.01) in the 'per-protocol' analysis. Stronger inverse associations were seen among older men (≥70 years) ('ITT' HR 0.56; 95% CI 0.38, 0.82; 'per-protocol' HR 0.47; 95% CI 0.30, 0.74), and in patients with CVD ('ITT' HR 0.75; 95% CI 0.53, 1.06; 'per-protocol' HR 0.60; 95% CI 0.39, 0.91). CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: GLP-1RA use was inversely associated with prostate cancer risk compared with use of basal insulin in the 'per-protocol' analysis. Older men and patients with CVD exhibited stronger inverse associations in both the 'ITT' and 'per-protocol' analyses. Our results may indicate that GLP-1RA use could protect against prostate cancer.

Once-weekly semaglutide use in patients with type 2 diabetes: Results from the SURE France multicentre, prospective, observational study.

AIMS: Real-world data are required to support glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist use in type 2 diabetes (T2D). SURE France assessed once-weekly semaglutide in adults with T2D in real-world clinical practice. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This multicentre, prospective, open-label, single-arm study included adults with T2D and ≥1 documented glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) value ≤12 weeks before semaglutide initiation. The primary endpoint was HbA1c change from baseline to end of study (EOS; ~30 weeks). Secondary endpoints included change from baseline to EOS in body weight (BW) and waist circumference (WC); and proportion achieving HbA1c targets. Baseline characteristics and safety were reported for the full analysis set (patients initiating semaglutide). Analysis of other endpoints was based on the effectiveness analysis set (study completers receiving semaglutide at EOS). RESULTS: Of 497 patients initiating semaglutide (41.6% female, mean age 58.3 years), 348 completed the study on treatment. Baseline HbA1c, diabetes duration, BW and WC, were 8.3%, 10.0 years, 98.2 kg and 114.2 cm, respectively. The most common reasons for initiating semaglutide were to improve glycaemic control (79.7%), reduce BW (69.8%) and address cardiovascular risk (24.1%). At EOS, mean changes were: HbA1c, -1.2% points [95% confidence interval (CI) -1.32; -1.10]; BW, -4.7 kg (95% CI -5.38; -4.07); and WC, -4.9 cm (95% CI -5.94; -3.88). At EOS, 81.7%, 67.7% and 51.6% of patients achieved an HbA1c target of <8.0%, <7.5% and <7.0%, respectively. No new safety concerns were identified. CONCLUSIONS: These results support the benefits of semaglutide in a real-world setting in adults with T2D in France showing a significant reduction in HbA1c and body weight.

Once-weekly semaglutide use in patients with type 2 diabetes: Real-world data from the SURE Italy observational study.

AIMS: SURE Italy, a multicentre, prospective, open-label, observational, real-world study, investigated once-weekly semaglutide in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) in routine clinical practice. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Adults with T2D and ≥1 documented glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) level within 12 weeks of semaglutide initiation were enrolled. The primary endpoint was change in HbA1c from baseline to end of study (EOS; ~30 weeks). Other endpoints included changes in body weight, waist circumference and patient-reported outcomes, and the proportion of patients achieving HbA1c <7.0% or <6.5%, weight loss ≥5% and a post-hoc composite endpoint (HbA1c reduction of ≥1%-point and weight loss ≥5%). These endpoints were reported for patients on semaglutide at EOS [effectiveness analysis set (EAS)]. Safety data were reported in the full analysis set. RESULTS: Of 579 patients who initiated semaglutide (full analysis set), 491 completed the study on treatment (EAS). Mean baseline HbA1c was 8.0%, and 20.7% (120 of 579) of patients had HbA1c <7.0%. Mean semaglutide dose at EOS was 0.66 ± 0.28 mg. In the EAS, mean HbA1c and body weight decreased by 1.1%-point (95% confidence interval 1.20, 1.05; P < .0001) and 4.2 kg (95% confidence interval 4.63, 3.67; P < .0001), respectively. At EOS, 61.7% and 40.8% of patients achieved HbA1c <7.0% and <6.5%, respectively, 40.5% achieved weight loss ≥5% and 25.3% achieved the post-hoc composite endpoint. Patient-reported outcomes improved from baseline to EOS. No new safety concerns were identified. CONCLUSIONS: In routine clinical practice in Italy, patients with T2D treated with once-weekly semaglutide for 30 weeks achieved clinically significant improvements in HbA1c, body weight and other outcomes.

Use of once-weekly semaglutide in patients with type 2 diabetes in routine clinical practice: Results from the SURE Canada multicentre, prospective, observational study.

AIM: To investigate once-weekly (OW) semaglutide, a glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1RA), in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) in routine clinical practice. METHODS: The SURE Canada study was a multicenter, prospective, observational study. Adults with T2D and one or more documented HbA1c values 12 weeks or less before semaglutide initiation were enrolled. The primary endpoint was change in HbA1c from baseline to end of study (EOS; ~30 weeks). Secondary endpoints included change in body weight (BW), waist circumference and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and the proportion of patients achieving HbA1c of less than 7.0%, weight loss (WL) of 5% or higher, and a composite of HbA1c reduction of 1% or higher and WL of 3% or higher at EOS. Data were analysed and presented for patients on semaglutide at EOS overall and for the following baseline medication subgroups: oral antihyperglycaemic drugs (OADs) only; GLP-1RA experienced; insulin ± OADs without GLP-1RA. RESULTS: In total, 452 patients initiated semaglutide and 356 completed the study on treatment. For the 452 patients, mean baseline HbA1c was 8.1%; 86 (19.0%) patients had HbA1c of less than 7.0%. Mean dose of semaglutide at EOS was 0.76 ± 0.31 mg. Mean HbA1c was reduced by 0.9%-point (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.97; 0.78). Mean BW was reduced by 4.3 kg (95% CI: 4.79; 3.76). At EOS, 46.9% of patients achieved HbA1c of less than 7.0%, 40.9% achieved WL of 5% or higher and 24.1% achieved the composite endpoint. PROs improved from baseline to EOS. No new safety concerns were reported. CONCLUSIONS: In SURE Canada, patients treated with OW semaglutide in routine clinical practice experienced clinically significant improvements in HbA1c, BW and other outcomes, supporting semaglutide use in routine clinical practice.

An indirect treatment comparison of the efficacy of semaglutide 1.0 mg versus dulaglutide 3.0 and 4.5 mg.

AIM: To compare the effects of semaglutide 1.0 mg versus dulaglutide 3.0 and 4.5 mg on HbA1c and body weight in patients with type 2 diabetes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A Bucher indirect comparison was conducted to compare efficacy outcomes of semaglutide 1.0 mg versus dulaglutide 3.0 and 4.5 mg using published results from the SUSTAIN 7 and AWARD-11 trials. Sensitivity analyses using individual patient data from SUSTAIN 7 and aggregate data from AWARD-11 were conducted to explore the impact of adjustment for cross-trial imbalances in baseline characteristics. RESULTS: Semaglutide 1.0 mg significantly reduced HbA1c versus dulaglutide 3.0 mg, with an estimated treatment difference (ETD) of -0.24%-points (95% confidence interval [CI] -0.43, -0.05), with comparable reductions in HbA1c versus dulaglutide 4.5 mg with an ETD of -0.07%-points (95% CI -0.26, 0.12). Semaglutide 1.0 mg significantly reduced body weight versus dulaglutide 3.0 and 4.5 mg with an ETD of -2.65 kg (95% CI -3.57, -1.73) and -1.95 kg (95% CI -2.87, -1.03), respectively. Sensitivity analyses supported the primary analysis findings. CONCLUSIONS: This indirect comparison showed significantly greater reductions in HbA1c with semaglutide 1.0 mg versus dulaglutide 3.0 mg and comparable HbA1c reductions versus dulaglutide 4.5 mg. Semaglutide 1.0 mg significantly reduced body weight versus both dulaglutide 3.0 and 4.5 mg. With several glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists available, information regarding their comparative efficacy can be valuable to clinicians.

Effects of once-weekly semaglutide vs once-daily canagliflozin on body composition in type 2 diabetes: a substudy of the SUSTAIN 8 randomised controlled clinical trial.

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: Intra-abdominal or visceral obesity is associated with insulin resistance and an increased risk for cardiovascular disease. This study aimed to compare the effects of semaglutide 1.0 mg and canagliflozin 300 mg on body composition in a subset of participants from the SUSTAIN 8 Phase IIIB, randomised double-blind trial who underwent whole-body dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) scanning. METHODS: Adults (age ≥18 years) with type 2 diabetes, HbA1c 53-91 mmol/mol (7.0-10.5%), on a stable daily dose of metformin (≥1500 mg or maximum tolerated dose) and with an eGFR ≥60 ml min-1 [1.73 m]-2 were randomised 1:1 to semaglutide 1.0 mg once weekly and canagliflozin placebo once daily, or canagliflozin 300 mg once daily and semaglutide placebo once weekly. Body composition was assessed using whole-body DXA scans. The study participants and investigator remained blinded throughout the trial, and quality of DXA scans was evaluated in a blinded manner. Change from baseline to week 52 in total fat mass (kg) was the confirmatory efficacy endpoint. RESULTS: A subset of 178 participants (semaglutide, n = 88; canagliflozin, n = 90) underwent DXA scanning at screening and were randomised into the substudy. Of these, 114 (semaglutide, n = 53; canagliflozin, n = 61) participants had observed end-of-treatment data included in the confirmatory efficacy analysis. Of the 178 participants in the substudy, numerical improvements in body composition (including fat mass, lean mass and visceral fat mass) were observed after 52 weeks with both treatments. Total fat mass (baseline 33.2 kg) was reduced by 3.4 kg and 2.6 kg with semaglutide and canagliflozin, respectively (estimated treatment difference: -0.79 [95% CI -2.10, 0.51]). Although total lean mass (baseline 51.3 kg) was also reduced by 2.3 kg and 1.5 kg with semaglutide and canagliflozin, respectively (estimated treatment difference: -0.78 [-1.61, 0.04]), the proportion of lean mass (baseline 59.4%) increased by 1.2%- and 1.1%-point, respectively (estimated treatment difference 0.14 [-0.89, 1.17]). Changes in visceral fat mass and overall changes in body composition (assessed by the fat to lean mass ratio) were comparable between the two treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: In individuals with uncontrolled type 2 diabetes on stable-dose metformin therapy, the changes in body composition with semaglutide and canagliflozin were not significantly different. Although numerical improvements in body composition were observed following treatment in both treatment arms, the specific impact of both treatments on body composition in the absence of a placebo arm is speculative at this stage. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03136484. FUNDING: This trial was supported by Novo Nordisk A/S, Denmark.

Real-World Use of Once-Weekly Semaglutide in Type 2 Diabetes: Results from SemaglUtide Real-world Evidence (SURE) Germany.

CONTEXT: Efficacy and safety of once-weekly semaglutide in type 2 diabetes were established in the phase 3 SUSTAIN trials, which included patients across the continuum of type 2 diabetes care. It is useful to complement these findings with real-world evidence. OBJECTIVE: SURE Germany evaluated once-weekly semaglutide in a real-world type 2 diabetes patient population. DESIGN/SETTING: The prospective observational study was conducted at 93 clinical practices in adults with+≥ 1 documented glycated haemoglobin value ≤12 weeks before initiation of semaglutide. INTERVENTION: Once-weekly semaglutide was prescribed at the physicians' discretion. MAIN OUTCOMES: The primary endpoint was change in glycated haemoglobin from baseline to end-of-study (~30 weeks). Secondary endpoints included changes in body weight and patient-reported outcomes. All adverse events were systematically collected and reported, including patient-reported documented and/or severe hypoglycaemia. RESULTS: Of 779 patients in the full analysis set, 669 (85.9%) completed the study on treatment with semaglutide, comprising the effectiveness analysis set. In this data set, estimated mean changes in glycated haemoglobin and body weight from baseline to end-of-study were -1.0%point (-10.9 mmol/mol; P<0.0001) and -4.5 kg (-4.2%; P<0.0001). Sensitivity analyses supported the primary analysis. Improvements were observed in other secondary endpoints, including patient-reported outcomes. No new safety concerns were identified. CONCLUSIONS: In a real-world population in Germany, patients with type 2 diabetes treated with once-weekly semaglutide experienced clinically significant improvements in glycaemic control and body weight. These results support the use of once-weekly semaglutide in routine clinical practice in adult patients with type 2 diabetes in Germany.

An Indirect Comparison of Basal Insulin Plus Once-Weekly Semaglutide and Fully Optimised Basal-Bolus Insulin in Type 2 Diabetes.

INTRODUCTION: To date, there have been few head-to-head comparisons between semaglutide once-weekly (OW) and short-acting meal-time insulin in participants with type 2 diabetes (T2D) treated with basal insulin and requiring treatment intensification. This indirect comparison evaluated the effects of these regimens on glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c), body weight, hypoglycaemia, and other clinically relevant outcomes. METHODS: A post-hoc, unanchored, individual participant data meta-analysis was conducted on the basis of data from single treatment arms in the SUSTAIN 5 and DUAL 7 trials. Semaglutide 0.5 mg OW and 1.0 mg OW plus basal insulin were compared with an optimised (treat-to-target) basal-bolus regimen of insulin glargine and insulin aspart over 26 weeks, using regression adjustment to account for baseline differences between the trials. RESULTS: Over 26 weeks, semaglutide 1.0 mg OW plus basal insulin reduced mean HbA1c by significantly more than the basal-bolus regimen (treatment difference: - 0.36%; p = 0.003), while semaglutide 0.5 mg OW plus basal insulin was comparable with basal-bolus insulin (treatment difference: 0.08%, p = 0.53). Both doses of semaglutide were associated with significant weight loss relative to insulin intensification (treatment differences: 6.8-9.4 kg; p < 0.001). At both doses, semaglutide intensification required less basal insulin per day than bolus intensification, and more participants on semaglutide met HbA1c targets of < 7.0% and ≤ 6.5% without hypoglycaemia or weight gain (odds ratio [OR] for < 7.0%, 21.9; OR for ≤ 6.5%, 16.2; both p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In T2D uncontrolled by basal insulin, intensification with semaglutide 1.0 mg OW was associated with better glycaemic control, weight loss, and reduced hypoglycaemia versus a basal-bolus regimen, while limiting the treatment burden associated with frequent injections. Clinicians could consider treatment intensification with semaglutide when T2D is uncontrolled by basal insulin, especially when weight management is a priority. Effective glycaemic control coupled with weight management can alleviate the burden of diabetes-associated complications.

Once-Weekly Semaglutide Use in Type 2 Diabetes: Real-World Data from the SURE Netherlands Observational Study.

INTRODUCTION: SURE Netherlands (NCT03929679) evaluated the use of once-weekly (OW) semaglutide, a glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist (GLP-1RA), in routine clinical care for individuals with type 2 diabetes (T2D). METHODS: Adults (age ≥ 18 years) with T2D were enrolled into the single-arm study. The primary endpoint was change from baseline to end of study (EOS; approx. 30 weeks) in glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c). Secondary endpoints were change from baseline to EOS in body weight (BW) and waist circumference (WC). Proportions of participants achieving predefined HbA1c targets and weight-loss responses at EOS, safety, health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and treatment satisfaction were assessed. RESULTS: In total, 211 participants (mean age 60.5 years; diabetes duration 13.3 years) initiated semaglutide; most were receiving metformin (82.9%) and/or basal insulin (59.2%) at baseline, and 6.2% switched from another GLP-1RA. Mean baseline HbA1c, BW and WC were 8.6%, 105.2 kg and 118.8 cm. In the 186 (88.2%) participants receiving semaglutide at EOS, mean reduction in HbA1c with semaglutide was - 1.2%-points (95% [confidence interval] CI - 1.3; - 1.0; p < 0.0001), with 124 (70.5%), 95 (54.0%) and 65 (36.9%) participants achieving HbA1c targets of < 8.0%, < 7.5% and < 7.0%, respectively. Mean reduction in BW was - 7.8 kg [95% CI - 8.7; - 6.8; p < 0.0001], corresponding to relative reduction of - 7.5% [95% CI - 8.4; - 6.6; p < 0.0001]. Improvements in WC (- 8.8 cm [95% CI - 10.4; - 7.2; p < 0.0001]), HRQoL and treatment satisfaction were observed, including across most Short-Form 36 Health Survey domains. One serious adverse drug reaction (cholecystitis) was reported. Eight participants (all receiving concomitant insulin) experienced severe or documented hypoglycaemia. CONCLUSION: Individuals with T2D treated with OW semaglutide experienced significant and clinically relevant improvements in glycaemic control and BW from baseline. These results from a diverse real-world population in the Netherlands support the use of OW semaglutide in treating adults with T2D in routine clinical practice.

Once-Weekly Semaglutide Use in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes: Results from the SURE Spain Multicentre, Prospective, Observational Study.

Type 2 diabetes (T2D) is a complex disease for which an individualised treatment approach is recommended. Once-weekly (OW) semaglutide is a glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist approved for the treatment of insufficiently controlled T2D. The aim of this study was to investigate the use of OW semaglutide in adults with T2D in a real-world context. SURE Spain, from the 10-country SURE programme, was a prospective, multicentre, open-label, observational study, approximately 30 weeks in duration. Adults with T2D and ≥1 documented HbA1c value ≤12 weeks before semaglutide initiation were enrolled. Change in HbA1c from baseline to end of study (EOS) was the primary endpoint, with change in body weight (BW), waist circumference, and patient-reported outcomes as secondary endpoints. Of the 227 patients initiating semaglutide, 196 (86.3%) completed the study on-treatment with semaglutide. The estimated mean changes in HbA1c and body weight between baseline and EOS were -1.3%-points (95% confidence interval (CI) -1.51;-1.18%-points) and -5.7 kg (95% CI -6.36;-4.98 kg). No new safety concerns were identified. Therefore, in routine clinical practice in Spain, OW semaglutide was shown to be associated with statistically significant and clinically relevant reductions in HbA1c and BW in adults with T2D.

Real-world use of once-weekly semaglutide in patients with type 2 diabetes: pooled analysis of data from four SURE studies by baseline characteristic subgroups.

INTRODUCTION: This post hoc pooled analysis of four real-world studies (SURE Canada, Denmark/Sweden, Switzerland and UK) aimed to characterize the use of once-weekly (OW) semaglutide, a glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1RA), in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: The Semaglutide Real-world Evidence (SURE) studies had a duration of ~30 weeks. Changes in glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) and body weight (BW) were analyzed for the overall population and the following baseline subgroups: GLP-1RA-naïve/GLP-1RA switchers; body mass index <25/≥25-<30/≥30-<35/≥35 kg/m2; age <65/≥65 years; HbA1c <7%/≥7-≤8%/>8-≤9%/>9%; T2D duration <5/≥5-<10/≥10 years. Data for patients achieving treatment targets were analyzed in the overall population and the baseline HbA1c ≥7% subgroup. RESULTS: Of 1212 patients, 960 were GLP-1RA-naïve and 252 had switched to semaglutide from another GLP-1RA. In the overall population, HbA1c was reduced from baseline to end of study (EOS) by -1.1% point and BW by -4.7 kg; changes were significant for all subgroups. There were significantly larger reductions of HbA1c and BW in GLP-1RA-naïve versus GLP-1RA switchers and larger reductions in HbA1c for patients with higher versus lower baseline HbA1c. At EOS, 52.6% of patients in the overall population achieved HbA1c <7%. No new safety concerns were identified in any of the completed SURE studies. CONCLUSIONS: In this pooled analysis, patients with T2D initiating OW semaglutide showed significant improvements from baseline to EOS in HbA1c and BW across various baseline subgroups, including patients previously treated with a GLP-1RA other than semaglutide, supporting OW semaglutide use in clinical practice. TRAIL REGISTRATION NUMBERS: NCT03457012; NCT03631186; NCT03648281; NCT03876015.

Real-world use of once-weekly semaglutide in patients with type 2 diabetes: Results from the SURE Switzerland multicentre, prospective, observational study.

AIMS: SURE Switzerland (NCT03631186) investigated real-world once-weekly (OW) semaglutide use in adults with type 2 diabetes (T2D). METHODS: This multicentre, prospective, observational study enrolled adults with T2D with ≥ 1 documented HbA1c value ≤ 12 weeks before semaglutide initiation. Primary endpoint was change in HbA1c from baseline to end of study (EOS; ~30 weeks). Secondary endpoints included changes in body weight (BW) and waist circumference (WC), and the proportion of patients achieving HbA1c < 8.0%, <7.5% and <7.0% at EOS. Semaglutide dose at EOS was a prespecified exploratory endpoint. RESULTS: Overall, 214 patients initiated semaglutide (baseline HbA1c 7.8% [62 mmol/mol], BW 99.9 kg and WC 117.4 cm); 187 attended the EOS visit. At EOS, 175 (81.8%) were still receiving semaglutide (mean [SD] dose 0.78 [0.29] mg); in those patients, mean HbA1c reduced by -0.8 [95% CI - 1.01;-0.68] %-points (-9 [-11;-7] mmol/mol), BW by -5.0 kg [-5.73;-4.24] and WC by -4.8 cm [-5.75;-3.79] (all p < 0.0001). At EOS, 85.9%, 76.5% and 55.9% patients achieved, respectively, HbA1c < 8.0%, <7.5% and < 7.0%. No new safety signals were identified. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with T2D in Switzerland initiating OW semaglutide experienced clinically relevant glycaemic control and BW improvements in a real-world setting, supporting semaglutide use in routine clinical practice.

Real-world use of once-weekly semaglutide in patients with type 2 diabetes: Results from the SURE Denmark/Sweden multicentre, prospective, observational study.

AIMS: As part of the SURE programme, SURE Denmark/Sweden aimed to study the real-world use of once-weekly (OW) semaglutide in adults with type 2 diabetes (T2D) in Denmark/Sweden. METHODS: SURE Denmark/Sweden was an ∼30-week, prospective, multicentre, open-label, observational study, enrolling adults with T2D and ≥1 documented HbA1c value ≤12 weeks before initiating semaglutide at their physician's discretion. Primary (change in HbA1c) and secondary (including change in body weight, glycaemic and weight-loss target achievement) endpoints were assessed between baseline and end of study (EOS). RESULTS: Of the 331 patients initiating semaglutide, 282 (85%) completed the study on treatment. For the latter, estimated mean changes [95% confidence interval] in HbA1c and body weight between baseline and EOS were -1.2 [-1.3; -1.1]%-points (-13 [-14; -12] mmol/mol) and -5.4 [-6.0; -4.7] kg (both p < 0.0001), respectively, with similar results in Denmark and Sweden. At EOS, 67.5% of patients achieved HbA1c <7%; 49.4% achieved a weight reduction of ≥5%. Reported adverse events were consistent with the known safety profile of semaglutide. CONCLUSIONS: In routine clinical practice in Denmark/Sweden, use of OW semaglutide was associated with glycaemic and weight-loss benefits in a wide range of adults with T2D, supporting real-world use. CLINICALTRIALS. GOV IDENTIFIER: NCT03648281.

Real-World Use of Once-Weekly Semaglutide in Type 2 Diabetes: Results from the SURE UK Multicentre, Prospective, Observational Study.

INTRODUCTION: Once-weekly (OW) semaglutide was associated with clinically relevant improvements in glycaemic control and body weight versus comparators in the SUSTAIN randomised controlled trials (RCTs). SURE UK, which is one of a series of individual studies that comprise the SURE programme, evaluated the use of OW semaglutide in a real-world patient population with type 2 diabetes (T2D) in the UK. METHODS: In this prospective, observational study, adults (≥ 18 years) with ≥ 1 documented glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) value ≤ 12 weeks before semaglutide initiation were enrolled. The primary endpoint was change in HbA1c from baseline to end of study (EOS; ~ 30 weeks, although due to the COVID-19 pandemic, visits up to week 52 were permitted). Secondary endpoints included change in body weight, waist circumference and patient-reported outcomes (PROs). Physicians were to report all episodes of documented or severe hypoglycaemia, fatal events, serious adverse drug reactions, pregnancies and adverse events (AEs) in foetuses/newborn infants; other AEs during the study period could be reported on a voluntary basis. RESULT: The estimated mean change in HbA1c from baseline to EOS was - 16.3 mmol/mol [95% confidence interval (CI): - 18.22, - 14.37] (- 1.5%-points [95% CI - 1.67, - 1.31]; p < 0.0001) among the 171 enrolled patients who completed the study on treatment. Mean body weight change was - 5.8 kg (95% CI - 6.75, - 4.94; p < 0.0001). Sensitivity analyses showed similar results. Improvements were also observed in other secondary endpoints, including PROs. No new safety concerns were identified with semaglutide treatment. CONCLUSION: Patients receiving OW semaglutide experienced statistically significant and clinically relevant reductions from baseline in HbA1c and body weight. These results are in line with those of the SUSTAIN RCTs and support the use of OW semaglutide in routine clinical practice in adults with T2D in the UK. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT03876015.

Efficacy of Once-Weekly Semaglutide vs Empagliflozin Added to Metformin in Type 2 Diabetes: Patient-Level Meta-analysis.

CONTEXT: No head-to-head trials have directly compared once-weekly (OW) semaglutide, a human glucagon-like peptide-1 analog, with empagliflozin, a sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitor, in type 2 diabetes (T2D). OBJECTIVE: We indirectly compared the efficacy of OW semaglutide 1 mg vs once-daily (OD) empagliflozin 25 mg in patients with T2D inadequately controlled on metformin monotherapy, using individual patient data (IPD) and meta-regression methodology. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, AND INTERVENTIONS: IPD for patients with T2D receiving metformin monotherapy and randomized to OW semaglutide 1 mg (SUSTAIN 2, 3, 8 trials), or to OD empagliflozin 25 mg (PIONEER 2 trial) were included. Meta-regression analyses were adjusted for potential prognostic factors and effect modifiers. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary efficacy outcomes were change from baseline to end-of-treatment (~1 year) in HbA1c (%-point) and body weight (kg). Responder outcomes and other clinically relevant efficacy measures were analyzed. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics were similar between OW semaglutide (n = 995) and empagliflozin (n = 410). Our analyses showed that OW semaglutide significantly reduced mean HbA1c and body weight vs empagliflozin (estimated treatment difference: -0.61%-point [95% confidence interval (CI): -0.72; -0.49] and -1.65 kg [95% CI: -2.22; -1.08], respectively; both P < 0.0001). Complementary analyses supported the robustness of these results. A significantly greater proportion of patients on OW semaglutide vs empagliflozin also achieved HbA1c targets and weight-loss responses. CONCLUSIONS: This indirect comparison suggests that OW semaglutide 1 mg provides superior reductions in HbA1c and body weight vs OD empagliflozin 25 mg in patients with T2D when added to metformin monotherapy.

Impact of patient characteristics on efficacy and safety of once-weekly semaglutide versus dulaglutide: SUSTAIN 7 post hoc analyses.

OBJECTIVE: In SUSTAIN 7, once-weekly semaglutide demonstrated superior glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) and body weight (BW) reductions versus once-weekly dulaglutide in subjects with type 2 diabetes (T2D). This post hoc analysis investigated the impact of clinically relevant subject characteristics on treatment effects of semaglutide versus dulaglutide. DESIGN: Analyses by baseline age (<65, ≥65 years), sex (male, female), diabetes duration (≤5, >5-10, >10 years), HbA1c (≤7.5, >7.5-8.5, >8.5% (≤58, >58-69, >69 mmol/mol)) and body mass index (BMI) (<30, 30-<35, ≥35 kg/m2). SETTING: 194 sites; 16 countries. PARTICIPANTS: Subjects with T2D (n=1199) exposed to treatment. INTERVENTIONS: Semaglutide 0.5 mg versus dulaglutide 0.75 mg (low-dose comparison); semaglutide 1.0 mg versus dulaglutide 1.5 mg (high-dose comparison), all subcutaneously once weekly. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Change in HbA1c (primary endpoint) and BW (confirmatory secondary endpoint) from baseline to week 40; proportion of subjects achieving HbA1c targets (<7%, ≤6.5% (<53, ≤48 mmol/mol)) and weight-loss responses (≥5%, ≥10%) at week 40; and safety. RESULTS: HbA1c and BW reductions (estimated treatment difference ranges: -0.22 to -0.70%-point; -1.76 to -3.84 kg) and proportion of subjects achieving HbA1c targets and weight-loss responses were statistically significantly greater for the majority of comparisons of semaglutide versus dulaglutide within each subgroup category and, excepting glycaemic control within the low-dose comparison in HbA1c subgroups, this was irrespective of subgroup or dose comparison. Gastrointestinal adverse events, the most common with both treatments, were reported by more women than men and, with semaglutide, decreased with increasing BMI. CONCLUSIONS: Consistently greater improvements in HbA1c and BW with semaglutide versus dulaglutide, regardless of age, sex, diabetes duration, glycaemic control and BMI, support the efficacy of semaglutide across the continuum of care in a heterogeneous population with T2D. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02648204.

Efficacy and safety of once-weekly semaglutide versus daily canagliflozin as add-on to metformin in patients with type 2 diabetes (SUSTAIN 8): a double-blind, phase 3b, randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Existing guidelines for management of type 2 diabetes recommend a patient-centred approach to guide the choice of pharmacological agents. Although glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists and sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitors are increasingly used as second-line agents, direct comparisons between these treatments are insufficient. In the SUSTAIN 8 trial, we compared the efficacy and safety of semaglutide (a GLP-1 receptor agonist) with canagliflozin (an SGLT2 inhibitor) in patients with type 2 diabetes. METHODS: This was a double-blind, parallel-group, phase 3b, randomised controlled trial done at 111 centres in 11 countries. Eligible patients were at least 18 years old and had uncontrolled type 2 diabetes (HbA1c 7·0-10·5% [53-91 mmol/mol]) on stable daily metformin therapy. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) by use of an interactive web response system to subcutaneous semaglutide 1·0 mg once weekly or oral canagliflozin 300 mg once daily. The primary endpoint was change from baseline in HbA1c, and the confirmatory secondary endpoint was change from baseline in bodyweight, both at week 52. The primary analysis population included all randomly assigned patients, using on-treatment data collected before initiation of rescue medication. The safety analysis was done on a population that included all patients exposed to at least one dose of trial product. The trial was powered for HbA1c and bodyweight superiority under reasonable assumptions. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03136484. FINDINGS: Between March 15, 2017, and Nov 16, 2018, 788 patients were randomly assigned to semaglutide 1·0 mg (394 patients) or canagliflozin 300 mg (394 patients). 739 patients completed the trial (367 in the semaglutide group and 372 in the canagliflozin group). From overall baseline mean, patients receiving semaglutide had significantly greater reductions in HbA1c and bodyweight than those receiving canagliflozin (HbA1c estimated treatment difference [ETD] -0·49 percentage points, 95% CI -0·65 to -0·33; -5·34 mmol/mol, 95% CI -7·10 to -3·57; p<0·0001; and bodyweight ETD -1·06 kg, 95% CI -1·76 to -0·36; p=0·0029). Gastrointestinal disorders, most commonly nausea, were the most frequently reported adverse events with semaglutide, occurring in 184 (47%) of 392 patients; whereas infections and infestations (defined using the Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities, version 21.0), most commonly urinary tract infections, occurred more frequently with canagliflozin, in 136 (35%) of 394 patients. Premature treatment discontinuation because of adverse events occurred in 38 (10%) of 392 patients with semaglutide and in 20 (5%) of 394 patients with canagliflozin. One fatal adverse event confirmed unlikely to be caused by treatment occurred in the semaglutide group. INTERPRETATION: Once-weekly semaglutide 1·0 mg was superior to daily canagliflozin 300 mg in reducing HbA1c and bodyweight in patients with type 2 diabetes uncontrolled on metformin therapy. These outcomes might guide treatment intensification choices. FUNDING: Novo Nordisk.