Seven glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists and polyagonists for weight loss in patients with obesity or overweight: an updated systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to provide evidence-based support and a reference for the efficacy and safety of seven glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists and polyagonists for weight loss in patients with obesity or overweight through a network meta-analysis. METHODS: Relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with an intervention duration of at least 16 weeks assessing seven GLP-1 receptor agonists and polyagonists (mazdutide, 6 or 4.5 mg; retatrutide, 12 or 8 mg; tirzepatide, 15 or 10 mg; liraglutide, 3.0 mg; semaglutide, 2.4 mg; orforglipron, 45 or 36 mg; and beinaglutide, 0.2 mg) in patient with obesity or overweight was searched using three databases (Cochrane Library, PubMed, and Embase) from creation to August 30, 2024. The primary outcome was the percentage change in body weight from baseline. Secondary outcomes included changes in waist circumference, hemoglobin A1c, and fasting plasma glucose level from baseline; adverse events, serious adverse events, adverse event withdrawal, and hypoglycemic events. We conducted a frequentist random-effects network meta-analysis to analyze the data extracted from the RCTs using Stata 16.1 software. RESULTS: Twenty-seven RCTs of seven GLP-1 receptor agonists and polyagonists and 15,584 patients were included in the network meta-analysis. In terms of efficacy, compared with placebo, retatrutide 12 mg (-22.10 % in body weight and - 17.00 cm in waist circumference), retatrutide 8 mg (-20.70 % and - 15.90 cm), and tirzepatide 15 mg (-16.53 % and - 13.23 cm) were the three most efficacious treatments for reducing body weight and waist circumference. However, these treatments were less effective in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). In addition, patients with a high body mass index (BMI) or longer treatment cycles exhibited significantly greater weight loss than those with a low BMI or shorter treatment cycles. In terms of safety, patients without T2DM had a higher incidence of adverse events than those with T2DM. None of the interventions increased the incidence of serious adverse or hypoglycemic events (˂54 mg/dL). There was no significant difference in the incidence of adverse event withdrawal for all interventions in head-to-head comparisons. In addition, disparities in race, BMI, and treatment cycles did not significantly increase the incidence of adverse events. Finally, the sensitivity and publication bias analyses indicated that the basic analysis results were reliable. CONCLUSION: Retatrutide (both doses) and tirzepatide exhibited superior efficacy compared to other GLP-1 receptor agonists and polyagonists in reducing body weight and waist circumference. Patients without T2DM, those with a high BMI, and individuals undergoing longer treatment cycles demonstrated significantly greater weight loss and reductions in waist circumference. Dual or triple receptor agonists (GLP-1 plus glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide and/or Glucagon receptor) are more effective for weight loss than GLP-1 receptor agonists.

The use of potentially interacting supplement-drug pairs in adults with type 2 diabetes: A large population-based cohort study in the UK Biobank.

AIMS: To examine the patterns of use of potentially interacting supplement-drug pairs in adults with type 2 diabetes (T2D) in real-world settings, and to explore the impact of potentially interacting supplement-drug pairs on downstream outcomes. METHODS: Potentially interacting supplement-drug pairs were identified from four tertiary databases. We categorized the potential pharmacodynamic interactions into different clinical types according to their related outcomes and explored their associations with incident outcomes using Cox models. RESULTS: 26,394 participants with T2D in the UK Biobank were included. Half (48.5 %) were supplement users, of whom 85.0 % were taking potentially interacting supplement-drug pairs. The potential pharmacodynamic interactions were related to various clinical outcomes, including reducing the effects of glucose-lowering drugs (50.7 %), hypotension (49.8 %), bleeding (50.4 %) and hepatotoxicity (34.8 %). Exploratory analyses found that the use of potentially interacting supplement-drug pairs was associated with incident hepatic diseases (hazard ratio = 1.26, 95 % confidence interval 1.10-1.44, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Real-world data suggests that most adults with T2D who concurrently used supplements and drugs were on potentially interacting supplement-drug combinations, with the potential of causing adverse outcomes such as incident hepatic diseases. Clinicians should communicate with patients and assess the potential risk of supplement-drug interactions in clinical settings.

A multicenter real-world study comparing the clinical equivalence of trastuzumab biosimilar HLX02 and reference trastuzumab in the treatment of HER-2-positive breast cancer.

As the first trastuzumab biosimilar introduced in China, there are few studies on the clinical application of HLX02, especially in combination with other antitumour drugs, for the treatment of HER-2-positive breast cancer. A multicenter retrospective study was conducted in three hospitals in China to select patients with HER-2-positive breast cancer who met the inclusion criteria and received HLX02 or the reference trastuzumab. Ninety-six patients diagnosed with HER-2-positive breast cancer were finally included and divided into two groups and treated with HLX02 or the reference trastuzumab. The results showed no significant differences in pathological complete response (70.0% vs. 76.2%; P=1.000) and overall response rate (91.9% vs. 94.9%; P=0.673) between the two groups. Kaplan-Meier survival curves also showed no significant difference in time-to-event variables between the two groups (log-rank P=0.48). Safety was also comparable in both groups. In conclusion, among patients with HER2-positive breast cancer, HLX02 demonstrated equivalent efficacy and safety to its reference trastuzumab, both in neoadjuvant chemotherapy and in postoperative adjuvant therapy. However, clinical equivalence studies between HLX02 and the original trastuzumab drug remain challenging. Future research should focus on the clinical exchange between biosimilars and original drugs, as well as the extrapolation of biosimilars' indications.

Efficacy and Safety of Liraglutide and Semaglutide on Weight Loss in People with Obesity or Overweight: A Systematic Review.

Purpose: The effect and safety of Semaglutide and Liraglutide on weight loss in people with obesity or overweight were evaluated by a Network Meta-Analysis system to provide an evidence-based reference for clinical treatment. Methods: Computer searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases to collect Liraglutide and Semaglutide injection monotherapy RCTs until April 2022, using Stata 16 software for Network Meta-Analysis. Results: Twenty-three RCTs study with 11,545 patients and 4 interventions (semaglutide 2.4mg, semaglutide 1.0mg, liraglutide 3.0mg and liraglutide 1.8 mg) were finally included. In terms of efficacy, semaglutide 2.4mg (-12.47 kg) had the best weight loss, followed by liraglutide 3.0mg (-5.24 kg), semaglutide 1.0mg (-3.74 kg) and liraglutide 1.8mg (-3.29 kg). In terms of decreased HbA1c, semaglutide 2.4mg (MD=-1.48%, 95% CI [-1.93, -1.04]), semaglutide 1.0mg (MD=-1.36%, 95% CI [-1.72, -1.01]), liraglutide 1.8mg (MD=-1.23%, 95%Cl [-1.66, -0.80]) more effective than placebo. In terms of safety, the total incidence of adverse events was semaglutide 2.4mg > liraglutide 3.0mg > liraglutide 1.8mg > semaglutide 1.0mg compare to placebo, the incidence of serious adverse events was liraglutide 3.0mg > liraglutide 1.8mg > semaglutide 2.4mg > semaglutide 1.0mg, the incidence of hypoglycemic events was semaglutide 2.4mg > liraglutide 3.0mg > semaglutide 1.0mg > liraglutide 1.8mg. Conclusion: This meta-analysis indicates that all GLP-1RAs were more efficacious than placebo in people with obesity or overweight on efficacy. Semaglutide 2.4mg has an absolute advantage in weight loss and decreased HbA1c, but the incidence of total adverse events is also the highest and can cause hypoglycemia. In addition, although liraglutide 3.0mg was less effective than semaglutide 2.4mg, serious adverse events were still the most elevated.

Efficacy and safety of proton pump inhibitors versus vonoprazan in treatment of erosive esophagitis: A PRISMA-compliant systematic review and network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs) and vonoprazan are recommended as first-line therapies for erosive esophagitis (EE). However, it is uncertain how the magnitude of efficacy and safety of first-line therapy, the choice of individual PPIs or vonoprazan in the treatment of EE remains controversial. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of vonoprazan and PPIs in healing esophageal mucosal injury in patients with EE. METHODS: Relevant databases were searched to collect randomized controlled trials of proton pump inhibitors and vonoprazan in the treatment of reflux esophagitis up to December 2021. Studies on standard-dose PPIs or vonoprazan that were published in Chinese or English and assessed healing effects in EE were included in the analysis. Stata16.0 was used to conduct a network Meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the treatment. RESULTS: A total of 41 literatures were included with 11,592 enrolled patients. For the endoscopic cure rate, all the PPIs and vonoprazan significantly improve compared to Placebo; Based on the surface under the cumulative ranking curve, Ilaprazole ranked first, followed by esomeprazole, vonoprazan, pantoprazole, lansoprazole, omeprazole, rabeprazole and placebo therapy ranked the last. For the rate of adverse events, there was no significant difference among all the PPIs, vonoprazan, and placebo. CONCLUSIONS: Ilaprazole, esomeprazole and vonoprazan have more advantages in mucosal erosion healing, there was no significant difference in the comparative safety among all interventions.

Comparative efficacy and safety of antiviral traditional Chinese medicine injections for viral pneumonia: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Viral pneumonia (VP) is becoming a persistent and pervasive burden of disease. Traditional Chinese medicine Injections (TCMIs) have been proved effective in the treatment of patients with VP, which are now widely used in China. The evidence of TCMIs for VP is evolving rapidly. This study aims to assess the comparative efficacy and safety of TCMIs to provide more evidence and sights for the treatment selection of VP. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Seven databases were searched from their inception up to 16 March 2022. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are included to compare the efficacy and safety of antiviral TCMIs for the treatment of viral pneumonia. Clinical efficacy and rate of adverse events were considered as primary outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 76 RCTs with eight TCMIs comprising 7925 patients were included in the NMA. According to NMA, Reduning Injection combined with conventional antiviral drugs (CAD) produced superior effects in the effective outcomes and reduced the adverse event incidence rate of VP. CONCLUSIONS: This study indicated that TCMIs combined with CAD was more effective and safer than CAD monotherapy and compared different TCMIs therapies, which provided guidance and reference for the selection of clinical treatment medication.

A Health Technology Assessment Based on Chinese Guidelines: Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonist in the Treatment of Type 2 Diabetes Complicated with Cardiovascular Disease.

Purpose: According to the requirements of the "Quick Guide for Drug Evaluation and Selection in Chinese Medical Institutions", this health technology assessment provides an evidence-based basis for drug selection and rational clinical use of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist drugs in medical institutions. Methods: We consult the drug instructions, clinical treatment guidelines and search relevant documents in databases such as China national knowledge infrastructure, Wanfang, PubMed, and government websites such as National Medical Products Administration, Food and Drug Administration, European Medicines Agency, and Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices Agency to collect and sort out the relevant information of the indications, pharmacological effects, guideline recommendations, drug prices and other information of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists, using a percentile system systematically evaluate the five dimensions of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists in terms of pharmaceutical properties, efficacy, safety, economy, and other attributes. Results: The final scores of the evaluation results from high to low are semaglutide (71.00 points), dulaglutide (68.75 points), liraglutide (67.50 points), exenatide (67.00 points), lixisenatide (63.50 points), polyethylene glycol loxenatide (58.00 points) and benaglutide (49.00 points). Conclusion: In clinical practice, semaglutide and dulaglutide are the top two drugs that can be used as recommended drugs. This health technology assessment can provide an evidence-based basis for hospital selection and rational use of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists. Clinicians can rationally choose and use drugs according to the patient's conditions and needs.

Trastuzumab biosimilar HLX02 versus reference trastuzumab in patients with recurrent or metastatic HER2-positive breast cancer: a model-based economic evaluation for China.

BACKGROUND: HLX02 is a newly marketed trastuzumab biosimilar in China, but whether its price reflects a potential benefit in terms of its value remains unclear. In addition, the development of biosimilars in China is just beginning, and the state encourages health economic evaluation of newly marketed biosimilars. METHODS: Based on the previously published randomized controlled trial data, a Markov model was used to perform health economic evaluation of HLX02 and trastuzumab in the treatment of HER2-positive recurrent or metastatic breast cancer, calculate quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), and evaluate the robustness of the model with sensitivity analysis. RESULTS: The model results showed that the 5-year mortality rate was 84.4% in the HLX02 group, while the mortality rate was 91.2% in the trastuzumab group. When without accounting for the cost of second-line treatment, patients treated with HLX02 had an increased life expectancy of 0.138 QALYs and a $421.11 lower cost compared with patients in the trastuzumab group, with an ICER value of -$3,051.52/QALY. CONCLUSIONS: At the willingness-to-pay threshold of $37,653/QALY in China, HLX02 is more cost-effective than trastuzumab. However, the relevant systems for the regulation of biosimilars still need to be improved.

Metastatic HER-2 positive breast cancer poses a considerable cost to society due to limitations in health care resources. HLX02 is the first trastuzumab biosimilar produced in China and evaluated worldwide, and its emergence has opened the door to trastuzumab biosimilars in China. Although HLX02 has been shown to be clinically equivalent to the original drug in the treatment of metastatic HER2-positive breast cancer, it remains unclear whether its price reflects the potential benefit in terms of its value. In addition, the development of biosimilars in China is just beginning, and the state encourages health economic evaluation of newly marketed biosimilars. Based on the results of Markov model, at the willingness-to-pay threshold of $37,653/QALY in China, HLX02 is more cost-effective than trastuzumab under the condition of equivalent efficacy and safety. However, it remains challenging to adjust the development of the regulation of biosimilars, such as the price difference between biosimilars and original drugs.

Rituximab biosimilar HLX01 versus reference rituximab in the treatment of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma: Real-world clinical experience.

INTRODUCTION: HLX01 is the first rituximab biosimilar produced in China and the first monoclonal antibody biosimilar marketed in China. The purpose of this study was to comprehensively evaluate whether HLX01 is clinically consistent with the original drug based on real-world data to provide evidence for the clinical substitution of biosimilars in China. METHODS: A single-center retrospective study was conducted to select patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma who met the inclusion criteria and were treated with HLX01 or reference rituximab. Baseline characteristics, efficacy and safety results were recorded, and the corresponding statistical analysis was performed for various indicators. RESULTS: Thirty-three patients diagnosed with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma were included and divided into two groups that received HLX01 or reference rituximab. The results showed no significant difference in the overall response rate (86.7% vs. 88.9%; p = 1.000) or complete response rate (46.7% vs. 55.6%; p = 0.889) between the two groups. Kaplan-Meier survival curves also showed no significant difference in time-to-event variables between the two groups (log-rank = 0.244). Safety was also comparable in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: HLX01 is a suitable replacement for reference rituximab in the treatment of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma and is relatively inexpensive, thereby reducing the economic burden of patients. Nevertheless, the conclusion of this study still needs to be further validated by large-sample real-world data and explored for HLX01 in other indications, such as follicular lymphoma. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: Not applicable.

Evaluation of favipiravir in the treatment of COVID-19 based on the real-world.

BACKGROUND: The role of favipiravir (FVP) as a COVID-19 treatment is recognized but not fully elucidated. We aimed to evaluate whether FVP has definite clinical efficacy and safety in the treatment of COVID-19. METHODS: International and Chinese databases were searched for randomized controlled clinical trials evaluating FVP for the treatment of COVID-19. A meta-analysis was performed and published literature was synthesized to evaluate the corresponding therapeutic effects. RESULTS: We included 13 studies (1430 patients in total). Meta-analysis showed that patients with mild-to-moderate disease treated with FVP had a significantly higher viral clearance rate than those in the control group 10 and 14 days after initiation of treatment [RR: 1.13 (95% CI: 1.00, 1.28), P = 0.04; I2 = 39% for day 10 and RR: 1.16 (95% CI: 1.04, 1.30), P = 0.008; I2 = 38% for day 14] and a significantly shorter hospital stay [MD: -1.52 (95% CI: -2.82, -0.23), P = 0.02; I2 = 0%]. CONCLUSIONS: FVP significantly promotes viral clearance and reduces the hospitalization duration in mild-to-moderate COVID-19 patients, which can reduce the risk of severe disease outcomes in patients. However, more importantly, the results showed no benefit of FVP in severe patients, and caution should be taken regarding the treatment options of FVP in severe patients.

PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARYThe urgent need to identify effective interventions to treat novel coronavirus infections is a major challenge. The role of favipiravir (FVP) as a COVID-19 treatment is recognized but not fully elucidated. Our study showed a significant correlation between viral clearance and the promotion of clinical improvement with FVP in mild-to-moderate patients, which is significant for reducing the length of hospital stay of patients, reducing the risk of patients progressing to severe disease, thereby reducing mortality. However, the results showed no benefit of FVP in severe patients and the conclusion of this study still needs to be further verified by clinical trials with large samples.