Efficacy and Safety of Once-Weekly Semaglutide for the Treatment of Type 2 Diabetes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

The effectiveness of 0.5 mg and 1mg of semaglutide in patients with type two diabetes and predictors of response: a retrospective cohort study

Background

Semaglutide is a glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1-RAs) approved for the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) at doses up to 1 mg. The results from randomized control trials and real-world studies revealed that weekly semaglutide was associated with significant improvements in HbA1c and body weight. To our knowledge, no study assessed the effectiveness of using semaglutide for patients with T2DM in the Saudi population. We aim to assess the effectiveness of once weekly SC 0.5 and 1 mg of semaglutide on HbA1c and weight reduction in patients with T2DM in the Saudi population within 12 months of use, evaluate the predictors of response, and compare the effect of the two doses.

Method

This is a retrospective cohort study conducted at Security Force Hospital in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Using electronic medical records of patients with type two diabetes who received semaglutide 0.5 or 1 mg for a total duration of at least 12 months of use.

Results

Within the study period of semaglutide use, HbA1c significantly decreased from baseline by -2.1% (-2.3 to -1.91, 95% CI) (P <0.001). While the mean change in weight was -6.19 kg (-6.66 to -5.72, 95% CI) (P<0.001). Moreover, BMI, FBG, total cholesterol, LDL, and TG all decreased significantly from baseline (p<0.001). When comparing the sub-groups of 0.5 and 1 mg doses, although results were numerically favorable of 1 mg, there were no statistically significant differences in HbA1c % (-2.1 ± 1.8 vs. -2.1 ± 1.9, p-value= 0.934, respectively), and weight (-6.1 ± 5 vs. -6.2 ± 4.4 kg, p-value=0.837, respectively). Significant predictors of HbA1c reduction were the duration of DM, baseline HbA1c, and insulin therapy. While the significant predictor for weight reduction was insulin therapy.

Conclusion

This study is document the effectiveness of once-weekly SC semaglutide on glycemic control and weight loss in real-world practice. We recommend a starting goal dose of 0.5 mg and gradual increase of dose based individual patient response. further studies are needed to assess the effectiveness and tolerability of various semagltude doses.

Adverse Events of Oral GLP-1 Receptor Agonist (Semaglutide Tablets): A Real-World Study Based on FAERS from 2019 to 2023

INTRODUCTION

Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) have attracted much attention because of their significant hypoglycemic and weight-loss effects. Previous preparations can only be subcutaneously injected. Oral administration of GLP-1RAs semaglutide helps to broaden treatment options, but its safety in the real world still needs to be observed. This study is based on FDA adverse event reporting system (FAERS) database to mine adverse drug events (ADE) of oral semaglutide, and provide references for the clinical safe use of this drug.

METHODS

To analyze the signal quality of oral semaglutide, which is a drug used in the FAERS database from the third quarter of 2019 to the third quarter of 2023, we collected ADE data and performed data mining by using disproportionate analysis. Then, we standardized the data and used a variety of signal-quantification techniques, including reported odds ratio (ROR), proportional reporting ratio (PRR), Bayesian belief propagation neural network (BCPNN), and multiple empirical Bayesian gamma Poisson contractions (MGPS), for further analysis.

RESULTS

We screened 2398 reports on the use of semaglutide tablets, involving a total of 5653 ADE. These reports were mainly submitted by consumers, and the reporting country was mainly the United States. A total of 23 system organ classes (SOC) and 93 preferred terms (PT) were mined for the signals of semaglutide tablets. The three most common SOC were gastrointestinal disorders, general disorders and administration site conditions, and investigations. At the PT level, metabolism and nutrition disorders exhibit the highest number of signals, with the top three being thyroid cyst, acute cholecystitis, and ketosis. Gastrointestinal disorders rank second, primarily involving eructation, pancreatitis, impaired gastric emptying, and regurgitation. In addition, vith nerve paralysis occurs and the signal intensity is high.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study provides a deeper and broader understanding of the safety of oral semaglutide. The results of the ROR, PRR, BCPNN, and MGPS algorithms exhibit high consistency, with metabolism and nutrition-related disorders having the highest number of signals. The conclusions align with the technical specifications of the product. Notably, other unexpected effects are reported, including acute cholecystitis, paralysis of the abducens nerve, and positional vertigo.

Adverse effects with semaglutide: a protocol for a systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis

INTRODUCTION

Semaglutide is increasingly used for the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus, overweight and other conditions. It is well known that semaglutide lowers blood glucose levels and leads to significant weight loss. Still, a systematic review has yet to investigate the adverse effects with semaglutide for all patient groups.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We will conduct a systematic review and search major medical databases (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Medline, Embase, Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature, Science Citation Index Expanded, Conference Proceedings Citation Index-Science) and clinical trial registries from their inception and onwards to identify relevant randomised clinical trials. We expect to conduct the literature search in July 2024. Two review authors will independently extract data and perform risk-of-bias assessments. We will include randomised clinical trials comparing oral or subcutaneous semaglutide versus placebo. Primary outcomes will be all-cause mortality and serious adverse events. Secondary outcomes will be myocardial infarction, stroke, all-cause hospitalisation and non-serious adverse events. Data will be synthesised by meta-analyses and trial sequential analysis; risk of bias will be assessed with Cochrane Risk of Bias tool-version 2, an eight-step procedure will be used to assess if the thresholds for statistical and clinical significance are crossed, and the certainty of the evidence will be assessed by Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This protocol does not present any results. Findings of this systematic review will be published in international peer-reviewed scientific journals.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42024499511.

The effect of incretin-based drugs on the riks of acute pancreatitis: a review

Objectives

In recent years, new hypoglycaemic drugs that affect the incretin system have become increasingly popular in the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM): glucagon-like receptor 1 agonists (GLP1RAs), dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitors (DPP4is) and the recently developed dual glucagon-like receptor 1 agonist and glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide (tirzepatide). Their main role of these drugs is to normalise blood glucose levels. In addition, GLP1RAs are approved for the treatment of excessive body weight. The efficacy of drugs affecting the incretin system is well described in the literature, however, there are still only few reports about their safety. This review aims to summarize the results of current research and meta-analyses on risk of acute pancreatitis (AP) during incretin-affecting drugs treatment.

Methods

A narrative review was performed using present literature in an attempt to identify the relationship between AP and incretin-affecting drugs. The following keywords were used: acute pancreatitis, glucagon-like receptor 1 agonists, dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitors and tirzepatide.

Results

It was demonstrated that the use of DPP4is is safe for the majority of patients with T2DM, whereas a risk of AP should be noted in case of GLP1RAs therapy. To date, most studies found no significant association between tirzepatide therapy and the increased risk of AP.

Conclusion

The majority of studies have shown that DPP4is, GLP1RAs and tirzepatide are effective and safe in most T2DM patients. However, the follow-up time for patients treated with tirzepatide is short, therefore more studies are required to confirm the safety of this drug.

Cost consequence analysis of adding semaglutide to treatment regimen for patients with Type II diabetes in Saudi Arabia

Introduction

Semaglutide, a Glucagon-like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonist (GLP-1 RA), is often prescribed for managing type 2 diabetes, particularly in cases unresponsive to other hypoglycemic agents. Despite its popularity, the real-world efficacy and cost-effectiveness of Semaglutide relative to other treatments remain understudied.

Objective

This study aimed to examine the direct medical cost and consequences of adding Semaglutide to the treatment regimen for patients with type 2 diabetes in Saudi Arabia.

Methods

We conducted a single-center, retrospective review of Electronic Medical Records (EMRs) for adults with type 2 diabetes. Patients who had been on Semaglutide for at least three months were matched with those receiving alternative hypoglycemic therapies. Exclusions were made for patients with cancer, incomplete EMRs, or lacking prescription data. Investigated outcomes included changes in HbA1C levels and weight, and the direct costs comprised medications, clinic visits, and emergency care. Baseline adjustments were made through inverse probability treatment weighting, and uncertainty was assessed via bootstrapping with 10,000 replications.

Results

Out of 350 patients meeting the criteria, 116 were on Semaglutide. Predominantly females (62%), the cohort had an average age of 60 and a disease duration of 22 years. The difference in HbA1C (%) reductions between Semaglutide and non-Semaglutide users over 3,6, and 12 months were 0.154 (95% CI: -0.452-0.483), -0.031(95% CI: -0.754-0.239), -0.16(95% CI: -1.425-0.840), respectively. Semaglutide users did experience modest weight reductions ranging from 0.42 kg to 1.16 kg. The annual additional direct medical cost for Semaglutide was USD 4,086.82 (95% CI: $3,710.85 - $4,294.99).

Conclusion

Although Semaglutide induced modest weight reductions, it did not offer significant advantages in lowering HbA1C levels compared to other hypoglycemic treatments. These findings suggest the need for further research involving larger and more diverse cohorts to corroborate these findings.

Glycemic Control, Weight Management, Cardiovascular Safety, and Cost-Effectiveness of Semaglutide for Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: A Rapid Review and Meta-analysis of Real-World Studies

INTRODUCTION

Semaglutide is a high-profile glucose-lowering drug that medical decision-makers have acknowledged in recent years. This rapid review aims to provide evidence-based clinical recommendations for the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) with semaglutide.

METHODS

We conducted a rapid review of randomized controlled trial (RCT)-based meta-analyses (MAs) and systematic reviews (SRs) of cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs) compared to other glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) or placebo in patients with T2DM. Prospective cohort real-world studies (RWS) were also retrieved and subjected to MA. Four databases, including PubMed, the Cochrane Library, Embase, and ISPOR, were searched from inception to 5 March 2023. The outcomes of interest were hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), body weight, major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), and economic outcomes such as quality-adjusted life-years and total cost.

RESULTS

We identified 33 publications: 22 RCT-based MAs, 1 SR of CEAs, and 10 RWS. Evidence showed that semaglutide at usual doses was associated with superior reductions in HbA1c and weight compared to most GLP-1 RAs in patients with T2DM who were drug naive, receiving basal insulin, or using oral hypoglycemic agents, and it was also associated with a lower number of MACE and was more cost-effective. Further, once-weekly semaglutide resulted in a significant reduction in HbA1c levels (-1.1%) and body weight (-4.88 kg) in routine clinical practice.

CONCLUSIONS

This review consolidates the positive current evidence base for prescribing semaglutide to patients with T2DM, but further rigorous studies are still urgently required to develop practice guidelines as innovative drugs become commercially available.

Once-weekly semaglutide use in glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist naïve patients with type 2 diabetes in North Macedonia: Real-world data from the MIRAGE study

AIMS

The MIRAGE study aimed to evaluate the real-world use of once weekly (OW) subcutaneous semaglutide in glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist naïve type 2 diabetes patients in routine clinical practice in North Macedonia.

METHODS

MIRAGE was a multicentre, single-arm, retrospective and 30-weeks study, conducted in North Macedonia. Primary [change in glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c)] and secondary endpoints [change in body weight, fasting plasma glucose (FPG), lipid parameters, blood pressure, waist circumference, glycaemic and weight-loss target achievement] were evaluated between baseline and end of study (EOS).

RESULTS

Baseline characteristics of 314 patients enrolled in the study were, mean age: 55.5 years, HbA1c: 9.0 %, diabetes duration: 7.8 years, body weight: 105.2 kg and waist circumference: 114 cm. Patients at EOS experienced statistically significant estimated mean change in HbA1c: -2.2 % points, body weight: -9.0 kg, and FPG: -4.1 mmol/L (all p < 0.0001). At EOS, 62.1 % patients achieved HbA1c < 7 %, and 79.3 % had ≥ 1 % HbA1c reduction. A weight reduction of ≥ 3 % and ≥ 5 % was noted in 88.3 % and 73.3 % patients, respectively. No new safety concern has emerged.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings from MIRAGE study demonstrated glycaemic and weight-loss benefits of semaglutide, with improvements in other cardiometabolic parameters. The study supports real-world OW subcutaneous semaglutide use in North Macedonia.

Efficacy and tolerability of the Subcutaneous Semaglutide for type 2 Diabetes patients: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

To update and assess the efficacy and tolerability of once weekly subcutaneous semaglutide in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

PubMed, Science Direct, Cochrane Library, Clinical trial, Springer, OVID, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), WanFang Data and China Science and Technology Journal Database (VIP) were searched from inception to January 18, 2023. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing subcutaneous semaglutide with placebo or any other antidiabetic agent in adults with T2D were eligible. The risk ratio (RR) and mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were determined to synthesize the results.

RESULTS

A total of 17 trials enrolling 14,940 T2D patients were included. For efficacy, compared with placebo, semaglutide exhibited beneficial effects on glycosylated hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) control [MD -0.97%, 95% CI (-1.33, -0.62), I2 = 91%; MD -1.36%, 95% CI (-1.59, -1.13), I2 = 84%, semaglutide 0.5 and 1.0 mg, respectively], body weight reduction, blood pressure control. At the same time, subcutaneous semaglutide 0.5 and 1 mg reduced HbA1c by 0.56% (95% CI 0.32 to 0.80) and 0.63% (95% CI 0.35 to 0.91) compared to other glucose-lowering agents. For tolerability, semaglutide did not increase the incidence of adverse events (AEs) and serious adverse events (SAEs), severe or blood glucose (BG) confirmed hypoglycaemia, acute pancreatitis and diabetic retinopathy compared to placebo or active comparators, but did increase the risk of nausea, diarrhea and vomiting.

CONCLUSIONS

Semaglutide has a better effect on glycaemic control and weight loss than other therapies. Nevertheless, semaglutide was associated with increased incidence of gastrointestinal-related disorders. Further large, multicenter randomized controlled clinical trials are still needed to obtain more robust evidence to better guide clinical treatment decisions.

Impact of Glucagon-Like Peptide 1 Receptor Agonists in Patients with Hemoglobin A1c of 9% or Greater

Background: Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 agonists) are effective hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) and weight-lowering agents. The treatment effect is unknown in patients with HbA1c of 9% or greater. Objective: The purpose of this study was to evaluate glycemic control and weight loss after adding a GLP-1 agonist in patients with a baseline HbA1c of 9% (75 mmol/mol) or greater. Methods: A single-health system retrospective chart review screened adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus with a baseline hemoglobin A1c of 9% (75 mmol/mol) or greater and were prescribed a GLP-1 agonist for eligibility. The primary outcome assessed was the change in HbA1c from baseline to the first HbA1c check. Secondary outcomes included change in weight (kg) from baseline to the first HbA1c check. Results: Three hundred sixty-two patients were screened of which 151 (41.7%) were included in the final analysis. The mean change in HbA1c from baseline to first HbA1c check for all participants was -2.1% (95% CI: -2.3% to -1.8%; P < .001; -23 mmol/mol [95% CI: -25 to -20 mmol/mol]). The mean change in weight from baseline to first HbA1c check was -2.0 kg (95% CI: -2.6 kg to -1.4 kg; P < .001). Conclusion: In patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus with a baseline HbA1c ≥ 9%, GLP-1 agonist initiation resulted in a significant reduction of both HbA1c and weight compared to baseline. Large, prospective, multisite studies are needed to confirm findings of this retrospective study.

Effect of semaglutide versus other glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists on cardio-metabolic risk factors in patients with type 2 diabetes: A systematic review and meta-analysis of head-to-head, phase 3, randomized controlled trials

INTRODUCTION

Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) have emerged as a cornerstone treatment for type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). The aim of the present meta-analysis was to assess whether semaglutide exerts greater effects on glycemia and other cardio-metabolic risk factors compared to other GLP-1RAs.

METHODS

PubMed and Cochrane Library databases, along with grey literature sources, were searched form inception to 8th February 2023, in order to retrieve head-to-head, phase 3 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the effect of semaglutide versus other GLP-1RAs on glycemia and other cardio-metabolic risk factors in T2DM.

RESULTS

We finally pooled data from 5 RCTs in a total of 3760 randomized participants. Semaglutide compared to other GLP-1RAs provided a significantly greater reduction in HbA1c levels by 0.44 %, in fasting plasma glucose by 0.48 mmol/L, in body weight by 2.53 kg and in body mass index by 0.91 kg/m². Subjects receiving semaglutide experienced significantly greater odds for achieving target and optimal HbA1c, along with significantly greater odds for weight loss >5 % and 10 %. However, subjects randomized to semaglutide also experienced significantly greater odds for gastrointestinal adverse events and treatment discontinuation.

CONCLUSION

Semaglutide is more effective than rest GLP-1RAs, in terms of improvement in glycemia and other cardio-metabolic risk factors, among individuals with T2DM.

Severe, Complicated Pancreatitis With an Unclear Etiology

Acute pancreatitis is an inflammatory process. There can be many causes of pancreatitis, which include alcohol or gallstones but can also be due to hypercalcemia, infections, or hypertriglyceridemia. Most cases of pancreatitis are mild and without complications. Severe cases of pancreatitis can cause complications, including organ failure. Pseudocysts are a rare complication of pancreatitis and may require management. We present a patient with severe acute pancreatitis with organ failure admitted to the intensive care unit, stabilized, and required subsequent management of a pseudocyst with cystogastrostomy with a lumen-apposing metal stent. The patient subsequently improved and is doing well today. Herein, we present an acute severe pancreatitis case report with an extensive workup complicated by pseudocyst development. We review pancreatitis causes, including rare causes and management.

Comparative efficacy and safety profile of once-weekly Semaglutide versus once-daily Sitagliptin as an add-on to metformin in patients with type 2 diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The emergence of genetically-modified human proteins and glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists have presented a promising strategy for effectively managing diabetes. Due to the scarcity of clinical trials focusing on the safety and efficacy of semaglutide as an adjunctive treatment for patients with type 2 diabetes who had inadequate glycemic control with metformin, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis. This was necessary to fill the gap and provide a comprehensive assessment of semaglutide compared to sitagliptin, a commonly prescribed DPP-4 inhibitor, in this patient population.

METHODS

A comprehensive and systematic search was carried out on reputable databases including PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and Elsevier's ScienceDirect to identify relevant studies that compared the efficacy of once-weekly Semaglutide with once-daily Sitagliptin in individuals diagnosed with type 2 diabetes mellitus. The analysis of the gathered data was performed utilizing the random-effects model, which considers both within-study and between-study variations.

RESULTS

The meta-analysis incorporated three randomized controlled trials (RCTs), encompassing 2401 participants, with a balanced distribution across the treatment groups. The primary focus of the study revolved around evaluating changes in HbA1C, blood pressure, pulse rate, body weight, waist circumference, and BMI. The findings revealed that once-weekly Semaglutide showed substantially improved HbA1C (WMD: -0.98; 95% CI: -1.28, -0.69, p-value: < 0.0001; I2: 100%), systolic (WMD: -3.73; 95% CI: -5.42, -2.04, p-value: <0.0001; I2: 100%) and diastolic blood pressures (WMD: -0.66; 95% CI: -1.02, -0.29, p-value: 0.0005; I2: 100%), and body weight (WMD: -3.17; 95% CI: -3.84, -2.49, p-value: <0.00001; I2: 100%) compared to once-daily Sitagliptin. However, there was an observed increase in pulse rate (WMD: 3.33; 95% CI: 1.61, 5.06, p-value: <0.00001; I2: 100%) associated with Semaglutide treatment. Regarding secondary outcomes, there was an elevated risk of total adverse events and premature treatment discontinuation with Semaglutide. The risk of serious, severe, moderate, and mild adverse events did not significantly differ between the two treatments.

CONCLUSIONS

In conclusion, the administration of once-weekly Semaglutide exhibited a substantial reduction in HbA1c, average systolic blood pressure (SBP), mean diastolic blood pressure (DBP), body weight, waist circumference, body mass index (BMI), and a rise in pulse rate, as opposed to the once-daily administration of Sitagliptin.

Side effect profile of pharmacologic therapies for liver fibrosis in nonalcoholic fatty liver disease: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

Several studies have found that antifibrosis treatment for nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) can cause a variety of side effects. No network meta-analysis (NMA) analyzes the adverse events of antifibrotic drugs for NAFLD. This NMA aimed to systematically compare the drug-related side effects when using different pharmacological agents for the treatment of liver fibrosis in NAFLD. PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science and Cochrane Library were systematically searched to select related studies published in English from the database inception until 30 June 2022. We conducted Bayesian fixed-effects NMA using data from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to derive relative risks (RRs). The surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA) probabilities was used to assess ranking. A total of 26 RCTs with 19 interventions met the inclusion criteria. SUCRA analysis suggested that the lanifibranor group had the highest risk of diarrhea (SUCRA, 94), whereas the liraglutide group had the highest risk of constipation (SUCRA, 92.9). The semaglutide group showed the highest incidence of nausea (SUCRA, 81.2) and abdominal pain (SUCRA, 90.5), respectively. The cenicriviroc group showed the highest risk in the incidence of fatigue (SUCRA, 82.4). The MSDC-0602K group had the highest risk of headache (SUCRA, 76.4), whereas the obeticholic acid group had the highest risk of pruritus (SUCRA, 80.1). The risk of side effects significantly varied among different pharmacologic regimens, and evidence showed that lanifibranor, liraglutide, semaglutide, cenicriviroc, MSDC-0602K and obeticholic acid were the pharmacological interventions with the highest risk in patients with NAFLD. This study may guide clinicians and support further research.

Gastrointestinal adverse events associated with semaglutide: A pharmacovigilance study based on FDA adverse event reporting system

Background

Semaglutide was approved for treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and chronic weight management in obesity or overweight adults. However, real-world data regarding its long-term gastrointestinal safety and tolerability in large sample population are incomplete. We evaluated semaglutide-associated gastrointestinal safety signals by data mining of the FDA pharmacovigilance database.

Methods

Reporting odds ratio (ROR) was employed to quantify the signals of semaglutide-related gastrointestinal adverse events (AEs) from 2018 to 2022. Serious and non-serious cases were compared by Mann-Whitney U test or Chi-squared (χ²) test, and signals were prioritized using a rating scale.

Results

We identified 5,442 cases of semaglutide-associated gastrointestinal AEs, with 45 signals detected, ranging from a ROR₀₂₅ of 1.01 (hypoaesthesia oral) to 42.03 (eructation), among which 17 AEs were identified as new and unexpected signals. Patient age (p < 0.001) and body weight (p = 0.006) rather than sex (p = 0.251) might be associated with an increased risk of gastrointestinal AEs severity. Notably, the association between semaglutide and gastrointestinal disorders remained when stratified by age, body weight, sex and reporter type. One strong, 22 moderate and 22 weak clinical priority signals were defined. The median time-to-onset (TTO) for strong clinical priority signal was 23 days, while for moderate and weak, they were 6 and 7 days, respectively. All of the disproportionality signals had early failure type features, suggesting that the risk of gastrointestinal AEs occurrence gradually decreased over time.

Conclusion

Our study provided a deeper and broader understanding of semaglutide's gastrointestinal safety profiles, which would help healthcare professionals to mitigate the risk of gastrointestinal AEs in clinical practice.

Meta-analysis of the association between new hypoglycemic agents and digestive diseases

BACKGROUND

New hypoglycemic agents include sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2is), glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists (GLP1RAs), and dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (DPP4is). The association between each class of these new hypoglycemic drugs and the risks of various digestive system diseases is unknown. We aimed to explore this relationship by performing a meta-analysis.

METHODS

We included large randomized trials of SGLT2is, GLP1RAs, and DPP4is. Outcomes of interest were 91 kinds of digestive diseases including 75 kinds of gastrointestinal disorders and 16 kinds of hepatobiliary disorders. Meta-analysis was done to generate pooled risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). Subgroup analysis was conducted according to 3 different drug classes.

RESULTS

We included 21 large trials in this meta-analysis. Compared with placebo, GLP1RAs were associated with the higher risks of gastric ulcer hemorrhage (RR 2.68, 95% CI 1.07-6.68; Pdrug = .035; I2 = 0), pancreatitis (RR 1.48, 95% CI 1.02-2.15; Pdrug = .041; I2 = 0), cholangitis acute (RR 5.96, 95% CI 1.04-34.08; Pdrug = .045; I2 = 0), and cholecystitis acute (RR 1.52, 95% CI 1.08-2.15; Pdrug = .017; I2 = 1.5%), but were not significantly associated with the occurrences of the other 87 kinds of digestive diseases (Pdrug ranged from .064 to .999). SGLT2is versus placebo were not significantly associated with the occurrences of 91 kinds of digestive diseases (Pdrug ranged from .077 to .995). DPP4is versus placebo were not significantly associated with the occurrences of 91 kinds of digestive diseases (Pdrug ranged from .085 to .999).

CONCLUSIONS

Neither SGLT2is nor DPP4is are associated with the occurrences of various kinds of digestive diseases, whereas GLP1RAs are associated with the higher risks of 4 kinds of digestive diseases, namely, gastric ulcer hemorrhage, pancreatitis, cholangitis acute, and cholecystitis acute. These findings seem to suggest that GLP1RAs are not applicable for patients at high risk of 4 specific digestive diseases, whereas SGLT2is and DPP4is are safe for patients susceptible to digestive diseases. However, our findings require to be further verified by future studies with sufficient statistical power.

Semaglutide for the treatment of type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: A systematic review and network meta-analysis of safety and efficacy outcomes

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

To assess the safety and efficacy of semaglutide compared with placebo and other anti-hyperglycaemic agents in type 2 diabetes (T2DM).

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane library for relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs). A network meta-analysis was conducted to compare different doses, durations, and interventions in T2DM. We presented results as mean difference (MD) or relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI).

RESULTS

Twenty-six included RCTs studied different doses of subcutaneous (SC) and oral semaglutide, tirzepatide, liraglutide, sitagliptin, canagliflozin, and empagliflozin compared with placebo. Tirzepatide showed the highest efficacy, however, it was comparable to semaglutide. SC semaglutide 1 mg once-weekly showed higher reduction in HbA_1c (MD = -1.72, 95% CI [-2.32; -1.12]), and fasting blood glucose (MD = -1.93, 95% CI [-2.81; -1.04]) versus placebo at 30 weeks and other timepoints. Adverse events (ADs) were comparable to placebo with oral and SC semaglutide, oral sitagliptin, SC liraglutide, and oral empagliflozin at most timepoints. However, SC semaglutide 0.8 mg and tirzepatide 10 mg groups had the highest gastrointestinal adverse events.

CONCLUSION

Tirzepatide, oral and SC semaglutide has a favourable efficacy in treating T2DM. The adverse events were comparable to placebo; however, gastrointestinal adverse events were highly recorded in tirzepatide, oral and SC semaglutide groups.

Efficacy and safety of once-weekly semaglutide in adults with overweight or obesity: a meta-analysis

PURPOSE

This meta-analysis aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of once-weekly semaglutide among adults with overweight or obesity.

METHODS

We searched multiple electronic databases for randomized controlled trials that compared once-weekly semaglutide versus placebo in adults with overweight or obesity. The primary outcomes were the percentage change and absolute change in body weight. Secondary outcomes included achievement of categorical weight loss targets (at least 5, 10, 15, or 20%), cardiometabolic risk profiles, and health-related quality of life.

RESULTS

This meta-analysis included a total of four trials with 3447 patients. Once-weekly semaglutide was superior to placebo in terms of the percentage change and absolute change in body weight. Compared with placebo, once-weekly semaglutide also led to significant increases in the proportions of achievement of categorical weight reduction targets. Moreover, once-weekly semaglutide induced superior reductions in waist circumference and body-mass index compared with placebo. Furthermore, the effect on improving other cardiometabolic risk factors and health-related quality of life was more pronounced for once-weekly semaglutide relative to placebo.

CONCLUSION

Among adults with overweight or obesity, once-weekly semaglutide could result in clinically meaningful weight loss, which was a promising therapy for treating overweight or obesity.

Semaglutide and Diabetic Retinopathy Risk in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND

Semaglutide is a recently approved glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist used to treat patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). The SUSTAIN 6 trial found a significantly higher rate of retinopathy complications in the semaglutide-treated group compared with the placebo group.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to evaluate the association between semaglutide and the risk of retinopathy in patients with T2DM.

METHODS

Electronic databases were systematically searched up to April 2021 to identify randomized controlled trials that reported diabetic retinopathy (DR) events in semaglutide-treated and control groups. A meta-analysis was conducted using Review Manager 5.4 software to calculate the risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

RESULTS

A total of 23 randomized trials involving 22,096 patients with T2DM were included. There were 730 incident DR cases-463 in the semaglutide group and 267 in the control group. Overall, semaglutide was not associated with increased DR risk compared with controls when all trials were combined (RR 1.14, 95% CI 0.98-1.33). Subgroup analysis showed that semaglutide was associated with an increased risk of DR compared with placebo (RR 1.24, 95% CI 1.03-1.50). Moreover, patient age ≥ 60 years and diabetes duration ≥ 10 years were also factors for increased risk of DR when using semaglutide (RR 1.27, 95% CI 1.02-1.59; RR 1.28, 95% CI 1.04-1.58, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Semaglutide was not associated with an increased risk of DR; however, caution regarding DR risk is needed for older patients or those with long diabetes duration when taking semaglutide.

Efficacy and Safety of Subcutaneous and Oral Semaglutide Administration in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes: A Meta-Analysis

Background: This meta-analysis aimed to combine the data available from clinical trials to assess the effects of subcutaneous and oral semaglutide administration on glycemic control, weight management, and safety outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D).

Methods: We systematically searched for phase 3 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared semaglutide with placebo or other anti-diabetic drugs in T2D patients. The primary outcome was the change from baseline in glycated hemoglobin (HbA_1c) levels. Secondary efficacy endpoints included the change from baseline in body weight, achievement of HbA_1c targets, and clinically significant weight loss. Key safety outcomes were also assessed.

Results: In this meta-analysis, 24 trials with a total of 22185 patients were included. Subcutaneous semaglutide administration reduced HbA_1c levels (weighted mean difference [WMD]: −1.14% and −1.37%, for 0.5 mg and 1 mg, respectively) and body weight (WMD: −2.73 kg and −4.09 kg, for 0.5 mg and 1 mg, respectively) when compared with placebo; its efficacy was also superior to other anti-diabetic drugs in reducing HbA_1c levels (WMD: −0.71% and −0.86%, for 0.5 mg and 1 mg, respectively) and body weight (WMD: −2.65 kg and −3.78 kg, for 0.5 mg and 1 mg, respectively). Oral semaglutide administration was superior to placebo in decreasing HbA_1c levels (WMD: −0.96% and −1.02%, for 7 mg and 14 mg, respectively). Moreover, oral administration of 14 mg of semaglutide also showed a significant reduction in HbA_1c levels (WMD: −0.36%) compared with other anti-diabetic drugs. Furthermore, oral semaglutide administration resulted in substantial weight loss compared with other anti-diabetic drugs (WMD: −1.53 kg and −1.73 kg, for 7 mg and 14 mg, respectively). Notably, subcutaneous and oral semaglutide administration also resulted in higher numbers of patients achieving the targets of HbA_1c levels and weight loss than placebo and other anti-diabetic drugs. Overall, we noted no clear evidence of detrimental effects on safety endpoints due to semaglutide treatment, except for some gastrointestinal adverse events.

Conclusion: Both subcutaneous and oral semaglutide administration could enable the achievement of sufficient glycemic control and weight management without increasing the risk of hypoglycemia, which were effective and safe for the treatment of T2D.

Weekly Semaglutide vs. Liraglutide Efficacy Profile: A Network Meta-Analysis

INTRODUCTION

Glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist (GLP-1 RA) is a class of hypoglycemic medications. Semaglutide once-weekly (QW) and liraglutide once-daily (OD) significantly improved glycemic control compared to placebo. To date, no long-term phase III trials directly comparing semaglutide and liraglutide are available. This network meta-analysis (NMA) aims to compare the long-term efficacy of semaglutide and liraglutide.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library were searched from inception until June 2019 to identify relevant articles. Nine long-term randomized controlled trials comparing once-weekly semaglutide or liraglutide with placebo or other active comparisons were identified. The outcomes of interest were changes in HbA1c and weight after 52 weeks. A Bayesian framework and NMA were used for data synthesis. This is a sub-study of the protocol registered in PROSPERO (number CRD42018091598).

RESULTS

The data showed significant superiority in HbA1c reduction of semaglutide 1 mg QW over liraglutide 1.2 and 1.8 mg with a treatment difference of 0.47% and 0.3%, respectively. Semaglutide 0.5 mg QW was found to be significantly superior to liraglutide 1.2 mg in HbA1c reduction with a treatment difference of 0.17%. Regarding weight reduction analysis, semaglutide 0.5 and 1 mg QW were significantly associated with a greater reduction than liraglutide 0.6 mg with a treatment difference of 2.42 and 3.06 kg, respectively. However, no significant reduction was found in comparison to liraglutide 1.2 and 1.8 mg.

CONCLUSIONS

Semaglutide improved the control of blood glucose and body weight. The capacity of long-term glycemic control and body weight control of semaglutide appears to be more effective than other GLP-1 RAs, including liraglutide. However, considering the number of included studies and potential limitations, more large-scale, head-to-head, well-designed randomized-controlled trials (RCTs) are needed to confirm these findings.

Type 2 diabetes in pediatrics

Type 2 diabetes (T2D) in adolescents has become an increasing health concern throughout the world and its prevention and screening should be implemented in pediatric care. As clinical features at presentation, in some cases can be similar to type 1 diabetes and family history can be in favour of a monogenic form of diabetes, it is pivotal for physicians to be aware of youth-onset T2D specificities to ensure an accurate diagnosis. The global increase of overweight and obesity can complicate the diagnostic process and makes it essential to apply a systematic approach to each new diagnosis. Microvascular complications may be present at the time of diagnosis and chronic complications are frequent and need to be screened regularly. Regular screening of comorbidities should also be performed. Childhood T2D should be followed up by pediatric diabetes units to avoid diagnostic errors and delay in care. A multidisciplinary approach, by an experienced team, is pivotal to provide treatment options targeting the unique needs of pediatric patients. Treatment programs must include the whole family and address all the aspects of the care (lifestyle, pharmacological therapy, psychological aspects, complications and comorbidities). An organized process of transition to adult care is essential.

Safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamics of concomitant administration of multiple doses of cagrilintide with semaglutide 2·4 mg for weight management: a randomised, controlled, phase 1b trial

BACKGROUND

Cagrilintide, a long-acting amylin analogue, and semaglutide 2·4 mg, a glucagon-like peptide-1 analogue, are both being investigated as options for weight management. We aimed to determine the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamics of this drug combination.

METHODS

In this randomised, placebo-controlled, multiple-ascending dose, phase 1b trial, individuals aged 18-55 years with a body-mass index 27·0-39·9 kg/m² and who were otherwise healthy were recruited from a single centre in the USA. The trial included six sequential overlapping cohorts, and in each cohort eligible participants were randomly assigned (3:1) to once-weekly subcutaneous cagrilintide (0·16, 0·30, 0·60, 1·2, 2·4, or 4·5 mg) or matched placebo, in combination with once-weekly subcutaneous semaglutide 2·4 mg, without lifestyle interventions. In each cohort, the doses of cagrilintide and semaglutide were co-escalated in 4-week intervals to the desired dose over 16 weeks, participants were treated at the target dose for 4 weeks, and then followed up for 5 weeks. Participants, investigators, and the sponsor were masked to treatment assignment. The primary endpoint was number of treatment-emergent adverse events from baseline to end of follow-up. Secondary pharmacokinetic endpoints assessed from day of last dose (week 19) to end of treatment (week 20) were area under the plasma concentration-time curve from 0 to 168 h (AUC_{0-168 h}) and maximum concentration [C_max] of cagrilintide and semaglutide; exploratory pharmacokinetic endpoints were half-life, time to C_max [t_max], plasma clearance, and volume of distribution of cagrilintide and semaglutide; and exploratory pharmacodynamic endpoints were changes in bodyweight, glycaemic parameters, and hormones. Safety, pharmacokinetic, and pharmacodynamic endpoints were assessed in all participants who were exposed to at least one dose of study drug. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03600480, and is now complete.

FINDINGS

Between July 25, 2018, and Dec 17, 2019, 285 individuals were screened and 96 were randomly assigned to cagrilintide (0·16-2·4 mg group n=12; 4·5 mg group n=11) or placebo (n=24), in combination with semaglutide 2·4 mg, of whom 95 were exposed to treatment (one patient in 0·60 mg cagrilintide group was not exposed) and included in the safety and full analysis datasets. The mean age was 40·6 years (SD 9·2), 56 (59%) of 95 participants were men and 51 (54%) were Black or African American. Of 566 adverse events reported in 92 participants (69 [97%] of 71 participants assigned to 0·16-4·5 mg cagrilintide and 23 [96%] of 24 assigned to placebo), 207 (37%) were gastrointestinal disorders. Most adverse events were mild to moderate in severity and the proportion of participants with one or more adverse event was similar across treatment groups. Exposure was proportional to cagrilintide dose and did not affect semaglutide exposure or elimination. AUC_{0-168 h} ranged from 926 nmol × h/L to 24 271 nmol × h/L, and C_max ranged from 6·14 nmol/L to 170 nmol/L with cagrilintide 0·16-4·5 mg. AUC_{0-168 h} ranged from 12 757 nmol × h/L to 15 305 nmol × h/L, and C_max ranged from 96·4 nmol/L to 120 nmol/L with semaglutide 2·4 mg. Cagrilintide 0·16-4·5 mg had a half-life of 159-195 h, with a median t_max of 24-72 h. Semaglutide 2·4 mg had a half-life of 145-165 h, with a median t_max of 12-24 h. Plasma clearance and volume of distribution for both cagrilintide and semaglutide were similar across treatment groups. At week 20, mean percentage bodyweight reductions were greater with cagrilintide 1·2 and 2·4 mg than with placebo (15·7% [SE 1·6] for cagrilintide 1·2 mg and 17·1% [1·5] for cagrilintide 2·4 mg vs 9·8% [1·2] for pooled placebo cohorts 1-5; estimated treatment difference of -6·0% [95% CI -9·9 to -2·0] for cagrilintide 1·2 mg and -7·4% [-11·2 to -3·5] for cagrilintide 2·4 mg vs pooled placebo), and with cagrilintide 4·5 mg than with matched placebo (15·4% [1·3] vs 8·0% [2·2]; estimated treatment difference -7·4% [-12·8 to -2·1]), all in combination with semaglutide 2·4 mg. Glycaemic parameters improved in all treatment groups, independently of cagrilintide dose. Changes in hormones were similar across treatment groups.

INTERPRETATION

Concomitant treatment with cagrilintide and semaglutide 2·4 mg was well tolerated with an acceptable safety profile. Future larger and longer trials are needed to fully assess the efficacy and safety of this treatment combination.

FUNDING

Novo Nordisk A/S.

Reporting and methodological quality of systematic reviews and meta-analysis with protocols in Diabetes Mellitus Type II: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Systematic reviews with or without meta-analyses (SR/MAs) are strongly encouraged to work from a protocol to facilitate high quality, transparent methodology. The completeness of reporting of a protocol (PRISMA-P) and manuscript (PRISMA) is essential to the quality appraisal (AMSTAR-2) and appropriate use of SR/MAs in making treatment decisions.

OBJECTIVES

The objectives of this study were to describe the completeness of reporting and quality of SR/MAs, assess the correlations between PRISMA-P, PRISMA, and AMSTAR-2, and to identify reporting characteristics between similar items of PRISMA-P and PRISMA.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus SR/MAs of hypoglycemic agents with publicly available protocols. Cochrane reviews, guidelines, and specific types of MA were excluded. Two reviewers independently, (i) searched PubMed and Embase between 1/1/2015 to 20/3/2019; (ii) identified protocols of included studies by searching the manuscript bibliography, supplementary material, PROSPERO, and Google; (iii) completed PRISMA-P, PRISMA, and AMSTAR-2 tools. Data analysis included descriptive statistics, Pearson correlation, and multivariable linear regression.

RESULTS

Of 357 relevant SR/MAs, 51 had available protocols and were included. The average score for PRISMA-P was 15.8±3.3 (66%; maximum 24) and 25.2±1.1 (93%; maximum 27) for PRISMA. The quality of SR/MAs assessed using the AMSTAR-2 tool identified an overall poor quality (63% critically low, 18% low, 8% moderate, 12% high). The correlation between the PRISMA-P and PRISMA was not significant (r = 0.264; p = 0.06). Correlation was significant between PRISMA-P and AMSTAR-2 (r = 0.333; p = 0.02) and PRISMA and AMSTAR-2 (r = 0.555; p<0.01). Discrepancies in reporting were common between similar PRISMA-P and PRISMA items.

CONCLUSION

Adherence to protocol reporting guidance was poor while manuscript reporting was comprehensive. Protocol completeness is not associated with a completely reported manuscript. Independently, PRISMA-P and PRISMA scores were weakly associated with higher quality assessments but insufficient as a surrogate for quality. Critical areas for quality improvement include protocol description, investigating causes of heterogeneity, and the impact of risk of bias on the evidence synthesis.

The cost-effectiveness of once-weekly semaglutide compared with other GLP-1 receptor agonists in type 2 Diabetes: a systematic literature review

Introduction: As a novel glucagon-like peptide-1receptor agonist (GLP-1 RA) for type 2 diabetes (T2D) treatment, the economic value of once-weekly semaglutide had been assessed in several country settings. The authors' objective was to systematically review the existing pharmacoeconomic literature evaluating the cost-effectiveness associated with once-weekly semaglutide compared with other GLP-1 RAs and provide implications for further researches.Areas covered: We conducted a systematic literature review of cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) published up to 25 July 2020 in PubMed, web of science, and the ISPOR presentation database, compared once-weekly semaglutide with other GLP-1 RAs in T2D. Nineteen studies were identified, including 8 short-term and 11 long-term studies. General characteristics and main results of the included studies were summarized.Expert opinion: This review provided references for other countries to overview the value of once-weekly semaglutide compared with other GLP-1 RAs in T2D in the healthcare decision-making process and to conduct their CEA studies associated with once-weekly semaglutide. The authors found that the cardiovascular (CV) benefit of once-weekly semaglutide was under-estimated in current studies and suggested that the methods of economic evaluations for novel anti-diabetic drugs with CV benefit should be improved in future researches.

Blood pressure control in type 2 diabetes mellitus with arterial hypertension. The important ancillary role of SGLT2-inhibitors and GLP1-receptor agonists

Type 2 diabetes mellitus and arterial hypertension are major cardiovascular risks factors which shares metabolic and haemodynamic abnormalities as well as pathophysiological mechanisms. The simultaneous presence of diabetes and arterial hypertension increases the risk of left ventricular hypertrophy, congestive heart failure, and stroke, as compared to either condition alone. A number of guidelines recommend lifestyle measures such as salt restriction, weight reduction and ideal body weight mainteinance, regular physical activity and smoking cessation, together with moderation of alcohol consumption and high intake of vegetables and fruits, as the basis for reduction of blood pressure and prevention of CV diseases. Despite the availability of multiple drugs effective for hypertension, BP targets are reached in only 50 % of patients, with even fewer individuals with T2DM-achieving goals. It is established that new emerging classes of type 2 diabetes mellitus treatment, SGLT2 inhibitors and GLP1-receptor agonists, are efficacious on glucose control, and safe in reducing HbA1c significantly, without increasing hypoglycemic episodes. Furthermore, in recent years, many CVOT trials have demonstrated, using GLP1-RA or SGLT2-inihibitors compared to placebo (in combination with the usual diabetes medications) important benefits on reducing MACE (cardio-cerebral vascular events) in the diabetic population. In this hypothesis-driven review, we have examined the anti-hypertensive effects of these novel molecules of the two different classes, in the diabetic population, and suggest that they could have an interesting ancillary role in controlling blood pressure in type 2 diabetic patients.

Efficacy and safety of GLP-1 receptor agonists as add-on to SGLT2 inhibitors in type 2 diabetes mellitus: A meta-analysis

GLP-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RA) and SGLT2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) have been associated with improved glycemic control, body weight loss and favorable changes in cardiovascular risk factors and outcomes. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the effects of the addition of GLP-1RA to SGLT2i in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and inadequate glycemic control. Six databases were searched until March 2019. Randomized controlled trials (RCT) with a follow-up of at least 24 weeks reporting on HbA1c, body weight, systolic blood pressure, lipids, achievement of HbA1c < 7%, requirement of rescue therapy due to hyperglycemia and hypoglycemic events were selected. Four RCTs were included. Compared to SGLT2i, the GLP-1RA/SGLT2i combination was associated with greater reduction in HbA1c (-0.74%), body weight (-1.61 kg), and systolic blood pressure (-3.32 mmHg). A higher number of patients achieved HbA1c < 7% (RR = 2.15), with a lower requirement of rescue therapy (RR = 0.37) and similar incidence of hypoglycemia. Reductions in total and LDL cholesterol were found. The present review supports treatment intensification with GLP-1RA in uncontrolled type 2 diabetes on SGLT2i. This drug regimen could provide improved HbA1c control, together with enhanced weight loss and blood pressure and lipids control.

Consensus Recommendations on GLP-1 RA Use in the Management of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: South Asian Task Force

The advent of incretin mimetics such as glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) has enriched the armamentarium for diabetes management owing to their glycaemic as well as extra-glycaemic benefits. The approval status and availability of this class of drugs vary widely across the globe. Being a relatively newer class of drug with numerous benefits, several national and international guidelines are working towards addressing clinical questions pertaining to the optimal use of GLP-1 RAs for the management of diabetes. Although the newer class of drugs are associated with significant benefits such as patient-centric approach, these drugs demand the providers to be vigilant and knowledgeable about the medication. The South Asian population is at higher risk of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) because of their genetic predisposition and lifestyle changes. Hence, prevention and management of T2DM and its associated complications in this population are of paramount importance. The current report aims to present an overview of current knowledge on GLP-1 RAs based on pragmatic review of the available clinical evidence. In addition, this report is a consensus of expert endocrinologists representing South Asian countries including India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Nepal, Sri Lanka, Afghanistan and the Maldives on essential recommendations related to the use of GLP-1 RAs in a real-world scenario.

Pharmacotherapy of obesity: Available medications and drugs under investigation

Obesity is a chronic disease with a continuously rising prevalence that currently affects more than half a billion people worldwide. Energy balance and appetite are highly regulated via central and peripheral mechanisms, and weight loss triggers a homeostatic response leading to weight regain. Lifestyle and behavioral modifications are the cornerstones of obesity management; however, they often fail to achieve or sustain long-term weight loss. Pharmacotherapy added onto lifestyle modifications results in an additional, albeit limited, weight reduction. Regardless, this weight reduction of 5-10% conveys multiple cardiovascular and metabolic benefits. In this review, evidence on the food and drug administration (FDA)-approved medications, i.e., orlistat, lorcaserin, phentermine/topiramate, liraglutide and naltrexone/bupropion, is summarized. Furthermore, anti-obesity agents in the pipeline for potential future therapeutic use are presented.

Primary Care Management of Patients With Type 2 Diabetes: Overcoming Inertia and Advancing Therapy With the Use of Injectables

Type 2 diabetes (T2D) is a progressive disease caused by insulin resistance and associated progressive β-cell functional decline, as well as multiple other related metabolic and pathophysiologic changes. Left unchecked, T2D increases the risk of long-term microvascular and cardiovascular complications and is associated with excess morbidity and mortality. Despite multiple effective options for reducing hyperglycemia, patients are not optimally managed, largely due to delays in appropriate and timely advancement of therapy. Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists and basal insulin are recommended by treatment guidelines as effective options for advancing therapy to achieve glycemic control. However, injected therapies often face resistance from patients and clinicians. Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists are associated with weight loss, low risk of hypoglycemia, and potential beneficial cardiovascular effects. The class is recommended for patients across the spectrum of disease severity and represents an attractive option to add to basal insulin therapy when additional control is needed. Newer second-generation basal insulin analogues offer advantages over first-generation basal insulins in terms of lower hypoglycemia rates and greater flexibility in dosing. Incorporating injectable therapy into patient care in a timely manner has the potential to improve outcomes and must not be overlooked. Primary care clinicians play a significant role in managing patients with T2D, and they must be able to address and overcome patient resistance and their own barriers to advancing therapy if optimal treatment outcomes are to be achieved. The purpose of this expert opinion article was to provide a commentary on the key principle of advancing therapy with injectables to control hyperglycemia.

The safety and efficacy of once-weekly glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist semaglutide in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: a systemic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the safety and efficacy of once-weekly glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonist semaglutide as monotherapy or add-on to other antihyperglycaemic agents (AHAs) in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM).

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, Cochrane library and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched from the inception to January 18, 2018. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing semaglutide with placebo or other AHAs in T2DM patients were included in our meta-analysis. Risk ratio (RR) and mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were used to evaluate the outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 11 studies with 9519 patients were included in our meta-analysis. The results revealed that compared with placebo or other AHAs, semaglutide had further reduced the level of haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) [MD 1.03%, 95% CI (0.85%, 1.22%), p < 0.00001], self-measured plasma glucose (SMPG) [MD 1.19 mmol/L, 95% CI (0.84 mmol/L, 1.53 mmol/L), p < 0.00001], fasting plasma glucose (FPG) [MD 1.33 mmol/L, 95% CI (0.97 mmol/L, 1.69 mmol/L), p < 0.00001] and weight [MD 3.61 kg, 95% CI (3.05 kg, 4.17 kg), p < 0.00001] and significantly increased participants who achieved HbA1c < 7.0% [RR 2.26, 95% CI (1.89, 2.70), p < 0.00001] in T2DM patients. Semaglutide had a significant increase in the incidence of adverse events (AEs) [RR 1.06, 95% CI (1.02, 1.11), p < 0.0001] and an analogous incidence in serious adverse events (SAEs) [RR 0.94, 95% CI (0.86, 1.02), p = 0.11] and hypoglycaemic events (severe or blood glucose (BG)-confirmed symptomatic) [RR 0.93, 95% CI (0.74, 1.16), p = 0.50] compared with the control group.

CONCLUSIONS

This article revealed that semaglutide had a favourable efficacy and safety in treating T2DM patients. It maybe a superior choice for T2DM patients who have obesity or a poor adherence to daily AHAs.