Literature DB >> 29397376

Semaglutide versus dulaglutide once weekly in patients with type 2 diabetes (SUSTAIN 7): a randomised, open-label, phase 3b trial.

Richard E Pratley1, Vanita R Aroda2, Ildiko Lingvay3, Jörg Lüdemann4, Camilla Andreassen5, Andrea Navarria5, Adie Viljoen6.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Despite common mechanisms of actions, glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists differ in structure, pharmacokinetic profile, and clinical effects. This head-to-head trial compared semaglutide with dulaglutide in patients with inadequately controlled type 2 diabetes.
METHODS: This was an open-label, parallel-group, phase 3b trial done at 194 hospitals, clinical institutions or private practices in 16 countries. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older and had type 2 diabetes with HbA1c 7·0-10·5% (53·0-91·0 mmol/mol) on metformin monotherapy. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1:1) by use of an interactive web-response system to once a week treatment with either semaglutide 0·5 mg, dulaglutide 0·75 mg, semaglutide 1·0 mg, or dulaglutide 1·5 mg subcutaneously. The primary endpoint was change from baseline in percentage HbA1c; the confirmatory secondary endpoint was change in bodyweight, both at week 40. The primary analysis population included all randomly assigned patients exposed to at least one dose of trial product obtained while on treatment and before the onset of rescue medication. The safety population included all randomly assigned patients exposed to at least one dose of trial product obtained while on treatment. The trial was powered for HbA1c non-inferiority (margin 0·4%) and bodyweight superiority. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02648204.
FINDINGS: Between Jan 6, 2016, and June 22, 2016, 1201 patients were randomly assigned to treatment; of these, 301 were exposed to semaglutide 0·5 mg, 299 to dulaglutide 0·75 mg, 300 to semaglutide 1·0 mg, and 299 to dulaglutide 1·5 mg. 72 (6%) patients withdrew from the trial (22 receiving semaglutide 0·5 mg, 13 receiving dulaglutide 0·75 mg, 21 receiving semaglutide 1·0 mg, and 16 receiving dulaglutide 1·5 mg). From overall baseline mean, mean percentage HbA1c was reduced by 1·5 (SE 0·06) percentage points with semaglutide 0·5 mg versus 1·1 (0·05) percentage points with dulaglutide 0·75 mg (estimated treatment difference [ETD] -0·40 percentage points [95% CI -0·55 to -0·25]; p<0·0001) and by 1·8 (0·06) percentage points with semaglutide 1·0 mg versus 1·4 (0·06) percentage points with dulaglutide 1·5 mg (ETD -0·41 percentage points [-0·57 to -0·25]; p<0·0001). From overall baseline mean, mean bodyweight was reduced by 4·6 kg (SE 0·28) with semaglutide 0·5 mg compared with 2·3 kg (0·27) with dulaglutide 0·75 mg (ETD -2·26 kg [-3·02 to -1·51]; p<0·0001) and by 6·5 kg (0·28) with semaglutide 1·0 mg compared with 3·0 kg (0·27) with dulaglutide 1·5 mg (ETD -3·55 kg [-4·32 to -2·78]; p<0·0001). Gastrointestinal disorders were the most frequently reported adverse event, occurring in 129 (43%) of 301 patients receiving semaglutide 0·5 mg, 133 (44%) of 300 patients receiving semaglutide 1·0 mg, 100 (33%) of 299 patients receiving dulaglutide 0·75 mg, and in 143 (48%) of 299 patients receiving dulaglutide 1·5 mg. Gastrointestinal disorders were also the most common reason for discontinuing treatment with semaglutide and dulaglutide. There were six fatalities: one in each semaglutide group and two in each dulaglutide group.
INTERPRETATION: At low and high doses, semaglutide was superior to dulaglutide in improving glycaemic control and reducing bodyweight, enabling a significantly greater number of patients with type 2 diabetes to achieve clinically meaningful glycaemic targets and weight loss, with a similar safety profile. FUNDING: Novo Nordisk.
Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29397376     DOI: 10.1016/S2213-8587(18)30024-X

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol        ISSN: 2213-8587            Impact factor:   32.069


  139 in total

1.  Corrination of a GLP-1 Receptor Agonist for Glycemic Control without Emesis.

Authors:  Tito Borner; Jayme L Workinger; Ian C Tinsley; Samantha M Fortin; Lauren M Stein; Oleg G Chepurny; George G Holz; Aleksandra J Wierzba; Dorota Gryko; Ebba Nexø; Evan D Shaulson; Ankur Bamezai; Valentina A Rodriguez Da Silva; Bart C De Jonghe; Matthew R Hayes; Robert P Doyle
Journal:  Cell Rep       Date:  2020-06-16       Impact factor: 9.423

Review 2.  Glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP-1).

Authors:  T D Müller; B Finan; S R Bloom; D D'Alessio; D J Drucker; P R Flatt; A Fritsche; F Gribble; H J Grill; J F Habener; J J Holst; W Langhans; J J Meier; M A Nauck; D Perez-Tilve; A Pocai; F Reimann; D A Sandoval; T W Schwartz; R J Seeley; K Stemmer; M Tang-Christensen; S C Woods; R D DiMarchi; M H Tschöp
Journal:  Mol Metab       Date:  2019-09-30       Impact factor: 7.422

Review 3.  Pharmacokinetics and Clinical Implications of Semaglutide: A New Glucagon-Like Peptide (GLP)-1 Receptor Agonist.

Authors:  Sylvie Hall; Diana Isaacs; Jennifer N Clements
Journal:  Clin Pharmacokinet       Date:  2018-12       Impact factor: 6.447

4.  Repurposing GLP-1 Receptor Agonists for Parkinson's Disease: Current Evidence and Future Opportunities.

Authors:  Daniella Balduino Victorino; Mariana Nejm; Marcia Guimarães-Marques; Fulvio Alexandre Scorza; Carla Alessandra Scorza
Journal:  Pharmaceut Med       Date:  2021-01-07

Review 5.  The development of oral semaglutide, an oral GLP-1 analog, for the treatment of type 2 diabetes.

Authors:  Mads Frederik Rasmussen
Journal:  Diabetol Int       Date:  2020-01-04

Review 6.  CNS-targeting pharmacological interventions for the metabolic syndrome.

Authors:  Kerstin Stemmer; Timo D Müller; Richard D DiMarchi; Paul T Pfluger; Matthias H Tschöp
Journal:  J Clin Invest       Date:  2019-08-05       Impact factor: 14.808

Review 7.  Consensus Recommendations on GLP-1 RA Use in the Management of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: South Asian Task Force.

Authors:  Sanjay Kalra; Ashok Kumar Das; Rakesh Kumar Sahay; Manash Pratim Baruah; Mangesh Tiwaskar; Sambit Das; Sudip Chatterjee; Banshi Saboo; Ganapathi Bantwal; Saptarshi Bhattacharya; Gagan Priya; Manoj Chawla; Kiraninder Brar; Syed Abbas Raza; Azizul Hasan Aamir; Dina Shrestha; Noel Somasundaram; Prasad Katulanda; Faria Afsana; Shahjada Selim; Mohammad Wali Naseri; Ali Latheef; Manilka Sumanatilleke
Journal:  Diabetes Ther       Date:  2019-07-29       Impact factor: 2.945

8.  Management of hyperglycaemia in type 2 diabetes, 2018. A consensus report by the American Diabetes Association (ADA) and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes (EASD).

Authors:  Melanie J Davies; David A D'Alessio; Judith Fradkin; Walter N Kernan; Chantal Mathieu; Geltrude Mingrone; Peter Rossing; Apostolos Tsapas; Deborah J Wexler; John B Buse
Journal:  Diabetologia       Date:  2018-12       Impact factor: 10.122

Review 9.  Cardiovascular Safety of Antihyperglycemic Agents: "Do Good or Do No Harm".

Authors:  Antonis A Manolis; Theodora A Manolis; Antonis S Manolis
Journal:  Drugs       Date:  2018-10       Impact factor: 9.546

Review 10.  Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonists and Cardiovascular Risk Reduction in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: Is It a Class Effect?

Authors:  Yixing Li; Paul D Rosenblit
Journal:  Curr Cardiol Rep       Date:  2018-09-26       Impact factor: 2.931

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.