BACKGROUND: The efficacy and safety of oral semaglutide, the first glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist available in tablet form for the treatment of type 2 diabetes, were established in the phase 3a PIONEER program. However, evidence regarding the titration of oral semaglutide in real-world clinical settings remains insufficient. This study aimed to elucidate the therapeutic advantages of escalating the dose of oral semaglutide from 7 to 14 mg through clinical data analysis.
METHODS: This retrospective observational study was conducted at a single center in Japan, focusing on adults with type 2 diabetes who were initiated on 14 mg oral semaglutide. The primary endpoint was the alteration in HbA1c levels 24 weeks after the initial prescription of 14 mg oral semaglutide. Secondary endpoints included changes in metabolic parameters and the incidence of adverse events.
RESULTS: Data from 66 patients who met the inclusion criteria were analyzed. The mean change in HbA1c levels from baseline to 24 weeks following dose escalation was - 0.5 ± 0.8% [from 7.4 ± 1.0% at baseline to 7.0 ± 0.9% at 24 weeks (p < 0.01)]. Moreover, a significant reduction in body weight of - 2.0 ± 4.4 kg was observed at 24 weeks [from 90.0 ± 20.5 kg at baseline to 88.2 ± 21.4 kg at 24 weeks (p < 0.01)], with 41% of patients achieving at least a 3% reduction compared to baseline. Gastrointestinal disorders emerged as the most prevalent adverse event (10.6%), particularly nausea (7.6%), although predominantly of mild or moderate severity, with no instances of serious adverse events necessitating drug discontinuation.
CONCLUSIONS: Escalating the dose of oral semaglutide to 14 mg could be an effective approach for enhancing glycemic control and managing body weight in individuals with type 2 diabetes.

UNASSIGNED: Type 2 diabetes (T2DM) remains a challenge to treat despite the expansion of various therapeutic classes. Visepegenatide (PB-119) is a once a week, subcutaneous, glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1 RA) injection without the requirement of dose titration that has shown glycaemic control and safety profile in two phase 2 studies conducted in China and the United States, respectively. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of visepegenatide as a monotherapy in treatment-naïve patients with T2DM.
UNASSIGNED: This was a multicentre, double-blind, parallel, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial conducted in 30 centres in China. Adult participants (aged 18-75 years) with T2DM, glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) of 7.5%-11.0% [58.47-96.73 mmol/mol], body mass index (BMI) of 18-40 kg/m2, and who had been treated with diet and exercise alone for at least 8 weeks before the screening visit were eligible for enrolment. After a 4-week placebo injection run-in period, participants with HbA1c of 7.0%-10.5% [53.0-91.3 mmol/mol] and fasting plasma glucose (FPG) < 15 mmol/L were randomised in a ratio of 1:1 to receive visepegenatide (150 μg) or placebo subcutaneous injections once a week for 24 weeks. The treatment was extended to another 28 weeks during which all participants received visepegenatide. The primary outcome was a change in HbA1c from baseline to week 24. This study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, as NCT04504370.
UNASSIGNED: Between November 2, 2020, and November 2, 2022, we randomly assigned 273 adult participants to the visepegenatide (n = 137) and placebo (n = 136) groups. In total, 257 (94.12%) participants, 131 (95.6%) on visepegenatide, and 126 (92.6%) on placebo, completed the double-blinded treatment period. At baseline, the mean (SD) HbA1c was 8.47% (0.81) [69.07 [8.81] mmol/mol], which rapidly decreased to 7.63% (0.80) [59.94 [8.70] mmol/mol] with visepegenatide by week 4 of treatment, and the change from baseline was significantly greater than that in the placebo group (-0.82% [-0.90 to -0.74]; [-8.99 [-9.89 to -8.10] mmol/mol] vs -0.30% [-0.41 to -0.19]; [-3.30 [-4.50 to -2.09] mmol/mol]). At week 24, when evaluating the effects of treatment with treatment policy estimand, the least square mean (LSM change in HbA1c from baseline was -1.36 (95% confidence interval [CI] -1.52 to -1.20) [-14.84 [-16.60 to -13.08] mmol/mol] in the visepegenatide group vs -0.63 (-0.79 to -0.46) [-6.84 [-8.61 to -5.07] mmol/mol] in the placebo group. The reduction in HbA1c was significantly greater with visepegenatide than placebo (LSM difference -0.73, 95% CI -0.96 to -0.50; p < 0.001). When evaluating the treatment estimand with hypothetic policy, the LSM change in HbA1c from baseline in the visepegenatide group (-1.37 [-1.53 to -1.20]) [-14.95 [-16.76 to -13.14] mmol/mol] was significantly greater than the placebo group (-0.63 [-0.81 to -0.45]) [6.90 (-8.89 to -4.90) mmol/mol]. The LSM difference was (-0.74, 95% CI -0.98 to -0.49; [-8.00 [-10.50 to -5.50] mmol/mol]; p < 0.001]. A significantly greater proportion of the visepegenatide group achieved a target HbA1c level of <7% (<53 mmol/mol) than the placebo (50.4% vs 14.2%; p < 0.05) and stringent HbA1c level of ≤6.5% (≤48 mmol/mol) (26.7% vs 7.9%), respectively. There was also a significantly greater improvement in FPG, 2-h postprandial glucose, homeostasis model assessment (HOMA) of beta cell function, post-prandial insulin, fasting, and post-prandial C-peptide level (p < 0.05) with visepegenatide treatment. The number (3 [2.2%]) of participants who received rescue therapy in the visepegenatide group was remarkably lower compared with those (17 [12.5%]) in the placebo group (p < 0.05). During the extended treatment period, visepegenatide consistently maintained the efficacy till week 52 confirmed by all the above endpoints. The reduction in HbA1c at week 52 was -1.39% (-1.58 to -1.19) [-15.14 [-17.28 to -13.01] mmol/mol], which was even greater than that at week 24. There was also a significant improvement in HOMA-insulin resistance (p = 0.004) at week 52 compared with the baseline value. For the placebo→visepegenatide group, which received visepegenatide in the extended treatment period, a notable decrease in HbA1c at week 52 compared to baseline was observed. The change from baseline in HbA1c was -1.49% (-1.68 to -1.30) [-16.27 [-18.37 to -14.16] mmol/mol]. The outcome was in the same direction as the visepegenatide group from the double-blind treatment period. Comprehensive benefits of visepegenatide including weight loss, improvement in lipid profile, and reduction in blood pressure have been demonstrated in this study. Visepegenatide reduced the body weight in a BMI-dependent manner that was prominent in BMI ˃32 kg/m2 with a mean (SD) reduction of -4.77 (13.94) kg at week 52 (p < 0.05). Incidences of gastrointestinal adverse events were less common than other weekly GLP-1 RA in the market, and most of the adverse events were mild and moderate in nature, occurring in the first weeks of the treatment, and were transient. No serious hypoglycaemia or grade 2 hypoglycaemia (blood glucose: ≤3 mmol/L) was reported during the study.
UNASSIGNED: As a monotherapy, visepegenatide provided rapid without the risk of hypoglycaemia, significant, and sustainable glycaemic control by improving islet β-cell function and insulin resistance. Treatment with visepegenatide induced early treatment response in reducing HbA1c and maintaining glycaemic control for 52 weeks. Meanwhile, visepegenatide provided a comprehensive benefit in body weight loss, lipids, and blood pressure reduction. Visepegenatide had a better safety profile than other weekly GLP-1 RA in participants with T2DM even without the requirement of dose titration. Visepegenatide would provide an optimal treatment approach with its high benefit and low-risk balance.
UNASSIGNED: PegBio Co., Ltd.

UNASSIGNED: The benefit of Glucagon-like Peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists (RAs) in weight reduction against potential harms remains unclear. This study aimed at evaluating the benefit-harm balance of initiating GLP-1 RAs versus placebo for weight loss in people living with overweight and obesity but without diabetes.
UNASSIGNED: We performed benefit-harm balance modelling, which will be updated as new evidence emerges. We searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in PubMed, controlled trials registry, drug approval and regulatory documents, and outcome preference weights as of April 10, 2024. We synthesize data using pairwise meta-analysis to estimate the effect of GLP-1 RAs to inform the benefit-harm balance modelling. We predicted the absolute effects of the positive and negative outcomes over 1 and 2 years of treatment using exponential models. We applied preference weights to the outcomes, ranging from 0 for least concerning to 1.0 for most concerning. We then calculated whether the benefit of achieving 5% and 10% weight loss outweighed the harms on a common scale. The analyses accounted for the statistical uncertainties of treatment effects, preference weights, and outcome risks.
UNASSIGNED: We included 8 RCTs involving 8847 participants. The pooled average age was 46.7 years, with the majority being women (74%) and people living with obesity (96%). Of 1000 persons treated with GLP-1 RAs for 2 years, 375 (95% confidence interval 352 to 399) achieved a 10% weight loss, and 318 (296 to 339) achieved a 5% weight loss compared to those treated with placebo. Several harm outcomes were more frequent in the GLP-1 RA group, including 41 abdominal pain events per 1000 persons over 2 years (19 to 69), cholelithiasis (8, 1 to 21), constipation (118, 78 to 164), diarrhoea (100, 42 to 173), alopecia (57, 10 to 176), hypoglycaemia (17, 1 to 68), injection site reactions (4, -3 to 19), and vomiting (110, 80 to 145) among others. Achieving a 10% weight loss with GLP-1 RA therapy outweighed the cumulative harms, with a net benefit probability of 0.97 at year 1 and 0.91 at year 2. The absolute net benefit was equivalent to 104 (100 to 112) per 1000 persons achieving a 10% weight loss over 2 years without experiencing any worrisome harm. A 5% weight loss did not show a net benefit, with probabilities of 0.13 and 0.01 at year 1 and year 2, respectively. However, these benefits were sensitive to preference weights, suggesting that even a 5% weight loss could be net beneficial for individuals with less concern about harm outcomes. The net benefit for a 10% weight loss was highest for semaglutide, followed by liraglutide and tirzepatide, with 2-year probabilities of 0.96, 0.72, and 0.60, respectively.
UNASSIGNED: The benefit of GLP-1 RAs exceeded the harms for weight loss in the first 2 years of treatment, yet the net benefit was dependent on individual\' treatment goals (10% or 5% weight loss) and willingness to accept harms in pursuit of weight loss. This implies that treatment decisions have to be personalized to individuals to optimize benefits and reduce harms and overuse of treatments. Due to varying evidence, especially regarding harm outcomes across studies, it is necessary to continuously update and monitor the benefit-harm balance of GLP-1 RAs.
UNASSIGNED: SNSF and LOOP Zurich.

BACKGROUND: Semaglutide, the only glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1 RA) available in subcutaneous and oral formulation for treatment of type 2 diabetes (T2D), has demonstrated clinically significant improvements in glycaemic control and weight in clinical trials. This study aimed to gain insights into the use of both formulations and evaluate their clinical effectiveness in a secondary care clinic in Wales.
METHODS: This was a retrospective observational analysis of adults with T2D initiated on oral or subcutaneous semaglutide. Changes from baseline in glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c), weight and other metabolic parameters were evaluated.
RESULTS: At baseline, participants (n = 103) had a mean age of 57.3 years, mean HbA1c of 79.1 mmol/mol (9.38%), mean weight of 111.8 kg and body mass index (BMI) of 39.6 kg/m2 (no statistically significant differences between oral and subcutaneous groups). At 6-month follow-up, statistically significant improvements in HbA1c (- 19.3 mmol/mol [- 1.77%] and - 20.8 mmol/mol [- 1.90%]), body weight (- 9.0 kg and - 7.2 kg), and BMI (- 3.3 kg/m2 and - 2.5 kg/m2) were observed for oral and subcutaneous semaglutide, respectively. No statistically significant differences between the formulations were observed, and safety profiles were comparable.
CONCLUSIONS: Both formulations of semaglutide provided clinically and statistically significant reductions in HbA1c and weight in real-world practice. Oral GLP-1 RA may offer a practical and effective option for the management of T2D.

OBJECTIVE: Novel long-acting drugs for type 2 diabetes mellitus may optimize patient compliance and glycaemic control. Exendin-4-IgG4-Fc (E4F4) is a long-acting glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist. This first-in-human study investigated the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetic, pharmacodynamic and immunogenicity profiles of a single subcutaneous injection of E4F4 in healthy subjects.
METHODS: This single-centre, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 1 clinical trial included 96 subjects in 10 sequential cohorts that were provided successively higher doses of E4F4 (0.45, 0.9, 1.8, 3.15, 4.5, 6.3, 8.1, 10.35, 12.6 and 14.85 mg) or placebo (ChinaDrugTrials.org.cn: ChiCTR2100049732). The primary endpoint was safety and tolerability of E4F4. Secondary endpoints were pharmacokinetic, pharmacodynamic and immunogenicity profiles of E4F4. Safety data to day 15 after the final subject in a cohort had been dosed were reviewed before commencing the next dose level.
RESULTS: E4F4 was safe and well tolerated among healthy Chinese participants in this study. There was no obvious dose-dependent relationship between frequency, severity or causality of treatment-emergent adverse events. Cmax and area under the curve of E4F4 were dose proportional over the 0.45-14.85 mg dose range. Median Tmax and t1/2 ranged from 146 to 210 h and 199 to 252 h, respectively, across E4F4 doses, with no dose-dependent trends. For the intravenous glucose tolerance test, area under the curve of glucose in plasma from time 0 to 180 min showed a dose-response relationship in the 1.8-10.35 mg dose range, with an increased response at the higher doses.
CONCLUSIONS: E4F4 exhibited an acceptable safety profile and linear pharmacokinetics in healthy subjects. The recommended phase 2 dose is 4.5-10.35 mg once every 2 weeks.

(1) Background: Oral semaglutide represents the first oral GLP-1 RA approved for the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). This real-world retrospective study aimed at evaluating its effectiveness and tolerability in the treatment of patients with T2DM when patients switched from a glucose-lowering agent to it and when it was added to the usual therapy. (2) Methods: Adult patients with T2DM taking oral semaglutide and followed in the ASUGI Diabetes Center were identified with the use of electronic medical records between October 2022 and May 2023. (3) Results: A total of 129 patients were recruited. The median follow-up was 6 months. Be it as a switchover or as an add-on therapy, oral semaglutide significantly reduced HbA1c and BMI. Switching from DPPIV inhibitors to oral semaglutide was associated with a significant reduction in HbA1c and BMI, switching from SGLT2 inhibitors was associated with a significant reduction in HbA1c, and switching from sulphonylureas was associated with a significant reduction in BMI. The median HbA1c change was associated with baseline HbA1c. SBP significantly decreased in the add-on group. Oral semaglutide was well tolerated. (4) Conclusions: This study shows that in the real-world setting, oral semaglutide is effective and safe as a switchover or as an add-on therapy for the treatment of T2DM.

Insulin is the primary treatment for type 1 diabetes. However, alternative glucose-lowering therapies are used adjunctively, but importantly are off-label in type 1 diabetes. Little work has previously been undertaken to evaluate safety with long-term efficacy and cardio-renal benefits of such therapies. We sought to investigate the real-world impact of sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor (SGLT2i) and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1 RA) therapy in individuals with type 1 diabetes in relation to effect on blood glucose levels, adverse events and cardio-renal outcomes.
We performed a retrospective cohort study of all patients aged 18 or over with type 1 diabetes on the TriNetX platform, a global collaborative network providing access to real-time, anonymised medical records. We included patients who had been treated with an SGLT2i or GLP-1 RA for at least 6 months and analysed the efficacy, safety and cardio-renal outcomes 5 years after initiation of therapy.
We identified 196,691 individuals with type 1 diabetes, 13% of whom were treated with adjunctive glucose-lowering therapy in addition to insulin. Included in the core analysis were 1822 patients treated with a GLP-1 RA and 992 individuals treated with an SGLT2i. Both agents provided clinically meaningful reductions in HbA1c (-2.6 mmol/mol [-0.2%] with SGLT2i and -5.4 mmol/mol [-0.5%] with GLP-1 RA). The SGLT2i treated cohort showed preservation of eGFR over a 5-year period compared with the GLP-1 RA treated cohort (+3.5 ml/min per 1.73 m2 vs -7.2 ml/min per 1.73 m2, respectively), including patients with established chronic kidney disease (CKD). The SGLT2i treated cohort experienced higher rates of diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) (RR 2.08 [95% CI 1.05, 4.12] p=0.0309) and urinary tract infection/pyelonephritis (RR 2.27 [95% CI 1.12, 4.55] p=0.019) compared with the GLP-1 RA treated cohort. However, the SGLT2i treated cohort were less likely to develop heart failure (RR 0.44 [95% CI 0.23, 0.83] p=0.0092), CKD (RR 0.49 [95% CI 0.28, 0.86] p=0.0118) and be hospitalised for any cause (RR 0.59 [95% CI 0.46, 0.76] p≤0.0001) when compared with the GLP-1 RA treated cohort.
Both SGLT2is and GLP-1 RAs have potential benefits as adjunctive agents in type 1 diabetes. SGLT2is provide cardio-renal benefits, despite an increase in the risk of DKA and urinary tract infection compared with GLP-1 RA therapy. Long-term evaluation of the efficacy and safety of these adjunctive therapies is required to guide their use in individuals with type 1 diabetes.

As new glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist (GLP-1 RA) formulations are available, the aim of this study was to understand dulaglutide and subcutaneous (s.c.) semaglutide dosing patterns in people with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) in the UK and Germany as well as oral semaglutide in the UK.
Adults with evidence of T2DM and a prescription of dulaglutide or semaglutide between August 2020 and December 2021 were identified using the IQVIA Longitudinal Prescription Data (LRx). Patients were divided into cohort 1 (incident users) and cohort 2 (prevalent users) based on previous exposure to GLP-1 RAs and were followed up to 12 months post-index.
During the patient selection window in Germany and the UK, 368,320 and 123,548 patients respectively received at least one prescription of a study GLP-1 RA. Among dulaglutide users in Germany at 12 months post-index, the 1.5-mg dosage formulation was the most common for both cohort 1 (65.6%) and 2 (71.2%). Among s.c. semaglutide users at 12 months post-index, 39.2% and 58.4% of cohort 1 received 0.5 mg and 1.0 mg, respectively. In the UK, at 12 months post-index, the most common dulaglutide dosage formulation was 1.5 mg (71.7% cohort 1 and 80.9% cohort 2). Among s.c. semaglutide users at 12 months post-index, 0.5- and 1.0-mg formulations were the most common for both cohort 1 (38.9% and 56.0%, respectively) and cohort 2 (29.5% and 67.1%, respectively). Prescribing of the more recently introduced 3.0- and 4.5-mg formulations for dulaglutide and oral semaglutide was also reported in the study.
Dosing patterns of GLP-1 RAs, although similar between the UK and Germany, were heterogeneous over time. Given that the higher dulaglutide doses and oral semaglutide were recently introduced to the market, additional real-world evidence studies which include clinical outcomes is required.

In elderly Type 2 Diabetes (T2D) patients the relationship between the destabilization of gut microbiome and reversal of dysbiosis via glucose lowering drugs has not been explored. We investigated the effect of 6 months therapy with a fixed combination of Liraglutide and Degludec on the composition of the gut microbiome and its relationship with Quality of Life, glucose metabolism, depression, cognitive function, and markers of inflammation in a group of very old T2D subjects (n=24, 5 women, 19 men, mean age=82 years). While we observed no significant differences in microbiome biodiversity or community among study participants (N = 24, 19 men, mean age 82 years) who responded with decreased HbA1c (n=13) versus those who did not (n=11), our results revealed a significant increase in Gram-negative Alistipes among the former group (p=0.013). Among the responders, changes in the Alistipes content were associated directly with cognitive improvement (r=0.545, p=0.062) and inversely with TNFα levels (r=-0.608, p=0.036). Our results suggest that this combination drug may have a significant impact on both gastrointestinal microbes and cognitive function in elderly T2D individuals.

(1) Background: Glucagone-Like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonists (GLP-1 RAs) (GLP-1 RAs) are incretine-based medications recommended in the treatment of type 2 Diabetes Mellitus (DM2) with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) or high or very high cardiovascular (CV) risk. However, knowledge of the direct mechanism of GLP-1 RAs on cardiac function is modest and not yet fully elucidated. Left ventricular (LV) Global Longitudinal Strain (GLS) with Speckle Tracking Echocardiography (STE) represents an innovative technique for the evaluation of myocardial contractility. (2) Methods: an observational, perspective, monocentric study was conducted in a cohort of 22 consecutive patients with DM2 and ASCVD or high/very high CV risk, enrolled between December 2019 and March 2020 and treated with GLP-1 RAs dulaglutide or semaglutide. The echocardiographic parameters of diastolic and systolic function were recorded at baseline and after six months of treatment. (3) Results: the mean age of the sample was 65 ± 10 years with a prevalence of the male sex (64%). A significant improvement in the LV GLS (mean difference: -1.4 ± 1.1%; p value < 0.001) was observed after six months of treatment with GLP-1 RAs dulaglutide or semaglutide. No relevant changes were seen in the other echocardiographic parameters. (4) Conclusions: six months of treatment with GLP-1 RAs dulaglutide or semaglutide leads to an improvement in the LV GLS in subjects with DM2 with and high/very high risk for ASCVD or with ASCVD. Further studies on larger populations and with a longer follow-up are warranted to confirm these preliminary results.