المؤلفون: Rubino, Domenica M., Greenway, Frank L., Khalid, Usman, O'Neil, Patrick M., Rosenstock, Julio, Sørrig, Rasmus, Wadden, Thomas A., Wizert, Alicja, Garvey, W. Timothy

المصدر: JAMA: Journal of the American Medical Association; 1/11/2022, Vol. 327 Issue 2, p138-150, 13p

مصطلحات موضوعية: BODY weight, OBESITY, OVERWEIGHT persons, DIABETES, WEIGHT loss

مستخلص: Key Points: Question: Among adults with overweight or obesity without diabetes, what is the effect of once-weekly subcutaneous semaglutide, 2.4 mg, vs once-daily subcutaneous liraglutide, 3.0 mg, on weight loss when each is added to counseling for diet and physical activity? Findings: In this randomized clinical trial that included 338 participants, mean body weight change from baseline to 68 weeks was –15.8% with semaglutide vs –6.4% with liraglutide, a statistically significant difference. Meaning: Among adults with overweight or obesity without diabetes, once-weekly subcutaneous semaglutide, compared with once-daily subcutaneous liraglutide, added to counseling for diet and physical activity resulted in significantly greater weight loss at 68 weeks. Importance: Phase 3 trials have not compared semaglutide and liraglutide, glucagon-like peptide-1 analogues available for weight management. Objective: To compare the efficacy and adverse event profiles of once-weekly subcutaneous semaglutide, 2.4 mg, vs once-daily subcutaneous liraglutide, 3.0 mg (both with diet and physical activity), in people with overweight or obesity. Design, Setting, and Participants: Randomized, open-label, 68-week, phase 3b trial conducted at 19 US sites from September 2019 (enrollment: September 11-November 26) to May 2021 (end of follow-up: May 11) in adults with body mass index of 30 or greater or 27 or greater with 1 or more weight-related comorbidities, without diabetes (N = 338). Interventions: Participants were randomized (3:1:3:1) to receive once-weekly subcutaneous semaglutide, 2.4 mg (16-week escalation; n = 126), or matching placebo, or once-daily subcutaneous liraglutide, 3.0 mg (4-week escalation; n = 127), or matching placebo, plus diet and physical activity. Participants unable to tolerate 2.4 mg of semaglutide could receive 1.7 mg; participants unable to tolerate 3.0 mg of liraglutide discontinued treatment and could restart the 4-week titration. Placebo groups were pooled (n = 85). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was percentage change in body weight, and confirmatory secondary end points were achievement of 10% or more, 15% or more, and 20% or more weight loss, assessed for semaglutide vs liraglutide at week 68. Semaglutide vs liraglutide comparisons were open-label, with active treatment groups double-blinded against matched placebo groups. Comparisons of active treatments vs pooled placebo were supportive secondary end points. Results: Of 338 randomized participants (mean [SD] age, 49 [13] years; 265 women [78.4%]; mean [SD] body weight, 104.5 [23.8] kg; mean [SD] body mass index, 37.5 [6.8]), 319 (94.4%) completed the trial, and 271 (80.2%) completed treatment. The mean weight change from baseline was –15.8% with semaglutide vs –6.4% with liraglutide (difference, –9.4 percentage points [95% CI, –12.0 to –6.8]; P <.001); weight change with pooled placebo was –1.9%. Participants had significantly greater odds of achieving 10% or more, 15% or more, and 20% or more weight loss with semaglutide vs liraglutide (70.9% of participants vs 25.6% [odds ratio, 6.3 {95% CI, 3.5 to 11.2}], 55.6% vs 12.0% [odds ratio, 7.9 {95% CI, 4.1 to 15.4}], and 38.5% vs 6.0% [odds ratio, 8.2 {95% CI, 3.5 to 19.1}], respectively; all P <.001). Proportions of participants discontinuing treatment for any reason were 13.5% with semaglutide and 27.6% with liraglutide. Gastrointestinal adverse events were reported by 84.1% with semaglutide and 82.7% with liraglutide. Conclusions and Relevance: Among adults with overweight or obesity without diabetes, once-weekly subcutaneous semaglutide compared with once-daily subcutaneous liraglutide, added to counseling for diet and physical activity, resulted in significantly greater weight loss at 68 weeks. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04074161 This clinical trial compares the efficacy and adverse event profiles of once-weekly subcutaneous semaglutide, 2.4 mg, vs once-daily subcutaneous liraglutide, 3.0 mg (both with diet and physical activity), in people with overweight or obesity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

: Copyright of JAMA: Journal of the American Medical Association is the property of American Medical Association and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

المؤلفون: Lara-Castro, Cristina, Newcomer, Bradley R., Rowell, Jennifer, Wallace, Penny, Shaughnessy, Sara M., Munoz, A. Julian, Shiflett, Alanna M., Rigsby, Dana Y., Lawrence, Jeannine C., Bohning, Daryl E., Buchthal, Steven, Garvey, W. Timothy

المصدر: Metabolism: Clinical & Experimental; Jan2008, Vol. 57 Issue 1, p1-8, 8p

مصطلحات موضوعية: DIABETES, PEOPLE with diabetes, OBESITY, BODY weight

مستخلص: Abstract: The study aimed to analyze the effects of a short-term very low-calorie diet (VLCD) on intramyocellular lipid (IMCL), total body fat, and insulin sensitivity in a group of obese nondiabetic and type 2 diabetic subjects. Seven untreated type 2 diabetic and 5 obese nondiabetic individuals were studied before and after a 6-day VLCD using proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy to quantify IMCL, dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry to assess body fat, and hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamps to measure peripheral insulin sensitivity. In both groups, decrements in total body fat mass and body mass index were small but statistically significant. In contrast, the diet resulted in a pronounced reduction in IMCL compared with baseline values in nondiabetic subjects (56% decrease) and type 2 diabetic subjects (40% decrease) (P < .05), and this was accompanied by an overall 9.3% increase in maximally stimulated glucose disposal rate (P < .01). Intramyocellular lipid was significantly correlated with insulin sensitivity (r = −0.69, P < .01) and waist circumference (r = 0.72 and 0.83, baseline and postdiet, respectively; both P < .01), but neither IMCL nor insulin sensitivity was related to measures of general adiposity such as body mass index, percentage of body fat, or total body fat (P = not significant). In conclusion, short-term VLCD is accompanied by small decrements in general adiposity, marked decrease in IMCL, and an increase in insulin sensitivity in nondiabetic and type 2 diabetic subjects. Therefore, rapid amelioration of insulin resistance by VLCD can be partially explained by loss of IMCL both in nondiabetic and type 2 diabetic subjects in the absence of substantial changes in total body fat. These observations are consistent with the idea that insulin resistance is more directly related to IMCL rather than to body fat per se. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

: Copyright of Metabolism: Clinical & Experimental is the property of W B Saunders and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)