A model-based approach to predict individual weight loss with semaglutide in people with overweight or obesity.

AIMS: To determine the relationship between exposure and weight-loss trajectories for the glucagon-like peptide-1 analogue semaglutide for weight management. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data from one 52-week, phase 2, dose-ranging trial (once-daily subcutaneous semaglutide 0.05-0.4 mg) and two 68-week phase 3 trials (once-weekly subcutaneous semaglutide 2.4 mg) for weight management in people with overweight or obesity with or without type 2 diabetes were used to develop a population pharmacokinetic (PK) model describing semaglutide exposure. An exposure-response model describing weight change was then developed using baseline demographics, glycated haemoglobin and PK data during treatment. The ability of the exposure-response model to predict 1-year weight loss based on weight data collected at baseline and after up to 28 weeks of treatment, was assessed using three independent phase 3 trials. RESULTS: Based on population PK, exposure levels over time consistently explained the weight-loss trajectories across trials and dosing regimens. The exposure-response model had high precision and limited bias for predicting body weight loss at 1 year in independent datasets, with increased precision when data from later time points were included in the prediction. CONCLUSION: An exposure-response model has been established that quantitatively describes the relationship between systemic semaglutide exposure and weight loss and predicts weight-loss trajectories for people with overweight or obesity who are receiving semaglutide doses up to 2.4 mg once weekly.

Reducing BMI below the obesity threshold in adolescents treated with once-weekly subcutaneous semaglutide 2.4 mg.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to examine how improvement in BMI with the glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist semaglutide translated to changes in BMI category in a post hoc analysis of the double-blind, phase 3a randomized controlled Semaglutide Treatment Effect in People with obesity (STEP) TEENS trial. METHODS: Adolescents with obesity received once-weekly subcutaneous semaglutide 2.4 mg or placebo plus lifestyle intervention, which comprised counseling in healthy nutrition and a goal of 60 minutes of moderate- to high-intensity physical activity per day. Achievement of an improvement in BMI category and attainment of normal-weight or overweight BMI by week 68 were analyzed using logistic regression models. RESULTS: In the overall population, 44.9% of participants receiving semaglutide achieved weight reduction resulting in reclassification to a normal-weight or overweight BMI category versus 12.1% receiving placebo at week 68 (odds ratio: 22.7; 95% CI: 7.6-67.9). The proportion of semaglutide-treated participants in obesity class III decreased from 37.3% to 13.6% but increased with placebo. The odds ratio for achieving an improvement of at least one BMI category was significantly greater with semaglutide versus placebo (23.5; 95% CI: 9.9-55.5); an improvement of at least one BMI category was seen in 73.7% of participants receiving semaglutide compared with 19.0% of participants receiving placebo. CONCLUSIONS: Semaglutide was highly effective in reducing BMI category. While on treatment, most trial participants' BMI improved by at least one category, and >40% reached a category below the obesity threshold.

Effects of Semaglutide on Albuminuria and Kidney Function in People With Overweight or Obesity With or Without Type 2 Diabetes: Exploratory Analysis From the STEP 1, 2, and 3 Trials.

OBJECTIVE: These post hoc analyses of the Semaglutide Treatment Effect in People with obesity (STEP) 1-3 trials (NCT03548935, NCT03552757, and NCT03611582) explored the effects of semaglutide (up to 2.4 mg) on kidney function. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: STEP 1-3 included adults with overweight/obesity; STEP 2 patients also had type 2 diabetes. Participants received once-weekly subcutaneous semaglutide 1.0 mg (STEP 2 only), 2.4 mg, or placebo for 68 weeks, plus lifestyle intervention (STEP 1 and 2) or intensive behavioral therapy (STEP 3). Changes in urine albumin-to-creatinine ratio (UACR) and UACR status from baseline to week 68 were assessed for STEP 2. Changes in estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) were assessed from pooled STEP 1-3 data. RESULTS: In STEP 2, 1,205 (99.6% total cohort) patients had UACR data; geometric mean baseline UACR was 13.7, 12.5, and 13.2 mg/g with semaglutide 1.0 mg, 2.4 mg, and placebo, respectively. At week 68, UACR changes were -14.8% and -20.6% with semaglutide 1.0 mg and 2.4 mg, respectively, and +18.3% with placebo (between-group differences [95% CI] vs. placebo: -28.0% [-37.3, -17.3], P < 0.0001 for semaglutide 1.0 mg; -32.9% [-41.6, -23.0], P = 0.003 for semaglutide 2.4 mg). UACR status improved in greater proportions of patients with semaglutide 1.0 mg and 2.4 mg versus placebo (P = 0.0004 and P = 0.0014, respectively). In the pooled STEP 1-3 analyses, 3,379 participants had eGFR data; there was no difference between semaglutide 2.4 mg and placebo in eGFR trajectories at week 68. CONCLUSIONS: Semaglutide improved UACR in adults with overweight/obesity and type 2 diabetes. In participants with normal kidney function, semaglutide did not have an effect on eGFR decline.

Semaglutide treatment for obesity in teenagers: a plain language summary of the STEP TEENS research study.

What is this summary about? This is a plain language summary of the STEP TEENS research study, which was originally published in the New England Journal of Medicine. As more teenagers are living with obesity than ever before, researchers are searching for new treatments. This was the first study looking at how well the medicine semaglutide works as a treatment for obesity in teenagers. What were the results? In this study, researchers looked at the effect of semaglutide on body mass index (BMI) and weight loss compared to a dummy medicine (placebo). A 17% decrease in BMI was reported for teenagers treated with semaglutide compared with placebo. For weight loss, an 18 kg decrease was seen when comparing semaglutide with placebo. Researchers found that there were more teenagers who had weight loss of 5%, 10%, 15%, and 20% or more in the group given semaglutide compared with the group given placebo. Improvements were also seen with semaglutide treatment for some risk factors for other diseases caused by obesity. Semaglutide was generally well tolerated by the teenagers with obesity in this study, and serious medication side effects did not happen very often. What do the results mean? The results from this study showed that there were no safety issues with semaglutide in teenagers with obesity, and that semaglutide can be used to help them lose weight. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT04102189 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Once-Weekly Semaglutide in Adolescents with Obesity.

BACKGROUND: A once-weekly, 2.4-mg dose of subcutaneous semaglutide, a glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist, is used to treat obesity in adults, but assessment of the drug in adolescents has been lacking. METHODS: In this double-blind, parallel-group, randomized, placebo-controlled trial, we enrolled adolescents (12 to <18 years of age) with obesity (a body-mass index [BMI] in the 95th percentile or higher) or with overweight (a BMI in the 85th percentile or higher) and at least one weight-related coexisting condition. Participants were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to receive once-weekly subcutaneous semaglutide (at a dose of 2.4 mg) or placebo for 68 weeks, plus lifestyle intervention. The primary end point was the percentage change in BMI from baseline to week 68; the secondary confirmatory end point was weight loss of at least 5% at week 68. RESULTS: A total of 201 participants underwent randomization, and 180 (90%) completed treatment. All but one of the participants had obesity. The mean change in BMI from baseline to week 68 was -16.1% with semaglutide and 0.6% with placebo (estimated difference, -16.7 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], -20.3 to -13.2; P<0.001). At week 68, a total of 95 of 131 participants (73%) in the semaglutide group had weight loss of 5% or more, as compared with 11 of 62 participants (18%) in the placebo group (estimated odds ratio, 14.0; 95% CI, 6.3 to 31.0; P<0.001). Reductions in body weight and improvement with respect to cardiometabolic risk factors (waist circumference and levels of glycated hemoglobin, lipids [except high-density lipoprotein cholesterol], and alanine aminotransferase) were greater with semaglutide than with placebo. The incidence of gastrointestinal adverse events was greater with semaglutide than with placebo (62% vs. 42%). Five participants (4%) in the semaglutide group and no participants in the placebo group had cholelithiasis. Serious adverse events were reported in 15 of 133 participants (11%) in the semaglutide group and in 6 of 67 participants (9%) in the placebo group. CONCLUSIONS: Among adolescents with obesity, once-weekly treatment with a 2.4-mg dose of semaglutide plus lifestyle intervention resulted in a greater reduction in BMI than lifestyle intervention alone. (Funded by Novo Nordisk; STEP TEENS ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04102189.).

Effect of Weekly Subcutaneous Semaglutide vs Daily Liraglutide on Body Weight in Adults With Overweight or Obesity Without Diabetes: The STEP 8 Randomized Clinical Trial.

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.

Differences and Temporal Changes in Risk of Invasive Pneumococcal Disease in Adults with Hematological Malignancies: Results from a Nationwide 16-Year Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Patients with hematological malignancies (HM) are known to carry an increased risk of invasive pneumococcal disease (IPD). However, temporal variations in IPD risks following a cancer diagnosis remain poorly characterized. To inform vaccine guidelines and patient management, we assessed the IPD incidence among patients with HM and other malignancies. METHODS: The study population included all individuals aged ≥15 years during 2000-2016 in Denmark. Variations in incidences of IPD over time and between different types of hematological malignancies and diagnoses were assessed by Poisson regression. RESULTS: During 85 002 224 person-years of observation, 13 332 episodes of a first IPD were observed, of which 765 (5.7%) occurred among individuals with HM. Among HM patients, the IPD incidence rate decreased continuously during the study period (rate ratio per year, 0.91; 95% confidence interval, .90-.92). The risk of IPD in patients with HM was up to 39 times higher when compared to the background population and was highest for multiple myeloma, acute lymphoblastic leukemia, and chronic lymphocytic leukemia. Unlike other malignancies, the increased IPD risk did not wane with the time since HM diagnosis. We found a vaccination uptake of only ≤2% in patients with HM and ≤1% for those with other types of malignancies. CONCLUSIONS: Adults with HM in general and patients with lymphoid malignancies in particular have an increased risk for IPD, compared with patients with other types of cancer and with individuals free of cancer. The pneumococcal vaccination uptake is extremely low in this at risk-population. Efforts to prevent IPD in HM patients are continuously warranted.

Semaglutide (SUSTAIN and PIONEER) reduces cardiovascular events in type 2 diabetes across varying cardiovascular risk.

AIM: To investigate the effects of semaglutide versus comparators on major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE: cardiovascular [CV] death, nonfatal myocardial infarction [MI] and nonfatal stroke) and hospitalization for heart failure (HF) in the SUSTAIN (subcutaneous semaglutide) and PIONEER (oral semaglutide) trials across subgroups of varying CV risk. METHODS: Post hoc analyses of individual patient-level data combined from SUSTAIN 6 and PIONEER 6 were performed to assess MACE and HF. MACE were analysed in subjects with and without: established CV disease and/or chronic kidney disease; prior MI or stroke; and prior HF. MACE in the SUSTAIN and PIONEER glycaemic efficacy trials were also assessed. RESULTS: In SUSTAIN 6 and PIONEER 6 combined, the hazard ratio (HR) for effect of semaglutide versus placebo on overall MACE was 0.76 (95% CI 0.62, 0.92), which was mainly driven by the effect on nonfatal stroke (HR 0.65 [95% CI 0.43, 0.97]). The HR for hospitalization for HF was 1.03 (95% CI 0.75, 1.40). The HRs for MACE were <1.0 in all subgroups, except for those with prior HF (HR 1.06 [95% CI 0.72, 1.57]); P-values for interaction of subgroup on treatment effect were >0.05, except for HF (0.046). In the combined glycaemic efficacy trials, the HR for effect of semaglutide versus comparators on MACE was 0.85 (95% CI 0.55, 1.33). CONCLUSIONS: In SUSTAIN and PIONEER combined, glucagon-like peptide-1 analogue semaglutide showed consistent effects on MACE versus comparators across varying CV risk. No effect of semaglutide on MACE was observed in subjects with prior HF.

Risk factors for infections in newly diagnosed Multiple Myeloma patients: A Danish retrospective nationwide cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: Infections pose the greatest risk of early death in patients with Multiple Myeloma. However, few studies have analyzed the risk factors for infections in Multiple Myeloma patients. The aim of this study was to analyze the risk factors infections within a population-based MM cohort. METHODS: Using Danish registries (from 2005 to 2013), we analyzed all ICD-10 codes for infections within the first 6 months of Multiple Myeloma diagnosis in 2557 patients. RESULTS: Pneumonia and sepsis represented 46% of infections. Multivariable regression analysis showed that risk factors for pneumonia were male gender (HR 1.4; P = 0.001), ISS II (HR 1.6; P = 0.0004) and ISSIII (HR 1.8; P = 0.0004) and elevated LDH (HR 2.6; P = 0.0008). Risk factors for sepsis were high bone marrow plasma cell % (HR 1.1; P = 0.038), ISS II (HR 1.7; P = 0.007) ISS III (HR 2.0; P = 0.002) and creatinine (HR 2.1; P = 0.002). Neither immunoparesis (hypogammaglobulinemia) nor comorbidity was significant risk factors. CONCLUSIONS: Our study suggests that tumor burden and renal impairment are risk factors for pneumonia and sepsis in the early phase of Multiple Myeloma.

Risk factors for blood stream infections in multiple myeloma: A population-based study of 1154 patients in Denmark.

OBJECTIVES: Multiple myeloma (MM) patients are at high risk of developing infections. The risk factors for blood stream infections (BSI) in MM patients are, however, less described. The aim of this study was to analyze the epidemiology of and risk factors for BSI in an unselected MM population. METHODS: Nationwide Danish MM data of 1154 patients diagnosed from 2010 to 2013 were linked with nationwide data on blood cultures (BCs; from 2010 to 2016) to assess the peak period of having a BC taken and BC positive for pathogenic microorganisms. RESULTS: The highest number of BC was taken in the period from day -30 to day +180 from date of MM diagnosis. Risk factors for having a BC sampling within the peak period were as follows: immunoparesis (HR 1.5 [1.1-2.1]; P = .007), ISS-III (HR 1.3 [1.0-1.7]; P = .035), high creatinine (HR 1.4 (1.0-2.0); P = .046), and high lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) (HR 2.8 (1.6-4.7; P < .001). Risk factors for positive BC during the peak period were ISS-III (HR 2.0 (1.1-3.7); P = .023) and high LDH (HR 3.4 [1.1-10.3]; P = .028). CONCLUSIONS: Our results show that MM patients with aggressive disease presentation are at the highest risk of developing BSI. Furthermore, our study implies that MM is diagnosed in relation to a serious infection for a large number of patients.

Immunoparesis in newly diagnosed Multiple Myeloma patients: Effects on overall survival and progression free survival in the Danish population.

Immunoparesis (hypogammaglobulinemia) is associated to an unfavorable prognosis in newly diagnosed Multiple myeloma (MM) patients. However, this finding has not been validated in an unselected population-based cohort. We analyzed 2558 newly diagnosed MM patients in the Danish Multiple Myeloma Registry representing the entire MM population in Denmark from 2005-2013. Two-thousand two hundred and fifty three patients (90%) presented with reduction below lower normal levels of at least one uninvolved immunoglobulin. Using multivariable Cox regression we found that high age, high ISS score, high LDH and IgA MM were associated to both shorter overall survival and progression free survival. Furthermore, bone marrow plasma cell % was associated to short progression free survival. Immunoparesis had no independent significant effect on OS (HR 0.9 (95%CI: 0.7;1.0; p = 0.12)). Likewise, the number of suppressed immunoglobulins or the relative degree of suppressed uninvolved immunoglobulins from lower normal level (quantitative immunoparesis) was not associated to OS in the multivariable analysis. However, quantitative immunoparesis with at least 25% reduction (from lower normal level) of uninvolved immunoglobulins was associated to shorter PFS for the entire population. The impact of quantitative immunoparesis on PFS was present irrespective of calendar periods 2005-2008 and 2009-2013. Our population-based study does not confirm that immunoparesis at diagnosis is an independent prognostic factor regarding OS. However, quantitative immunoparesis is associated to a shorter PFS.

Smoldering multiple myeloma risk factors for progression: a Danish population-based cohort study.

Several risk scores for disease progression in patients with smoldering multiple myeloma (SMM) have been proposed; however, all have been developed using single-center registries. To examine risk factors for time to progression (TTP) to multiple myeloma (MM) for SMM, we analyzed a nationwide population-based cohort of 321 patients with newly diagnosed SMM registered within the Danish Multiple Myeloma Registry between 2005 and 2014. Significant univariable risk factors for TTP were selected for multivariable Cox regression analyses. We found that both an M-protein ≥30 g/L and immunoparesis significantly influenced TTP (HR 2.7, 95%CI (1.5;4.7), P = 0.001, and HR 3.3, 95%CI (1.4;7.8), P = 0.002, respectively). High free light chain (FLC) ratio did not significantly influence TTP in our cohort. Therefore, our data do not support recent IMWG proposal of identifying patients with FLC ratio above 100 as having ultra high-risk of transformation to MM. Using only immunoparesis and M-protein ≥30 g/L, we created a scoring system to identify low-, intermediate-, and high-risk SMM. This first population-based study of patients with SMM confirms that an M-protein ≥30 g/L and immunoparesis remain important risk factors for progression to MM.