No QTc Prolongation with Semaglutide: A Thorough QT Study in Healthy Subjects.

INTRODUCTION: Semaglutide is a glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) analog approved for the once-weekly treatment of type 2 diabetes. The objective of this 16-week, double-blind, single-center thorough QT study was to confirm that semaglutide treatment does not prolong cardiac repolarization versus placebo. Prolongation of the QT interval is a biomarker for ventricular tachyarrhythmia. METHODS: In a parallel design, 168 healthy subjects were randomized to the treatment or placebo arms, of whom 166 were treated with subcutaneous semaglutide (N = 83; escalated to a supratherapeutic dose of 1.5 mg) or placebo (N = 83). The subjects (60% males) had a mean age of 38.2 years and body mass index of 25.1 kg/m2. To assess QT assay sensitivity, subjects in the placebo group received a single 400 mg moxifloxacin dose as positive control, and placebo in a crossover fashion. The primary endpoint was the time-matched change from baseline in QT interval corrected individually for heart rate (ΔQTcI), calculated from 11 electrocardiogram recordings from 0 to 48 h after the last 1.5 mg dose. Similar assessments were made for the therapeutic 0.5 and 1.0 mg semaglutide dose levels. RESULTS: No QTcI prolongation occurred with any semaglutide dose; the upper limits of two-sided 90% confidence intervals of the placebo-subtracted ΔQTcI were < 10 ms at all doses and time points. Exposure-response analysis showed no dependence of QTcI on semaglutide concentration. QT assay sensitivity was confirmed. The semaglutide safety profile was similar to that of other GLP-1 receptor agonists. CONCLUSION: Based on investigations of QT/QTc, no concern with regard to ventricular arrhythmias was raised as semaglutide did not prolong the cardiac repolarization duration in healthy subjects. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT 02064348. FUNDING: Novo Nordisk.

Effects of semaglutide on beta cell function and glycaemic control in participants with type 2 diabetes: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: Semaglutide is a glucagon-like peptide-1 analogue in development for the treatment of type 2 diabetes. Its effects on first- and second-phase insulin secretion and other measures of beta cell function and glycaemic control were assessed. METHODS: In this single-centre, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group trial, conducted at the Profil Institut für Stoffwechselforschung, Germany, 75 adult (aged 18-64 years) participants with type 2 diabetes (eligibility: HbA1c of 6.5-9.0% (47.5-74.9 mmol/mol); BMI 20.0-35.0 kg/m2; and treatment with diet and exercise and/or metformin monotherapy with a dose unchanged in the 30 days prior to screening) were randomised (1:1) to once-weekly s.c. semaglutide 1.0 mg (0.25, 0.5, 1.0 mg escalated) or placebo for 12 weeks. Co-primary endpoints were changes from baseline to end of treatment in the first (AUC0-10 min) and second (AUC10-120 min) insulin secretion phases, as measured by the IVGTT. An arginine stimulation test (AST) and a 24 h meal stimulation test were also conducted. A graded glucose infusion test (GGIT) assessed insulin secretion rate (ISR) in treated participants and a group of untreated healthy participants. Safety endpoints were also assessed. RESULTS: In total, 37 participants received semaglutide and 38 received placebo. Following IVGTT, for insulin, both AUC0-10min and AUC10-120min were significantly increased with semaglutide (estimated treatment ratio [95% CI] 3.02 [2.53, 3.60] and 2.10 [1.86, 2.37], respectively; p < 0.0001). The 24 h meal test showed reduced fasting, postprandial and overall (AUC0-24h) glucose and glucagon responses with semaglutide (p < 0.0001). The AST showed that maximal insulin capacity increased following semaglutide treatment. During GGIT, semaglutide significantly increased ISR to levels similar to those in healthy participants. Semaglutide was well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: Twelve weeks of once-weekly treatment with semaglutide significantly improved beta cell function and glycaemic control in participants with type 2 diabetes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02212067 FUNDING: The study was funded by Novo Nordisk A/S.

Pharmacokinetics and Tolerability of a Single Dose of Semaglutide, a Human Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 Analog, in Subjects With and Without Renal Impairment.

BACKGROUND: The pharmacokinetics and tolerability of semaglutide, a once-weekly human glucagon-like peptide-1 analog in development for the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus, were investigated in subjects with/without renal impairment (RI). METHODS: Fifty-six subjects, categorized into renal function groups [normal, mild, moderate, severe, and end-stage renal disease (ESRD)], received a single subcutaneous dose of semaglutide 0.5 mg. Semaglutide plasma concentrations were assessed ≤480 h post-dose; the primary endpoint was the area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time zero to infinity. RESULTS: Semaglutide exposure in subjects with mild/moderate RI and ESRD was similar to that in subjects with normal renal function. In subjects with severe RI, the mean exposure of semaglutide was 22% higher than in subjects with normal renal function, and the 95% confidence interval (1.02-1.47) for the ratio exceeded the pre-specified limits (0.70-1.43). When adjusted for differences in sex, age, and body weight between the groups, all comparisons were within the pre-specified clinically relevant limits. Across RI groups there was no relationship between creatinine clearance (CLCR) and semaglutide exposure, or between CLCR and semaglutide maximum plasma drug concentration (C max). Hemodialysis did not appear to affect the pharmacokinetics of semaglutide. No appreciable changes in safety parameters or vital signs and no serious adverse events were noted. One subject with severe RI reported two major hypoglycemic events. CONCLUSION: When adjusted for differences in sex, age, and body weight, semaglutide exposure was similar between subjects with RI and subjects with normal renal function. Semaglutide (0.5 mg) was well-tolerated. Dose adjustment may not be warranted for subjects with RI. CLINICALTRIALS. GOV IDENTIFIER: NCT00833716.

Effect of Semaglutide on the Pharmacokinetics of Metformin, Warfarin, Atorvastatin and Digoxin in Healthy Subjects.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Semaglutide is a glucagon-like peptide-1 analogue in development for the once-weekly treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus. Its effect on the rate and extent of absorption of concomitant oral medications (metformin, warfarin, atorvastatin and digoxin) was evaluated in healthy subjects. METHODS: Subjects received metformin (500 mg twice daily for 3.5 days), warfarin (25 mg, single dose), atorvastatin (40 mg, single dose) or digoxin (0.5 mg, single dose) before and with subcutaneous semaglutide treatment at steady state (1.0 mg). Lack of drug-drug interaction was concluded if the 90% confidence intervals for the area under the plasma concentration-time curve ratio before and with semaglutide were within a pre-specified interval (0.80-1.25). RESULTS: Overall, metformin, warfarin, atorvastatin and digoxin pharmacokinetics were not affected to a clinically relevant degree with semaglutide co-administration. Estimated area under the plasma concentration-time curve ratios for all concomitant medications before and with semaglutide treatment were within the pre-specified interval. In addition, semaglutide did not affect maximum plasma concentration of concomitant medications to a relevant degree. Furthermore, no clinically relevant change in international normalised ratio response to warfarin was observed with semaglutide co-administration. Most adverse events with semaglutide treatment were mild or moderate. Adverse events with semaglutide and co-administered medication were comparable to those reported during treatment with semaglutide alone, and were mostly gastrointestinal related. CONCLUSIONS: No clinically significant pharmacokinetic or pharmacodynamic interactions were identified and no new safety issues observed with combined treatment with semaglutide. This suggests that no dose adjustments should be required when semaglutide is administered concomitantly with these medications.

Patient comorbidity is associated with conservative treatment of localized prostate cancer.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate how prostate cancer treatment varies by level of comorbidity among men with localized prostate cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A nationwide cohort study was conducted of all patients younger than 75 years of age with incident localized prostate cancer registered in the Danish Cancer Registry from 1 October 2003 to 31 December 2010. Number and percentages were tabulated, and the prevalence ratios were calculated of patients treated with radical prostatectomy or radiotherapy during the first year after prostate cancer diagnosis according to comorbidity level at the time of prostate cancer diagnosis. RESULTS: The study included 9643 patients, of whom 79% (7576) had no comorbidity, 10% (979) had a Charlson comorbidity index score of 1, 8% (779) had a Charlson score of 2, and 3% (309) had a Charlson score of 3 or more. The cumulative 1 year incidences of prostatectomies were 41%, 23% and 13% among those with Charlson scores of 0, 1-2 and ≥ 3, respectively. This corresponded to 1 year prevalence ratios of 0.60 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.54-0.67] and 0.33 (95% CI 0.25-0.44) for patients with Charlson scores of 1-2 and ≥ 3, respectively, compared with patients with Charlson 0. The cumulative 1 year incidence of radiotherapy did not differ much by Charlson score. The 1 year prevalence ratios of radiotherapy were 1.27 (95% CI, 1.12-1.45) and 1.10 (95% CI 0.94-1.28) for patients with Charlson scores of 1 and ≥ 2, respectively, compared with patients with Charlson 0. CONCLUSION: The results show that patients with comorbidity were treated less aggressively for their localized prostate cancer than patients without comorbidity.

Short look-back periods in pharmacoepidemiologic studies of new users of antibiotics and asthma medications introduce severe misclassification.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to quantify the effect of the look back period on the misclassification of new users of antibiotics and asthma medications. METHODS: We included all children born in Denmark from 1995 through 2006 and all prescriptions of antibiotics and asthma medication from 1995 through 2011. The study period was 2007 through 2011. True new users redeemed their first prescription in the study period whereas prior users redeemed their first prescription before the study period. Look-back periods ranged from 30 days up to 12 years prior to the study period, and we defined new users as those without a prescription in the look-back period. The relative misclassification (RM) was estimated as the number of defined new users divided by the number of true new users. RESULTS: For antibiotics, the RM decreased from 4.75 for look-back periods of 30 days to 2.36 for 2 years and 1.33 for 5 years. For asthma medication, the RM decreased from 2.53 for look-back periods of 30 days to 1.48 for 2 years and 1.20 for 5 years. Older age, male gender, and absence of treatment-related diagnoses were associated with higher RM. CONCLUSIONS: Studies applying the new user design are strongly dependent on the available information on prescriptions. For drug classes with intermittent use such as asthma medications, even a 2-year look-back period produced severe misclassification. Excluding children with a prior treatment-related diagnosis can reduce the level of misclassification.

Eighteen-year trends in stroke mortality and the prognostic influence of comorbidity.

OBJECTIVES: To examine 18-year trends in short-term and long-term stroke mortality and the prognostic influence of comorbidity. METHODS: We conducted a nationwide population-based cohort study. Using the Danish National Registry of Patients, covering all Danish hospitals, we identified all 219,354 patients with a first-time hospitalization for stroke during 1994-2011. We computed standardized 30-day, 1-year, and 5-year mortality by sex. Comorbidity categories were defined by Charlson Comorbidity Index scores of 0 (none), 1 (moderate), 2 (severe), and 3 or more (very severe). Calendar periods of diagnosis (1994-1998, 1999-2003, 2004-2008, and 2009-2011) and comorbidity categories were compared by means of mortality rate ratios based on Cox regression. RESULTS: Over time, the 30-day mortality rate ratio adjusted for age, sex, and comorbidity decreased by approximately 45% for ischemic stroke (standardized risk decreased from 17.2% in 1994-1998 to 10.6% in 2009-2011) and by 35% for intracerebral hemorrhage (from 43.2% to 33.8%). The absolute mortality reduction occurred for all levels of comorbidity. Five-year mortality risk decreased from 56.4% in 1994-1998 to 46.1% in 2004-2008 for ischemic stroke and from 66.1% to 61.0% for intracerebral hemorrhage. Comparing very severe comorbidity with no comorbidity, 30-day and 5-year mortality rate ratios were both approximately 2.5-fold increased for ischemic stroke and 1.7-fold increased for intracerebral hemorrhage. CONCLUSIONS: Short- and long-term mortality improved considerably between 1994 and 2011 for all types of stroke. Short-term mortality improved regardless of comorbidity burden. However, comorbidity burden was a strong prognostic factor for both short- and long-term mortality.

Incidence of bone metastases and skeletal-related events in breast cancer patients: a population-based cohort study in Denmark.

BACKGROUND: Breast cancer (BrCa) is the most commonly diagnosed cancer among women in the industrialized world. More than half of women presenting with metastatic BrCa develop bone metastases. Bone metastases increase the risk of skeletal-related events (SREs), defined as pathological fractures, spinal cord compression, bone pain requiring palliative radiotherapy, and orthopaedic surgery. Both bone metastases and SREs are associated with unfavorable prognosis and greatly affect quality of life. Few epidemiological data exist on SREs after primary diagnosis of BrCa and subsequent bone metastasis. We therefore estimated the incidence of bone metastases and SREs in newly-diagnosed BrCa patients in Denmark from 1999 through 2007. METHODS: We estimated the overall and annual incidence of bone metastases and SREs in newly-diagnosed breast cancer patients in Denmark from January 1, 1999 to December 31, 2007 using the Danish National Patient Registry (DNPR), which covers all Danish hospitals. We estimated the cumulative incidence of bone metastases and SREs and associated 95% confidence intervals (CI) using the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: Of the 35,912 BrCa patients, 178 (0.5%) presented with bone metastases at the time of primary breast cancer diagnosis, and of these, 77 (43.2%) developed an SRE during follow up. A total of 1,272 of 35,690 (3.6%) BrCa patients without bone metastases at diagnosis developed bone metastases during a median follow-up time of 3.4 years. Among these patients, 590 (46.4%) subsequently developed an SRE during a median follow-up time of 0.7 years. Incidence rates of bone metastases were highest the first year after the primary BrCa diagnosis, particularly among patients with advanced BrCa at diagnosis. Similarly, incidence rates of a first SRE was highest the first year after first diagnosis of a bone metastasis. CONCLUSIONS: The high incidence of SREs following the first year after first diagnosis of a bone metastasis underscores the need for early BrCa detection and research on effective treatments to delay the onset of SREs.