Dataset Information

Neoplasms Reported With Liraglutide or Placebo in People With Type 2 Diabetes: Results From the LEADER Randomized Trial.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

This study explored neoplasm risk with liraglutide versus placebo in the LEADER (Liraglutide Effect and Action in Diabetes: Evaluation of Cardiovascular Outcome Results) cohort.

Research design and methods

LEADER (NCT01179048) was an international, phase 3b, randomized, double-blind, controlled trial. Participants aged ≥50 years with type 2 diabetes and high cardiovascular risk were assigned 1:1 to receive liraglutide (≤1.8 mg daily; n = 4,668) or placebo (n = 4,672) in addition to standard care and monitored for 3.5-5 years (median follow-up 3.8 years). The occurrence of neoplasms was a prespecified, exploratory secondary end point. Post hoc analyses of the time to the first confirmed neoplasms were conducted using a Cox regression model.

Results

Neoplasm was confirmed in 10.1% of patients with liraglutide versus 9.0% with placebo (hazard ratio [HR] 1.12 [95% CI 0.99; 1.28]). The HR (95% CI) for liraglutide versus placebo was 1.06 (0.90; 1.25) for malignant neoplasms and 1.16 (0.93; 1.44) for benign neoplasms. Sensitivity analyses excluding neoplasms occurring <1 year or <2 years after randomization and analyses by sex provided similar results. In our main analyses, the 95% CI for the HR included one for all malignant neoplasms evaluated (including pancreatic and thyroid neoplasms) except for prostate neoplasms, which occurred in fewer liraglutide-treated patients.

Conclusions

LEADER was not primarily designed to assess neoplasm risk. Firm conclusions cannot be made regarding numeric imbalances observed for individual neoplasm types (e.g., pancreatic cancer) that occurred infrequently. LEADER data do, however, exclude a major increase in the risk of total malignant neoplasms with liraglutide versus placebo. Additional studies are needed to assess longer-term exposure.

SUBMITTER: Nauck MA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6463597 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundLiraglutide is an antidiabetic agent with cardioprotective effect. The purpose of this study is to test efficacy of liraglutide to improve diabetic cardiomyopathy in patients with diabetes mellitus type 2 (DM2) without cardiovascular disease.MethodsPatients with DM2 were randomly assigned to receive liraglutide 1.8 mg/day or placebo in this double-blind trial of 26 weeks. Primary outcome measures were LV diastolic function (early (E) and late (A) transmitral peak flow rate, E/A ratio, early deceleration peak (Edec), early peak mitral annular septal tissue velocity (Ea) and estimated LV filling pressure (E/Ea), and systolic function (stroke volume, ejection fraction, cardiac output, cardiac index and peak ejection rate) assessed with CMR. Intention-to-treat analysis of between-group differences was performed using ANCOVA. Mean estimated treatment differences (95% confidence intervals) are reported.Results23 patients were randomized to liraglutide and 26 to placebo. As compared with placebo, liraglutide significantly reduced E (- 56 mL/s (- 91 to - 21)), E/A ratio (- 0.17 (- 0.27 to - 0.06)), Edec (- 0.9 mL/s2 * 10-3 (- 1.3 to - 0.2)) and E/Ea (- 1.8 (- 3.0 to - 0.6)), without affecting A (3 mL/s (- 35 to 41)) and Ea (0.4 cm/s (- 0.9 to 1.4)). Liraglutide reduced stroke volume (- 9 mL (- 16 to - 2)) and ejection fraction (- 3% (- 6 to - 0.1)), but did not change cardiac output (- 0.4 L/min (- 0.9 to 0.2)), cardiac index (- 0.1 L/min/m2 (- 0.4 to 0.1)) and peak ejection rate (- 46 mL/s (- 95 to 3)).ConclusionsLiraglutide reduced early LV diastolic filling and LV filling pressure, thereby unloading the left ventricle. LV systolic function reduced and remained within normal range. Future studies are needed to investigate if liraglutide-induced left ventricular unloading slows progression of diabetic cardiomyopathy into symptomatic stages. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01761318.

Project description:BackgroundStandardized patient-reported outcome (PRO) questionnaires can be utilized to evaluate treatment satisfaction (subjective evaluation of treatment) in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D). These outcomes are important because they may affect patient adherence and overall study results.MethodsPROs were evaluated in two randomized 26-week clinical trials in Japanese patients with T2D taking dulaglutide 0.75 mg (dulaglutide) once weekly; comparators were once-daily liraglutide (0.9 mg/day) and once-weekly placebo in one study and once-daily insulin glargine (glargine) in the other study. The Perceptions About Medications-Diabetes 21 Questionnaire - Japanese version (PAM-D21-J) and the Injectable Diabetes Medication Questionnaire - Japanese version (IDMQ-J) were completed by patients in both studies. These measures were both considered exploratory endpoints. All scale scores range from 0 to 100, with higher scores reflecting better outcomes.ResultsPatients reported that dulaglutide was more convenient and flexible than liraglutide (PAM-D21-J Convenience/Flexibility subscale: dulaglutide least-square mean [LSM], 84.58; liraglutide LSM, 78.94; p = .026), and that they were more satisfied with dulaglutide than with liraglutide (IDMQ-J Satisfaction subscale: dulaglutide, 75.24; liraglutide, 69.53; p = .012). Patients also reported that dulaglutide was more convenient and flexible than glargine (PAM-D21-J Convenience/Flexibility subscale: dulaglutide, 87.89; glargine, 79.22; p < .001), and that they were more satisfied with dulaglutide than with glargine (IDMQ-J Satisfaction subscale: dulaglutide, 78.86; glargine, 69.66; p < .001), and felt dulaglutide was more effective than glargine, with fewer symptoms and adverse events (PAM-D21-J Perceived Effectiveness subscale: dulaglutide, 77.61; glargine, 67.22; p < .001; Emotional Effects subscale: dulaglutide, 93.02; glargine, 89.55; p = .017; IDMQ-J Blood Glucose Control subscale: dulaglutide, 76.33; glargine, 67.57; p < .001). In addition, patients responded that dulaglutide was superior to placebo in the PAM-D21-J Convenience/Flexibility, Perceived Effectiveness, and Emotional Effects subscales and all IDMQ-J subscales (Satisfaction, Ease of Use, Lifestyle Impact, Blood Glucose Control).ConclusionsOverall, after 26 weeks of once-weekly dulaglutide administration in Japanese patients with T2D, PROs were generally positive versus the three comparator treatments (liraglutide, glargine, and placebo), suggesting increased treatment satisfaction through better blood glucose control and convenience/flexibility and reduced negative emotional effects of diabetes.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov (monotherapy study: NCT01558271 , registered March 12, 2012; combination therapy study: NCT01584232 , registered April 23, 2012).