Trial reportDiabetes, obesity & metabolism2016

Once-weekly glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist dulaglutide significantly decreases glycated haemoglobin compared with once-daily liraglutide in Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes: 52 weeks of treatment in a randomized phase III study.

M Odawara, J Miyagawa, N Iwamoto, Y Takita, T Imaoka, T Takamura

Open access · hybridAbstract readClinical Trial, Phase IIIComparative StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Diabetes, obesity & metabolism, 2016. The graph read 1 number from its abstract, feeding 1 cell of the map: it supports the treatment in 1. Cited by 31 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

1number the graph read from it
1cell of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
4.0field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

← favours the treatmentfavours the comparator →
-0.390 · no effect
Glycemic controlfavours the treatment · against placebo · obesity, t2dfeeds one cell of the map
Δ -0.20-0.39 to -0.01p = 0.04
RESULTS: At week 52, dulaglutide decreased HbA1c significantly from baseline compared with liraglutide [least squares mean difference: -0.20; 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.39, -0.01; p = 0.04].

clause the extractor read what became the number

2 · Its place on the map

Where it lands on the map

Rows are treatments, columns are outcomes. The coloured squares are the cells this paper feeds, coloured by the vote it casts there. Click one to jump to what this paper adds to it.

supports the treatmentfavours the comparatorno clear differenceread, but no usable result
3 · What it changes

What it adds to each cell

For every cell the paper feeds: the belief in the claim with and without this paper, and this paper's estimate drawn against every other readable study in the cell. The ringed dot is this paper.

GLP-1 receptor agonists×glycemic control

SupportsOpen on the map →What to test next →

40 readable studies in this cell: 96 favour the treatment, 17 find no difference, 10 favour the comparator.

Belief with this paper
0.91replicated · 68 families support, 7 contradict · against placebo
Without it
0.91This paper does not move the number.
← favours the treatmentfavours the comparator →
0 · no effect
This paper · 2016
Δ -0.20-0.39 to -0.01
NCT017204463,297 enrolled · 2013
Δ -0.66-0.80 to -0.52
NCT036893742,274 enrolled · 2018
Δ -0.29-0.38 to -0.20
NCT039879191,879 enrolled · 2019
Δ -0.51-0.64 to -0.38
NCT026078651,864 enrolled · 2016
Δ -0.50-0.60 to -0.40
NCT013360231,663 enrolled · 2011
Treatment contrast -0.64-0.75 to -0.53
NCT040178321,441 enrolled · 2019
Δ -0.20-0.30 to -0.10
NCT018365231,398 enrolled · 2013
Δ -0.20-0.32 to -0.07
NCT019301881,231 enrolled · 2013
Δ -1.06-1.21 to -0.91
NCT007344741,202 enrolled · 2008
Δ -0.71-0.87 to -0.55
NCT020581471,170 enrolled · 2014
Δ -0.29-0.38 to -0.19
NCT003184611,091 enrolled · 2006
Δ -1.09-1.30 to -0.88
NCT021289321,089 enrolled · 2014
Δ -0.81-0.96 to -0.67
4 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

5 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

31 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 56 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. American Association of Clinical Endocrinology Clinical Practice Guideline: Developing a Diabetes Mellitus Comprehensive Care Plan-2022 Update.Endocrine practice : official journal of the American College of Endocrinology and the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists · 2022
    Guideline
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Observational
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Consensus Recommendations on GLP-1 RA Use in the Management of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: South Asian Task Force.Diabetes therapy : research, treatment and education of diabetes and related disorders · 2019
    Review
6 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

7 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

M OdawaraDivision of Diabetes, Endocrinology and Metabolism, Department of Diabetes, Endocrinology, Metabolism and Rheumatology, Tokyo Medical University, Tokyo, Japan.
J MiyagawaDivision of Diabetes, Endocrinology and Metabolism, Department of Internal Medicine, Hyogo College of Medicine, Nishinomiya, Japan.
N IwamotoEli Lilly Japan K.K., Kobe, Japan.
Y TakitaEli Lilly Japan K.K., Kobe, Japan.
T ImaokaEli Lilly Japan K.K., Kobe, Japan.
T TakamuraDepartment of Comprehensive Metabology, Kanazawa University Graduate School of Medical Sciences, Kanazawa, Japan.
Eli Lilly (Japan) · JPHyogo Medical University · JPKanazawa University · JPTokyo Medical University · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

8 · The paper itself

Abstract

The marked sentences are the ones the graph read a number from.

aimsTo examine the efficacy and safety of once-weekly dulaglutide 0.75 mg monotherapy compared with once-daily liraglutide 0.9 mg in Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) for 52 weeks.

methodsWe conducted a phase III, randomized, 52-week (26-week primary endpoint), active- and placebo-controlled trial comparing 492 Japanese patients (dulaglutide, n = 281; liraglutide, n = 141; and placebo, n = 70). Participants and investigators were blinded to treatment assignment for dulaglutide and placebo but not for liraglutide (open-label comparator); after 26 weeks, patients randomized to placebo were switched to once-weekly dulaglutide 0.75 mg (open-label). The present paper reports results for patients treated with dulaglutide and patients treated with liraglutide for 52 weeks.

resultsAt week 52, dulaglutide decreased HbA1c significantly from baseline compared with liraglutide [least squares mean difference: -0.20; 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.39, -0.01; p = 0.04]. At week 52 (last observation carried forward), dulaglutide significantly decreased pre- and post-dinner blood glucose (BG) levels, the mean of seven-point self-monitored BG profiles, the mean of all postprandial BG levels and circadian variation compared with liraglutide. Body weight was generally stable in both groups through 52 weeks. The most frequently reported adverse events were nasopharyngitis, constipation, nausea and diarrhoea. Eight dulaglutide-treated (2.9%) and four liraglutide-treated (2.9%) patients reported hypoglycaemia, with no event being severe.

conclusionsMonotherapy with once-weekly dulaglutide 0.75 mg was effective and safe in Japanese patients with T2D, with better glycaemic control compared with once-daily liraglutide 0.9 mg.

Indexed as

AgedBlood GlucoseBody WeightDiabetes Mellitus, Type 2Double-Blind MethodDrug Administration ScheduleFemaleGlucagon-Like PeptidesGlycated HemoglobinHumansHypoglycemiaHypoglycemic AgentsImmunoglobulin Fc FragmentsJapanLiraglutideMaleBlood GlucosedulaglutideGlucagon-Like PeptidesGlycated Hemoglobinhemoglobin A1c protein, humanHypoglycemic AgentsImmunoglobulin Fc FragmentsLiraglutideRecombinant Fusion ProteinsdulaglutideGLP-1 receptor agonistliraglutidetype 2 diabetes

Identifiers

PMID26661514
PMCPMC5064615
OpenAlexW1951367122

What Socratic holds

Texttitle and abstract
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.