SynthesisThe Journal of clinical endocrinology and metabolism2020

Efficacy of Once-Weekly Semaglutide vs Empagliflozin Added to Metformin in Type 2 Diabetes: Patient-Level Meta-analysis.

Ildiko Lingvay, Matthew S Capehorn, Andrei-Mircea Catarig, Pierre Johansen, Jack Lawson, Anna Sandberg, Robert Shaw, Abby Paine

Open access · hybridFull text readMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Journal of clinical endocrinology and metabolism, 2020. The graph read 2 numbers from its abstract, feeding 2 cells of the map, but none could be read as for or against, so it casts no vote. It also reports 2 associations that do not count as treatment evidence, such as difference -0.61 (-0.72 to -0.49) for mean HbA1c. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

2numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.7field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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.

Read, but not usablea number the graph found but could not read as for or against

Mean HbA1cOW semaglutide 1 mg vs OD empagliflozin 25 mgan association or prognostic statement, not a treatment comparison · t2dfeeds one cell of the map
Δ -0.61-0.72 to -0.49< 0.0001
Our analyses showed that OW semaglutide significantly reduced mean HbA1c and body weight vs empagliflozin (estimated treatment difference: -0.61%-point [95% confidence interval (CI): -0.72; -0.49] and -1.65 kg [95% CI: -2.22; -1.08], respectively; both P < 0.0001).
Body weightOW semaglutide 1 mg vs OD empagliflozin 25 mgan association or prognostic statement, not a treatment comparison · t2dfeeds one cell of the map
Δ -1.65-2.22 to -1.08< 0.0001
Our analyses showed that OW semaglutide significantly reduced mean HbA1c and body weight vs empagliflozin (estimated treatment difference: -0.61%-point [95% confidence interval (CI): -0.72; -0.49] and -1.65 kg [95% CI: -2.22; -1.08], respectively; both P < 0.0001).

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

No readable resultOpen 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 itNot a counted family in this claim, so removing it changes nothing.
← favours the treatmentfavours the comparator →
0 · no effect
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

This paper's own estimate is on a different scale from the rest of the cell, so it is not drawn here.

GLP-1 receptor agonists×body weight & composition

No readable resultOpen on the map →What to test next →

40 readable studies in this cell: 83 favour the treatment, 15 find no difference, 11 favour the comparator.

Belief with this paper
0.90replicated · 64 families support, 7 contradict · against placebo
Without itNot a counted family in this claim, so removing it changes nothing.
← favours the treatmentfavours the comparator →
0 · no effect
NCT012722193,731 enrolled · 2011
Δ -5.39-5.82 to -4.95
Δ -17.3-18.1 to -16.6
NCT017204463,297 enrolled · 2013
Δ -2.95-3.47 to -2.44
NCT035489351,961 enrolled · 2018
Δ -12.4-13.4 to -11.5
NCT039879191,879 enrolled · 2019
Δ -1.70-2.60 to -0.70
NCT026078651,864 enrolled · 2016
Δ -2.50-3.00 to -2.00
NCT056467061,407 enrolled · 2023
Δ -14.8-16.2 to -13.4
NCT018365231,398 enrolled · 2013
Δ -4.90-5.65 to -4.16
NCT035527571,210 enrolled · 2018
Δ -6.21-7.28 to -5.15
NCT007344741,202 enrolled · 2008
Δ -1.50-2.08 to -0.92
Δ -10.4-11.2 to -9.50
NCT020581471,170 enrolled · 2014
Δ 14.38.37 to 20.3

This paper's own estimate is on a different scale from the rest of the cell, so it is not drawn here.

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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 31 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
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

8 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Ildiko LingvayUniversity of Texas Southwestern Medical Center at Dallas, Harry Hines Boulevard, Dallas, Texas.
Matthew S CapehornRotherham Institute for Obesity, Clifton Medical Centre, Doncaster Gate, Rotherham, UK.
Andrei-Mircea CatarigNovo Nordisk, Vandtårnsvej, Søborg, Denmark.
Pierre JohansenNovo Nordisk, Vandtårnsvej, Søborg, Denmark.
Jack LawsonNovo Nordisk, Vandtårnsvej, Søborg, Denmark.
Anna SandbergNovo Nordisk, Vandtårnsvej, Søborg, Denmark.
Robert ShawNovo Nordisk, Vandtårnsvej, Søborg, Denmark.
Abby Paine
Novo Nordisk (Denmark) · DKThe University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center · US

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.

contextNo head-to-head trials have directly compared once-weekly (OW) semaglutide, a human glucagon-like peptide-1 analog, with empagliflozin, a sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitor, in type 2 diabetes (T2D).

objectiveWe indirectly compared the efficacy of OW semaglutide 1 mg vs once-daily (OD) empagliflozin 25 mg in patients with T2D inadequately controlled on metformin monotherapy, using individual patient data (IPD) and meta-regression methodology. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, AND

interventionsIPD for patients with T2D receiving metformin monotherapy and randomized to OW semaglutide 1 mg (SUSTAIN 2, 3, 8 trials), or to OD empagliflozin 25 mg (PIONEER 2 trial) were included. Meta-regression analyses were adjusted for potential prognostic factors and effect modifiers.

main outcome measuresThe primary efficacy outcomes were change from baseline to end-of-treatment (~1 year) in HbA1c (%-point) and body weight (kg). Responder outcomes and other clinically relevant efficacy measures were analyzed.

resultsBaseline characteristics were similar between OW semaglutide (n = 995) and empagliflozin (n = 410). Our analyses showed that OW semaglutide significantly reduced mean HbA1c and body weight vs empagliflozin (estimated treatment difference: -0.61%-point [95% confidence interval (CI): -0.72; -0.49] and -1.65 kg [95% CI: -2.22; -1.08], respectively; both P < 0.0001). Complementary analyses supported the robustness of these results. A significantly greater proportion of patients on OW semaglutide vs empagliflozin also achieved HbA1c targets and weight-loss responses.

conclusionsThis indirect comparison suggests that OW semaglutide 1 mg provides superior reductions in HbA1c and body weight vs OD empagliflozin 25 mg in patients with T2D when added to metformin monotherapy.

Indexed as

Benzhydryl CompoundsClinical Trials as TopicDiabetes Mellitus, Type 2Drug Therapy, CombinationFemaleGlucagon-Like PeptidesGlucosidesGlycated HemoglobinHumansHypoglycemic AgentsMaleMetforminMiddle AgedSemaglutideTreatment OutcomeBenzhydryl CompoundsempagliflozinGlucagon-Like PeptidesGlucosidesGlycated Hemoglobinhemoglobin A1c protein, humanHypoglycemic AgentsMetforminSemaglutideGLP-1 receptor agonistindirect comparisonindividual patient dataSGLT-2 inhibitortype 2 diabetes

Identifiers

PMID32827435
PMCPMC7549924
OpenAlexW3080722123

What Socratic holds

Textfull text, public
LicenceCC BY
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.