Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Evaluation of Patient-Reported Satisfaction and Clinical Efficacy of Once-Weekly Semaglutide in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes: An Ambispective Study

  • Original Research
  • Published:
Advances in Therapy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Introduction

The method of therapy administration and injection device characteristics have been documented to influence perceptions and preference of treatment among patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D). We aimed to assess the metabolic effectiveness and patient-reported satisfaction of once-weekly semaglutide compared to liraglutide in suboptimally controlled patients with T2D.

Methods

We conducted this single-center cohort study at diabetes center clinics at a tertiary care hospital between February 2021 and August 2021. We included suboptimally controlled patients with T2D who had been treated with liraglutide for at least 3 months at baseline, then shifted to once-weekly semaglutide and followed up for the same period. Ambulatory glucose profile (AGP) metrics [i.e., mean glucose level, glycemic variability (GV), time above range (TAR), and time in range (TIR)] for baseline and follow-up were compared. To assess the satisfaction with shifting, we used the valid Arabic version of the Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire status (DTSQs) and change (DTSQc) while the injection device preference was assessed using the Diabetes Injection Device Preference Questionnaire (DID-PQ).

Results

We included 52 patients (25 male and 27 female), with a mean age of 48 (± 6) years and a mean diabetes mellitus duration of 7.27 (± 3.79) years. We observed a significantly decreased mean HbA1c level following semaglutide treatment (7.79% at study end vs. 8.07% at baseline, p < 0.001) and body weight (84.64 ± 7.68 vs. 87.15 ± 8.011, p < 0.001). Compared to the glucometrics data at baseline, we observed a significantly improved mean average glucose, GV, TAR, and TIR (p < 0.001). Data from the DTSQs and DTSQc questionnaires showed a high level of patient-reported satisfaction after shifting to semaglutide treatment. All patients preferred/strongly preferred once-weekly semaglutide over liraglutide in most DID-PQ questionnaire domains.

Conclusions

Switching from once-daily liraglutide to once-weekly semaglutide led to improvements in both clinical measures of glycemic control and patient-reported satisfaction.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Cho NH, Shaw JE, Karuranga S, et al. IDF Diabetes Atlas: global estimates of diabetes prevalence for 2017 and projections for 2045. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2018;138:271–81.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Abdelhaleem IA, Salamah HM, Alsabbagh FA, et al. Efficacy and safety of imeglimin in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials. Diabetes Metab Syndr. 2021;15:102323.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Ogurtsova K, da Rocha Fernandes JD, Huang Y, et al. IDF Diabetes Atlas: global estimates for the prevalence of diabetes for 2015 and 2040. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2017;128:40–50.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Patterson CC, Harjutsalo V, Rosenbauer J, et al. Trends and cyclical variation in the incidence of childhood type 1 diabetes in 26 European centres in the 25 year period 1989–2013: a multicentre prospective registration study. Diabetologia. 2019;62:408–17.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Saeedi P, Petersohn I, Salpea P, et al. Global and regional diabetes prevalence estimates for 2019 and projections for 2030 and 2045: results from the International Diabetes Federation Diabetes Atlas. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2019;157:107843.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. World Health Organization. Saudi Arabia—Diabetes country profile.

  7. Bailey CJ. Metformin: historical overview. Diabetologia. 2017;60:1566–76.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Dhatariya K. Diabetes: the place of new therapies. Ther Adv Endocrinol Metab. 2019. https://doi.org/10.1177/2042018818807599.

  9. Makrilakis K. The role of DPP-4 inhibitors in the treatment algorithm of type 2 diabetes mellitus: when to select, what to expect. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2019;16(15):2720.

    CAS  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Nauck M. Incretin therapies: highlighting common features and differences in the modes of action of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists and dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors. Diabetes Obes Metab. 2016;18:203–16.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Prashant N, Chepurny OG, Holz GG. Regulation of glucose homeostasis by GLP-1. Prog Mol Biol Transl Sci. 2014;121:23–65.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Nauck M, Rizzo M, Johnson A, Bosch-Traberg H, Madsen J, Cariou B. Once-daily liraglutide versus lixisenatide as add-on to metformin in type 2 diabetes: a 26-week randomized controlled clinical trial. Diabetes Care. 2016;39:1501–9.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Pratley RE, Nauck M, Bailey T, et al. Liraglutide versus sitagliptin for patients with type 2 diabetes who did not have adequate glycaemic control with metformin: a 26-week, randomised, parallel-group, open-label trial. Lancet. 2010;375:1447–56.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Lau J, Bloch P, Schäffer L, et al. Discovery of the once-weekly glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) analogue semaglutide. J Med Chem. 2015;58:7370–80.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Ahmann AJ, Capehorn M, Charpentier G, et al. Efficacy and safety of once-weekly semaglutide versus exenatide ER in subjects with type 2 diabetes (SUSTAIN 3): a 56-week, open-label, randomized clinical trial. Diabetes Care. 2018;41:258–66.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Pratley RE, Aroda VR, Lingvay I, et al. Semaglutide versus dulaglutide once weekly in patients with type 2 diabetes (SUSTAIN 7): a randomised, open-label, phase 3b trial. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2018;6:275–86.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Marso SP, Bain SC, Consoli A, et al. Semaglutide and cardiovascular outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes. N Engl J Med. 2016;375:1834–44.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Katsiki N, Mikhailidis D, Banach M. Leptin, cardiovascular diseases and type 2 diabetes mellitus. Acta Pharmacol Sin. 2018;39(7):1176–88.

  19. Davies MJ, D’Alessio DA, Fradkin J, et al. Management of hyperglycemia in type 2 diabetes, 2018. A consensus report by the American Diabetes Association (ADA) and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes (EASD). Diabetes Care. 2018;2018:2669–701.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Sorli C, Harashima S, Tsoukas GM, et al. Efficacy and safety of once-weekly semaglutide monotherapy versus placebo in patients with type 2 diabetes (SUSTAIN 1): a double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, multinational, multicentre phase 3a trial. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2017;5:251–60.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Ahrén B, Masmiquel L, Kumar H, et al. Efficacy and safety of once-weekly semaglutide versus once-daily sitagliptin as an add-on to metformin, thiazolidinediones, or both, in patients with type 2 diabetes (SUSTAIN 2): a 56-week, double-blind, phase 3a, randomised trial. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2017;5:341–54.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Aroda VR, Bain SC, Cariou B, et al. Efficacy and safety of once-weekly semaglutide versus once-daily insulin glargine as add-on to metformin (with or without sulfonylureas) in insulin-naive patients with type 2 diabetes (SUSTAIN 4): a randomised, open-label, parallel-group, multicentre, mul. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2017;5:355–66.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Rodbard HW, Lingvay I, Reed J, et al. Semaglutide added to basal insulin in type 2 diabetes (SUSTAIN 5): a randomized controlled trial. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2018;103:2291–301.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. Gelhorn HL, Bacci ED, Poon JL, Boye KS, Suzuki S, Babineaux SM. Evaluating preferences for profiles of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists among injection-naive type 2 diabetes patients in Japan. Patient Prefer Adherence. 2016;10:1337–48.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  25. Gelhorn HL, Poon JL, Davies EW, Paczkowski R, Curtis SE, Boye KS. Evaluating preferences for profiles of GLP-1 receptor agonists among injection-naïve type 2 diabetes patients in the UK. Patient Prefer Adherence. 2015;9:1611–22.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  26. Matza LS, Boye KS, Stewart KD, Davies EW, Paczkowski R. Health state utilities associated with attributes of weekly injection devices for treatment of type 2 diabetes. BMC Health Serv Res. 2017;17:774.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. Thieu VT, Robinson S, Kennedy-Martin T, Boye KS, Garcia-Perez LE. Patient preferences for glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor–agonist treatment attributes. Patient Prefer Adherence. 2019;13:561–76.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  28. Matza LS, Boye KS, Jordan JB, et al. Patient preferences in Italy: health state utilities associated with attributes of weekly injection devices for treatment of type 2 diabetes. Patient Prefer Adherence. 2018;12:971–9.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  29. Khunti K, Seidu S, Kunutsor S, Davies M. Association between adherence to pharmacotherapy and outcomes in type 2 diabetes: a meta-analysis. Diabetes Care. 2017;40:1588–96.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Al Shahrani A, Baraja M. Patient satisfaction and it’s relation to diabetic control in a primary care setting. J Fam Med Prim Care. 2014;3:5–11.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Matza LS, Boye KS, Stewart KD, et al. Assessing patient PREFERence between the dulaglutide pen and the semaglutide pen: a crossover study (PREFER). Diabetes, Obes Metab. 2020;22:355–64.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Jude EB, Nixon M, O’Leary C, et al. Evaluating glycemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes suboptimally controlled on basal insulin: UK ATTAIN real-world study. Diabetes Ther. 2019;10:1847–58.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  33. Bradley C, Lewis KS. Measures of psychological well-being and treatment satisfaction developed from the responses of people with tablet-treated diabetes. Diabet Med. 1990;7:445–51.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Bradley C, Plowright R, Stewart J, Valentine J, Witthaus E. The Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire change version (DTSQc) evaluated in insulin glargine trials shows greater responsiveness to improvements than the original DTSQ. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2007;5:57.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  35. Matza LS, Boye KS, Stewart KD, Paczkowski R, Jordan J, Murray LT. Development of the diabetes injection device experience questionnaire (DID-EQ) and diabetes injection device preference questionnaire (DID-PQ). J Pat Reported Outcomes. 2018;2:43.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Matza LS, Stewart KD, Paczkowski R, Coyne KS, Currie B, Boye KS. Psychometric evaluation of the diabetes injection device experience questionnaire (DID-EQ) and diabetes injection device preference questionnaire (DID-PQ). J Pat Reported Outcomes. 2018;2:44.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Ceriello A, Monnier L, Owens D. Glycaemic variability in diabetes: clinical and therapeutic implications. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2019;7:221–30.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Lingvay I, Desouza CV, Lalic KS, et al. A 26-week randomized controlled trial of semaglutide once daily versus liraglutide and placebo in patients with type 2 diabetes suboptimally controlled on diet and exercise with or without metformin. Diabetes Care. 2018;41:1926–37.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Yale JF, Catarig AM, Grau K, et al. Use of once-weekly semaglutide in patients with type 2 diabetes in routine clinical practice: results from the SURE Canada multicentre, prospective, observational study. Diabetes Obes Metab. 2021;23:2269–78.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Goncalves E, Bell DS. Efficacy of semaglutide versus liraglutide in clinical practice. Diabetes Metab. 2020;46:515–7.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Jain AB, Kanters S, Khurana R, Kissock J, Severin N, Stafford SG. Real-world effectiveness analysis of switching from liraglutide or dulaglutide to semaglutide in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: the retrospective REALISE-DM study. Diabetes Ther. 2021;12:527–36.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Frontoni S, Di Bartolo P, Avogaro A, Bosi E, Paolisso G, Ceriello A. Glucose variability: an emerging target for the treatment of diabetes mellitus. Diabetes Res. Clin Pract. 2013;102:86–95.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Reaven PD, Emanuele NV, Wiitala WL, et al. Intensive glucose control in patients with type 2 diabetes—15-year follow-up. N Engl J Med. 2019;380:2215–24.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  44. Monnier L, Mas E, Ginet C, et al. Activation of oxidative stress by acute glucose fluctuations compared with sustained chronic hyperglycemia in patients with type 2 diabetes. J Am Med Assoc. 2006;295:1681–7.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  45. Yin J, Han M, Li L, et al. To assess liraglutide’s therapeutic effect in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus using flash glucose monitoring system. Diabetes Metab Syndr Obes. 2021;14:4399–407.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  46. Ji L, Guo X, Guo L, Ren Q, Yu N, Zhang J. A multicenter evaluation of the performance and usability of a novel glucose monitoring system in Chinese adults with diabetes. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2017;11:290–5.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  47. Bailey T, Bode BW, Christiansen MP, Klaff LJ, Alva S. The performance and usability of a factory-calibrated flash glucose monitoring system. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2015;17:787–94.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  48. Sato T, Oshima H, Nakata K, et al. Accuracy of flash glucose monitoring in insulin-treated patients with type 2 diabetes. J Diabetes Investig. 2019;10:846–50.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Klonoff DC, Bassock S, Dwyer A, et al. Evaluating the usability and safety of the semaglutide single-dose pen-injectors through summative (human factors) usability testing. J Diabetes Investig. 2021;12:978–87.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Stauder U, Enginee D, Elton H, Penfornis A, Edelman S. Comparative assessment of lixisenatide, exenatide, and liraglutide pen devices: a pilot user-based study. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2014;8:123–31.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  51. Zhou AY, Trujillo JM. Comparison of usability, accuracy, preference, and satisfaction among three once-weekly GLP-1 receptor agonist pen devices. Diabetes Spectr. 2018;31:359–66.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  52. Capehorn M, Janez A, Price H, et al. Efficacy and safety of semaglutide 1.0mg once weekly vs liraglutide 1.2mg once daily as add-on to 1–3 oral antidiabetic drugs in subjects with type 2 diabetes (SUSTAIN 10). Diabet Med. 2019;36:172. https://doi.org/10.1111/dme.13883.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Holst JJ, Madsbad S. Semaglutide seems to be more effective the other GLP-1Ras. Ann Transl Med. 2017;5(24):505.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  54. Sofizadeh S, Imberg H, Ólafsdóttir AF, et al. Effect of liraglutide on times in glycaemic ranges as assessed by CGM for type 2 diabetes patients treated with multiple daily insulin injections. Diabetes Ther. 2019;10:2115–30.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  55. Nagakura J, Yamakawa T, Taguri M, et al. Effects of exenatide and liraglutide on 24-hour glucose fluctuations in type 2 diabetes. Endocr J. 2016;63:239–47.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Meier JJ, Rosenstock J, Hincelin-Méry A, et al. Contrasting effects of lixisenatide and liraglutide on postprandial glycemic control, gastric emptying, and safety parameters in patients with type 2 diabetes on optimized insulin glargine with or without metformin: a randomized, open-label trial. Diabetes Care. 2015;38:1263–73.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors thank the study participants for their participation.

Funding

No funding or sponsorship was received for this study or publication of this article. The Rapid Service Fee was funded by the authors.

Authorship

All named authors meet the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) criteria for authorship for this article, take responsibility for the integrity of the work as a whole, and have given their approval for this version to be published.

Author Contributions

Both authors contributed to the study conception and design, material preparation, data collection, and statistical analysis. Both authors wrote and approved the final manuscript.

Medical Writing Assistance

Medical writing assistance in the preparation of this article was provided by RAY-CRO.

Disclosures

Dr. Ayman A. Al Hayek and Dr. Mohamed A. Al-Dawish have nothing to disclose.

Compliance with Ethics Guidelines

The protocols and the subject information/informed consent forms were reviewed and approved by the Research and Ethics Committee of PSMMC (IRB approval No.# 1007). Our study was performed in accordance with the Helsinki Declaration of 1964, and its later amendments. All participants provided oral and written informed consent before completing the study measurement.

Data Availability

The datasets generated during and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Endocrinology and Diabetes, Diabetes Treatment Center, Prince Sultan Military Medical City, P.O. Box 7897, Riyadh, 11159, Saudi Arabia

    Ayman A. Al Hayek & Mohamed A. Al Dawish

Authors
  1. Ayman A. Al Hayek
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mohamed A. Al Dawish
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ayman A. Al Hayek.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (PDF 411 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Al Hayek, A.A., Al Dawish, M.A. Evaluation of Patient-Reported Satisfaction and Clinical Efficacy of Once-Weekly Semaglutide in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes: An Ambispective Study. Adv Ther 39, 1582–1595 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12325-022-02053-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12325-022-02053-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation