4.7 Article

Long-term efficacy and safety comparison of liraglutide, glimepiride and placebo, all in combination with metformin in type 2 diabetes: 2-year results from the LEAD-2 study

Journal

DIABETES OBESITY & METABOLISM
Volume 15, Issue 3, Pages 204-212

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/dom.12012

Keywords

GLP-1 analogue; type 2 diabetes

Funding

  1. National Institute of Health Research (NIHR), UK
  2. Berlin-Chemie AG/Menarini
  3. Eli Lilly Co
  4. Merck Sharp Dohme
  5. Novartis Pharma
  6. AstraZeneca
  7. Boehringer-Ingelheim
  8. GlaxoSmithKline
  9. Lilly Deutschland GmbH
  10. MetaCure Inc.
  11. Roche Pharma AG
  12. Novo Nordisk Pharma GmbH
  13. Tolerx Inc.
  14. Berlin Chemie AG/Menarini
  15. Hoffman-La Roche
  16. Janssen Global Services
  17. Novo Nordisk A/S
  18. Sanofi
  19. Takeda
  20. Versartis
  21. Novo Nordisk
  22. Becton Dickinson
  23. Merck Co.
  24. Bristol-Myers Squibb
  25. Novartis
  26. Johnson and Johnson
  27. Servier
  28. National Institute for Health Research [NF-SI-0508-10272] Funding Source: researchfish

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Aims To investigate efficacy and safety of dual therapy with liraglutide and metformin in comparison to glimepiride and metformin, and metformin monotherapy over 2?years in patients with type 2 diabetes. Methods In the 26-week the Liraglutide Effect and Action in Diabetes (LEAD)-2 core trial, patients (n?=?1091) were randomized (2?:?2?:?2?:?1:?2) to liraglutide (0.6, 1.2 or 1.8?mg once-daily), placebo or glimepiride; all with metformin. Patients were enrolled if they were 1880?years old with HbA1c 7.011.0% (previous monotherapy =3?months), or 7.010.0% (previous combination therapy =3?months), and body mass index =40?kg/m2. Patients completing the 26-week double-blinded phase could enter an 18-month open-label extension. Results HbA1c decreased significantly with liraglutide (0.4% with 0.6?mg, 0.6% with 1.2 and 1.8?mg) versus 0.3% increase with metformin monotherapy (p?

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available