3.8 Article

Effect of lorcaserin on weight reduction in persons with obstructive sleep apnea (OSA): a combined subgroup analysis from three randomized, controlled clinical trials

期刊

OBESITY SCIENCE & PRACTICE
卷 5, 期 3, 页码 238-245

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/osp4.340

关键词

Lorcaserin; obstructive sleep apnea; sleep-related breathing disorder; weight loss

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Study objectives To evaluate weight loss with lorcaserin in persons with obstructive sleep apnea (OSA). Methods This retrospective analysis evaluated weight loss of lorcaserin (10 mg twice daily) versus placebo in persons with obesity or overweight persons with OSA from a pooled database of three randomized, controlled trials. Primary end points were reductions in the baseline body weight of >= 5% and >= 10% at year 1 and overall weight change at year 1. Changes in heart rate and blood pressure were also evaluated. Results A total of 336 persons with OSA were identified in the overall pooled population (N = 6,636). At year 1, more patients receiving lorcaserin lost >= 5% (47.2% lorcaserin vs. 25.6% placebo; p < 0.0001) and 10% (22.2% lorcaserin vs. 13.1% placebo; p < 0.0354) of their baseline body weight. Weight loss at year 1 was 6.4 kg versus 3.5 kg in the lorcaserin and placebo groups, respectively (p < 0.0001). Similar results were observed for change in blood pressure and heart rate, with responders having larger benefits. Weight loss was similar between persons with and without OSA. Conclusions In this retrospective analysis, persons with OSA showed significant and meaningful weight loss, blood pressure and heart rate reductions in patients treated with lorcaserin versus placebo. Persons with OSA lost just as much weight as those without OSA. Health care providers can expect persons with OSA to lose weight by diet, exercise and the weight loss medication lorcaserin comparable with persons without OSA. Further prospective research is warranted to evaluate impact of weight loss on OSA and overall outcomes for patients.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

3.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据