MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3157996603 · doi:10.1210/jendso/bvab048.018

Efficacy and Safety of Once-Weekly Subcutaneous Semaglutide 2.4 MG in Adults With Overweight or Obesity (STEP 1)

2021· article· en· W3157996603 on OpenAlexaff
John Wilding, Rachel L. Batterham, Salvatore Calanna, Melanie J. Davies, Luc F. Van Gaal, Ildiko Lingvay, Barbara McGowan, Julio Rosenstock, Marie Thi Dao Tran, Thomas A. Wadden, Sean Wharton, Koutaro Yokote, Niels Zeuthen, Robert F. Kushner

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Endocrine Society · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetes Treatment and Management
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSemaglutideMedicineOverweightTolerabilityBody mass indexPlaceboObesityWeight managementRandomized controlled trialAdverse effectWeight lossInternal medicineConfidence intervalPhysical therapyType 2 diabetesDiabetes mellitusEndocrinologyLiraglutide

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background: Despite the increasing global adverse health impact of obesity, there are few pharmacological options for effective weight management. STEP 1 investigated the efficacy and safety of the glucagon-like peptide-1 analogue, subcutaneous (s.c.) semaglutide, for weight management in adults with overweight or obesity. Methods: This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial was conducted at 129 sites across 16 countries (NCT03548935). Adults aged ≥18 years with either body mass index (BMI) ≥30 kg/m2 or BMI ≥27 kg/m2 with ≥1 weight-related comorbidity, without type 2 diabetes, were randomized 2:1 to 68 weeks’ treatment with once-weekly s.c. semaglutide 2.4 mg or placebo, both as adjunct to lifestyle intervention. The co-primary endpoints were percentage change in body weight and achievement of weight loss ≥5%. Cardiometabolic risk factors, patient-reported outcomes, and safety/tolerability were also assessed. Two estimands were defined: treatment policy (effect regardless of treatment adherence and use of rescue intervention) and trial product (effect assuming treatment adherence and without rescue intervention); results are presented for the treatment policy estimand, unless stated otherwise. P values for parameters marked with # were not controlled for multiplicity. Results: 1961 randomized participants (mean age 46 years, body weight 105.3 kg, BMI 37.9 kg/m2; 74.1% female) were included. Mean body weight change from baseline to week 68 was −14.9% in the semaglutide group vs −2.4% with placebo (estimated treatment difference [ETD]: −12.4%; 95% confidence interval (CI): −13.4, −11.5; p<0.0001). Similar results were obtained with the trial product estimand: mean body weight change# was -16.9% for semaglutide vs -2.4% for placebo (ETD: -14.4%; 95% CI: -15.3, -13.6; p<0.0001). Participants were more likely to achieve weight loss ≥5%, ≥10%, ≥15%, and ≥20%# with semaglutide vs placebo (86.4% vs 31.5%, 69.1% vs 12.0%, 50.5% vs 4.9%, and 32.0% vs 1.7%, respectively; p<0.0001 for all). Greater improvements were seen with semaglutide vs placebo in waist circumference, BMI#, systolic and diastolic# blood pressure, glycated hemoglobin#, fasting plasma glucose#, C-reactive protein#, fasting lipid profile#, and self-reported physical functioning (p<0.05 for all). No new safety signals with semaglutide were observed. The most frequent adverse events with semaglutide were gastrointestinal disorders (typically transient and mild-to-moderate). Conclusion: In adults with overweight or obesity, once-weekly s.c. semaglutide 2.4 mg plus lifestyle intervention induced a mean weight loss of approximately 15% by week 68. Clinically beneficial weight loss of ≥10% was achieved by over two-thirds of participants and ≥20% by one-third of participants, along with associated improvements in cardiometabolic risk factors and physical functioning.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.066
Threshold uncertainty score0.302

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.229 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Endocrine SocietySame topicDiabetes Treatment and ManagementFrench-language works237,207