Skip to main content

The Pharmaceuticalization of Obesity

Picture from AllGo - Unsplash

Good and bad news. It is clear that the pharmaceuticalization of obesity means its treatment will need to be long-term.

Should the emergence of so-called glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists as a treatment for obesity be celebrated? Yes, if you have vested interests in the pharmaceutical industry and you think the long-term risks of these treatments are less than the comorbidities associated with obesity. No, if you think obesity can be managed successfully with lifestyle and behavioural modifications.

The study below of once-weekly subcutaneous semaglutide shows that if you stop the drug after 20 weeks the treatment effect of continued weight loss is reversed and the inevitable weight gain

The class of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists increase the production of insulin. Insulin lowers the blood sugar level, enhances the growth of β cells in the pancreas, which is the site of insulin production. The downside of increased insulin production is an increased risk of some cancers. In the STEP 4 trial there appears to be a secondary malignancy signal:

“During the randomized period, malignant neoplasms occurred in 1.1% of participants taking continued semaglutide vs 0.4% taking placebo. Of the events in the continued semaglutide group, 3 were breast neoplasms (intraductal proliferative breast lesion, invasive breast cancer, and invasive ductal breast carcinoma), and the remaining 3 had no apparent clustering (endometrial adenocarcinoma, marginal zone lymphoma, and malignant melanoma). One event occurring in the placebo group was metastatic lung cancer.“

Maybe we should go back to basics and recognise obesity as a metabolic disease that could be managed with lifestyle modifications and behavioural change before resorting to pharmaceuticals? Or should the prescription pad take precedence? 



Question: What effect does continued treatment with 2.4 mg of subcutaneous semaglutide have on the maintenance of body weight loss in adults with overweight or obesity without diabetes?

Findings: In this randomized clinical trial of adults with overweight or obesity, 803 participants completed a 20-week run-in of weekly treatment with subcutaneous semaglutide, 2.4 mg, with a mean weight loss of 10.6%, and were randomized to continued treatment with subcutaneous semaglutide vs placebo for an additional 48 weeks. At the end of this time, mean weight change was −7.9% vs +6.9%, respectively, a difference that was statistically significant.

Meaning: Among adults with overweight or obesity completing a 20-week run-in period, maintaining treatment with subcutaneous semaglutide compared with switching to placebo resulted in continued weight loss.

Importance: The effect of continuing vs withdrawing treatment with semaglutide, a glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist, on weight loss maintenance in people with overweight or obesity is unknown.

Objective: To compare continued once-weekly treatment with subcutaneous semaglutide, 2.4 mg, with switch to placebo for weight maintenance (both with lifestyle intervention) in adults with overweight or obesity after a 20-week run-in with subcutaneous semaglutide titrated to 2.4 mg weekly.

Design, Setting, and Participants: Randomized, double-blind, 68-week phase 3a withdrawal study conducted at 73 sites in 10 countries from June 2018 to March 2020 in adults with body mass index of at least 30 (or ≥27 with ≥1 weight-related comorbidity) and without diabetes.

Interventions: A total of 902 participants received once-weekly subcutaneous semaglutide during run-in. After 20 weeks (16 weeks of dose escalation; 4 weeks of maintenance dose), 803 participants (89.0%) who reached the 2.4-mg/wk semaglutide maintenance dose were randomized (2:1) to 48 weeks of continued subcutaneous semaglutide (n = 535) or switched to placebo (n = 268), plus lifestyle intervention in both groups.

Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary endpoint was percent change in body weight from week 20 to week 68; confirmatory secondary endpoints were changes in waist circumference, systolic blood pressure, and physical functioning (assessed using the Short Form 36 Version 2 Health Survey, Acute Version [SF-36]).

Results: Among 803 study participants who completed the 20-week run-in period (with a mean weight loss of 10.6%) and were randomized (mean age, 46 [SD, 12] years; 634 [79%] women; mean body weight, 107.2 kg [SD, 22.7 kg]), 787 participants (98.0%) completed the trial and 741 (92.3%) completed treatment. With continued semaglutide, mean body weight change from week 20 to week 68 was −7.9% vs +6.9% with the switch to placebo (difference, −14.8 [95% CI, −16.0 to −13.5] percentage points; P < .001). Waist circumference (−9.7 cm [95% CI, −10.9 to −8.5 cm]), systolic blood pressure (−3.9 mm Hg [95% CI, −5.8 to −2.0 mm Hg]), and SF-36 physical functioning score (2.5 [95% CI, 1.6-3.3]) also improved with continued subcutaneous semaglutide vs placebo (all P < .001). Gastrointestinal events were reported in 49.1% of participants who continued subcutaneous semaglutide vs 26.1% with placebo; similar proportions discontinued treatment because of adverse events with continued semaglutide (2.4%) and placebo (2.2%).

Conclusions and Relevance: Among adults with overweight or obesity who completed a 20-week run-in period with subcutaneous semaglutide, 2.4 mg once weekly, maintaining treatment with semaglutide compared with switching to placebo resulted in continued weight loss over the following 48 weeks.

Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03548987

CoI: multiple

Twitter: @gavinGiovannoni              Medium: @gavin_24211
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Are you ready for an EBV vaccine to prevent MS?

"Professor Giovannoni, you tell me that my daughter has a 1 in 40 chance of developing multiple sclerosis and that MS has reached epidemic proportions in parts of the world? Is there anything I can do to reduce her chances of getting MS? Is there anything we can do to stop other people from getting MS?" Although multiple sclerosis (MS) is a complex disease due to the interaction of genetic and environmental factors data on the occurrence of MS at the population level (epidemiology) supports the Epstein Barr Virus (EBV) as being necessary, but not sufficient, for someone to develop MS. In other words, EBV is probably the cause of MS. Of all the putative causative agents that have been proposed to be associated with MS, EBV is the only one where the risk of getting MS if you are EBV negative is close to zero or zero if you limit the analyses to those studies which use a technique called immunofluorescence microscopy as the gold-standard assay to detect anti-EBV antibodies. EBV ...
7 comments
Read more

Smoking: a major preventable MS risk factor

I have been complaining about my low productivity levels since I have gotten back to work after my accident. However, last night with a single one hour webinar we have managed to set-up a new international collaboration to study and address the social determinants of health (SDoH) and their impact on MS. Our focus is going to be on which SDoH can we modify and hence improve the outcome for people with MS (pwMS)? Smoking is one such modifiable factor and needs to be addressed at a (1) population level with policy and legislation, (2) at a local or community level, (3) with the family and (4) at an individual level target the people with MS (pwMS). We know that pwMS who smoke have a worse outcome than people who don’t smoke. The effect of smoking is equivalent to negating the treatment effect of being on an injectable therapy such as interferon beta. Put simply smokers with MS start using a walking stick (EDSS = 6.0) about 6 years earlier than pwMS who don’t smoke. Getting pwMS to stop s...
7 comments
Read more

Corpulence and poverty

Since stating my intention to join the  #BackTo21  campaign to get my BMI back to what it was when I was 21 years of age, I have had several emails and direct messages on social media questioning the wisdom of my intention.  Photo by NeONBRAND on Unsplash It is clear that despite BMI being a relatively poor metric of health there is overwhelming evidence that at a population level it predicts poor health outcomes. Importantly there is new data that indicates the target BMI for the prevention of type 2 diabetes and the metabolic syndrome depends on your ethnicity. For people of South Asian origin, there is a call to reset the BMI cutoff to 23.9, which for most people is within the normal range. At the same time, there is a call to classify obesity as an important social determinant of health. Arnaud Chiolero argues below for using BMI as a socioeconomic indicator. Do you agree? Isn’t it quite amazing that in a previous era corpulence was a sign of affluence, whereas in th...
4 comments
Read more