Efficacy and safety of iGlarLixi versus IDegLira in adults with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled by glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists: a systematic literature review and indirect treatment comparison.

Home PD, Aroda VR, Blonde L, Guyot P, Shaunik A, Fazeli MS, Goswami H, Kalra S, Pourrahmat MM

Diabetes, obesity & metabolism26 Jul 2020Cited by 12 (Europe PMC)

PMID32627297DOI10.1111/dom.14136PepBankPUB-32627297

Publisher page PubMedAsk about this study

Summary

The text of this summary is not shown here, because the article license does not allow reuse. Read it at the source (opens in a new tab)

Text rights: CC BY-NC. Results still quote short attributed sentences.

Results from this study6

No result from this study comes from a test of the peptide.

Studies that did not test the peptide alone6

In this study, Liraglutide was a lab tool or a carrier, part of a mix, or the subject of a lab method. These results are not evidence about taking Liraglutide.

01HumanNot a test of Liraglutide aloneSystematic reviewEfficacy outcome
In adults with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled on a GLP-1 receptor agonist, IDegLira lowered HbA1c more than iGlarLixi at 26 weeks in an indirect comparison.
In plain wordsIn adults with type 2 diabetes, the combination product IDegLira lowered HbA1c more than the combination product iGlarLixi in an indirect comparison.
Peptide
Liraglutide
Outcome
DecreaseHbA1c mean difference at 26 weeks
Study
n: not reported in source
Comparator
iGlarLixi
Outcome group
Glycemic control · Metabolic and weight
Measurements
HbA1c mean difference
−0.36%
IDegLira vs iGlarLixi, 26 weeks
Source sentences
Summary
The mean difference at 26 weeks between IDegLira and iGlarLixi was -0.36 (95% credible intervals -0.58, -0.14) % [-3.9 (-6.3, -1.5) mmol/mol] for HbA1c
2 context sentences(design, population, supporting numbers)
Summary · context
To estimate the relative treatment effect between the fixed-ratio combinations iGlarLixi and IDegLira (glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist with basal insulin) in people with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled on a glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist.
Summary · context
From 4850 abstracts screened, 78 qualified for full-text article review and two randomized controlled trials were included.
In this study, Liraglutide was a lab tool or a carrier, part of a mix, or the subject of a lab method. This result is not evidence about taking Liraglutide.
Report a problemFND-3262729701
02HumanNot a test of Liraglutide aloneSystematic reviewEfficacy outcome
In adults with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled on a GLP-1 receptor agonist, IDegLira lowered fasting plasma glucose more than iGlarLixi at 26 weeks in an indirect comparison.
In plain wordsIn adults with type 2 diabetes, the combination product IDegLira lowered fasting blood glucose more than the combination product iGlarLixi in an indirect comparison.
Peptide
Liraglutide
Outcome
DecreaseFasting plasma glucose mean difference at 26 weeks
Study
n: not reported in source
Comparator
iGlarLixi
Outcome group
Glycemic control · Metabolic and weight
Measurements
Fasting plasma glucose mean difference
−1 mmol/L
IDegLira vs iGlarLixi, 26 weeks
Source sentences
Summary
and -1.0 (-1.6, -0.4) mmol/L for fasting plasma glucose.
2 context sentences(design, population, supporting numbers)
Summary · context
To estimate the relative treatment effect between the fixed-ratio combinations iGlarLixi and IDegLira (glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist with basal insulin) in people with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled on a glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist.
Summary · context
From 4850 abstracts screened, 78 qualified for full-text article review and two randomized controlled trials were included.
In this study, Liraglutide was a lab tool or a carrier, part of a mix, or the subject of a lab method. This result is not evidence about taking Liraglutide.
Report a problemFND-3262729702
03HumanNot a test of Liraglutide aloneSystematic reviewEfficacy outcome
In adults with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled on a GLP-1 receptor agonist, an indirect comparison found no significant difference between IDegLira and iGlarLixi in HbA1c target attainment.
In plain wordsIn adults with type 2 diabetes, an indirect comparison found no significant difference between the two combination products in reaching the HbA1c target.
Peptide
Liraglutide
Outcome
No significant changeHbA1c target attainment
Study
n: not reported in source
Comparator
iGlarLixi
Outcome group
Glycemic control · Metabolic and weight
Source sentences
Summary
No significant differences were found in HbA1c target attainment
2 context sentences(design, population, supporting numbers)
Summary · context
To estimate the relative treatment effect between the fixed-ratio combinations iGlarLixi and IDegLira (glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist with basal insulin) in people with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled on a glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist.
Summary · context
From 4850 abstracts screened, 78 qualified for full-text article review and two randomized controlled trials were included.
In this study, Liraglutide was a lab tool or a carrier, part of a mix, or the subject of a lab method. This result is not evidence about taking Liraglutide.
Report a problemFND-3262729703
04HumanNot a test of Liraglutide aloneSystematic reviewEfficacy outcome
In adults with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled on a GLP-1 receptor agonist, an indirect comparison found no significant difference between IDegLira and iGlarLixi in preprandial or postprandial self-monitored plasma glucose.
In plain wordsIn adults with type 2 diabetes, an indirect comparison found no significant difference between the two combination products in home-measured glucose before or after meals.
Peptide
Liraglutide
Outcome
No significant changePreprandial and postprandial self-monitored plasma glucose
Study
n: not reported in source
Comparator
iGlarLixi
Outcome group
Glycemic control · Metabolic and weight
Source sentences
Summary
preprandial or postprandial self-monitored plasma glucose, or body weight change.
2 context sentences(design, population, supporting numbers)
Summary · context
To estimate the relative treatment effect between the fixed-ratio combinations iGlarLixi and IDegLira (glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist with basal insulin) in people with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled on a glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist.
Summary · context
From 4850 abstracts screened, 78 qualified for full-text article review and two randomized controlled trials were included.
In this study, Liraglutide was a lab tool or a carrier, part of a mix, or the subject of a lab method. This result is not evidence about taking Liraglutide.
Report a problemFND-3262729704
05HumanNot a test of Liraglutide aloneSystematic reviewEfficacy outcome
In adults with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled on a GLP-1 receptor agonist, an indirect comparison found no significant difference between IDegLira and iGlarLixi in body weight change.
In plain wordsIn adults with type 2 diabetes, an indirect comparison found no significant difference in body weight change between the two combination products.
Peptide
Liraglutide
Outcome
No significant changeBody weight change
Study
n: not reported in source
Comparator
iGlarLixi
Outcome group
Body weight · Metabolic and weight
Source sentences
Summary
or body weight change.
2 context sentences(design, population, supporting numbers)
Summary · context
To estimate the relative treatment effect between the fixed-ratio combinations iGlarLixi and IDegLira (glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist with basal insulin) in people with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled on a glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist.
Summary · context
From 4850 abstracts screened, 78 qualified for full-text article review and two randomized controlled trials were included.
In this study, Liraglutide was a lab tool or a carrier, part of a mix, or the subject of a lab method. This result is not evidence about taking Liraglutide.
Report a problemFND-3262729705
06HumanNot a test of Liraglutide aloneSystematic reviewSafety outcome
In non-sulphonylurea users, hypoglycaemia incidence was 28% with IDegLira and 9% with iGlarLixi, but the studies used different definitions, so no formal comparison was possible.
In plain wordsIn adults with type 2 diabetes, low blood sugar was reported in 28% with IDegLira and 9% with iGlarLixi, but the studies defined it differently.
Peptide
Liraglutide
Outcome
Not applicableHypoglycaemia incidence in non-sulphonylurea users
Study
n: not reported in source
Comparator
iGlarLixi
Outcome group
Adverse events · Metabolic and weight
Measurements
Hypoglycaemia incidence
28%
IDegLira
Hypoglycaemia incidence
9%
iGlarLixi
Source sentences
Summary
Formal comparisons of hypoglycaemia were limited by differences in definitions between the studies: in non-sulphonylurea users, incidence was 28% for IDegLira ('confirmed' at ≤3.1 mmol/L); for iGlarLixi, incidence was 9% ('documented symptomatic' at <3.0 mmol/L).
2 context sentences(design, population, supporting numbers)
Summary · context
To estimate the relative treatment effect between the fixed-ratio combinations iGlarLixi and IDegLira (glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist with basal insulin) in people with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled on a glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist.
Summary · context
From 4850 abstracts screened, 78 qualified for full-text article review and two randomized controlled trials were included.
In this study, Liraglutide was a lab tool or a carrier, part of a mix, or the subject of a lab method. This result is not evidence about taking Liraglutide.
Report a problemFND-3262729706

AI wrote and checked these results. AI can make mistakes, so check important results against the source.

Version history

PepBank keeps every version of the data on this study. Status changes from Retraction Watch, Europe PMC and Crossref are listed with their source.

Version 2Current
12 Oct 2026, 11:11 UTC
Study results updated
Version 1
9 Oct 2026, 03:05 UTC
First added · source update from Europe PMC

Subjects

Terms as the source lists them.

PepBank is a research reference. Talk to a doctor before you use any peptide.