Glucose-lowering effects of semaglutide compared with dulaglutide using professional continuous glucose monitoring in outpatients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: a pilot study.

Kurozumi A, Okada Y, Saitoh M, Tanaka Y

Diabetology international6 Jun 2023Cited by 1 (Europe PMC)

PMID37781464PMCIDPMC10533751DOI10.1007/s13340-023-00640-2PepBankPUB-37781464

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: Publisher copyright. Results still quote short attributed sentences.

Results from this study20

20 results from studies that gave the peptide. 20 results from people.

01HumanNon-randomized trialEfficacy outcome
In patients with type 2 diabetes, semaglutide improved time in range compared with dulaglutide.
In plain wordsIn patients with diabetes, semaglutide improved time in the glucose target range compared with dulaglutide.
Peptide
Semaglutide
Outcome
IncreaseTime in range
Study
n = 12
Comparator
Dulaglutide
Analysis
Primary
Outcome group
Glycemic control · Metabolic and weight
Studied dose
0.5 mg/weekAs given in this study (human).
Source sentences
Summary
Time in range was significantly better with SG than with DG, which was the main outcome measure.
3 context sentences(design, population, supporting numbers)
Summary · context
This study compared the efficacy and safety of DG and SG using professional CGM in 12 patients attending our outpatient with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) while using GLP-1RA.
Summary · context
The study subjects were 12 T2DM patients with HbA1c ≥ 7.0% on treatment with 0.75 mg/week DG for at least 24 weeks.
Summary · context
All patients wore the professional CGM twice, once while receiving DG and once when the SG dose was increased to 0.5 mg/week.
Report a problemFND-3778146401
02HumanNon-randomized trialEfficacy outcome
In patients with type 2 diabetes, time in range was worse with dulaglutide than semaglutide.
In plain wordsIn patients with diabetes, time in the glucose target range was worse with dulaglutide than semaglutide.
Peptide
Dulaglutide (Trulicity)
Outcome
DecreaseTime in range
Study
n = 12
Comparator
Semaglutide
Analysis
Primary
Outcome group
Glycemic control · Metabolic and weight
Studied dose
0.75 mg/week · At least 24 weeksAs given in this study (human).
Source sentences
Summary
Time in range was significantly better with SG than with DG, which was the main outcome measure.
3 context sentences(design, population, supporting numbers)
Summary · context
This study compared the efficacy and safety of DG and SG using professional CGM in 12 patients attending our outpatient with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) while using GLP-1RA.
Summary · context
The study subjects were 12 T2DM patients with HbA1c ≥ 7.0% on treatment with 0.75 mg/week DG for at least 24 weeks.
Summary · context
All patients wore the professional CGM twice, once while receiving DG and once when the SG dose was increased to 0.5 mg/week.
Report a problemFND-3778146402
03HumanNon-randomized trialEfficacy outcome
In patients with diabetes, semaglutide improved glucose standard deviation compared with dulaglutide.
In plain wordsIn patients with diabetes, glucose variation was lower with semaglutide than dulaglutide.
Peptide
Semaglutide
Outcome
DecreaseGlucose standard deviation
Study
n = 12
Comparator
Dulaglutide
Analysis
Secondary
Outcome group
Glycemic control · Metabolic and weight
Studied dose
0.5 mg/weekAs given in this study (human).
Source sentences
Summary
Regarding the secondary outcome measures, standard deviation of glucose, average sensor glucose, time above range, maximum sensor glucose, interquartile range, SD of glucose during the nocturnal period (0000-0559), and average nocturnal sensor glucose (0000-0559) were significantly better with SG than DG.
3 context sentences(design, population, supporting numbers)
Summary · context
This study compared the efficacy and safety of DG and SG using professional CGM in 12 patients attending our outpatient with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) while using GLP-1RA.
Summary · context
The study subjects were 12 T2DM patients with HbA1c ≥ 7.0% on treatment with 0.75 mg/week DG for at least 24 weeks.
Summary · context
All patients wore the professional CGM twice, once while receiving DG and once when the SG dose was increased to 0.5 mg/week.
Report a problemFND-3778146403
04HumanNon-randomized trialEfficacy outcome
In patients with diabetes, glucose standard deviation was worse with dulaglutide than semaglutide.
In plain wordsIn patients with diabetes, glucose variation was higher with dulaglutide than semaglutide.
Peptide
Dulaglutide (Trulicity)
Outcome
IncreaseGlucose standard deviation
Study
n = 12
Comparator
Semaglutide
Analysis
Secondary
Outcome group
Glycemic control · Metabolic and weight
Studied dose
0.75 mg/week · At least 24 weeksAs given in this study (human).
Source sentences
Summary
Regarding the secondary outcome measures, standard deviation of glucose, average sensor glucose, time above range, maximum sensor glucose, interquartile range, SD of glucose during the nocturnal period (0000-0559), and average nocturnal sensor glucose (0000-0559) were significantly better with SG than DG.
3 context sentences(design, population, supporting numbers)
Summary · context
This study compared the efficacy and safety of DG and SG using professional CGM in 12 patients attending our outpatient with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) while using GLP-1RA.
Summary · context
The study subjects were 12 T2DM patients with HbA1c ≥ 7.0% on treatment with 0.75 mg/week DG for at least 24 weeks.
Summary · context
All patients wore the professional CGM twice, once while receiving DG and once when the SG dose was increased to 0.5 mg/week.
Report a problemFND-3778146404
05HumanNon-randomized trialEfficacy outcome
In patients with diabetes, semaglutide improved average sensor glucose compared with dulaglutide.
In plain wordsIn patients with diabetes, average glucose was lower with semaglutide than dulaglutide.
Peptide
Semaglutide
Outcome
DecreaseAverage sensor glucose
Study
n = 12
Comparator
Dulaglutide
Analysis
Secondary
Outcome group
Glycemic control · Metabolic and weight
Studied dose
0.5 mg/weekAs given in this study (human).
Source sentences
Summary
Regarding the secondary outcome measures, standard deviation of glucose, average sensor glucose, time above range, maximum sensor glucose, interquartile range, SD of glucose during the nocturnal period (0000-0559), and average nocturnal sensor glucose (0000-0559) were significantly better with SG than DG.
3 context sentences(design, population, supporting numbers)
Summary · context
This study compared the efficacy and safety of DG and SG using professional CGM in 12 patients attending our outpatient with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) while using GLP-1RA.
Summary · context
The study subjects were 12 T2DM patients with HbA1c ≥ 7.0% on treatment with 0.75 mg/week DG for at least 24 weeks.
Summary · context
All patients wore the professional CGM twice, once while receiving DG and once when the SG dose was increased to 0.5 mg/week.
Report a problemFND-3778146405
06HumanNon-randomized trialEfficacy outcome
In patients with diabetes, average sensor glucose was worse with dulaglutide than semaglutide.
In plain wordsIn patients with diabetes, average glucose was higher with dulaglutide than semaglutide.
Peptide
Dulaglutide (Trulicity)
Outcome
IncreaseAverage sensor glucose
Study
n = 12
Comparator
Semaglutide
Analysis
Secondary
Outcome group
Glycemic control · Metabolic and weight
Studied dose
0.75 mg/week · At least 24 weeksAs given in this study (human).
Source sentences
Summary
Regarding the secondary outcome measures, standard deviation of glucose, average sensor glucose, time above range, maximum sensor glucose, interquartile range, SD of glucose during the nocturnal period (0000-0559), and average nocturnal sensor glucose (0000-0559) were significantly better with SG than DG.
3 context sentences(design, population, supporting numbers)
Summary · context
This study compared the efficacy and safety of DG and SG using professional CGM in 12 patients attending our outpatient with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) while using GLP-1RA.
Summary · context
The study subjects were 12 T2DM patients with HbA1c ≥ 7.0% on treatment with 0.75 mg/week DG for at least 24 weeks.
Summary · context
All patients wore the professional CGM twice, once while receiving DG and once when the SG dose was increased to 0.5 mg/week.
Report a problemFND-3778146406
07HumanNon-randomized trialEfficacy outcome
In patients with diabetes, semaglutide improved time above range compared with dulaglutide.
In plain wordsIn patients with diabetes, time above the glucose target was lower with semaglutide than dulaglutide.
Peptide
Semaglutide
Outcome
DecreaseTime above range
Study
n = 12
Comparator
Dulaglutide
Analysis
Secondary
Outcome group
Glycemic control · Metabolic and weight
Studied dose
0.5 mg/weekAs given in this study (human).
Source sentences
Summary
Regarding the secondary outcome measures, standard deviation of glucose, average sensor glucose, time above range, maximum sensor glucose, interquartile range, SD of glucose during the nocturnal period (0000-0559), and average nocturnal sensor glucose (0000-0559) were significantly better with SG than DG.
3 context sentences(design, population, supporting numbers)
Summary · context
This study compared the efficacy and safety of DG and SG using professional CGM in 12 patients attending our outpatient with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) while using GLP-1RA.
Summary · context
The study subjects were 12 T2DM patients with HbA1c ≥ 7.0% on treatment with 0.75 mg/week DG for at least 24 weeks.
Summary · context
All patients wore the professional CGM twice, once while receiving DG and once when the SG dose was increased to 0.5 mg/week.
Report a problemFND-3778146407
08HumanNon-randomized trialEfficacy outcome
In patients with diabetes, time above range was worse with dulaglutide than semaglutide.
In plain wordsIn patients with diabetes, time above the glucose target was higher with dulaglutide than semaglutide.
Peptide
Dulaglutide (Trulicity)
Outcome
IncreaseTime above range
Study
n = 12
Comparator
Semaglutide
Analysis
Secondary
Outcome group
Glycemic control · Metabolic and weight
Studied dose
0.75 mg/week · At least 24 weeksAs given in this study (human).
Source sentences
Summary
Regarding the secondary outcome measures, standard deviation of glucose, average sensor glucose, time above range, maximum sensor glucose, interquartile range, SD of glucose during the nocturnal period (0000-0559), and average nocturnal sensor glucose (0000-0559) were significantly better with SG than DG.
3 context sentences(design, population, supporting numbers)
Summary · context
This study compared the efficacy and safety of DG and SG using professional CGM in 12 patients attending our outpatient with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) while using GLP-1RA.
Summary · context
The study subjects were 12 T2DM patients with HbA1c ≥ 7.0% on treatment with 0.75 mg/week DG for at least 24 weeks.
Summary · context
All patients wore the professional CGM twice, once while receiving DG and once when the SG dose was increased to 0.5 mg/week.
Report a problemFND-3778146408
09HumanNon-randomized trialEfficacy outcome
In patients with diabetes, semaglutide improved maximum sensor glucose compared with dulaglutide.
In plain wordsIn patients with diabetes, maximum glucose was lower with semaglutide than dulaglutide.
Peptide
Semaglutide
Outcome
DecreaseMaximum sensor glucose
Study
n = 12
Comparator
Dulaglutide
Analysis
Secondary
Outcome group
Glycemic control · Metabolic and weight
Studied dose
0.5 mg/weekAs given in this study (human).
Source sentences
Summary
Regarding the secondary outcome measures, standard deviation of glucose, average sensor glucose, time above range, maximum sensor glucose, interquartile range, SD of glucose during the nocturnal period (0000-0559), and average nocturnal sensor glucose (0000-0559) were significantly better with SG than DG.
3 context sentences(design, population, supporting numbers)
Summary · context
This study compared the efficacy and safety of DG and SG using professional CGM in 12 patients attending our outpatient with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) while using GLP-1RA.
Summary · context
The study subjects were 12 T2DM patients with HbA1c ≥ 7.0% on treatment with 0.75 mg/week DG for at least 24 weeks.
Summary · context
All patients wore the professional CGM twice, once while receiving DG and once when the SG dose was increased to 0.5 mg/week.
Report a problemFND-3778146409
10HumanNon-randomized trialEfficacy outcome
In patients with diabetes, maximum sensor glucose was worse with dulaglutide than semaglutide.
In plain wordsIn patients with diabetes, maximum glucose was higher with dulaglutide than semaglutide.
Peptide
Dulaglutide (Trulicity)
Outcome
IncreaseMaximum sensor glucose
Study
n = 12
Comparator
Semaglutide
Analysis
Secondary
Outcome group
Glycemic control · Metabolic and weight
Studied dose
0.75 mg/week · At least 24 weeksAs given in this study (human).
Source sentences
Summary
Regarding the secondary outcome measures, standard deviation of glucose, average sensor glucose, time above range, maximum sensor glucose, interquartile range, SD of glucose during the nocturnal period (0000-0559), and average nocturnal sensor glucose (0000-0559) were significantly better with SG than DG.
3 context sentences(design, population, supporting numbers)
Summary · context
This study compared the efficacy and safety of DG and SG using professional CGM in 12 patients attending our outpatient with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) while using GLP-1RA.
Summary · context
The study subjects were 12 T2DM patients with HbA1c ≥ 7.0% on treatment with 0.75 mg/week DG for at least 24 weeks.
Summary · context
All patients wore the professional CGM twice, once while receiving DG and once when the SG dose was increased to 0.5 mg/week.
Report a problemFND-3778146410
11HumanNon-randomized trialEfficacy outcome
In patients with diabetes, semaglutide improved glucose interquartile range compared with dulaglutide.
In plain wordsIn patients with diabetes, glucose interquartile range was lower with semaglutide than dulaglutide.
Peptide
Semaglutide
Outcome
DecreaseGlucose interquartile range
Study
n = 12
Comparator
Dulaglutide
Analysis
Secondary
Outcome group
Glycemic control · Metabolic and weight
Studied dose
0.5 mg/weekAs given in this study (human).
Source sentences
Summary
Regarding the secondary outcome measures, standard deviation of glucose, average sensor glucose, time above range, maximum sensor glucose, interquartile range, SD of glucose during the nocturnal period (0000-0559), and average nocturnal sensor glucose (0000-0559) were significantly better with SG than DG.
3 context sentences(design, population, supporting numbers)
Summary · context
This study compared the efficacy and safety of DG and SG using professional CGM in 12 patients attending our outpatient with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) while using GLP-1RA.
Summary · context
The study subjects were 12 T2DM patients with HbA1c ≥ 7.0% on treatment with 0.75 mg/week DG for at least 24 weeks.
Summary · context
All patients wore the professional CGM twice, once while receiving DG and once when the SG dose was increased to 0.5 mg/week.
Report a problemFND-3778146411
12HumanNon-randomized trialEfficacy outcome
In patients with diabetes, glucose interquartile range was worse with dulaglutide than semaglutide.
In plain wordsIn patients with diabetes, glucose interquartile range was higher with dulaglutide than semaglutide.
Peptide
Dulaglutide (Trulicity)
Outcome
IncreaseGlucose interquartile range
Study
n = 12
Comparator
Semaglutide
Analysis
Secondary
Outcome group
Glycemic control · Metabolic and weight
Studied dose
0.75 mg/week · At least 24 weeksAs given in this study (human).
Source sentences
Summary
Regarding the secondary outcome measures, standard deviation of glucose, average sensor glucose, time above range, maximum sensor glucose, interquartile range, SD of glucose during the nocturnal period (0000-0559), and average nocturnal sensor glucose (0000-0559) were significantly better with SG than DG.
3 context sentences(design, population, supporting numbers)
Summary · context
This study compared the efficacy and safety of DG and SG using professional CGM in 12 patients attending our outpatient with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) while using GLP-1RA.
Summary · context
The study subjects were 12 T2DM patients with HbA1c ≥ 7.0% on treatment with 0.75 mg/week DG for at least 24 weeks.
Summary · context
All patients wore the professional CGM twice, once while receiving DG and once when the SG dose was increased to 0.5 mg/week.
Report a problemFND-3778146412
13HumanNon-randomized trialEfficacy outcome
In patients with diabetes, semaglutide improved nocturnal glucose standard deviation compared with dulaglutide.
In plain wordsIn patients with diabetes, night glucose variation was lower with semaglutide than dulaglutide.
Peptide
Semaglutide
Outcome
DecreaseNocturnal glucose standard deviation
Study
n = 12
Comparator
Dulaglutide
Analysis
Secondary
Outcome group
Glycemic control · Metabolic and weight
Studied dose
0.5 mg/weekAs given in this study (human).
Source sentences
Summary
Regarding the secondary outcome measures, standard deviation of glucose, average sensor glucose, time above range, maximum sensor glucose, interquartile range, SD of glucose during the nocturnal period (0000-0559), and average nocturnal sensor glucose (0000-0559) were significantly better with SG than DG.
3 context sentences(design, population, supporting numbers)
Summary · context
This study compared the efficacy and safety of DG and SG using professional CGM in 12 patients attending our outpatient with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) while using GLP-1RA.
Summary · context
The study subjects were 12 T2DM patients with HbA1c ≥ 7.0% on treatment with 0.75 mg/week DG for at least 24 weeks.
Summary · context
All patients wore the professional CGM twice, once while receiving DG and once when the SG dose was increased to 0.5 mg/week.
Report a problemFND-3778146413
14HumanNon-randomized trialEfficacy outcome
In patients with diabetes, nocturnal glucose standard deviation was worse with dulaglutide than semaglutide.
In plain wordsIn patients with diabetes, night glucose variation was higher with dulaglutide than semaglutide.
Peptide
Dulaglutide (Trulicity)
Outcome
IncreaseNocturnal glucose standard deviation
Study
n = 12
Comparator
Semaglutide
Analysis
Secondary
Outcome group
Glycemic control · Metabolic and weight
Studied dose
0.75 mg/week · At least 24 weeksAs given in this study (human).
Source sentences
Summary
Regarding the secondary outcome measures, standard deviation of glucose, average sensor glucose, time above range, maximum sensor glucose, interquartile range, SD of glucose during the nocturnal period (0000-0559), and average nocturnal sensor glucose (0000-0559) were significantly better with SG than DG.
3 context sentences(design, population, supporting numbers)
Summary · context
This study compared the efficacy and safety of DG and SG using professional CGM in 12 patients attending our outpatient with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) while using GLP-1RA.
Summary · context
The study subjects were 12 T2DM patients with HbA1c ≥ 7.0% on treatment with 0.75 mg/week DG for at least 24 weeks.
Summary · context
All patients wore the professional CGM twice, once while receiving DG and once when the SG dose was increased to 0.5 mg/week.
Report a problemFND-3778146414
15HumanNon-randomized trialEfficacy outcome
In patients with diabetes, semaglutide improved average nocturnal glucose compared with dulaglutide.
In plain wordsIn patients with diabetes, average night glucose was lower with semaglutide than dulaglutide.
Peptide
Semaglutide
Outcome
DecreaseAverage nocturnal sensor glucose
Study
n = 12
Comparator
Dulaglutide
Analysis
Secondary
Outcome group
Glycemic control · Metabolic and weight
Studied dose
0.5 mg/weekAs given in this study (human).
Source sentences
Summary
Regarding the secondary outcome measures, standard deviation of glucose, average sensor glucose, time above range, maximum sensor glucose, interquartile range, SD of glucose during the nocturnal period (0000-0559), and average nocturnal sensor glucose (0000-0559) were significantly better with SG than DG.
3 context sentences(design, population, supporting numbers)
Summary · context
This study compared the efficacy and safety of DG and SG using professional CGM in 12 patients attending our outpatient with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) while using GLP-1RA.
Summary · context
The study subjects were 12 T2DM patients with HbA1c ≥ 7.0% on treatment with 0.75 mg/week DG for at least 24 weeks.
Summary · context
All patients wore the professional CGM twice, once while receiving DG and once when the SG dose was increased to 0.5 mg/week.
Report a problemFND-3778146415
16HumanNon-randomized trialEfficacy outcome
In patients with diabetes, average nocturnal glucose was worse with dulaglutide than semaglutide.
In plain wordsIn patients with diabetes, average night glucose was higher with dulaglutide than semaglutide.
Peptide
Dulaglutide (Trulicity)
Outcome
IncreaseAverage nocturnal sensor glucose
Study
n = 12
Comparator
Semaglutide
Analysis
Secondary
Outcome group
Glycemic control · Metabolic and weight
Studied dose
0.75 mg/week · At least 24 weeksAs given in this study (human).
Source sentences
Summary
Regarding the secondary outcome measures, standard deviation of glucose, average sensor glucose, time above range, maximum sensor glucose, interquartile range, SD of glucose during the nocturnal period (0000-0559), and average nocturnal sensor glucose (0000-0559) were significantly better with SG than DG.
3 context sentences(design, population, supporting numbers)
Summary · context
This study compared the efficacy and safety of DG and SG using professional CGM in 12 patients attending our outpatient with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) while using GLP-1RA.
Summary · context
The study subjects were 12 T2DM patients with HbA1c ≥ 7.0% on treatment with 0.75 mg/week DG for at least 24 weeks.
Summary · context
All patients wore the professional CGM twice, once while receiving DG and once when the SG dose was increased to 0.5 mg/week.
Report a problemFND-3778146416
17HumanNon-randomized trialEfficacy outcome
In patients with diabetes, time below range did not differ between semaglutide and dulaglutide.
In plain wordsIn patients with diabetes, time below the glucose target was similar with semaglutide and dulaglutide.
Peptide
Semaglutide
Outcome
No significant changeTime below range
Study
n = 12
Comparator
Dulaglutide
Outcome group
Glycemic control · Metabolic and weight
Studied dose
0.5 mg/weekAs given in this study (human).
Source sentences
Summary
In contrast, SG had no effect on the time below range and minimum sensor glucose compared to DG.
3 context sentences(design, population, supporting numbers)
Summary · context
This study compared the efficacy and safety of DG and SG using professional CGM in 12 patients attending our outpatient with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) while using GLP-1RA.
Summary · context
The study subjects were 12 T2DM patients with HbA1c ≥ 7.0% on treatment with 0.75 mg/week DG for at least 24 weeks.
Summary · context
All patients wore the professional CGM twice, once while receiving DG and once when the SG dose was increased to 0.5 mg/week.
Report a problemFND-3778146417
18HumanNon-randomized trialEfficacy outcome
In patients with diabetes, time below range did not differ between dulaglutide and semaglutide.
In plain wordsIn patients with diabetes, time below the glucose target was similar with dulaglutide and semaglutide.
Peptide
Dulaglutide (Trulicity)
Outcome
No significant changeTime below range
Study
n = 12
Comparator
Semaglutide
Outcome group
Glycemic control · Metabolic and weight
Studied dose
0.75 mg/week · At least 24 weeksAs given in this study (human).
Source sentences
Summary
In contrast, SG had no effect on the time below range and minimum sensor glucose compared to DG.
3 context sentences(design, population, supporting numbers)
Summary · context
This study compared the efficacy and safety of DG and SG using professional CGM in 12 patients attending our outpatient with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) while using GLP-1RA.
Summary · context
The study subjects were 12 T2DM patients with HbA1c ≥ 7.0% on treatment with 0.75 mg/week DG for at least 24 weeks.
Summary · context
All patients wore the professional CGM twice, once while receiving DG and once when the SG dose was increased to 0.5 mg/week.
Report a problemFND-3778146418
19HumanNon-randomized trialEfficacy outcome
In patients with diabetes, minimum sensor glucose did not differ between semaglutide and dulaglutide.
In plain wordsIn patients with diabetes, minimum glucose was similar with semaglutide and dulaglutide.
Peptide
Semaglutide
Outcome
No significant changeMinimum sensor glucose
Study
n = 12
Comparator
Dulaglutide
Outcome group
Glycemic control · Metabolic and weight
Studied dose
0.5 mg/weekAs given in this study (human).
Source sentences
Summary
In contrast, SG had no effect on the time below range and minimum sensor glucose compared to DG.
3 context sentences(design, population, supporting numbers)
Summary · context
This study compared the efficacy and safety of DG and SG using professional CGM in 12 patients attending our outpatient with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) while using GLP-1RA.
Summary · context
The study subjects were 12 T2DM patients with HbA1c ≥ 7.0% on treatment with 0.75 mg/week DG for at least 24 weeks.
Summary · context
All patients wore the professional CGM twice, once while receiving DG and once when the SG dose was increased to 0.5 mg/week.
Report a problemFND-3778146419
20HumanNon-randomized trialEfficacy outcome
In patients with diabetes, minimum sensor glucose did not differ between dulaglutide and semaglutide.
In plain wordsIn patients with diabetes, minimum glucose was similar with dulaglutide and semaglutide.
Peptide
Dulaglutide (Trulicity)
Outcome
No significant changeMinimum sensor glucose
Study
n = 12
Comparator
Semaglutide
Outcome group
Glycemic control · Metabolic and weight
Studied dose
0.75 mg/week · At least 24 weeksAs given in this study (human).
Source sentences
Summary
In contrast, SG had no effect on the time below range and minimum sensor glucose compared to DG.
3 context sentences(design, population, supporting numbers)
Summary · context
This study compared the efficacy and safety of DG and SG using professional CGM in 12 patients attending our outpatient with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) while using GLP-1RA.
Summary · context
The study subjects were 12 T2DM patients with HbA1c ≥ 7.0% on treatment with 0.75 mg/week DG for at least 24 weeks.
Summary · context
All patients wore the professional CGM twice, once while receiving DG and once when the SG dose was increased to 0.5 mg/week.
Report a problemFND-3778146420

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 3Current
22 Oct 2026, 02:25 UTC
Study results updated
Version 2
21 Oct 2026, 18:59 UTC
Study data updated · source update from Europe PMC
Version 1
9 Oct 2026, 03:06 UTC
First added · source update from Europe PMC

Glucose-lowering effects of semaglutide compared with dulaglutide using professional continuous glucose monitoring in outpatients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: a pilot study.

Summary

Results from this study20

Version history

Subjects

Publication types

Keywords