Trial Outcomes & Findings for Effect and Safety of Liraglutide 3.0 mg in Subjects With Overweight or Obesity and Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Treated With Basal Insulin (NCT NCT02963922)
NCT ID: NCT02963922
Last Updated: 2020-03-30
Results Overview
Change in body weight from baseline (week 0) to week 56 was presented based on in-trial data and on-drug data. In-trial observation period: the uninterrupted time interval from the date of randomisation until and including the date of the follow-up visit or date of last contact. On-drug observation period: includes all time intervals in which participants are considered to be on treatment from the date of first trial product administration to 7 days (or 14 days for adverse events \[AEs\]) after the final trial product administration, excluding potential off-treatment time intervals triggered by at least 7 consecutive missed doses (or 14 consecutive missed doses for AEs).
COMPLETED
PHASE3
396 participants
Week 0, week 56
2020-03-30
Participant Flow
The trial was conducted at 53 sites in Canada (7), Germany (7), Israel (6), Italy (4), Mexico (2), Turkey (7) and United States (20).
Participants were randomised in a 1:1 manner to receive either liraglutide or placebo as an adjunct to a reduced-calorie diet and increased physical activity as part of a comprehensive lifestyle intervention program.
Participant milestones
| Measure |
Liraglutide 3.0 mg
Participants received liraglutide once daily by subcutaneous injection irrespective of the timing of meals. Participants received 0.6 milligrams (mg) liraglutide during the first week. The dose was escalated in weekly increments of 0.6 mg until the maintenance dose of 3.0 mg was reached after 4 weeks. The treatment period was 56 weeks.
|
Placebo
Participants received matching placebo once daily by subcutaneous injection irrespective of the timing of meals. Dose escalation for placebo matched that of liraglutide. The treatment period was 56 weeks.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Overall Study
STARTED
|
198
|
198
|
|
Overall Study
COMPLETED
|
166
|
168
|
|
Overall Study
NOT COMPLETED
|
32
|
30
|
Reasons for withdrawal
| Measure |
Liraglutide 3.0 mg
Participants received liraglutide once daily by subcutaneous injection irrespective of the timing of meals. Participants received 0.6 milligrams (mg) liraglutide during the first week. The dose was escalated in weekly increments of 0.6 mg until the maintenance dose of 3.0 mg was reached after 4 weeks. The treatment period was 56 weeks.
|
Placebo
Participants received matching placebo once daily by subcutaneous injection irrespective of the timing of meals. Dose escalation for placebo matched that of liraglutide. The treatment period was 56 weeks.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Overall Study
Lost to Follow-up
|
2
|
3
|
|
Overall Study
Other
|
8
|
14
|
|
Overall Study
Adverse Event
|
15
|
6
|
|
Overall Study
Protocol deviation
|
6
|
6
|
|
Overall Study
Lack of Efficacy
|
1
|
1
|
Baseline Characteristics
Effect and Safety of Liraglutide 3.0 mg in Subjects With Overweight or Obesity and Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Treated With Basal Insulin
Baseline characteristics by cohort
| Measure |
Liraglutide 3.0 mg
n=198 Participants
Participants received liraglutide once daily by subcutaneous injection irrespective of the timing of meals. Participants received 0.6 mg liraglutide during the first week. The dose was escalated in weekly increments of 0.6 mg until the maintenance dose of 3.0 mg was reached after 4 weeks. The treatment period was 56 weeks.
|
Placebo
n=198 Participants
Participants received matching placebo once daily by subcutaneous injection irrespective of the timing of meals. Dose escalation for placebo matched that of liraglutide. The treatment period was 56 weeks.
|
Total
n=396 Participants
Total of all reporting groups
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
Age, Continuous
|
55.9 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 11.3 • n=99 Participants
|
57.6 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 10.4 • n=107 Participants
|
56.8 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 10.9 • n=206 Participants
|
|
Sex: Female, Male
Female
|
108 Participants
n=99 Participants
|
99 Participants
n=107 Participants
|
207 Participants
n=206 Participants
|
|
Sex: Female, Male
Male
|
90 Participants
n=99 Participants
|
99 Participants
n=107 Participants
|
189 Participants
n=206 Participants
|
|
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Hispanic or Latino
|
43 Participants
n=99 Participants
|
29 Participants
n=107 Participants
|
72 Participants
n=206 Participants
|
|
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Not Hispanic or Latino
|
155 Participants
n=99 Participants
|
169 Participants
n=107 Participants
|
324 Participants
n=206 Participants
|
|
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Unknown or Not Reported
|
0 Participants
n=99 Participants
|
0 Participants
n=107 Participants
|
0 Participants
n=206 Participants
|
|
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
American Indian or Alaska Native
|
2 Participants
n=99 Participants
|
0 Participants
n=107 Participants
|
2 Participants
n=206 Participants
|
|
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
Asian
|
3 Participants
n=99 Participants
|
5 Participants
n=107 Participants
|
8 Participants
n=206 Participants
|
|
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
Black or African American
|
17 Participants
n=99 Participants
|
11 Participants
n=107 Participants
|
28 Participants
n=206 Participants
|
|
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander
|
2 Participants
n=99 Participants
|
0 Participants
n=107 Participants
|
2 Participants
n=206 Participants
|
|
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
White
|
174 Participants
n=99 Participants
|
180 Participants
n=107 Participants
|
354 Participants
n=206 Participants
|
|
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
Other
|
0 Participants
n=99 Participants
|
2 Participants
n=107 Participants
|
2 Participants
n=206 Participants
|
|
Body weight
|
100.6 Kilograms (kg)
STANDARD_DEVIATION 20.8 • n=99 Participants
|
98.9 Kilograms (kg)
STANDARD_DEVIATION 19.9 • n=107 Participants
|
99.7 Kilograms (kg)
STANDARD_DEVIATION 20.3 • n=206 Participants
|
PRIMARY outcome
Timeframe: Week 0, week 56Population: Full analysis set included all randomised participants. "Number analyzed"=participants with available data.
Change in body weight from baseline (week 0) to week 56 was presented based on in-trial data and on-drug data. In-trial observation period: the uninterrupted time interval from the date of randomisation until and including the date of the follow-up visit or date of last contact. On-drug observation period: includes all time intervals in which participants are considered to be on treatment from the date of first trial product administration to 7 days (or 14 days for adverse events \[AEs\]) after the final trial product administration, excluding potential off-treatment time intervals triggered by at least 7 consecutive missed doses (or 14 consecutive missed doses for AEs).
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Liraglutide 3.0 mg
n=198 Participants
Participants received liraglutide once daily by subcutaneous injection irrespective of the timing of meals. Participants received 0.6 mg liraglutide during the first week. The dose was escalated in weekly increments of 0.6 mg until the maintenance dose of 3.0 mg was reached after 4 weeks. The treatment period was 56 weeks.
|
Placebo
n=198 Participants
Participants received matching placebo once daily by subcutaneous injection irrespective of the timing of meals. Dose escalation for placebo matched that of liraglutide. The treatment period was 56 weeks.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Change in Body Weight (%)
In-trial observation period
|
-6.0 Percentage change
Standard Deviation 6.0
|
-1.5 Percentage change
Standard Deviation 5.4
|
|
Change in Body Weight (%)
On-drug observation period
|
-6.5 Percentage change
Standard Deviation 5.8
|
-1.7 Percentage change
Standard Deviation 5.2
|
PRIMARY outcome
Timeframe: Week 56Population: Full analysis set included all randomised participants. "Number analyzed"=participants with available data.
The estimated percentage of participants losing at least 5% of baseline (week 0) body weight at week 56 was presented based on in-trial data and on-drug data. In-trial observation period: the uninterrupted time interval from the date of randomisation until and including the date of the follow-up visit or date of last contact. On-drug observation period: includes all time intervals in which participants are considered to be on treatment from the date of first trial product administration to 7 days (or 14 days for adverse events \[AEs\]) after the final trial product administration, excluding potential off-treatment time intervals triggered by at least 7 consecutive missed doses (or 14 consecutive missed doses for AEs).
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Liraglutide 3.0 mg
n=198 Participants
Participants received liraglutide once daily by subcutaneous injection irrespective of the timing of meals. Participants received 0.6 mg liraglutide during the first week. The dose was escalated in weekly increments of 0.6 mg until the maintenance dose of 3.0 mg was reached after 4 weeks. The treatment period was 56 weeks.
|
Placebo
n=198 Participants
Participants received matching placebo once daily by subcutaneous injection irrespective of the timing of meals. Dose escalation for placebo matched that of liraglutide. The treatment period was 56 weeks.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Participants Losing at Least 5% of Baseline Body Weight
In-trial observation period
|
51.80 Percentage of participants
|
23.98 Percentage of participants
|
|
Participants Losing at Least 5% of Baseline Body Weight
On-drug observation period
|
56.92 Percentage of participants
|
21.83 Percentage of participants
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Week 56Population: Full analysis set included all randomised participants. "Number analyzed"=participants with available data.
The estimated percentage of participants losing more than 10% of baseline (week 0) body weight at week 56 was presented based on in-trial data and on-drug data. In-trial observation period: the uninterrupted time interval from the date of randomisation until and including the date of the follow-up visit or date of last contact. On-drug observation period: includes all time intervals in which participants are considered to be on treatment from the date of first trial product administration to 7 days (or 14 days for adverse events \[AEs\]) after the final trial product administration, excluding potential off-treatment time intervals triggered by at least 7 consecutive missed doses (or 14 consecutive missed doses for AEs).
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Liraglutide 3.0 mg
n=198 Participants
Participants received liraglutide once daily by subcutaneous injection irrespective of the timing of meals. Participants received 0.6 mg liraglutide during the first week. The dose was escalated in weekly increments of 0.6 mg until the maintenance dose of 3.0 mg was reached after 4 weeks. The treatment period was 56 weeks.
|
Placebo
n=198 Participants
Participants received matching placebo once daily by subcutaneous injection irrespective of the timing of meals. Dose escalation for placebo matched that of liraglutide. The treatment period was 56 weeks.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Participants Losing More Than 10% of Baseline Body Weight at Week 56
In-trial observation period
|
22.77 Percentage of participants
|
6.55 Percentage of participants
|
|
Participants Losing More Than 10% of Baseline Body Weight at Week 56
On-drug observation period
|
22.56 Percentage of participants
|
5.58 Percentage of participants
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Week 0, week 56Population: Full analysis set included all randomised participants. "Number analyzed"=participants with available data.
Change in waist circumference from baseline (week 0) to week 56 was presented based on in-trial data and on-drug data. In-trial observation period: the uninterrupted time interval from the date of randomisation until and including the date of the follow-up visit or date of last contact. On-drug observation period: includes all time intervals in which participants are considered to be on treatment from the date of first trial product administration to 7 days (or 14 days for AEs) after the final trial product administration, excluding potential off-treatment time intervals triggered by at least 7 consecutive missed doses (or 14 consecutive missed doses for AEs).
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Liraglutide 3.0 mg
n=198 Participants
Participants received liraglutide once daily by subcutaneous injection irrespective of the timing of meals. Participants received 0.6 mg liraglutide during the first week. The dose was escalated in weekly increments of 0.6 mg until the maintenance dose of 3.0 mg was reached after 4 weeks. The treatment period was 56 weeks.
|
Placebo
n=198 Participants
Participants received matching placebo once daily by subcutaneous injection irrespective of the timing of meals. Dose escalation for placebo matched that of liraglutide. The treatment period was 56 weeks.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Change in Waist Circumference
In-trial observation period
|
-5.40 Centimeters (cm)
Standard Deviation 6.06
|
-2.60 Centimeters (cm)
Standard Deviation 5.72
|
|
Change in Waist Circumference
On-drug observation period
|
-5.71 Centimeters (cm)
Standard Deviation 6.05
|
-2.78 Centimeters (cm)
Standard Deviation 5.63
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Week 0, week 56Population: Full analysis set included all randomised participants. "Number analyzed"=participants with available data.
Change in glycosylated haemoglobin (HbA1c) from baseline (week 0) to week 56 was presented based on in-trial data and on-drug data. In-trial observation period: the uninterrupted time interval from the date of randomisation until and including the date of the follow-up visit or date of last contact. On-drug observation period: includes all time intervals in which participants are considered to be on treatment from the date of first trial product administration to 7 days (or 14 days for AEs) after the final trial product administration, excluding potential off-treatment time intervals triggered by at least 7 consecutive missed doses (or 14 consecutive missed doses for AEs).
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Liraglutide 3.0 mg
n=198 Participants
Participants received liraglutide once daily by subcutaneous injection irrespective of the timing of meals. Participants received 0.6 mg liraglutide during the first week. The dose was escalated in weekly increments of 0.6 mg until the maintenance dose of 3.0 mg was reached after 4 weeks. The treatment period was 56 weeks.
|
Placebo
n=198 Participants
Participants received matching placebo once daily by subcutaneous injection irrespective of the timing of meals. Dose escalation for placebo matched that of liraglutide. The treatment period was 56 weeks.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Change in HbA1c
In-trial observation period
|
-1.1 Percentage of HbA1c
Standard Deviation 1.2
|
-0.5 Percentage of HbA1c
Standard Deviation 1.2
|
|
Change in HbA1c
On-drug observation period
|
-1.2 Percentage of HbA1c
Standard Deviation 1.1
|
-0.7 Percentage of HbA1c
Standard Deviation 1.0
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Week 0, week 56Population: Full analysis set included all randomised participants. "Number analyzed"=participants with available data.
Change in fasting plasma glucose (FPG) from baseline (week 0) to week 56 was presented based on in-trial data and on-drug data. In-trial observation period: the uninterrupted time interval from the date of randomisation until and including the date of the follow-up visit or date of last contact. On-drug observation period: includes all time intervals in which participants are considered to be on treatment from the date of first trial product administration to 7 days (or 14 days for AEs) after the final trial product administration, excluding potential off-treatment time intervals triggered by at least 7 consecutive missed doses (or 14 consecutive missed doses for AEs).
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Liraglutide 3.0 mg
n=198 Participants
Participants received liraglutide once daily by subcutaneous injection irrespective of the timing of meals. Participants received 0.6 mg liraglutide during the first week. The dose was escalated in weekly increments of 0.6 mg until the maintenance dose of 3.0 mg was reached after 4 weeks. The treatment period was 56 weeks.
|
Placebo
n=198 Participants
Participants received matching placebo once daily by subcutaneous injection irrespective of the timing of meals. Dose escalation for placebo matched that of liraglutide. The treatment period was 56 weeks.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Change in FPG
In-trial observation period
|
-0.91 Millimoles per liter (mmol/L)
Standard Deviation 3.13
|
-0.68 Millimoles per liter (mmol/L)
Standard Deviation 3.04
|
|
Change in FPG
On-drug observation period
|
-1.05 Millimoles per liter (mmol/L)
Standard Deviation 3.08
|
-0.96 Millimoles per liter (mmol/L)
Standard Deviation 2.68
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Week 0, week 56Population: Full analysis set included all randomised participants. "Number analyzed"=participants with available data.
SF-36 is a 36-item patient-reported survey of patient health that measures the participant's overall health-related quality of life (HRQoL). SF-36v2™ questionnaire measured the HRQoL on 8 domains on individual scale ranges. The scores 0-100 (where higher scores indicated a better HRQoL) from the SF-36 were converted to norm-based scores to enable a direct interpretation in relation to the distribution of the scores in the 2009 U.S. general population. A norm-based score of 50 corresponds to the mean score and 10 corresponds to the standard deviation of the 2009 U.S. general population. Change from baseline (week 0) in SF-36 physical functioning score was presented based on in-trial data and on-drug data. A positive change score indicates an improvement since baseline.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Liraglutide 3.0 mg
n=198 Participants
Participants received liraglutide once daily by subcutaneous injection irrespective of the timing of meals. Participants received 0.6 mg liraglutide during the first week. The dose was escalated in weekly increments of 0.6 mg until the maintenance dose of 3.0 mg was reached after 4 weeks. The treatment period was 56 weeks.
|
Placebo
n=198 Participants
Participants received matching placebo once daily by subcutaneous injection irrespective of the timing of meals. Dose escalation for placebo matched that of liraglutide. The treatment period was 56 weeks.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Change in Short Form-36 (SF-36) v2.0 Acute, Physical Functioning Score
In-trial observation period
|
2.5 Score on a scale
Standard Deviation 7.9
|
2.6 Score on a scale
Standard Deviation 7.3
|
|
Change in Short Form-36 (SF-36) v2.0 Acute, Physical Functioning Score
On-drug observation period
|
2.9 Score on a scale
Standard Deviation 7.8
|
2.5 Score on a scale
Standard Deviation 7.1
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Week 0, week 56Population: Full analysis set included all randomised participants. "Number analyzed"=participants with available data.
Change in IWQoL-Lite for CT physical function domain (5-items) score. IWQoL-Lite for CT is a modified version of an instrument designed to assess weight-related quality of life. The scores ranged between 0-100 where higher scores indicated a better quality of life. A positive change score indicates an improvement since baseline. The endpoint was presented based on in-trial data and on-drug data. In-trial observation period: the uninterrupted time interval from the date of randomisation until and including the date of the follow-up visit or date of last contact. On-drug observation period: includes all time intervals in which participants are considered to be on treatment from the date of first trial product administration to 7 days (or 14 days for AEs) after the final trial product administration, excluding potential off-treatment time intervals triggered by at least 7 consecutive missed doses (or 14 consecutive missed doses for AEs).
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Liraglutide 3.0 mg
n=198 Participants
Participants received liraglutide once daily by subcutaneous injection irrespective of the timing of meals. Participants received 0.6 mg liraglutide during the first week. The dose was escalated in weekly increments of 0.6 mg until the maintenance dose of 3.0 mg was reached after 4 weeks. The treatment period was 56 weeks.
|
Placebo
n=198 Participants
Participants received matching placebo once daily by subcutaneous injection irrespective of the timing of meals. Dose escalation for placebo matched that of liraglutide. The treatment period was 56 weeks.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Change in Impact of Weight on Quality of Life-Lite for Clinical Trial Version (IWQoL-Lite for CT), Physical Function Domain (5-items) Score
In-trial observation period
|
7.3 Score on a scale
Standard Deviation 22.5
|
6.8 Score on a scale
Standard Deviation 21.5
|
|
Change in Impact of Weight on Quality of Life-Lite for Clinical Trial Version (IWQoL-Lite for CT), Physical Function Domain (5-items) Score
On-drug observation period
|
8.2 Score on a scale
Standard Deviation 20.9
|
6.5 Score on a scale
Standard Deviation 21.8
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Week 0, week 56Population: Full analysis set included all randomised participants. "Number analyzed"=participants with available data.
Change in total daily insulin dose from baseline (week 0) to week 56 was presented based on in-trial data. In-trial observation period: the uninterrupted time interval from the date of randomisation until and including the date of the follow-up visit or date of last contact.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Liraglutide 3.0 mg
n=198 Participants
Participants received liraglutide once daily by subcutaneous injection irrespective of the timing of meals. Participants received 0.6 mg liraglutide during the first week. The dose was escalated in weekly increments of 0.6 mg until the maintenance dose of 3.0 mg was reached after 4 weeks. The treatment period was 56 weeks.
|
Placebo
n=198 Participants
Participants received matching placebo once daily by subcutaneous injection irrespective of the timing of meals. Dose escalation for placebo matched that of liraglutide. The treatment period was 56 weeks.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Change in Total Daily Insulin Dose (U)
|
3 Units of insulin dose (U)
Standard Deviation 30
|
18 Units of insulin dose (U)
Standard Deviation 38
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Week 0, week 56Population: Full analysis set included all randomised participants. "Number analyzed"=participants with available data.
Change in total daily basal insulin dose from baseline (week 0) to week 56 was presented based on in-trial data. In-trial observation period: the uninterrupted time interval from the date of randomisation until and including the date of the follow-up visit or date of last contact.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Liraglutide 3.0 mg
n=198 Participants
Participants received liraglutide once daily by subcutaneous injection irrespective of the timing of meals. Participants received 0.6 mg liraglutide during the first week. The dose was escalated in weekly increments of 0.6 mg until the maintenance dose of 3.0 mg was reached after 4 weeks. The treatment period was 56 weeks.
|
Placebo
n=198 Participants
Participants received matching placebo once daily by subcutaneous injection irrespective of the timing of meals. Dose escalation for placebo matched that of liraglutide. The treatment period was 56 weeks.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Change in Total Daily Basal Insulin Dose (% of Pre-trial Dose in U)
|
19 Percentage change
Standard Deviation 121
|
64 Percentage change
Standard Deviation 139
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Week 0, week 56Population: Full analysis set included all randomised participants. "Number analyzed"=participants with available data.
Change in total daily basal insulin dose from baseline (week 0) to week 56 was presented based on in-trial data. In-trial observation period: the uninterrupted time interval from the date of randomisation until and including the date of the follow-up visit or date of last contact.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Liraglutide 3.0 mg
n=198 Participants
Participants received liraglutide once daily by subcutaneous injection irrespective of the timing of meals. Participants received 0.6 mg liraglutide during the first week. The dose was escalated in weekly increments of 0.6 mg until the maintenance dose of 3.0 mg was reached after 4 weeks. The treatment period was 56 weeks.
|
Placebo
n=198 Participants
Participants received matching placebo once daily by subcutaneous injection irrespective of the timing of meals. Dose escalation for placebo matched that of liraglutide. The treatment period was 56 weeks.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Change in Total Daily Basal Insulin Dose (U/kg)
|
0.05 Units of insulin dose per kilogram(U/kg)
Standard Deviation 0.33
|
0.15 Units of insulin dose per kilogram(U/kg)
Standard Deviation 0.30
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Week 0, week 56Population: Full analysis set included all randomised participants. "Number analyzed"=participants with available data.
Change in total daily insulin dose from baseline (week 0) to week 56 was presented based on in-trial data. In-trial observation period: the uninterrupted time interval from the date of randomisation until and including the date of the follow-up visit or date of last contact.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Liraglutide 3.0 mg
n=198 Participants
Participants received liraglutide once daily by subcutaneous injection irrespective of the timing of meals. Participants received 0.6 mg liraglutide during the first week. The dose was escalated in weekly increments of 0.6 mg until the maintenance dose of 3.0 mg was reached after 4 weeks. The treatment period was 56 weeks.
|
Placebo
n=198 Participants
Participants received matching placebo once daily by subcutaneous injection irrespective of the timing of meals. Dose escalation for placebo matched that of liraglutide. The treatment period was 56 weeks.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Change in Total Daily Insulin Dose (U/kg)
|
0.05 U/kg
Standard Deviation 0.33
|
0.18 U/kg
Standard Deviation 0.37
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Week 0, week 56Population: Full analysis set included all randomised participants. "Number analyzed"=participants with available data.
Participants measured plasma glucose values using the blood glucose meter at 7 time points: before breakfast, 90 min after start of breakfast, before lunch, 90 minutes after start of lunch, before dinner, 90 min after start of dinner and at bedtime. Change from baseline (week 0) to week 56 in 7-point self-measured plasma glucose (SMPG) profile mean daytime glucose value was presented based on in-trial data. In-trial observation period: the uninterrupted time interval from the date of randomisation until and including the date of the follow-up visit or date of last contact.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Liraglutide 3.0 mg
n=198 Participants
Participants received liraglutide once daily by subcutaneous injection irrespective of the timing of meals. Participants received 0.6 mg liraglutide during the first week. The dose was escalated in weekly increments of 0.6 mg until the maintenance dose of 3.0 mg was reached after 4 weeks. The treatment period was 56 weeks.
|
Placebo
n=198 Participants
Participants received matching placebo once daily by subcutaneous injection irrespective of the timing of meals. Dose escalation for placebo matched that of liraglutide. The treatment period was 56 weeks.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Change in 7-point SMPG Profile Mean Daytime Glucose Value
|
-2.2 mmol/L
Standard Deviation 2.6
|
-1.6 mmol/L
Standard Deviation 2.8
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Week 0, week 56Population: Full analysis set included all randomised participants. "Number analyzed"=participants with available data.
Change in systolic blood pressure (sBP) and diastolic blood pressure (dBP) from baseline (week 0) to week 56 was presented based on in-trial data. In-trial observation period: the uninterrupted time interval from the date of randomisation until and including the date of the follow-up visit or date of last contact.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Liraglutide 3.0 mg
n=198 Participants
Participants received liraglutide once daily by subcutaneous injection irrespective of the timing of meals. Participants received 0.6 mg liraglutide during the first week. The dose was escalated in weekly increments of 0.6 mg until the maintenance dose of 3.0 mg was reached after 4 weeks. The treatment period was 56 weeks.
|
Placebo
n=198 Participants
Participants received matching placebo once daily by subcutaneous injection irrespective of the timing of meals. Dose escalation for placebo matched that of liraglutide. The treatment period was 56 weeks.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Change in sBP and dBP
sBP
|
-6 Millimeters of mercury (mmHg)
Standard Deviation 14
|
-2 Millimeters of mercury (mmHg)
Standard Deviation 15
|
|
Change in sBP and dBP
dBP
|
-3 Millimeters of mercury (mmHg)
Standard Deviation 9
|
-1 Millimeters of mercury (mmHg)
Standard Deviation 9
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Week 0, week 56Population: Full analysis set included all randomised participants. "Number analyzed"=participants with available data.
Change in total cholesterol, high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol, low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol, very low density lipoprotein (VLDL) cholesterol, triglycerides and free fatty acids (FFA) from baseline (week 0) to week 56 was presented based on in-trial data. In-trial observation period: the uninterrupted time interval from the date of randomisation until and including the date of the follow-up visit or date of last contact.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Liraglutide 3.0 mg
n=198 Participants
Participants received liraglutide once daily by subcutaneous injection irrespective of the timing of meals. Participants received 0.6 mg liraglutide during the first week. The dose was escalated in weekly increments of 0.6 mg until the maintenance dose of 3.0 mg was reached after 4 weeks. The treatment period was 56 weeks.
|
Placebo
n=198 Participants
Participants received matching placebo once daily by subcutaneous injection irrespective of the timing of meals. Dose escalation for placebo matched that of liraglutide. The treatment period was 56 weeks.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Change in Lipids -Total Cholesterol, HDL, LDL, VLDL, Triglycerides and FFA
Total cholesterol
|
-0.12 mmol/L
Standard Deviation 0.82
|
0.04 mmol/L
Standard Deviation 0.69
|
|
Change in Lipids -Total Cholesterol, HDL, LDL, VLDL, Triglycerides and FFA
HDL cholesterol
|
0.05 mmol/L
Standard Deviation 0.17
|
0.03 mmol/L
Standard Deviation 0.17
|
|
Change in Lipids -Total Cholesterol, HDL, LDL, VLDL, Triglycerides and FFA
LDL cholesterol
|
-0.08 mmol/L
Standard Deviation 0.72
|
0.05 mmol/L
Standard Deviation 0.57
|
|
Change in Lipids -Total Cholesterol, HDL, LDL, VLDL, Triglycerides and FFA
VLDL cholesterol
|
-0.09 mmol/L
Standard Deviation 0.35
|
-0.04 mmol/L
Standard Deviation 0.33
|
|
Change in Lipids -Total Cholesterol, HDL, LDL, VLDL, Triglycerides and FFA
Triglycerides
|
-0.21 mmol/L
Standard Deviation 0.89
|
-0.08 mmol/L
Standard Deviation 0.80
|
|
Change in Lipids -Total Cholesterol, HDL, LDL, VLDL, Triglycerides and FFA
Free fatty acids
|
-0.10 mmol/L
Standard Deviation 0.27
|
-0.06 mmol/L
Standard Deviation 0.34
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Week 0, week 56Population: Full analysis set included all randomised participants. "Number analyzed"=participants with available data.
SF-36 is a 36-item patient-reported survey of patient health that measures the participant's overall health-related quality of life (HRQoL). SF-36v2™ questionnaire measured the HRQoL on 8 domains on individual scale ranges. The scores 0-100 (where higher scores indicated a better HRQoL) from the SF-36 were converted to norm-based scores to enable a direct interpretation in relation to the distribution of the scores in the 2009 U.S. general population. A norm-based score of 50 corresponds to the mean score and 10 corresponds to the standard deviation of the 2009 U.S. general population. Change from baseline in the sub-domain scores was presented based on in-trial data. A positive change score indicates an improvement since baseline. Results are presented based on in-trial data. In-trial observation period: the uninterrupted time interval from the date of randomisation until and including the date of the follow-up visit or date of last contact.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Liraglutide 3.0 mg
n=198 Participants
Participants received liraglutide once daily by subcutaneous injection irrespective of the timing of meals. Participants received 0.6 mg liraglutide during the first week. The dose was escalated in weekly increments of 0.6 mg until the maintenance dose of 3.0 mg was reached after 4 weeks. The treatment period was 56 weeks.
|
Placebo
n=198 Participants
Participants received matching placebo once daily by subcutaneous injection irrespective of the timing of meals. Dose escalation for placebo matched that of liraglutide. The treatment period was 56 weeks.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Change in SF-36: Sub-domains
Bodily Pain
|
1.2 Score on a scale
Standard Deviation 8.3
|
1.2 Score on a scale
Standard Deviation 9.1
|
|
Change in SF-36: Sub-domains
General Health
|
1.9 Score on a scale
Standard Deviation 7.8
|
0.3 Score on a scale
Standard Deviation 7.7
|
|
Change in SF-36: Sub-domains
Physical Functioning
|
2.5 Score on a scale
Standard Deviation 7.9
|
2.6 Score on a scale
Standard Deviation 7.3
|
|
Change in SF-36: Sub-domains
Role-physical
|
0.8 Score on a scale
Standard Deviation 7.7
|
0.9 Score on a scale
Standard Deviation 8.0
|
|
Change in SF-36: Sub-domains
Role Lim Emotion Prob
|
-1.2 Score on a scale
Standard Deviation 8.1
|
-0.3 Score on a scale
Standard Deviation 8.2
|
|
Change in SF-36: Sub-domains
Mental Health
|
-1.1 Score on a scale
Standard Deviation 8.6
|
-1.1 Score on a scale
Standard Deviation 7.5
|
|
Change in SF-36: Sub-domains
Social Functioning
|
-0.7 Score on a scale
Standard Deviation 7.7
|
-0.6 Score on a scale
Standard Deviation 6.3
|
|
Change in SF-36: Sub-domains
Vitality
|
1.0 Score on a scale
Standard Deviation 8.0
|
-0.0 Score on a scale
Standard Deviation 7.7
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Week 0, week 56Population: Full analysis set included all randomised participants. "Number analyzed"=participants with available data.
Change in short form 36 v2.0 acute domain physical component summary (PCS) from baseline (week 0) to week 56 was presented based on in-trial data. SF-36v2™ questionnaire measured the HRQoL on 8 domains on individual scale ranges. It consists of 2 component summary measures that further summarize 8 health domain scales. The physical component summary (PCS) measure is derived from domain scales of physical functioning, role-physical, bodily pain, and general health. The scores 0-100 (where higher scores indicated a better HRQoL) from the SF-36 were converted to norm-based scores to enable a direct interpretation in relation to the distribution of the scores in the 2009 U.S. general population. A norm-based score of 50 corresponds to the mean score and 10 corresponds to the standard deviation of the 2009 U.S. general population. A positive change score indicates an improvement since baseline.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Liraglutide 3.0 mg
n=198 Participants
Participants received liraglutide once daily by subcutaneous injection irrespective of the timing of meals. Participants received 0.6 mg liraglutide during the first week. The dose was escalated in weekly increments of 0.6 mg until the maintenance dose of 3.0 mg was reached after 4 weeks. The treatment period was 56 weeks.
|
Placebo
n=198 Participants
Participants received matching placebo once daily by subcutaneous injection irrespective of the timing of meals. Dose escalation for placebo matched that of liraglutide. The treatment period was 56 weeks.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Change in SF-36: Physical Component Summary (PCS)
|
2.7 Score on a scale
Standard Deviation 7.5
|
2.2 Score on a scale
Standard Deviation 7.2
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Week 0, week 56Population: Full analysis set included all randomised participants. "Number analyzed"=participants with available data.
Change in short form 36 v2.0 acute domain mental component summary (MCS) from baseline (week 0) to week 56 was presented based on in-trial data. SF- 36v2™ questionnaire measured the HRQoL on 8 domains on individual scale ranges. The mental component summary (MCS) measure is derived from domain scales of vitality, social functioning, role emotional and mental health. The scores 0-100 (where higher scores indicated a better HRQoL) from the SF-36 were converted to norm-based scores to enable a direct interpretation in relation to the distribution of the scores in the 2009 U.S. general population. A norm-based score of 50 corresponds to the mean score and 10 corresponds to the standard deviation of the 2009 U.S. general population. A positive change score indicates an improvement since baseline.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Liraglutide 3.0 mg
n=198 Participants
Participants received liraglutide once daily by subcutaneous injection irrespective of the timing of meals. Participants received 0.6 mg liraglutide during the first week. The dose was escalated in weekly increments of 0.6 mg until the maintenance dose of 3.0 mg was reached after 4 weeks. The treatment period was 56 weeks.
|
Placebo
n=198 Participants
Participants received matching placebo once daily by subcutaneous injection irrespective of the timing of meals. Dose escalation for placebo matched that of liraglutide. The treatment period was 56 weeks.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Change in SF-36: Mental Component Summary (MCS)
|
-1.9 Score on a scale
Standard Deviation 7.9
|
-1.7 Score on a scale
Standard Deviation 6.8
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Week 0, week 56Population: Full analysis set included all randomised participants. "Number analyzed"=participants with available data.
Change in IWQoL-Lite for CT pain and discomfort domain from baseline (week 0) to week 56 was presented based on in-trial data. IWQoL-Lite for CT is a modified version of an instrument designed to assess weight-related quality of life. The scores ranged between 0-100 where higher scores indicated a better quality of life. A positive change score indicates an improvement since baseline. In-trial observation period: the uninterrupted time interval from the date of randomisation until and including the date of the follow-up visit or date of last contact.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Liraglutide 3.0 mg
n=198 Participants
Participants received liraglutide once daily by subcutaneous injection irrespective of the timing of meals. Participants received 0.6 mg liraglutide during the first week. The dose was escalated in weekly increments of 0.6 mg until the maintenance dose of 3.0 mg was reached after 4 weeks. The treatment period was 56 weeks.
|
Placebo
n=198 Participants
Participants received matching placebo once daily by subcutaneous injection irrespective of the timing of meals. Dose escalation for placebo matched that of liraglutide. The treatment period was 56 weeks.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Change in IWQoL-Lite for CT: Pain/Discomfort Domain Score
|
4.0 Score on a scale
Standard Deviation 22.1
|
4.6 Score on a scale
Standard Deviation 23.1
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Week 0, week 56Population: Full analysis set included all randomised participants. "Number analyzed"=participants with available data.
Change in IWQoL-Lite for CT psychosocial domain from baseline (week 0) to week 56 was presented based on in-trial data. IWQoL-Lite for CT is a modified version of an instrument designed to assess weight-related quality of life. The scores ranged between 0-100 where higher scores indicated a better quality of life. A positive change score indicates an improvement since baseline. In-trial observation period: the uninterrupted time interval from the date of randomisation until and including the date of the follow-up visit or date of last contact.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Liraglutide 3.0 mg
n=198 Participants
Participants received liraglutide once daily by subcutaneous injection irrespective of the timing of meals. Participants received 0.6 mg liraglutide during the first week. The dose was escalated in weekly increments of 0.6 mg until the maintenance dose of 3.0 mg was reached after 4 weeks. The treatment period was 56 weeks.
|
Placebo
n=198 Participants
Participants received matching placebo once daily by subcutaneous injection irrespective of the timing of meals. Dose escalation for placebo matched that of liraglutide. The treatment period was 56 weeks.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Change in IWQoL-Lite for CT: Psychosocial Domain Score
|
5.4 Score on a scale
Standard Deviation 18.4
|
4.0 Score on a scale
Standard Deviation 16.7
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Week 0, week 56Population: Full analysis set included all randomised participants. "Number analyzed"=participants with available data.
Change in IWQoL-Lite for CT total score from baseline (week 0) to week 56 was presented based on in-trial data. IWQoL-Lite for CT is a modified version of an instrument designed to assess weight-related quality of life. The scores ranged between 0-100 where higher scores indicated a better quality of life. A positive change score indicates an improvement since baseline. In-trial observation period: the uninterrupted time interval from the date of randomisation until and including the date of the follow-up visit or date of last contact.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Liraglutide 3.0 mg
n=198 Participants
Participants received liraglutide once daily by subcutaneous injection irrespective of the timing of meals. Participants received 0.6 mg liraglutide during the first week. The dose was escalated in weekly increments of 0.6 mg until the maintenance dose of 3.0 mg was reached after 4 weeks. The treatment period was 56 weeks.
|
Placebo
n=198 Participants
Participants received matching placebo once daily by subcutaneous injection irrespective of the timing of meals. Dose escalation for placebo matched that of liraglutide. The treatment period was 56 weeks.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Change in IWQoL-Lite for CT: Total Score
|
5.7 Score on a scale
Standard Deviation 17.6
|
4.8 Score on a scale
Standard Deviation 16.6
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Week 0, week 56Population: Full analysis set included all randomised participants. "Number analyzed"=participants with available data.
The WRSS measure is a questionnaire under development. The version applied in this study has 10 items that measure the presence and bothersomeness of 10 weight-related symptoms. Each item has a categorical part with answers on the following 5 possible levels: 'Never/Almost never', 'Rarely', 'Sometimes', 'Often' and 'Almost always/Always'. Number of participants in each category at baseline (week 0) and week 56 was presented. Scoring algorithm was not available prior to database lock and therefore it was decided and documented in the statistical analysis plan that WRSS total score was not to be calculated and analyzed.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Liraglutide 3.0 mg
n=198 Participants
Participants received liraglutide once daily by subcutaneous injection irrespective of the timing of meals. Participants received 0.6 mg liraglutide during the first week. The dose was escalated in weekly increments of 0.6 mg until the maintenance dose of 3.0 mg was reached after 4 weeks. The treatment period was 56 weeks.
|
Placebo
n=198 Participants
Participants received matching placebo once daily by subcutaneous injection irrespective of the timing of meals. Dose escalation for placebo matched that of liraglutide. The treatment period was 56 weeks.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Weight Related Sign and Symptom (WRSS) Measure, Categorical Responses
Week 0: Joint pain · Almost always/Always
|
11 Participants
|
5 Participants
|
|
Weight Related Sign and Symptom (WRSS) Measure, Categorical Responses
Week 0: Joint pain · Never/Almost never
|
74 Participants
|
85 Participants
|
|
Weight Related Sign and Symptom (WRSS) Measure, Categorical Responses
Week 0: Joint pain · Often
|
17 Participants
|
18 Participants
|
|
Weight Related Sign and Symptom (WRSS) Measure, Categorical Responses
Week 0: Joint pain · Rarely
|
47 Participants
|
42 Participants
|
|
Weight Related Sign and Symptom (WRSS) Measure, Categorical Responses
Week 0: Joint pain · Sometimes
|
49 Participants
|
46 Participants
|
|
Weight Related Sign and Symptom (WRSS) Measure, Categorical Responses
Week 56: Joint pain · Almost always/Always
|
6 Participants
|
5 Participants
|
|
Weight Related Sign and Symptom (WRSS) Measure, Categorical Responses
Week 56: Joint pain · Never/Almost never
|
95 Participants
|
75 Participants
|
|
Weight Related Sign and Symptom (WRSS) Measure, Categorical Responses
Week 56: Joint pain · Often
|
12 Participants
|
17 Participants
|
|
Weight Related Sign and Symptom (WRSS) Measure, Categorical Responses
Week 56: Joint pain · Rarely
|
35 Participants
|
39 Participants
|
|
Weight Related Sign and Symptom (WRSS) Measure, Categorical Responses
Week 56: Joint pain · Sometimes
|
39 Participants
|
52 Participants
|
|
Weight Related Sign and Symptom (WRSS) Measure, Categorical Responses
Week 0: Shortness of breath · Almost always/Always
|
0 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
|
Weight Related Sign and Symptom (WRSS) Measure, Categorical Responses
Week 0: Shortness of breath · Never/Almost never
|
131 Participants
|
140 Participants
|
|
Weight Related Sign and Symptom (WRSS) Measure, Categorical Responses
Week 0: Shortness of breath · Often
|
3 Participants
|
3 Participants
|
|
Weight Related Sign and Symptom (WRSS) Measure, Categorical Responses
Week 0: Shortness of breath · Rarely
|
45 Participants
|
32 Participants
|
|
Weight Related Sign and Symptom (WRSS) Measure, Categorical Responses
Week 0: Shortness of breath · Sometimes
|
19 Participants
|
21 Participants
|
|
Weight Related Sign and Symptom (WRSS) Measure, Categorical Responses
Week 56: Shortness of breath · Almost always/Always
|
1 Participants
|
1 Participants
|
|
Weight Related Sign and Symptom (WRSS) Measure, Categorical Responses
Week 56: Shortness of breath · Never/Almost never
|
137 Participants
|
111 Participants
|
|
Weight Related Sign and Symptom (WRSS) Measure, Categorical Responses
Week 56: Shortness of breath · Often
|
5 Participants
|
3 Participants
|
|
Weight Related Sign and Symptom (WRSS) Measure, Categorical Responses
Week 56: Shortness of breath · Rarely
|
28 Participants
|
46 Participants
|
|
Weight Related Sign and Symptom (WRSS) Measure, Categorical Responses
Week 56: Shortness of breath · Sometimes
|
16 Participants
|
27 Participants
|
|
Weight Related Sign and Symptom (WRSS) Measure, Categorical Responses
Week 0: Heat sensitivity · Almost always/Always
|
8 Participants
|
9 Participants
|
|
Weight Related Sign and Symptom (WRSS) Measure, Categorical Responses
Week 0: Heat sensitivity · Never/Almost never
|
106 Participants
|
109 Participants
|
|
Weight Related Sign and Symptom (WRSS) Measure, Categorical Responses
Week 0: Heat sensitivity · Often
|
13 Participants
|
16 Participants
|
|
Weight Related Sign and Symptom (WRSS) Measure, Categorical Responses
Week 0: Heat sensitivity · Rarely
|
34 Participants
|
31 Participants
|
|
Weight Related Sign and Symptom (WRSS) Measure, Categorical Responses
Week 0: Heat sensitivity · Sometimes
|
37 Participants
|
31 Participants
|
|
Weight Related Sign and Symptom (WRSS) Measure, Categorical Responses
Week 56: Heat sensitivity · Almost always/Always
|
2 Participants
|
8 Participants
|
|
Weight Related Sign and Symptom (WRSS) Measure, Categorical Responses
Week 56: Heat sensitivity · Never/Almost never
|
92 Participants
|
87 Participants
|
|
Weight Related Sign and Symptom (WRSS) Measure, Categorical Responses
Week 56: Heat sensitivity · Often
|
12 Participants
|
13 Participants
|
|
Weight Related Sign and Symptom (WRSS) Measure, Categorical Responses
Week 56: Heat sensitivity · Rarely
|
42 Participants
|
47 Participants
|
|
Weight Related Sign and Symptom (WRSS) Measure, Categorical Responses
Week 56: Heat sensitivity · Sometimes
|
39 Participants
|
33 Participants
|
|
Weight Related Sign and Symptom (WRSS) Measure, Categorical Responses
Week 0: Sexual desire · Almost always/Always
|
8 Participants
|
8 Participants
|
|
Weight Related Sign and Symptom (WRSS) Measure, Categorical Responses
Week 0: Sexual desire · Never/Almost never
|
119 Participants
|
121 Participants
|
|
Weight Related Sign and Symptom (WRSS) Measure, Categorical Responses
Week 0: Sexual desire · Often
|
13 Participants
|
13 Participants
|
|
Weight Related Sign and Symptom (WRSS) Measure, Categorical Responses
Week 0: Sexual desire · Rarely
|
35 Participants
|
32 Participants
|
|
Weight Related Sign and Symptom (WRSS) Measure, Categorical Responses
Week 0: Sexual desire · Sometimes
|
23 Participants
|
22 Participants
|
|
Weight Related Sign and Symptom (WRSS) Measure, Categorical Responses
Week 56: Sexual desire · Almost always/Always
|
6 Participants
|
11 Participants
|
|
Weight Related Sign and Symptom (WRSS) Measure, Categorical Responses
Week 56: Sexual desire · Never/Almost never
|
105 Participants
|
109 Participants
|
|
Weight Related Sign and Symptom (WRSS) Measure, Categorical Responses
Week 56: Sexual desire · Often
|
18 Participants
|
11 Participants
|
|
Weight Related Sign and Symptom (WRSS) Measure, Categorical Responses
Week 56: Sexual desire · Rarely
|
34 Participants
|
32 Participants
|
|
Weight Related Sign and Symptom (WRSS) Measure, Categorical Responses
Week 56: Sexual desire · Sometimes
|
24 Participants
|
25 Participants
|
|
Weight Related Sign and Symptom (WRSS) Measure, Categorical Responses
Week 0: Heavy sweating · Almost always/Always
|
2 Participants
|
5 Participants
|
|
Weight Related Sign and Symptom (WRSS) Measure, Categorical Responses
Week 0: Heavy sweating · Never/Almost never
|
101 Participants
|
104 Participants
|
|
Weight Related Sign and Symptom (WRSS) Measure, Categorical Responses
Week 0: Heavy sweating · Often
|
15 Participants
|
14 Participants
|
|
Weight Related Sign and Symptom (WRSS) Measure, Categorical Responses
Week 0: Heavy sweating · Rarely
|
40 Participants
|
38 Participants
|
|
Weight Related Sign and Symptom (WRSS) Measure, Categorical Responses
Week 0: Heavy sweating · Sometimes
|
40 Participants
|
35 Participants
|
|
Weight Related Sign and Symptom (WRSS) Measure, Categorical Responses
Week 56: Heavy sweating · Almost always/Always
|
1 Participants
|
5 Participants
|
|
Weight Related Sign and Symptom (WRSS) Measure, Categorical Responses
Week 56: Heavy sweating · Never/Almost never
|
98 Participants
|
92 Participants
|
|
Weight Related Sign and Symptom (WRSS) Measure, Categorical Responses
Week 56: Heavy sweating · Often
|
7 Participants
|
16 Participants
|
|
Weight Related Sign and Symptom (WRSS) Measure, Categorical Responses
Week 56: Heavy sweating · Rarely
|
51 Participants
|
48 Participants
|
|
Weight Related Sign and Symptom (WRSS) Measure, Categorical Responses
Week 56: Heavy sweating · Sometimes
|
30 Participants
|
27 Participants
|
|
Weight Related Sign and Symptom (WRSS) Measure, Categorical Responses
Week 0: Low physical stamina · Almost always/Always
|
2 Participants
|
8 Participants
|
|
Weight Related Sign and Symptom (WRSS) Measure, Categorical Responses
Week 0: Low physical stamina · Never/Almost never
|
73 Participants
|
78 Participants
|
|
Weight Related Sign and Symptom (WRSS) Measure, Categorical Responses
Week 0: Low physical stamina · Often
|
22 Participants
|
14 Participants
|
|
Weight Related Sign and Symptom (WRSS) Measure, Categorical Responses
Week 0: Low physical stamina · Rarely
|
56 Participants
|
47 Participants
|
|
Weight Related Sign and Symptom (WRSS) Measure, Categorical Responses
Week 0: Low physical stamina · Sometimes
|
45 Participants
|
49 Participants
|
|
Weight Related Sign and Symptom (WRSS) Measure, Categorical Responses
Week 56: Low physical stamina · Almost always/Always
|
3 Participants
|
4 Participants
|
|
Weight Related Sign and Symptom (WRSS) Measure, Categorical Responses
Week 56: Low physical stamina · Never/Almost never
|
77 Participants
|
65 Participants
|
|
Weight Related Sign and Symptom (WRSS) Measure, Categorical Responses
Week 56: Low physical stamina · Often
|
15 Participants
|
19 Participants
|
|
Weight Related Sign and Symptom (WRSS) Measure, Categorical Responses
Week 56: Low physical stamina · Rarely
|
57 Participants
|
56 Participants
|
|
Weight Related Sign and Symptom (WRSS) Measure, Categorical Responses
Week 56: Low physical stamina · Sometimes
|
35 Participants
|
44 Participants
|
|
Weight Related Sign and Symptom (WRSS) Measure, Categorical Responses
Week 0: Foot pain · Almost always/Always
|
5 Participants
|
7 Participants
|
|
Weight Related Sign and Symptom (WRSS) Measure, Categorical Responses
Week 0: Foot pain · Never/Almost never
|
114 Participants
|
108 Participants
|
|
Weight Related Sign and Symptom (WRSS) Measure, Categorical Responses
Week 0: Foot pain · Often
|
17 Participants
|
12 Participants
|
|
Weight Related Sign and Symptom (WRSS) Measure, Categorical Responses
Week 0: Foot pain · Rarely
|
34 Participants
|
31 Participants
|
|
Weight Related Sign and Symptom (WRSS) Measure, Categorical Responses
Week 0: Foot pain · Sometimes
|
28 Participants
|
38 Participants
|
|
Weight Related Sign and Symptom (WRSS) Measure, Categorical Responses
Week 56: Foot pain · Almost always/Always
|
2 Participants
|
7 Participants
|
|
Weight Related Sign and Symptom (WRSS) Measure, Categorical Responses
Week 56: Foot pain · Never/Almost never
|
106 Participants
|
88 Participants
|
|
Weight Related Sign and Symptom (WRSS) Measure, Categorical Responses
Week 56: Foot pain · Often
|
15 Participants
|
14 Participants
|
|
Weight Related Sign and Symptom (WRSS) Measure, Categorical Responses
Week 56: Foot pain · Rarely
|
29 Participants
|
39 Participants
|
|
Weight Related Sign and Symptom (WRSS) Measure, Categorical Responses
Week 56: Foot pain · Sometimes
|
35 Participants
|
40 Participants
|
|
Weight Related Sign and Symptom (WRSS) Measure, Categorical Responses
Week 0: Trouble sleeping · Almost always/Always
|
6 Participants
|
4 Participants
|
|
Weight Related Sign and Symptom (WRSS) Measure, Categorical Responses
Week 0: Trouble sleeping · Never/Almost never
|
119 Participants
|
111 Participants
|
|
Weight Related Sign and Symptom (WRSS) Measure, Categorical Responses
Week 0: Trouble sleeping · Often
|
11 Participants
|
10 Participants
|
|
Weight Related Sign and Symptom (WRSS) Measure, Categorical Responses
Week 0: Trouble sleeping · Rarely
|
30 Participants
|
42 Participants
|
|
Weight Related Sign and Symptom (WRSS) Measure, Categorical Responses
Week 0: Trouble sleeping · Sometimes
|
32 Participants
|
29 Participants
|
|
Weight Related Sign and Symptom (WRSS) Measure, Categorical Responses
Week 56: Trouble sleeping · Almost always/Always
|
6 Participants
|
3 Participants
|
|
Weight Related Sign and Symptom (WRSS) Measure, Categorical Responses
Week 56: Trouble sleeping · Never/Almost never
|
104 Participants
|
98 Participants
|
|
Weight Related Sign and Symptom (WRSS) Measure, Categorical Responses
Week 56: Trouble sleeping · Often
|
15 Participants
|
14 Participants
|
|
Weight Related Sign and Symptom (WRSS) Measure, Categorical Responses
Week 56: Trouble sleeping · Rarely
|
38 Participants
|
33 Participants
|
|
Weight Related Sign and Symptom (WRSS) Measure, Categorical Responses
Week 56: Trouble sleeping · Sometimes
|
24 Participants
|
40 Participants
|
|
Weight Related Sign and Symptom (WRSS) Measure, Categorical Responses
Week 0: Back pain · Almost always/Always
|
8 Participants
|
6 Participants
|
|
Weight Related Sign and Symptom (WRSS) Measure, Categorical Responses
Week 0: Back pain · Never/Almost never
|
96 Participants
|
98 Participants
|
|
Weight Related Sign and Symptom (WRSS) Measure, Categorical Responses
Week 0: Back pain · Often
|
13 Participants
|
8 Participants
|
|
Weight Related Sign and Symptom (WRSS) Measure, Categorical Responses
Week 0: Back pain · Rarely
|
49 Participants
|
40 Participants
|
|
Weight Related Sign and Symptom (WRSS) Measure, Categorical Responses
Week 0: Back pain · Sometimes
|
32 Participants
|
44 Participants
|
|
Weight Related Sign and Symptom (WRSS) Measure, Categorical Responses
Week 56: Back pain · Almost always/Always
|
5 Participants
|
4 Participants
|
|
Weight Related Sign and Symptom (WRSS) Measure, Categorical Responses
Week 56: Back pain · Never/Almost never
|
93 Participants
|
86 Participants
|
|
Weight Related Sign and Symptom (WRSS) Measure, Categorical Responses
Week 56: Back pain · Often
|
13 Participants
|
11 Participants
|
|
Weight Related Sign and Symptom (WRSS) Measure, Categorical Responses
Week 56: Back pain · Rarely
|
47 Participants
|
45 Participants
|
|
Weight Related Sign and Symptom (WRSS) Measure, Categorical Responses
Week 56: Back pain · Sometimes
|
29 Participants
|
42 Participants
|
|
Weight Related Sign and Symptom (WRSS) Measure, Categorical Responses
Week 0: Low energy · Almost always/Always
|
0 Participants
|
2 Participants
|
|
Weight Related Sign and Symptom (WRSS) Measure, Categorical Responses
Week 0: Low energy · Never/Almost never
|
102 Participants
|
90 Participants
|
|
Weight Related Sign and Symptom (WRSS) Measure, Categorical Responses
Week 0: Low energy · Often
|
19 Participants
|
12 Participants
|
|
Weight Related Sign and Symptom (WRSS) Measure, Categorical Responses
Week 0: Low energy · Rarely
|
46 Participants
|
42 Participants
|
|
Weight Related Sign and Symptom (WRSS) Measure, Categorical Responses
Week 0: Low energy · Sometimes
|
31 Participants
|
50 Participants
|
|
Weight Related Sign and Symptom (WRSS) Measure, Categorical Responses
Week 56: Low energy · Almost always/Always
|
0 Participants
|
4 Participants
|
|
Weight Related Sign and Symptom (WRSS) Measure, Categorical Responses
Week 56: Low energy · Never/Almost never
|
82 Participants
|
77 Participants
|
|
Weight Related Sign and Symptom (WRSS) Measure, Categorical Responses
Week 56: Low energy · Often
|
16 Participants
|
16 Participants
|
|
Weight Related Sign and Symptom (WRSS) Measure, Categorical Responses
Week 56: Low energy · Rarely
|
49 Participants
|
50 Participants
|
|
Weight Related Sign and Symptom (WRSS) Measure, Categorical Responses
Week 56: Low energy · Sometimes
|
40 Participants
|
41 Participants
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Week 56Population: Full analysis set included all randomised participants.
Percentage of participants who achieved HbA1c \<7% and weight loss ≥5% from baseline at week 56 was presented based on in-trial data. In-trial observation period: the uninterrupted time interval from the date of randomisation until and including the date of the follow-up visit or date of last contact.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Liraglutide 3.0 mg
n=198 Participants
Participants received liraglutide once daily by subcutaneous injection irrespective of the timing of meals. Participants received 0.6 mg liraglutide during the first week. The dose was escalated in weekly increments of 0.6 mg until the maintenance dose of 3.0 mg was reached after 4 weeks. The treatment period was 56 weeks.
|
Placebo
n=198 Participants
Participants received matching placebo once daily by subcutaneous injection irrespective of the timing of meals. Dose escalation for placebo matched that of liraglutide. The treatment period was 56 weeks.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Participants Who Achieved (Yes/no): HbA1c <7% and Weight Loss ≥5%
|
39.9 Percentage of participants
|
13.6 Percentage of participants
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Week 56Population: Full analysis set included all randomised participants.
Percentage of participants who achieved HbA1c \<7%, weight loss ≥5% from baseline and no documented symptomatic hypoglycaemia at week 56 was presented based on in-trial data. In-trial observation period: the uninterrupted time interval from the date of randomisation until and including the date of the follow-up visit or date of last contact.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Liraglutide 3.0 mg
n=198 Participants
Participants received liraglutide once daily by subcutaneous injection irrespective of the timing of meals. Participants received 0.6 mg liraglutide during the first week. The dose was escalated in weekly increments of 0.6 mg until the maintenance dose of 3.0 mg was reached after 4 weeks. The treatment period was 56 weeks.
|
Placebo
n=198 Participants
Participants received matching placebo once daily by subcutaneous injection irrespective of the timing of meals. Dose escalation for placebo matched that of liraglutide. The treatment period was 56 weeks.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Participants Who Achieved (Yes/no): HbA1c <7%, Weight Loss ≥5% and no Documented Symptomatic Hypoglycaemia
|
10.1 Percentage of participants
|
3.5 Percentage of participants
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Week 56Population: Full analysis set included all randomised participants.
Percentage of participants who achieved ≥4.3 T-score points increase from baseline in SF-36 acute physical functioning score at week 56 was presented based on in-trial data. In-trial observation period: the uninterrupted time interval from the date of randomisation until and including the date of the follow-up visit or date of last contact.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Liraglutide 3.0 mg
n=198 Participants
Participants received liraglutide once daily by subcutaneous injection irrespective of the timing of meals. Participants received 0.6 mg liraglutide during the first week. The dose was escalated in weekly increments of 0.6 mg until the maintenance dose of 3.0 mg was reached after 4 weeks. The treatment period was 56 weeks.
|
Placebo
n=198 Participants
Participants received matching placebo once daily by subcutaneous injection irrespective of the timing of meals. Dose escalation for placebo matched that of liraglutide. The treatment period was 56 weeks.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Participants Who Achieved (Yes/no): ≥4.3 T-score Points Increase From Baseline in SF-36 Acute Physical Functioning Score
|
28.8 Percentage of participants
|
26.3 Percentage of participants
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Week 56Population: Full analysis set included all randomised participants.
Percentage of participants who achieved ≥3.8 T-score points increase from baseline in SF-36 acute PCS at week 56 was presented based on in-trial data. In-trial observation period: the uninterrupted time interval from the date of randomisation until and including the date of the follow-up visit or date of last contact.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Liraglutide 3.0 mg
n=198 Participants
Participants received liraglutide once daily by subcutaneous injection irrespective of the timing of meals. Participants received 0.6 mg liraglutide during the first week. The dose was escalated in weekly increments of 0.6 mg until the maintenance dose of 3.0 mg was reached after 4 weeks. The treatment period was 56 weeks.
|
Placebo
n=198 Participants
Participants received matching placebo once daily by subcutaneous injection irrespective of the timing of meals. Dose escalation for placebo matched that of liraglutide. The treatment period was 56 weeks.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Participants Who Achieved (Yes/no): ≥3.8 T-score Points Increase From Baseline in SF-36 Acute PCS
|
37.9 Percentage of participants
|
31.3 Percentage of participants
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Week 56Population: Full analysis set included all randomised participants.
Percentage of participants who achieved ≥4.6 T-score points increase from baseline in SF-36 acute MCS at week 56 was presented based on in-trial data. In-trial observation period: the uninterrupted time interval from the date of randomisation until and including the date of the follow-up visit or date of last contact.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Liraglutide 3.0 mg
n=198 Participants
Participants received liraglutide once daily by subcutaneous injection irrespective of the timing of meals. Participants received 0.6 mg liraglutide during the first week. The dose was escalated in weekly increments of 0.6 mg until the maintenance dose of 3.0 mg was reached after 4 weeks. The treatment period was 56 weeks.
|
Placebo
n=198 Participants
Participants received matching placebo once daily by subcutaneous injection irrespective of the timing of meals. Dose escalation for placebo matched that of liraglutide. The treatment period was 56 weeks.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Participants Who Achieved (Yes/no): ≥4.6 T-score Points Increase From Baseline in SF-36 Acute MCS
|
14.6 Percentage of participants
|
11.6 Percentage of participants
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Week 56Population: Full analysis set included all randomised participants.
Percentage of participants who achieve responder definition value for IWQoL-Lite for CT physical function domain score was presented based on in-trial data. In-trial observation period: the uninterrupted time interval from the date of randomisation until and including the date of the follow-up visit or date of last contact.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Liraglutide 3.0 mg
n=198 Participants
Participants received liraglutide once daily by subcutaneous injection irrespective of the timing of meals. Participants received 0.6 mg liraglutide during the first week. The dose was escalated in weekly increments of 0.6 mg until the maintenance dose of 3.0 mg was reached after 4 weeks. The treatment period was 56 weeks.
|
Placebo
n=198 Participants
Participants received matching placebo once daily by subcutaneous injection irrespective of the timing of meals. Dose escalation for placebo matched that of liraglutide. The treatment period was 56 weeks.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Responder Definition Value for IWQoL-Lite for CT Physical Function Domain Score
|
25.3 Percentage of participants
|
24.2 Percentage of participants
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Week 0 to week 56 + 30 daysPopulation: Safety analysis set (SAS) included all randomised participants exposed to at least one dose of trial drug.
An AE was defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a participant administered a medicinal product, and which does not necessarily have a causal relationship with this treatment. Number of AEs from randomisation to until the end of the post-treatment follow-up period (30 days). Results based on in-trial data was presented. In-trial observation period: the uninterrupted time interval from the date of randomisation until and including the date of the follow-up visit or date of last contact.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Liraglutide 3.0 mg
n=195 Participants
Participants received liraglutide once daily by subcutaneous injection irrespective of the timing of meals. Participants received 0.6 mg liraglutide during the first week. The dose was escalated in weekly increments of 0.6 mg until the maintenance dose of 3.0 mg was reached after 4 weeks. The treatment period was 56 weeks.
|
Placebo
n=197 Participants
Participants received matching placebo once daily by subcutaneous injection irrespective of the timing of meals. Dose escalation for placebo matched that of liraglutide. The treatment period was 56 weeks.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Adverse Events (AEs)
|
1223 Adverse events
|
1148 Adverse events
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Week 0 to week 56 + 30 daysPopulation: SAS included all randomised participants exposed to at least one dose of trial drug.
Number of hypoglycaemic episodes was presented based on in-trial data. In-trial observation period: the uninterrupted time interval from the date of randomisation until and including the date of the follow-up visit or date of last contact.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Liraglutide 3.0 mg
n=195 Participants
Participants received liraglutide once daily by subcutaneous injection irrespective of the timing of meals. Participants received 0.6 mg liraglutide during the first week. The dose was escalated in weekly increments of 0.6 mg until the maintenance dose of 3.0 mg was reached after 4 weeks. The treatment period was 56 weeks.
|
Placebo
n=197 Participants
Participants received matching placebo once daily by subcutaneous injection irrespective of the timing of meals. Dose escalation for placebo matched that of liraglutide. The treatment period was 56 weeks.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Number of Hypoglycaemic Episodes
|
1538 Hypoglycaemic episodes
|
1973 Hypoglycaemic episodes
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Week -1, week 56Population: SAS included all randomised participants exposed to at least one dose of trial drug. "Number analyzed"=participants with available data.
Physical examination parameters are categorised as abdomen; gastrointestinal system; cardiovascular system; central and peripheral nervous system; general appearance; head, eyes, ears, nose, throat (ENT) and neck; lymph node palpation; musculoskeletal system; respiratory system; skin and thyroid gland. The number of participants assessed as normal, abnormal not clinically significant (NCS) and abnormal clinically significant (CS) at baseline (week -1) and week 56 was presented based on in-trial data. In-trial observation period: the uninterrupted time interval from the date of randomisation until and including the date of the follow-up visit or date of last contact.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Liraglutide 3.0 mg
n=195 Participants
Participants received liraglutide once daily by subcutaneous injection irrespective of the timing of meals. Participants received 0.6 mg liraglutide during the first week. The dose was escalated in weekly increments of 0.6 mg until the maintenance dose of 3.0 mg was reached after 4 weeks. The treatment period was 56 weeks.
|
Placebo
n=197 Participants
Participants received matching placebo once daily by subcutaneous injection irrespective of the timing of meals. Dose escalation for placebo matched that of liraglutide. The treatment period was 56 weeks.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Change in Physical Examination
Respiratory System (week 56) Abnormal CS
|
0 Participants
|
2 Participants
|
|
Change in Physical Examination
Abdomen (week -1) Normal
|
165 Participants
|
169 Participants
|
|
Change in Physical Examination
Abdomen (week -1) Abnormal, NCS
|
25 Participants
|
25 Participants
|
|
Change in Physical Examination
Abdomen (week -1) Abnormal CS
|
5 Participants
|
3 Participants
|
|
Change in Physical Examination
Abdomen (week 56) Normal
|
167 Participants
|
160 Participants
|
|
Change in Physical Examination
Abdomen (week 56) Abnormal, NCS
|
15 Participants
|
24 Participants
|
|
Change in Physical Examination
Abdomen (week 56) Abnormal, CS
|
3 Participants
|
3 Participants
|
|
Change in Physical Examination
Gastrointestinal System (week -1) Normal
|
185 Participants
|
187 Participants
|
|
Change in Physical Examination
Gastrointestinal System (week -1) Abnormal NCS
|
10 Participants
|
10 Participants
|
|
Change in Physical Examination
Gastrointestinal System (week -1) Abnormal CS
|
0 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
|
Change in Physical Examination
Gastrointestinal System (week 56) Normal
|
175 Participants
|
177 Participants
|
|
Change in Physical Examination
Gastrointestinal System (week 56) Abnormal NCS
|
10 Participants
|
8 Participants
|
|
Change in Physical Examination
Gastrointestinal System (week 56) Abnormal CS
|
0 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
|
Change in Physical Examination
Cardiovascular System (week-1) Normal
|
183 Participants
|
182 Participants
|
|
Change in Physical Examination
Cardiovascular System (week-1) Abnormal NCS
|
10 Participants
|
15 Participants
|
|
Change in Physical Examination
Cardiovascular System (week-1) Abnormal CS
|
2 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
|
Change in Physical Examination
Cardiovascular System (week 56) Normal
|
178 Participants
|
175 Participants
|
|
Change in Physical Examination
Cardiovascular System (week 56) Abnormal NCS
|
6 Participants
|
12 Participants
|
|
Change in Physical Examination
Cardiovascular System (week 56) Abnormal CS
|
1 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
|
Change in Physical Examination
Nervous System (week -1) Normal
|
158 Participants
|
159 Participants
|
|
Change in Physical Examination
Nervous System (week -1) Abnormal NCS
|
26 Participants
|
25 Participants
|
|
Change in Physical Examination
Nervous System (week -1) Abnormal CS
|
11 Participants
|
13 Participants
|
|
Change in Physical Examination
Nervous System (week 56) Normal
|
150 Participants
|
149 Participants
|
|
Change in Physical Examination
Nervous System (week 56) Abnormal NCS
|
22 Participants
|
24 Participants
|
|
Change in Physical Examination
Nervous System (week 56) Abnormal CS
|
13 Participants
|
14 Participants
|
|
Change in Physical Examination
General Appearance (week -1) Normal
|
150 Participants
|
150 Participants
|
|
Change in Physical Examination
General Appearance (week -1) Abnormal NCS
|
39 Participants
|
36 Participants
|
|
Change in Physical Examination
General Appearance (week -1) Abnormal CS
|
6 Participants
|
11 Participants
|
|
Change in Physical Examination
General Appearance (week 56) Normal
|
156 Participants
|
151 Participants
|
|
Change in Physical Examination
General Appearance (week 56) Abnormal NCS
|
23 Participants
|
27 Participants
|
|
Change in Physical Examination
General Appearance (week 56) Abnormal CS
|
6 Participants
|
9 Participants
|
|
Change in Physical Examination
Head, eyes, ENTand Neck (week -1) Normal
|
176 Participants
|
182 Participants
|
|
Change in Physical Examination
Head, eyes, ENTand Neck (week -1) Abnormal NCS
|
17 Participants
|
13 Participants
|
|
Change in Physical Examination
Head, eyes, ENTand Neck (week -1) Abnormal CS
|
2 Participants
|
2 Participants
|
|
Change in Physical Examination
Head, eyes, ENTand Neck (week 56) Normal
|
168 Participants
|
173 Participants
|
|
Change in Physical Examination
Head, eyes, ENTand Neck (week 56) Abnormal NCS
|
15 Participants
|
12 Participants
|
|
Change in Physical Examination
Head, eyes, ENTand Neck (week 56) Abnormal CS
|
2 Participants
|
2 Participants
|
|
Change in Physical Examination
Lymph Node Palpation (week -1) Normal
|
195 Participants
|
197 Participants
|
|
Change in Physical Examination
Lymph Node Palpation (week -1) Abnormal NCS
|
0 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
|
Change in Physical Examination
Lymph Node Palpation (week -1) Abnormal CS
|
0 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
|
Change in Physical Examination
Lymph Node Palpation (week 56) Normal
|
185 Participants
|
186 Participants
|
|
Change in Physical Examination
Lymph Node Palpation (week 56) Abnormal NCS
|
0 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
|
Change in Physical Examination
Lymph Node Palpation (week 56) Abnormal CS
|
0 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
|
Change in Physical Examination
Musculoskeletal System (week -1) Normal
|
180 Participants
|
180 Participants
|
|
Change in Physical Examination
Musculoskeletal System (week -1) Abnormal NCS
|
13 Participants
|
16 Participants
|
|
Change in Physical Examination
Musculoskeletal System (week -1) Abnormal CS
|
2 Participants
|
1 Participants
|
|
Change in Physical Examination
Musculoskeletal System (week 56) Normal
|
171 Participants
|
171 Participants
|
|
Change in Physical Examination
Musculoskeletal System (week 56) Abnormal NCS
|
13 Participants
|
14 Participants
|
|
Change in Physical Examination
Musculoskeletal System (week 56) Abnormal CS
|
1 Participants
|
2 Participants
|
|
Change in Physical Examination
Respiratory System (week -1) Normal
|
192 Participants
|
192 Participants
|
|
Change in Physical Examination
Respiratory System (week -1) Abnormal NCS
|
3 Participants
|
3 Participants
|
|
Change in Physical Examination
Respiratory System (week -1) Abnormal CS
|
0 Participants
|
2 Participants
|
|
Change in Physical Examination
Respiratory System (week 56) Normal
|
183 Participants
|
185 Participants
|
|
Change in Physical Examination
Respiratory System (week 56) Abnormal NCS
|
2 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
|
Change in Physical Examination
Skin (week -1) Normal
|
155 Participants
|
156 Participants
|
|
Change in Physical Examination
Skin (week -1) Abnormal NCS
|
36 Participants
|
33 Participants
|
|
Change in Physical Examination
Skin (week -1) Abnormal CS
|
4 Participants
|
8 Participants
|
|
Change in Physical Examination
Skin (week 56) Normal
|
150 Participants
|
149 Participants
|
|
Change in Physical Examination
Skin (week 56) Abnormal NCS
|
28 Participants
|
29 Participants
|
|
Change in Physical Examination
Skin (week 56) Abnormal CS
|
7 Participants
|
9 Participants
|
|
Change in Physical Examination
Thyroid Gland (week -1) Normal
|
183 Participants
|
187 Participants
|
|
Change in Physical Examination
Thyroid Gland (week -1) Abnormal NCS
|
10 Participants
|
7 Participants
|
|
Change in Physical Examination
Thyroid Gland (week -1) Abnormal CS
|
2 Participants
|
3 Participants
|
|
Change in Physical Examination
Thyroid Gland (week 56) Normal
|
180 Participants
|
178 Participants
|
|
Change in Physical Examination
Thyroid Gland (week 56) Abnormal NCS
|
5 Participants
|
6 Participants
|
|
Change in Physical Examination
Thyroid Gland (week 56) Abnormal CS
|
0 Participants
|
3 Participants
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Week -1, week 56Population: SAS included all randomised participants exposed to at least one dose of trial drug. "Number analyzed" = participants with available data.
Change from baseline (week -1) to week 56 in resting pulse was presented based on in-trial data. In-trial observation period: the uninterrupted time interval from the date of randomisation until and including the date of the follow-up visit or date of last contact.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Liraglutide 3.0 mg
n=195 Participants
Participants received liraglutide once daily by subcutaneous injection irrespective of the timing of meals. Participants received 0.6 mg liraglutide during the first week. The dose was escalated in weekly increments of 0.6 mg until the maintenance dose of 3.0 mg was reached after 4 weeks. The treatment period was 56 weeks.
|
Placebo
n=197 Participants
Participants received matching placebo once daily by subcutaneous injection irrespective of the timing of meals. Dose escalation for placebo matched that of liraglutide. The treatment period was 56 weeks.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Change in Resting Pulse
|
2 Beats/minute
Standard Deviation 9
|
-0 Beats/minute
Standard Deviation 9
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Week -1, week 56Population: SAS included all randomised participants exposed to at least one dose of trial drug. "Number analyzed"=participants with available data.
The ECGs were interpreted by the investigator at baseline (week -1) and week 56 and categorised as normal, abnormal NCS or abnormal CS. Number of participants in each ECG category at baseline and week 56 were presented based on in-trial data. In-trial observation period: the uninterrupted time interval from the date of randomisation until and including the date of the follow-up visit or date of last contact.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Liraglutide 3.0 mg
n=195 Participants
Participants received liraglutide once daily by subcutaneous injection irrespective of the timing of meals. Participants received 0.6 mg liraglutide during the first week. The dose was escalated in weekly increments of 0.6 mg until the maintenance dose of 3.0 mg was reached after 4 weeks. The treatment period was 56 weeks.
|
Placebo
n=197 Participants
Participants received matching placebo once daily by subcutaneous injection irrespective of the timing of meals. Dose escalation for placebo matched that of liraglutide. The treatment period was 56 weeks.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Change in Electrocardiogram (ECG)
Abnormal NCS (week -1)
|
78 Participants
|
60 Participants
|
|
Change in Electrocardiogram (ECG)
Abnormal CS (week -1)
|
4 Participants
|
4 Participants
|
|
Change in Electrocardiogram (ECG)
Normal (week 56)
|
118 Participants
|
126 Participants
|
|
Change in Electrocardiogram (ECG)
Abnormal NCS (week 56)
|
62 Participants
|
57 Participants
|
|
Change in Electrocardiogram (ECG)
Abnormal CS (week 56)
|
5 Participants
|
3 Participants
|
|
Change in Electrocardiogram (ECG)
Normal (week -1)
|
113 Participants
|
133 Participants
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Week 0, week 56Population: SAS included all randomised participants exposed to at least one dose of trial drug. "Number analyzed"=participants with available data.
Change from baseline (week 0) to week 56 in haemoglobin was presented based on in-trial data. In-trial observation period: the uninterrupted time interval from the date of randomisation until and including the date of the follow-up visit or date of last contact.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Liraglutide 3.0 mg
n=195 Participants
Participants received liraglutide once daily by subcutaneous injection irrespective of the timing of meals. Participants received 0.6 mg liraglutide during the first week. The dose was escalated in weekly increments of 0.6 mg until the maintenance dose of 3.0 mg was reached after 4 weeks. The treatment period was 56 weeks.
|
Placebo
n=197 Participants
Participants received matching placebo once daily by subcutaneous injection irrespective of the timing of meals. Dose escalation for placebo matched that of liraglutide. The treatment period was 56 weeks.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Change in Laboratory Measurements (Haematology) - Haemoglobin
|
-0.1 mmol/L
Standard Deviation 0.5
|
-0.1 mmol/L
Standard Deviation 0.6
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Week 0, week 56Population: SAS included all randomised participants exposed to at least one dose of trial drug. "Number analyzed"=participants with available data.
Change from baseline (week 0) to week 56 in Haematocrit was presented based on in-trial data. In-trial observation period: the uninterrupted time interval from the date of randomisation until and including the date of the follow-up visit or date of last contact.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Liraglutide 3.0 mg
n=195 Participants
Participants received liraglutide once daily by subcutaneous injection irrespective of the timing of meals. Participants received 0.6 mg liraglutide during the first week. The dose was escalated in weekly increments of 0.6 mg until the maintenance dose of 3.0 mg was reached after 4 weeks. The treatment period was 56 weeks.
|
Placebo
n=197 Participants
Participants received matching placebo once daily by subcutaneous injection irrespective of the timing of meals. Dose escalation for placebo matched that of liraglutide. The treatment period was 56 weeks.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Change in Laboratory Measurements (Haematology) - Haematocrit
|
-0.4 Percentage of red blood cells
Standard Deviation 2.8
|
-0.2 Percentage of red blood cells
Standard Deviation 3.0
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Week 0, week 56Population: SAS included all randomised participants exposed to at least one dose of trial drug. "Number analyzed"=participants with available data.
Change from baseline (week 0) to week 56 in erythrocytes was presented based on in-trial data. In-trial observation period: the uninterrupted time interval from the date of randomisation until and including the date of the follow-up visit or date of last contact.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Liraglutide 3.0 mg
n=195 Participants
Participants received liraglutide once daily by subcutaneous injection irrespective of the timing of meals. Participants received 0.6 mg liraglutide during the first week. The dose was escalated in weekly increments of 0.6 mg until the maintenance dose of 3.0 mg was reached after 4 weeks. The treatment period was 56 weeks.
|
Placebo
n=197 Participants
Participants received matching placebo once daily by subcutaneous injection irrespective of the timing of meals. Dose escalation for placebo matched that of liraglutide. The treatment period was 56 weeks.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Change in Laboratory Measurements (Haematology) - Erythrocytes
|
-0.07 10^12 cells per liter (10^12 cells/L)
Standard Deviation 0.27
|
-0.04 10^12 cells per liter (10^12 cells/L)
Standard Deviation 0.28
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Week 0, week 56Population: SAS included all randomised participants exposed to at least one dose of trial drug. "Number analyzed"=participants with available data.
Change from baseline (week 0) to week 56 in thrombocytes and leukocytes was presented based on in-trial data. In-trial observation period: the uninterrupted time interval from the date of randomisation until and including the date of the follow-up visit or date of last contact.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Liraglutide 3.0 mg
n=195 Participants
Participants received liraglutide once daily by subcutaneous injection irrespective of the timing of meals. Participants received 0.6 mg liraglutide during the first week. The dose was escalated in weekly increments of 0.6 mg until the maintenance dose of 3.0 mg was reached after 4 weeks. The treatment period was 56 weeks.
|
Placebo
n=197 Participants
Participants received matching placebo once daily by subcutaneous injection irrespective of the timing of meals. Dose escalation for placebo matched that of liraglutide. The treatment period was 56 weeks.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Change in Laboratory Measurements (Haematology) - Thrombocytes, Leukocytes
Thrombocytes
|
7 10^9 cells/L
Standard Deviation 45
|
7 10^9 cells/L
Standard Deviation 46
|
|
Change in Laboratory Measurements (Haematology) - Thrombocytes, Leukocytes
Leukocytes
|
-0.22 10^9 cells/L
Standard Deviation 1.41
|
-0.24 10^9 cells/L
Standard Deviation 1.28
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Week 0, week 56Population: SAS included all randomised participants exposed to at least one dose of trial drug. "Number analyzed"=participants with available data.
Change from baseline (week 0) to week 56 in albumin was presented based on in-trial data. In-trial observation period: the uninterrupted time interval from the date of randomisation until and including the date of the follow-up visit or date of last contact.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Liraglutide 3.0 mg
n=195 Participants
Participants received liraglutide once daily by subcutaneous injection irrespective of the timing of meals. Participants received 0.6 mg liraglutide during the first week. The dose was escalated in weekly increments of 0.6 mg until the maintenance dose of 3.0 mg was reached after 4 weeks. The treatment period was 56 weeks.
|
Placebo
n=197 Participants
Participants received matching placebo once daily by subcutaneous injection irrespective of the timing of meals. Dose escalation for placebo matched that of liraglutide. The treatment period was 56 weeks.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Change in Laboratory Parameters (Biochemistry) - Albumin
|
-0.1 Grams per deciliter (g/dL)
Standard Deviation 0.2
|
-0.1 Grams per deciliter (g/dL)
Standard Deviation 0.2
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Week 0, week 56Population: SAS included all randomised participants exposed to at least one dose of trial drug. "Number analyzed"=participants with available data.
Change from baseline (week 0) to week 56 in alkaline phosphatase, alanine aminotransferase, amylase, aspartate aminotransferase and lipase was presented based on in-trial data. In-trial observation period: the uninterrupted time interval from the date of randomisation until and including the date of the follow-up visit or date of last contact.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Liraglutide 3.0 mg
n=195 Participants
Participants received liraglutide once daily by subcutaneous injection irrespective of the timing of meals. Participants received 0.6 mg liraglutide during the first week. The dose was escalated in weekly increments of 0.6 mg until the maintenance dose of 3.0 mg was reached after 4 weeks. The treatment period was 56 weeks.
|
Placebo
n=197 Participants
Participants received matching placebo once daily by subcutaneous injection irrespective of the timing of meals. Dose escalation for placebo matched that of liraglutide. The treatment period was 56 weeks.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Change in Laboratory Parameters (Biochemistry) - Alkaline Phosphatase, Alanine Aminotransferase, Amylase, Aspartate Aminotransferase and Lipase
Alkaline Phosphatase
|
-1 Units per liter (U/L)
Standard Deviation 16
|
-0 Units per liter (U/L)
Standard Deviation 15
|
|
Change in Laboratory Parameters (Biochemistry) - Alkaline Phosphatase, Alanine Aminotransferase, Amylase, Aspartate Aminotransferase and Lipase
Alanine Aminotransferase
|
-5 Units per liter (U/L)
Standard Deviation 15
|
-6 Units per liter (U/L)
Standard Deviation 18
|
|
Change in Laboratory Parameters (Biochemistry) - Alkaline Phosphatase, Alanine Aminotransferase, Amylase, Aspartate Aminotransferase and Lipase
Amylase
|
13 Units per liter (U/L)
Standard Deviation 73
|
-1 Units per liter (U/L)
Standard Deviation 22
|
|
Change in Laboratory Parameters (Biochemistry) - Alkaline Phosphatase, Alanine Aminotransferase, Amylase, Aspartate Aminotransferase and Lipase
Aspartate aminotransferase
|
-3 Units per liter (U/L)
Standard Deviation 11
|
-3 Units per liter (U/L)
Standard Deviation 14
|
|
Change in Laboratory Parameters (Biochemistry) - Alkaline Phosphatase, Alanine Aminotransferase, Amylase, Aspartate Aminotransferase and Lipase
Lipase
|
30 Units per liter (U/L)
Standard Deviation 143
|
-8 Units per liter (U/L)
Standard Deviation 47
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Week 0, week 56Population: SAS included all randomised participants exposed to at least one dose of trial drug. "Number analyzed"=participants with available data.
Change from baseline (week 0) to week 56 in bicarbonate, total calcium, potassium, sodium and urea was presented based on in-trial data. In-trial observation period: the uninterrupted time interval from the date of randomisation until and including the date of the follow-up visit or date of last contact.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Liraglutide 3.0 mg
n=195 Participants
Participants received liraglutide once daily by subcutaneous injection irrespective of the timing of meals. Participants received 0.6 mg liraglutide during the first week. The dose was escalated in weekly increments of 0.6 mg until the maintenance dose of 3.0 mg was reached after 4 weeks. The treatment period was 56 weeks.
|
Placebo
n=197 Participants
Participants received matching placebo once daily by subcutaneous injection irrespective of the timing of meals. Dose escalation for placebo matched that of liraglutide. The treatment period was 56 weeks.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Change in Laboratory Parameters (Biochemistry) - Bicarbonate, Total Calcium, Potassium, Sodium and Urea
Bicarbonate serum
|
0 mmol/L
Standard Deviation 2
|
-0 mmol/L
Standard Deviation 2
|
|
Change in Laboratory Parameters (Biochemistry) - Bicarbonate, Total Calcium, Potassium, Sodium and Urea
Total Calcium
|
-0.00 mmol/L
Standard Deviation 0.11
|
-0.02 mmol/L
Standard Deviation 0.14
|
|
Change in Laboratory Parameters (Biochemistry) - Bicarbonate, Total Calcium, Potassium, Sodium and Urea
Potassium
|
-0.0 mmol/L
Standard Deviation 0.5
|
-0.0 mmol/L
Standard Deviation 0.5
|
|
Change in Laboratory Parameters (Biochemistry) - Bicarbonate, Total Calcium, Potassium, Sodium and Urea
Sodium
|
-1 mmol/L
Standard Deviation 2
|
-0 mmol/L
Standard Deviation 3
|
|
Change in Laboratory Parameters (Biochemistry) - Bicarbonate, Total Calcium, Potassium, Sodium and Urea
Urea
|
0.1 mmol/L
Standard Deviation 1.5
|
0.1 mmol/L
Standard Deviation 1.4
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Week 0, week 56Population: SAS included all randomised participants exposed to at least one dose of trial drug. "Number analyzed"=participants with available data.
Change from baseline (week 0) to week 56 in total bilirubin and creatinine was presented based on in-trial data. In-trial observation period: the uninterrupted time interval from the date of randomisation until and including the date of the follow-up visit or date of last contact.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Liraglutide 3.0 mg
n=195 Participants
Participants received liraglutide once daily by subcutaneous injection irrespective of the timing of meals. Participants received 0.6 mg liraglutide during the first week. The dose was escalated in weekly increments of 0.6 mg until the maintenance dose of 3.0 mg was reached after 4 weeks. The treatment period was 56 weeks.
|
Placebo
n=197 Participants
Participants received matching placebo once daily by subcutaneous injection irrespective of the timing of meals. Dose escalation for placebo matched that of liraglutide. The treatment period was 56 weeks.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Change in Laboratory Parameters (Biochemistry) - Total Bilirubin and Creatinine
Total Bilirubin
|
1.0 Micromoles per liter (umol/L)
Standard Deviation 3.9
|
0.6 Micromoles per liter (umol/L)
Standard Deviation 3.6
|
|
Change in Laboratory Parameters (Biochemistry) - Total Bilirubin and Creatinine
Creatinine
|
-0.1 Micromoles per liter (umol/L)
Standard Deviation 8.7
|
-0.2 Micromoles per liter (umol/L)
Standard Deviation 8.4
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Week 0, week 56Population: SAS included all randomised participants exposed to at least one dose of trial drug. "Number analyzed"=participants with available data.
Change from baseline (week 0) to week 56 in high sensitive C-reactive protein was presented based on in-trial data. In-trial observation period: the uninterrupted time interval from the date of randomisation until and including the date of the follow-up visit or date of last contact.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Liraglutide 3.0 mg
n=195 Participants
Participants received liraglutide once daily by subcutaneous injection irrespective of the timing of meals. Participants received 0.6 mg liraglutide during the first week. The dose was escalated in weekly increments of 0.6 mg until the maintenance dose of 3.0 mg was reached after 4 weeks. The treatment period was 56 weeks.
|
Placebo
n=197 Participants
Participants received matching placebo once daily by subcutaneous injection irrespective of the timing of meals. Dose escalation for placebo matched that of liraglutide. The treatment period was 56 weeks.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Change in Laboratory Parameters (Biochemistry) - High Sensitive C-reactive Protein
|
-1.40 Milligrams per liter (mg/L)
Standard Deviation 8.02
|
-1.29 Milligrams per liter (mg/L)
Standard Deviation 10.07
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Week 0, week 56Population: SAS included all randomised participants exposed to at least one dose of trial drug. "Number analyzed"=participants with available data.
Change from baseline (week 0) to week 56 in estimated GFR serum using Modification of Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD) formula was presented based on in-trial data. In-trial observation period: the uninterrupted time interval from the date of randomisation until and including the date of the follow-up visit or date of last contact.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Liraglutide 3.0 mg
n=195 Participants
Participants received liraglutide once daily by subcutaneous injection irrespective of the timing of meals. Participants received 0.6 mg liraglutide during the first week. The dose was escalated in weekly increments of 0.6 mg until the maintenance dose of 3.0 mg was reached after 4 weeks. The treatment period was 56 weeks.
|
Placebo
n=197 Participants
Participants received matching placebo once daily by subcutaneous injection irrespective of the timing of meals. Dose escalation for placebo matched that of liraglutide. The treatment period was 56 weeks.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Change in Laboratory Parameters (Biochemistry) - eGFR
|
0 Milliliters per minute per 1.73m^2
Standard Deviation 13
|
1 Milliliters per minute per 1.73m^2
Standard Deviation 13
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Week 0, week 56Population: SAS included all randomised participants exposed to at least one dose of trial drug. "Number analyzed"=participants with available data.
Change from baseline (week 0) to week 56 in uric acid was presented based on in-trial data. In-trial observation period: the uninterrupted time interval from the date of randomisation until and including the date of the follow-up visit or date of last contact.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Liraglutide 3.0 mg
n=195 Participants
Participants received liraglutide once daily by subcutaneous injection irrespective of the timing of meals. Participants received 0.6 mg liraglutide during the first week. The dose was escalated in weekly increments of 0.6 mg until the maintenance dose of 3.0 mg was reached after 4 weeks. The treatment period was 56 weeks.
|
Placebo
n=197 Participants
Participants received matching placebo once daily by subcutaneous injection irrespective of the timing of meals. Dose escalation for placebo matched that of liraglutide. The treatment period was 56 weeks.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Change in Laboratory Parameters (Biochemistry) - Uric Acid
|
-0.2 mg/dL
Standard Deviation 1.0
|
-0.0 mg/dL
Standard Deviation 0.9
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Week 0, week 56Population: SAS included all randomised participants exposed to at least one dose of trial drug. "Number analyzed"=participants with available data.
Change from baseline (week 0) to week 56 in calcitonin was presented based on in-trial data. In-trial observation period: the uninterrupted time interval from the date of randomisation until and including the date of the follow-up visit or date of last contact.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Liraglutide 3.0 mg
n=195 Participants
Participants received liraglutide once daily by subcutaneous injection irrespective of the timing of meals. Participants received 0.6 mg liraglutide during the first week. The dose was escalated in weekly increments of 0.6 mg until the maintenance dose of 3.0 mg was reached after 4 weeks. The treatment period was 56 weeks.
|
Placebo
n=197 Participants
Participants received matching placebo once daily by subcutaneous injection irrespective of the timing of meals. Dose escalation for placebo matched that of liraglutide. The treatment period was 56 weeks.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Change in Laboratory Parameters (Biochemistry) - Calcitonin
|
0.0 Nanograms per liter (ng/L)
Standard Deviation 1.5
|
0.0 Nanograms per liter (ng/L)
Standard Deviation 1.4
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Week 0, week 56Population: SAS included all randomised participants exposed to at least one dose of trial drug. "Number analyzed"=participants with available data.
Change from baseline (week 0) to week 56 in thyroid stimulating hormone was presented based on in-trial data. In-trial observation period: the uninterrupted time interval from the date of randomisation until and including the date of the follow-up visit or date of last contact.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Liraglutide 3.0 mg
n=195 Participants
Participants received liraglutide once daily by subcutaneous injection irrespective of the timing of meals. Participants received 0.6 mg liraglutide during the first week. The dose was escalated in weekly increments of 0.6 mg until the maintenance dose of 3.0 mg was reached after 4 weeks. The treatment period was 56 weeks.
|
Placebo
n=197 Participants
Participants received matching placebo once daily by subcutaneous injection irrespective of the timing of meals. Dose escalation for placebo matched that of liraglutide. The treatment period was 56 weeks.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Change in Laboratory Parameters (Biochemistry) - Thyroid Stimulating Hormone
|
-0.0842 Milli-international units per liter
Standard Deviation 1.2233
|
0.1002 Milli-international units per liter
Standard Deviation 0.9493
|
Adverse Events
Liraglutide 3.0 mg
Placebo
Serious adverse events
| Measure |
Liraglutide 3.0 mg
n=195 participants at risk
Participants received liraglutide once daily by subcutaneous injection irrespective of the timing of meals. Participants received 0.6 mg liraglutide during the first week. The dose was escalated in weekly increments of 0.6 mg until the maintenance dose of 3.0 mg was reached after 4 weeks. The treatment period was 56 weeks.
|
Placebo
n=197 participants at risk
Participants received matching placebo once daily by subcutaneous injection irrespective of the timing of meals. Dose escalation for placebo matched that of liraglutide. The treatment period was 56 weeks.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps)
Adenocarcinoma pancreas
|
0.51%
1/195 • Number of events 1 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
0.00%
0/197 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
|
Investigations
Amylase increased
|
0.51%
1/195 • Number of events 1 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
0.00%
0/197 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
|
Cardiac disorders
Angina pectoris
|
0.00%
0/195 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
0.51%
1/197 • Number of events 1 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
|
Cardiac disorders
Atrial fibrillation
|
0.00%
0/195 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
0.51%
1/197 • Number of events 1 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
|
Cardiac disorders
Atrial flutter
|
0.00%
0/195 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
1.0%
2/197 • Number of events 2 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
|
Cardiac disorders
Cardiac failure congestive
|
0.00%
0/195 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
0.51%
1/197 • Number of events 1 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
|
Infections and infestations
Cellulitis
|
0.00%
0/195 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
0.51%
1/197 • Number of events 1 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
|
Cardiac disorders
Coronary artery disease
|
0.51%
1/195 • Number of events 1 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
0.00%
0/197 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
|
Infections and infestations
Diverticulitis
|
0.51%
1/195 • Number of events 1 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
0.00%
0/197 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
|
Gastrointestinal disorders
Diverticulum
|
0.51%
1/195 • Number of events 1 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
0.00%
0/197 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
|
Gastrointestinal disorders
Duodenal ulcer haemorrhage
|
0.00%
0/195 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
0.51%
1/197 • Number of events 1 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
|
Reproductive system and breast disorders
Endometrial hyperplasia
|
0.51%
1/195 • Number of events 1 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
0.00%
0/197 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
|
Infections and infestations
Escherichia bacteraemia
|
0.00%
0/195 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
0.51%
1/197 • Number of events 1 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
|
Injury, poisoning and procedural complications
Facial bones fracture
|
0.51%
1/195 • Number of events 1 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
0.00%
0/197 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
|
Injury, poisoning and procedural complications
Fall
|
0.00%
0/195 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
0.51%
1/197 • Number of events 1 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
|
Gastrointestinal disorders
Gastrointestinal haemorrhage
|
0.00%
0/195 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
0.51%
1/197 • Number of events 1 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
|
Nervous system disorders
Haemorrhage intracranial
|
0.00%
0/195 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
0.51%
1/197 • Number of events 1 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
|
Injury, poisoning and procedural complications
Hand fracture
|
0.00%
0/195 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
0.51%
1/197 • Number of events 1 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
|
Metabolism and nutrition disorders
Hypomagnesaemia
|
0.00%
0/195 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
0.51%
1/197 • Number of events 1 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
|
Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders
Intervertebral disc disorder
|
0.51%
1/195 • Number of events 1 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
0.00%
0/197 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
|
Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps)
Invasive lobular breast carcinoma
|
0.00%
0/195 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
0.51%
1/197 • Number of events 1 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
|
Investigations
Lipase increased
|
0.51%
1/195 • Number of events 1 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
0.00%
0/197 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
|
Surgical and medical procedures
Lipoma excision
|
0.51%
1/195 • Number of events 1 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
0.00%
0/197 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
|
Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps)
Malignant melanoma
|
0.00%
0/195 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
0.51%
1/197 • Number of events 1 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
|
Injury, poisoning and procedural complications
Meniscus injury
|
0.00%
0/195 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
0.51%
1/197 • Number of events 1 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
|
Injury, poisoning and procedural complications
Metaphyseal corner fracture
|
0.51%
1/195 • Number of events 1 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
0.00%
0/197 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
|
General disorders
Non-cardiac chest pain
|
0.00%
0/195 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
0.51%
1/197 • Number of events 1 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
|
Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders
Osteoarthritis
|
1.0%
2/195 • Number of events 2 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
0.00%
0/197 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
|
Gastrointestinal disorders
Pancreatitis
|
0.00%
0/195 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
0.51%
1/197 • Number of events 1 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
|
Gastrointestinal disorders
Pancreatitis acute
|
0.00%
0/195 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
0.51%
1/197 • Number of events 1 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
|
Gastrointestinal disorders
Peptic ulcer
|
0.00%
0/195 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
0.51%
1/197 • Number of events 1 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
|
Vascular disorders
Peripheral vascular disorder
|
0.51%
1/195 • Number of events 1 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
0.00%
0/197 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
|
Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders
Pleural effusion
|
0.51%
1/195 • Number of events 1 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
0.00%
0/197 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
|
Infections and infestations
Pneumonia
|
0.51%
1/195 • Number of events 1 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
0.00%
0/197 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
|
Injury, poisoning and procedural complications
Postpericardiotomy syndrome
|
0.51%
1/195 • Number of events 1 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
0.00%
0/197 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
|
Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders
Pulmonary embolism
|
0.00%
0/195 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
0.51%
1/197 • Number of events 1 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
|
Nervous system disorders
Relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis
|
0.51%
1/195 • Number of events 1 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
0.00%
0/197 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
|
Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps)
Renal cell carcinoma
|
0.51%
1/195 • Number of events 1 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
0.00%
0/197 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
|
Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders
Spinal pain
|
0.51%
1/195 • Number of events 1 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
0.00%
0/197 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
|
Injury, poisoning and procedural complications
Subdural haematoma
|
0.51%
1/195 • Number of events 1 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
0.00%
0/197 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
|
Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps)
Thyroid adenoma
|
0.51%
1/195 • Number of events 1 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
0.00%
0/197 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
|
Renal and urinary disorders
Ureterolithiasis
|
0.00%
0/195 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
0.51%
1/197 • Number of events 1 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
|
Renal and urinary disorders
Urinary incontinence
|
0.51%
1/195 • Number of events 1 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
0.00%
0/197 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
|
Injury, poisoning and procedural complications
Urinary retention postoperative
|
0.00%
0/195 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
0.51%
1/197 • Number of events 1 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
|
Infections and infestations
Urinary tract infection
|
0.00%
0/195 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
0.51%
1/197 • Number of events 1 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
|
Infections and infestations
Wound infection
|
0.00%
0/195 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
0.51%
1/197 • Number of events 1 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
Other adverse events
| Measure |
Liraglutide 3.0 mg
n=195 participants at risk
Participants received liraglutide once daily by subcutaneous injection irrespective of the timing of meals. Participants received 0.6 mg liraglutide during the first week. The dose was escalated in weekly increments of 0.6 mg until the maintenance dose of 3.0 mg was reached after 4 weeks. The treatment period was 56 weeks.
|
Placebo
n=197 participants at risk
Participants received matching placebo once daily by subcutaneous injection irrespective of the timing of meals. Dose escalation for placebo matched that of liraglutide. The treatment period was 56 weeks.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Gastrointestinal disorders
Abdominal discomfort
|
5.6%
11/195 • Number of events 17 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
4.1%
8/197 • Number of events 11 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
|
Gastrointestinal disorders
Abdominal pain upper
|
6.2%
12/195 • Number of events 17 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
4.1%
8/197 • Number of events 9 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
|
Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders
Arthralgia
|
6.2%
12/195 • Number of events 14 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
12.2%
24/197 • Number of events 37 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
|
Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders
Back pain
|
6.7%
13/195 • Number of events 13 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
6.1%
12/197 • Number of events 17 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
|
Gastrointestinal disorders
Constipation
|
14.4%
28/195 • Number of events 36 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
8.6%
17/197 • Number of events 21 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
|
Metabolism and nutrition disorders
Decreased appetite
|
9.7%
19/195 • Number of events 24 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
2.5%
5/197 • Number of events 5 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
|
Gastrointestinal disorders
Diarrhoea
|
23.1%
45/195 • Number of events 77 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
15.2%
30/197 • Number of events 54 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
|
Nervous system disorders
Dizziness
|
6.7%
13/195 • Number of events 18 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
3.6%
7/197 • Number of events 7 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
|
Gastrointestinal disorders
Dyspepsia
|
6.2%
12/195 • Number of events 13 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
2.5%
5/197 • Number of events 5 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
|
General disorders
Fatigue
|
7.2%
14/195 • Number of events 18 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
5.1%
10/197 • Number of events 11 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
|
Infections and infestations
Gastroenteritis
|
7.7%
15/195 • Number of events 15 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
2.5%
5/197 • Number of events 5 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
|
Gastrointestinal disorders
Gastrooesophageal reflux disease
|
5.1%
10/195 • Number of events 12 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
1.0%
2/197 • Number of events 2 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
|
Nervous system disorders
Headache
|
14.9%
29/195 • Number of events 36 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
14.7%
29/197 • Number of events 47 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
|
Vascular disorders
Hypertension
|
2.1%
4/195 • Number of events 4 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
6.1%
12/197 • Number of events 14 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
|
Infections and infestations
Influenza
|
6.2%
12/195 • Number of events 14 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
11.2%
22/197 • Number of events 26 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
|
Infections and infestations
Nasopharyngitis
|
21.5%
42/195 • Number of events 48 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
18.3%
36/197 • Number of events 49 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
|
Gastrointestinal disorders
Nausea
|
29.7%
58/195 • Number of events 105 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
11.7%
23/197 • Number of events 27 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
|
Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders
Oropharyngeal pain
|
3.6%
7/195 • Number of events 7 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
5.1%
10/197 • Number of events 12 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
|
Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders
Osteoarthritis
|
3.1%
6/195 • Number of events 9 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
6.1%
12/197 • Number of events 13 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
|
Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders
Pain in extremity
|
8.2%
16/195 • Number of events 17 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
9.6%
19/197 • Number of events 21 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
|
Infections and infestations
Sinusitis
|
4.6%
9/195 • Number of events 11 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
5.1%
10/197 • Number of events 11 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
|
Infections and infestations
Upper respiratory tract infection
|
12.3%
24/195 • Number of events 32 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
14.7%
29/197 • Number of events 37 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
|
Infections and infestations
Urinary tract infection
|
3.6%
7/195 • Number of events 12 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
9.6%
19/197 • Number of events 22 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
|
Gastrointestinal disorders
Vomiting
|
16.4%
32/195 • Number of events 53 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
6.1%
12/197 • Number of events 13 • From the date of first dose of trial product (week 0) to end of treatment (week 56) + post treatment follow-up of 30 days.
Evaluation of safety was based on SAS which comprised of all randomised participants who received at least one dose of trial product. AEs with onset during the on-treatment observation period (the period when participants were exposed to trial product) were considered treatment-emergent.
|
Additional Information
Clinical Reporting Anchor and Disclosure (1452)
Novo Nordisk A/S
Results disclosure agreements
- Principal investigator is a sponsor employee At the end of the trial, one or more scientific publications may be prepared collaboratively by the investigator(s) and Novo Nordisk. Novo Nordisk reserves the right to postpone publication and/or communication for up to 60 days to protect intellectual property.
- Publication restrictions are in place
Restriction type: OTHER