Abstract P3134: Semaglutide Versus Liraglutide and Incidence of Diabetes and Cardiovascular Disease: an Analysis of Real-World Data

Introduction: Semaglutide (2.4 mg) and liraglutide (3.0 mg) are glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1 RA) drugs used to promote weight loss, with evidence indicating a greater effect for semaglutide. In the SELECT trial, semaglutide reduced the risk of major adverse cardiovascular disease (CVD) events compared to placebo among overweight or obese individuals without diabetes. Both semaglutide and liraglutide are effective at improving glycemic control, though no clinical trials have assessed incident diabetes as a primary endpoint. Hypothesis: Among patients without diabetes, semaglutide is associated with lower risk of incident CVD and diabetes compared with liraglutide. Methods: Using the MarketScan insurance claims database from 2020-22, we matched diabetes-free patients prescribed semaglutide with up to 2 controls prescribed liraglutide by age, sex, enrollment date and prescription date. We used Cox regression to assess the association of semaglutide versus liraglutide use with incident 1) diabetes, 2) hard CVD (myocardial infarction, stroke and heart failure), and 3) a composite outcome of hard CVD plus unstable angina and coronary revascularization. Models adjusted for age, sex, and a propensity score determined by comorbidities and the use of other medications. Results: Our sample included 15,017 semaglutide users and 21,431 matched liraglutide users who initiated treatment during 2021 or 2022 (mean age 45 years; 83% female). Follow-up concluded at the end of 2022 or insurance disenrollment. Over a mean of 0.7 years, there were 631 diabetes, 30 hard CVD, and 64 composite CVD events. Comparing semaglutide with liraglutide, the hazard ratio (95% confidence interval) was 0.60 (0.35-1.02) for the composite CVD outcome and 0.57 (0.26-1.25) for hard CVD. The proportional hazards assumption was violated in the analysis of diabetes (p=0.01). Semaglutide use was associated with higher risk of diabetes during the first six months of follow-up (2.07 [1.70-2.53]) and lower risk thereafter (0.70 [0.54-0.92]). Conclusions: In this real-world study of GLP-1 RAs and CVD outcomes, results directionally favored semaglutide over liraglutide. The change in directionality of the association with incident diabetes may be supported by the results of the SUSTAIN 10 and PIONEER 4 trials, which showed a greater improvement in measures of glycemic control for liraglutide during early follow-up visits, but a superior effect of semaglutide by the end of the trial.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Circulation
Published
2025-03-11
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1161/cir.151.suppl_1.p3134
Primary Topic
Diabetes Treatment and Management
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Abstract P3134: Semaglutide Versus Liraglutide and Incidence of Diabetes and Cardiovascular Disease: an Analysis of Real-World Data

Robert J. Walker, Faye L. Norby, Pamela L. Lutsey, Wendy Wang et al.
2 links
Circulation
Diabetes Treatment and Management
article

Abstract P3134: Semaglutide Versus Liraglutide and Incidence of Diabetes and Cardiovascular Disease: an Analysis of Real-World Data

Robert J. Walker, Faye L. Norby, Pamela L. Lutsey, Wendy Wang, Ethan Cannon
article en

Abstract

Introduction: Semaglutide (2.4 mg) and liraglutide (3.0 mg) are glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1 RA) drugs used to promote weight loss, with evidence indicating a greater effect for semaglutide. In the SELECT trial, semaglutide reduced the risk of major adverse cardiovascular disease (CVD) events compared to placebo among overweight or obese individuals without diabetes. Both semaglutide and liraglutide are effective at improving glycemic control, though no clinical trials have assessed incident diabetes as a primary endpoint. Hypothesis: Among patients without diabetes, semaglutide is associated with lower risk of incident CVD and diabetes compared with liraglutide. Methods: Using the MarketScan insurance claims database from 2020-22, we matched diabetes-free patients prescribed semaglutide with up to 2 controls prescribed liraglutide by age, sex, enrollment date and prescription date. We used Cox regression to assess the association of semaglutide versus liraglutide use with incident 1) diabetes, 2) hard CVD (myocardial infarction, stroke and heart failure), and 3) a composite outcome of hard CVD plus unstable angina and coronary revascularization. Models adjusted for age, sex, and a propensity score determined by comorbidities and the use of other medications. Results: Our sample included 15,017 semaglutide users and 21,431 matched liraglutide users who initiated treatment during 2021 or 2022 (mean age 45 years; 83% female). Follow-up concluded at the end of 2022 or insurance disenrollment. Over a mean of 0.7 years, there were 631 diabetes, 30 hard CVD, and 64 composite CVD events. Comparing semaglutide with liraglutide, the hazard ratio (95% confidence interval) was 0.60 (0.35-1.02) for the composite CVD outcome and 0.57 (0.26-1.25) for hard CVD. The proportional hazards assumption was violated in the analysis of diabetes (p=0.01). Semaglutide use was associated with higher risk of diabetes during the first six months of follow-up (2.07 [1.70-2.53]) and lower risk thereafter (0.70 [0.54-0.92]). Conclusions: In this real-world study of GLP-1 RAs and CVD outcomes, results directionally favored semaglutide over liraglutide. The change in directionality of the association with incident diabetes may be supported by the results of the SUSTAIN 10 and PIONEER 4 trials, which showed a greater improvement in measures of glycemic control for liraglutide during early follow-up visits, but a superior effect of semaglutide by the end of the trial.

CirculationVol. 151(Suppl_1)
University of Minnesota System (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 90%
Diabetes Treatment and Management
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.