Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Home
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Install the app
Install
Reply to Thread
Guest, we'd love to know what you think about the forum! Take the
Diabetes Forum Survey 2024 »
Home
Forums
Diabetes Management
Diabetes Medication and Drugs
Other Diabetic Medications
Semaglutide
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="SimonCrox" data-source="post: 2090452" data-attributes="member: 388174"><p>The retinopathy was often persistent and thought to need treatment:-</p><p></p><p>Diabetic retinopathy complications occurred in 50 patients (3.0%) in the semaglutide group and 29 (1.8%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 1.76; 95% CI, 1.11 to 2.78; P=0.02) (<a href="https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa1607141#" target="_blank">Table 2</a>, and Table S9 and Fig. S5 in the <a href="https://www.nejm.org/doi/suppl/10.1056/NEJMoa1607141/suppl_file/nejmoa1607141_appendix.pdf" target="_blank">Supplementary Appendix</a>). The treatment difference between groups was first seen very early in the trial. The numbers of patients who required retinal photocoagulation were 38 (2.3%) in the semaglutide group versus 20 (1.2%) in the placebo group, the numbers of those who required the use of an intravitreal agent were 16 (1.0%) versus 13 (0.8%), the numbers of those who had a vitreous hemorrhage were 16 (1.0%) versus 7 (0.4%), and the numbers of those who had an onset of diabetes-related blindness were 5 (0.3%) versus 1 (0.1%) (Table S9 in the <a href="https://www.nejm.org/doi/suppl/10.1056/NEJMoa1607141/suppl_file/nejmoa1607141_appendix.pdf" target="_blank">Supplementary Appendix</a>). Of the 79 patients with retinopathy complications, 66 (83.5%) had preexisting retinopathy at baseline (42 of 50 [84.0%] in the semaglutide group and 24 of 29 [82.8%] in the placebo group). New or worsening nephropathy occurred in 62 patients (3.8%) in the semaglutide group and 100 (6.1%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.46 to 0.88; P=0.005) (<a href="https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa1607141#" target="_blank">Table 2</a>, and Table S9 and Fig. S5 in the <a href="https://www.nejm.org/doi/suppl/10.1056/NEJMoa1607141/suppl_file/nejmoa1607141_appendix.pdf" target="_blank">Supplementary Appendix</a>).</p><p></p><p>There is always the problem of multpile statistical tests - if one takes the data and tests lots of questions on it, there may be a significant P value not because of a genuine link, but because a P value of say 5%, 1 in 20, will occur purely by chance about 1 test in 20.</p><p></p><p>Not got around to looking at the other GLP-1 analogue studies - sorry</p><p></p><p>best wishes</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="SimonCrox, post: 2090452, member: 388174"] The retinopathy was often persistent and thought to need treatment:- Diabetic retinopathy complications occurred in 50 patients (3.0%) in the semaglutide group and 29 (1.8%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 1.76; 95% CI, 1.11 to 2.78; P=0.02) ([URL='https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa1607141#']Table 2[/URL], and Table S9 and Fig. S5 in the [URL='https://www.nejm.org/doi/suppl/10.1056/NEJMoa1607141/suppl_file/nejmoa1607141_appendix.pdf']Supplementary Appendix[/URL]). The treatment difference between groups was first seen very early in the trial. The numbers of patients who required retinal photocoagulation were 38 (2.3%) in the semaglutide group versus 20 (1.2%) in the placebo group, the numbers of those who required the use of an intravitreal agent were 16 (1.0%) versus 13 (0.8%), the numbers of those who had a vitreous hemorrhage were 16 (1.0%) versus 7 (0.4%), and the numbers of those who had an onset of diabetes-related blindness were 5 (0.3%) versus 1 (0.1%) (Table S9 in the [URL='https://www.nejm.org/doi/suppl/10.1056/NEJMoa1607141/suppl_file/nejmoa1607141_appendix.pdf']Supplementary Appendix[/URL]). Of the 79 patients with retinopathy complications, 66 (83.5%) had preexisting retinopathy at baseline (42 of 50 [84.0%] in the semaglutide group and 24 of 29 [82.8%] in the placebo group). New or worsening nephropathy occurred in 62 patients (3.8%) in the semaglutide group and 100 (6.1%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.46 to 0.88; P=0.005) ([URL='https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa1607141#']Table 2[/URL], and Table S9 and Fig. S5 in the [URL='https://www.nejm.org/doi/suppl/10.1056/NEJMoa1607141/suppl_file/nejmoa1607141_appendix.pdf']Supplementary Appendix[/URL]). There is always the problem of multpile statistical tests - if one takes the data and tests lots of questions on it, there may be a significant P value not because of a genuine link, but because a P value of say 5%, 1 in 20, will occur purely by chance about 1 test in 20. Not got around to looking at the other GLP-1 analogue studies - sorry best wishes [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post Reply
Home
Forums
Diabetes Management
Diabetes Medication and Drugs
Other Diabetic Medications
Semaglutide
Top
Bottom
Find support, ask questions and share your experiences. Ad free.
Join the community »
This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn More.…