Evaluating Glycemic Control Efficacy and Safety of the Oral Small Molecule Glucagon-Like Peptide 1 Receptor Agonist Danuglipron in Type 2 Diabetes Patients: A Systemic Review and Meta-Analysis

Hareer Fatima; Hussain Sohail Rangwala; Muhammad Saqlain Mustafa; Muhammad Ashir Shafique; Syed Raza Abbas; Azra Rizwan; Tagwa Kalool Fadlalla Ahmed; Ainan Arshad

doi:10.2147/DMSO.S439587

Evaluating Glycemic Control Efficacy and Safety of the Oral Small Molecule Glucagon-Like Peptide 1 Receptor Agonist Danuglipron in Type 2 Diabetes Patients: A Systemic Review and Meta-Analysis

Diabetes Metab Syndr Obes. 2023 Nov 7:16:3567-3578. doi: 10.2147/DMSO.S439587. eCollection 2023.

Authors

Hareer Fatima¹, Hussain Sohail Rangwala¹, Muhammad Saqlain Mustafa¹, Muhammad Ashir Shafique¹, Syed Raza Abbas², Azra Rizwan³, Tagwa Kalool Fadlalla Ahmed⁴, Ainan Arshad³

Affiliations

¹ Department of Medicine, Jinnah Sindh Medical University, Karachi, Pakistan.
² Department of Medicine, Dow University of Health Sciences, Karachi, Pakistan.
³ Department of Medicine, Aga Khan University Hospital, Karachi, Pakistan.
⁴ Department of Medicine, Ahfad University for Women, Omdurman, Al-Khartum, Sudan.

Abstract

Introduction: Diabetes Mellitus (DM) is a significant global health concern, with Type 2 DM (T2DM) being highly prevalent. Glucagon-Like Peptide 1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RA), such as Danuglipron, offer potential benefits in T2DM management. This meta-analysis examines the safety and efficacy of Danuglipron, focusing on adverse outcomes and glycemic parameters.

Methods: A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane Library for RCTs involving Danuglipron till August 2023, following PRISMA guidelines. The Cochrane risk-of-bias tool was used for quality assessment. Adverse outcomes (diarrhea, nausea, vomiting, headache, decreased appetite, dyspepsia, dizziness) and glycemic parameters like changes in HbA1C, fasting plasma glucose (FPG), and body weight were analyzed.

Results: Four RCTs published from 2021 to 2023 were included. Both doses of Danuglipron were associated with diarrhea (RR=2.66, 90% CI: 1.32 to 5.35, p=0.02), nausea (RR=5.5, 90% CI: 3.4 to 8.88, p<0.00001), and vomiting (RR=5.98, 90% CI: 2.93 to 12.23, p=0.0001). The 120mg dose showed decreased appetite (RR=3.46, 90% CI: 1.57 to 7.62, p=0.01), dyspepsia (RR=4.04, 90% CI: 1.93 to 8.43, p=0.002), and dizziness (RR=5.08, 90% CI: 1.45 to 17.82, p=0.03). Reductions in HbA1C (SMD -1.09, 90% CI -1.39 to -0.8, p < 0.00001), FPG (SMD -1.10, 90% CI -1.46 to -0.75, p < 0.00001), and body weight (SMD -1.08, 90% CI -1.42 to -0.74, p < 0.00001) were observed for both doses.

Conclusion: Danuglipron demonstrates potential for glycemic control and weight reduction in T2DM. Adverse outcomes include diarrhea, nausea, vomiting, and decreased appetite, with dose-related effects. Clinicians must weigh benefits against side effects when considering Danuglipron for T2DM management.

Keywords: Danuglipron; adverse outcomes; diabetes mellitus; glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists; glycemic parameters.

Publication types

Review