Diabetologia

Tirzepatide compared to semaglutide for reaching treatment goals in type 2 diabetes

Updated

Abstract

In a post hoc analysis of 1879 adults with type 2 diabetes, tirzepatide significantly improved the attainment of therapeutic targets compared to semaglutide.

  • At baseline, 21% of participants were on target for two or more standard goals, and only 4% met two or more intensive goals.
  • For standard targets, 34% of participants on semaglutide met three or more targets, while this increased to 42%, 53%, and 57% with tirzepatide at doses of 5, 10, and 15 mg, respectively.
  • For intensive targets, 8% of semaglutide participants achieved three or more goals, compared to 15%, 20%, and 29% for tirzepatide at the same respective doses.
  • Tirzepatide was associated with increased odds of achieving HbA targets (OR 1.50 for standard and OR 1.88 for intensive), weight loss (>10%: OR 2.72; >15%: OR 3.86), and blood pressure (OR 1.45 for intensive).

Simplified

Full Text

Full text is available at the source.

Funding

Competing interests

Acknowledgements: This publication is based on research using data from data contributors Eli Lilly that have been made available through Vivli. Vivli has not contributed to or approved, and Vivli and Eli Lilly are not in any way responsible for, the contents of this publication. An abstract reporting part of the results presented here was submitted to the Endocrine Society’s annual meeting ENDO 2025 (12 July 2025 to 15 July 2025, San Francisco, CA, USA). Data availability: Data for this post hoc analysis was accessed through the Vivli (Center for Global Clinical Research Data) platform ( https://vivli.org ) with the Vivli ID 00009964. Funding: This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors. Authors’ relationships and activities: JSN reports having received consulting and speaker fees from AstraZeneca, BIAL, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly and Novo Nordisk and speaker fees from Merck. ARL reports having received consulting fees from BIAL. PM received salary support from an educational grant by Janssen. FVN has received consultancy fees and/or research support from AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Daiichi-Sankyo, Novartis and Ultragenyx. ALM has received research support from Boehringer Ingelheim, AstraZeneca, Novartis. JPF has received research support from Boehringer Ingelheim, AstraZeneca, Novartis, Bial, Salamandra and Bayer. The authors declare that there are no other relationships or activities that might bias, or be perceived to bias, their work. Contribution statement: JSN, ARL and JPF conceived and designed the study. JSN and ARL performed the data analysis. CV, PM, FVN, ALM and JPF provided methodological and statistical guidance. All authors contributed to the interpretation of the data. JSN and ARL drafted the first version of the manuscript. All authors critically revised the manuscript for important intellectual content and approved the final version to be submitted. JSN and ARL are the guarantors of this work and, as such, had full access to all the data in the analysis and take responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis.
PubMed

What Lands in Your Inbox Each Week:

  • 📚7 fresh studies
  • 📝plain-language summaries
  • direct links to original studies
  • 🏅top journal indicators
  • 📅weekly delivery
  • 🧘‍♂️always free