Superior results vs Trulicity® and as add-on to basal insulin, and statistically significant results vs study-titrated Lantus®1,2
Consider once-weekly Ozempic® for your adult patients with type 2 diabetes
Unmatched glycemic control
Significant weight reduction1,2
Ozempic® is not indicated for weight loss. Examined as secondary endpoint in multiple head-to-head trials.
Significant reduction in risk of MACE as evaluated in a 2‑year CVOT vs placebo1,a,b
In adults with type 2 diabetes and established CVD
aResults apply to Ozempic® plus standard of care vs standard of care alone in SUSTAIN 6 trial.
bMajor adverse CV events (MACE)=CV death, nonfatal MI, or nonfatal stroke
The only type 2 diabetes treatment with greater A1C and weight results vs Trulicity®, and study-titrated Lantus® and as an add-on to basal insulin1,2
Ozempic®—The once-weekly injectable with greater A1C reductions across trials1,2
Primary endpoint: Mean change in A1C from baselinec
cAt Week 40 for SUSTAIN 7, at Week 30 for SUSTAIN 4 and 5. Results for all trials based on a sensitivity analysis of retrieved dropout population.
Ozempic®—Significant weight reductions in a once‑weekly injectable1,2
Secondary endpoint: Mean change in body weight from baselinec
Ozempic® is not indicated for
weight loss.
cAt Week 40 for SUSTAIN 7, at Week 30 for SUSTAIN 4 and 5. Results for all trials based on a sensitivity analysis of retrieved dropout population.
ETD=estimated treatment difference.
SUSTAIN 7:
A 40-week, randomized, open-label, active-controlled trial in 1201 adult patients with type 2 diabetes comparing Ozempic® 0.5 mg to Trulicity® 0.75 mg and Ozempic® 1 mg to Trulicity® 1.5 mg.2
SUSTAIN 4:
A 30-week, randomized open-label, active controlled, treat-to-target trial in 1089 insulin-naïve adult patients with type 2 diabetes on metformin with or without sulfonylurea, comparing Ozempic® 0.5 mg and Ozempic® 1 mg with Lantus®.1,3
SUSTAIN 5:
A 30-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group trial in 397 adult patients with type 2 diabetes on basal insulin ± metformin, evaluating the addition of Ozempic® 0.5 mg and Ozempic® 1 mg with basal insulin ± metformin.1,4
EXPLORE EXPERT INSIGHTS
Ozempic® as the first injectable
Hear an MD and an NP on why they consider a GLP-1 RA therapy as the first injectable for appropriate patients.
EXPLORE EXPERT INSIGHTS
Ozempic® vs Trulicity®
Learn about the results of a head-to-head trial of 2 once-weekly GLP-1 RA therapies from one of the primary investigators.
Help patients realize the potential with Ozempic®
Help patients realize the potential with Ozempic®
Check your patients’ coverage and view savings offer
6-week samples are available
STUDY DESIGNS
SUSTAIN 7: Head-to-head vs Trulicity® (dulaglutide)2
Study design: 40-week, multinational, multicenter, randomized, open-label, 4-armed, pair-wise, active-controlled, parallel-group trial to compare the efficacy and safety of Ozempic® vs dulaglutide.
Patients: A total of 1201 adult patients with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled on metformin were randomized to receive Ozempic® 0.5 mg (n=301), Ozempic® 1 mg (n=300), dulaglutide 0.75 mg (n=299), or dulaglutide 1.5 mg (n=299) once weekly.
Primary endpoint: Mean change in A1C from baseline at Week 40.
Secondary endpoints: Mean change in body weight from baseline at Week 40; proportion of patients achieving A1C <7% at Week 40.
SUSTAIN 4: Head-to-head vs Lantus® (insulin glargine U-100)1,3
Study design: 30-week, randomized, open-label, active-controlled, parallel-group, multinational, multicenter trial to compare the efficacy and safety of Ozempic® vs insulin glargine U-100.
Patients: A total of 1089 insulin-naïve adult patients with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled on metformin alone (48%) or in combination with a sulfonylurea (51%) were randomized to receive once-weekly Ozempic® 0.5 mg (n=362), once-weekly Ozempic® 1 mg (n=360), or once-daily insulin glargine U-100 (n=360). Patients assigned to insulin glargine had a baseline mean A1C of 8.1% and were started on a dose of 10 units once daily. Insulin glargine dose adjustments occurred throughout the trial period based on self-measured fasting plasma glucose before breakfast, targeting 71 to <100 mg/dL. In addition, investigators could titrate insulin glargine based on their discretion between study visits. Twenty-six percent of patients had been titrated to goal by the primary endpoint at Week 30, at which time the mean daily insulin dose was 29 units per day.
Primary endpoint: Mean change in A1C from baseline at Week 30.
Secondary endpoints: Mean change in body weight at Week 30; proportion of patients achieving A1C <7% at Week 30; change in mean fasting plasma glucose (FPG) at Week 30; change in PPG increment (difference between the postprandial and preprandial glucose values across the 3 main meals from an 8-point self-measured plasma glucose (SMPG) profile at Week 30).
SUSTAIN 5: As add-on to basal insulin vs placebo1,4
Study design: 30-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, multinational, multicenter trial to compare the efficacy and safety of Ozempic® in combination with basal insulin vs volume-matched placebo in combination with basal insulin.
Patients: A total of 397 adult patients inadequately controlled on basal insulin with or without metformin were randomized to once-weekly Ozempic® 0.5 mg (n=132), Ozempic® 1 mg (n=131), or placebo (n=133). Randomization was stratified according to A1C at screening. Patients with A1C ≤8% at screening reduced the insulin dose by 20% at start of trial to reduce the risk of hypoglycemia.
Primary endpoint: Mean change in A1C from baseline at Week 30.
Secondary endpoints: Mean change in body weight from baseline at Week 30; proportion of patients achieving A1C <7% at Week 30; change in mean fasting plasma glucose (FPG) at Week 30.