# Using real-world data to predict findings of an ongoing phase IV trial: glycemic control of semaglutide versus standard of care

## TL;DR

This study used real-world data to predict the results of a trial comparing semaglutide to standard diabetes treatments, finding semaglutide more effective at improving glycemic control.

## Contribution

The study demonstrates that real-world data can predict ongoing trial outcomes and complement randomized trials.

## Key findings

- Semaglutide initiators were 30% more likely to achieve A1C <7% compared to standard of care.
- Semaglutide led to a 1.3% A1C reduction versus 1.1% with standard of care medications.

## Abstract

Using national claims databases, we sought to emulate the design of the ongoing SEPRA trial and predict its findings, comparing the effects of once weekly semaglutide to SoC medications on glycemic control (A1C <7%) in type-2 diabetes mellitus (T2D).

Using Optum Clinformatics (July 2017 – May 2022), we identified a 1:1 propensity score-matched (PSM) cohort of adults with T2D on metformin monotherapy, who had recorded A1C and initiated either injectable semaglutide or SoC medications (dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors, sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors, SUs, or glucagon-like peptide-1 agonists) and met eligibility criteria adapted from the SEPRA trial. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients achieving A1C <7%. The study protocol was preregistered (NCT05577728, ClinicalTrials.gov) before any etiologic analyses. Risk ratios and corresponding 95% CIs were estimated.

We identified 1,144 PSM pairs of injectable semaglutide and SoC initiators with balance in pre-exposure covariates. Semaglutide initiators were 30% (risk ratio (95% CI), 1.30 (1.16 to 1.45)) more likely to achieve glycemic control (A1C <7%) than those initiating SoC. Additionally, semaglutide initiators had a 1.3% reduction in A1C, compared with a 1.1% reduction in the SoC group. These results were consistent with interim results of the SEPRA trial, which were released after the protocol for our database study was preregistered.

This claims database study, designed to predict the results of the SEPRA trial, found results consistent with interim trial results. Our findings support the notion that well-designed non-randomized studies using fit-for-purpose data can effectively complement pragmatic randomized controlled trials.