PEDEvidence@pedevidence

SOURCE-LINKED STUDY SUMMARY

Semaglutide vs Dulaglutide: Weight & A1C in SUSTAIN 7

Original publication: Semaglutide versus dulaglutide once weekly in patients with type 2 diabetes (SUSTAIN 7): a randomised, open-label, phase 3b trial.

The lancet. Diabetes & endocrinology ·

Human

PED EVIDENCE INTERPRETATION

How did semaglutide compare directly with dulaglutide?

Semaglutide produced greater weight and HbA1c reductions at both paired dose comparisons over 40 weeks. The study compared 0.5 vs 0.75 mg and 1.0 vs 1.5 mg, respectively, in adults with type 2 diabetes taking metformin. [1]

Design
Randomized, open-label, phase 3b SUSTAIN 7 trial; 1,201 participants
Population
Type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled on metformin
Comparison
Weekly subcutaneous semaglutide 0.5/1.0 mg vs dulaglutide 0.75/1.5 mg
Duration
40 weeks

The evidence at a glance

Prespecified lower- and higher-dose comparisons [1]
Outcome / dose pairSemaglutideDulaglutideEstimated difference (95% CI)
HbA1c: 0.5 vs 0.75 mg [1]−1.5 percentage points−1.1 percentage points−0.40 (−0.55 to −0.25)
HbA1c: 1.0 vs 1.5 mg [1]−1.8 percentage points−1.4 percentage points−0.41 (−0.57 to −0.25)
Weight: 0.5 vs 0.75 mg [1]−4.6 kg−2.3 kg−2.26 kg (−3.02 to −1.51)
Weight: 1.0 vs 1.5 mg [1]−6.5 kg−3.0 kg−3.55 kg (−4.32 to −2.78)

All four comparisons: P < .0001. The primary efficacy analysis used on-treatment observations before rescue medication. Gastrointestinal events occurred in 43%/44% with semaglutide and 33%/48% with dulaglutide, in lower/higher-dose groups respectively.

OUR READING OF THE EVIDENCE

What this changes

Randomizing the comparator within the same trial makes this more directly informative than ranking separate trials by their average results. [1]

What it does not establish

It does not compare every available dose, establish lifetime safety, or show that an individual will experience the group-average difference. [1]

Put it in context

Sources and transparency

Interpretation added . Primary publication abstract, with results and limitations checked against the indexed source. Full tables and supplementary materials were not independently reviewed.

Funded by Novo Nordisk. Abstract-based interpretation; not an independent assessment of all adverse events or methodological quality. [1]

  1. Semaglutide versus dulaglutide once weekly in patients with type 2 diabetes (SUSTAIN 7): a randomised, open-label, phase 3b trial.DOI 10.1016/s2213-8587(18)30024-x · Primary abstract: methods, outcomes and funding

AI-assisted editorial analysis by PED Evidence. Sources are linked for verification; no independent clinician review or formal risk-of-bias assessment is claimed. Studied exposures describe the research, not a recommended regimen. Editorial and correction policy.

Questions this study helps answer

Did the trial compare today’s highest available doses?

It compared only the four doses listed in the trial. Results cannot settle comparisons involving untested higher doses or different patient populations. [1]

Were these placebo comparisons?

No. SUSTAIN 7 was an open-label active-comparator trial. Both treatments were given alongside metformin, and the result is specific to the paired doses studied. [1]

Original compact summary and study details
Abstract summarizedQuality not appraised
What was studied
SUSTAIN 7 was a randomized, open-label phase 3b trial comparing weekly semaglutide with dulaglutide; HbA1c and body weight were assessed at week 40.
Who / model studied
Participants were adults with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled on metformin alone.
Studied dose & schedule
Dose and schedule have not yet been extracted for this summary.
What the study found
At the lower-dose comparison, body weight fell by 4.6 kg with semaglutide and 2.3 kg with dulaglutide.
Limitations & context
The study was open-label. Gastrointestinal disorders were the most common reason for discontinuation, and six fatalities occurred across the four groups.

Read summary source ↗ · Prepared 9/22/2026 · AI-assisted, source-based summary

Review record & corrections

Summary prepared: . Source scope: abstract. This is an AI-assisted source summary, not an independent clinician sign-off.

No public field-by-field revision history is available for this card yet. The date above is the summary date, not proof that every field was updated then.

Inspect the source · Correction policy

Save, annotate or compare this study in the library →

Research findings apply to the population and conditions studied. This educational summary is not a treatment recommendation or a formal assessment of study quality.

Original publication ↗ · DOI: 10.1016/s2213-8587(18)30024-x

Explore related compounds

Evidence and review standards

← All study summaries