Church of PeptidesSearch
Liraglutide · Chapter 4 of 6

The missing chairs

Human randomized follow-up · Published February 23, 2017

What changes when half the participants do not finish?

Fictional scene

Subject One counts chairs in a lecture hall, then notices how many are empty. “Can we assume they all heard the ending?” Doctide hands him the follow-up sheet. He writes a question mark beside every seat he cannot account for.

What changes here

Fewer diabetes diagnoses occurred during treatment, but missing follow-up matters. [1]

Read the study details & dates
Human randomized follow-up · Published February 23, 2017

The missing chairs

NCT01272219: 160-week double-blind comparison in 2,254 adults with prediabetes and obesity, or overweight with comorbidities. Daily subcutaneous liraglutide versus placebo plus diet/activity measures. Study dates: June 1, 2011–March 2, 2015. Diabetes while on treatment: 26/1,472 versus 46/738; time-to-onset hazard ratio 0.21 (95% CI 0.13–0.34). Analysis included randomized treated people with a post-baseline assessment. [1]

What this does not establish

Only 50% completed 160 weeks; withdrawn participants were not followed after discontinuation. This is neither proof of permanent prevention after stopping nor an independent trial from the earlier SCALE chapter. Sponsor: Novo Nordisk.

Original sources
  1. le Roux et al., Lancet, February 23, 2017 — three-year original abstract

Reviewed November 10, 2026. Original indexed abstract; full safety supplement unavailable in this review.

Up next
Which part of a combined kidney outcome drove the result?

Subject One is fictional. Separate studies, species and populations are not a single patient’s experience. How to read the story