GLPwatch

Comparative Assessment of Lixisenatide, Exenatide, and Liraglutide Pen Devices: A Pilot User-Based Study.

J Diabetes Sci Technol · 2014

Last updated 2026-05-28

In a study of 30 people with type 2 diabetes, the lixisenatide pen was used faster and with fewer errors than the exenatide pen, while both the lixisenatide and liraglutide pens received higher user satisfaction ratings than the exenatide pen. The average participant was 60 years old, and 27% had visual impairments while 20% had reduced hand dexterity.

AI summary of the abstract below.

JournalJ Diabetes Sci Technol, 2014
Citations12
Relative citation ratio0.43
NIH percentile25
Molecules liraglutide, exenatide, lixisenatide
Conditions studied Type 2 Diabetes, Obesity

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists are a relatively recent addition to the treatment options for type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and are administered using prefilled pen devices. METHOD: In this open-label task and interview-based pilot study, 3 GLP-1 receptor agonist pen devices-exenatide (Byetta, Bristol-Myers Squibb/AstraZeneca), liraglutide (Victoza, Novo Nordisk), and lixisenatide (Lyxumia, Sanofi-Aventis)-were comparatively assessed in a randomized order in 30 participants with T2DM for ease of use, using a series of key performance measures (time taken to complete a series of tasks, number of user errors [successful performance], and user satisfaction rating). Linear and logistic regression analysis was conducted for the lixisenatide and liraglutide pens versus the exenatide pen. Participants' mean age was 60 years; 27% and 20% of the participants had visual impairments and reduced manual dexterity, respectively. RESULTS: Tasks were completed faster (P < .001) and with higher successful performance (P = .001) with the lixisenatide pen than with the exenatide pen, whereas the liraglutide pen was not statistically significant versus the exenatide pen on these parameters. Overall, user satisfaction was statistically higher for the lixisenatide and liraglutide pens versus the exenatide pen (P < .001 for both). CONCLUSIONS: Lixisenatide and liraglutide pens are associated with higher user satisfaction compared with the exenatide pen. In addition, the lixisenatide pen is faster and results in fewer errors than its comparator (exenatide). The lixisenatide pen may therefore be a suitable choice for patients with T2DM, including older and pen device-naïve patients, and those with visual impairments and reduced manual dexterity.

Verbatim abstract via PubMed 24876548 ↗

Related research