Safety and efficacy of somapacitan in adults with growth hormone deficiency who were switched from daily growth hormone therapy: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Kamrul-Hasan. A B M ABM; Nagendra. Lakshmi L; Ashraf. Ambika P AP; Chatterjee. Subhankar S; Dutta. Deep D; Pappachan. Joseph M JM
Key Findings
- Somapacitan raised the overall risk of any adverse event (RR 1.31) compared with daily GH, but serious adverse events were unchanged.
- IGF‑1 levels and overall treatment effectiveness were virtually the same between weekly somapacitan and daily GH.
- Glucose control was a bit better with somapacitan (smaller rise in HbA1c, less increase in fasting insulin and HOMA‑IR).
- Patients reported higher convenience scores with the weekly injection, while satisfaction and effectiveness scores were similar.
- No major differences in body‑composition changes, though one study showed improved lumbar spine bone density with somapacitan.
Practical Outcomes
- For biohackers looking to simplify GH therapy, a weekly somapacitan dose can replace daily injections without losing efficacy, and it may be gentler on blood‑sugar regulation. However, be aware of a modest uptick in mild side‑effects and monitor any symptoms. Dosage appears comparable to daily GH, so no major adjustments are needed beyond the switch in frequency.
Summary
Switching from daily growth‑hormone shots to a once‑weekly version called somapacitan works just as well for adults who lack GH, gives similar muscle‑and‑bone benefits, and is easier to use, but it does cause a slightly higher chance of mild side‑effects while not increasing serious problems.
Abstract
The safety and efficacy of somapacitan, a novel long-acting growth hormone (GH) formulation, in adults with GH deficiency (GHD) remain insufficiently explored in systematic reviews and meta-analyses (SR/MA). We aimed to fill this knowledge gap. Databases were searched to identify RCTs and real-world studies involving adults with GHD who had previously been treated with daily GH and switched to once-weekly somapacitan. The primary outcome was the risk of adverse events (AEs); additional outcomes included treatment satisfaction, body composition measures, and insulin-like growth factor-1 standard deviation scores (IGF-1 SDS). This SR/MA included five studies (N = 297); four RCTs (n = 286) with a daily GH comparator group were meta-analyzed. Compared to daily GH, somapacitan increased the risk of all AEs (RR 1.31, 95 % CI [1.07, 1.61], P = 0.01), but not the risk of serious AEs or other specific AEs. Glucose homeostasis was less affected by somapacitan, indicated by a lesser increment in HbA1c in the somapacitan group and larger increases in fasting insulin and HOMA-IR in the daily GH group. The convenience score increased more with somapacitan, while effectiveness and satisfaction scores changed similarly in both groups. No differences in body composition changes were observed, but somapacitan improved lumbar spine bone mineral content and density in one study. By the end, IGF-1 SDS values were comparable (MD -0.05 [-0.24, 0.15], P = 0.64). Somapacitan is as effective as daily GH in treating adults with GHD, with a reasonable safety profile and modest benefits for glucose homeostasis, as well as treatment convenience.
Study Information
pubmed
2025
2025-11-17T00:00:00.000Z
10.1016/j.ghir.2025.101677
28