Table 4.

Cox proportional hazards (PH) regression analyses for liraglutide (all doses [0.6 mg, 1.2 mg, and 1.8 mg per day]) versus lixisenatide (20 µg per day) to assess the effect of exposure on time to achieving HbA1c and weight reduction targets within 12 months of therapy

	Cox PH regression analyses
	HR	95% LCL	95% UCL	p value
Probability of achieving HbA1c <6.5%a
Lixisenatide (20 µg) (N = 454)	–
Liraglutide (all doses) (N = 1213)	2.54	1.55	4.16	0.0002
Probability of achieving HbA1c <7.0%a
Lixisenatide (20 µg) (N = 446)	–
Liraglutide (all doses) (N = 1186)	2.10	1.57	2.83	<0.0001
Probability of achieving HbA1c <7.5%a
Lixisenatide (20 µg) (N = 438)	–
Liraglutide (all doses) (N = 1134)	1.65	1.33	2.05	<0.0001
Probability of achieving >1% HbA1c reductiona
Lixisenatide (20 µg) (N = 459)	–
Liraglutide (all doses) (N = 1231)	1.29	1.13	1.47	0.0002
Probability of achieving ≥3% weight reductionb
Lixisenatide (20 µg) (N = 120)	–
Liraglutide (all doses) (N = 312)	1.12	0.82	1.53	0.493

HbA1c glycated hemoglobin, HR hazard ratio, LCL lower confidence limit, PH proportional hazards, UCL upper confidence limit

^aCox PH regression adjusted for baseline HbA1c only

^bCox PH regression adjusted for baseline weight only