
Combination Treatment Reduces Weight While Keeping Muscle
CHICAGO — Combined use of semaglutide with an investigational monoclonal antibody called bimagrumab produced significant fat mass loss while preserving lean mass, results from the phase 2b BELIEVE study found.
Loss of muscle mass is an emerging concern with increasing use of GLP-1 agonists for weight loss as lean body mass is estimated to account for up to 15%-40% of total weight loss from GLP-1 drugs.
One potential solution is bimagrumab, which blocks the activin pathways that inhibit growth in skeletal muscle and increases lipid storage in adipose tissue, leading to both increased muscle mass and decreased fat mass.
'We're presenting an entirely new mechanism for managing obesity. We've heard a lot about GLP-1s and their combinations. This is going to be a unique one with bimagrumab, a drug that has completely different mechanism of action,' study investigator Steven B. Heymsfield, MD, professor and director of the Body Composition-Metabolism Laboratory at the Pennington Biomedical Research Center of the Louisiana State University System, Baton Rouge, told Medscape Medical News .
Results from the study comparing bimagrumab and semaglutide alone and in combination for treating obesity were presented on June 23, 2025, here at the American Diabetes Association 85th Scientific Sessions.
Bimagrumab's effects are complementary to those of GLP-1 drugs and other appetite suppressants, explained co-investigator Louis J. Aronne, MD, professor of metabolic research and director of the Comprehensive Weight Control Center at Weill-Cornell Medical College, New York, at a press briefing.
As such, he added, the drug's potential uses include being an adjunct to GLP-1 agonists for obesity induction therapy as an alternative to incretins for people who can't tolerate them or who don't respond adequately, and as a potential preferred maintenance therap.
Fat Mass vs Muscle Mass
The BELIEVE study was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter study in 507 adults with obesity or overweight.
Participants were randomized into a total of nine groups: placebo; bimagrumab alone at doses of 10 mg/kg and 30 mg/kg; semaglutide 1.0 mg or 2.4 mg plus placebo; and one of four groups of combined bimagrumab and semaglutide — bimagrumab 10 mg/kg plus semaglutide 1 mg; bimagrumab 30 mg/kg plus semaglutide 1 mg; bimagrumab 10 mg/kg plus semaglutide 2.4 mg; or bimagrumab 30 mg/kg plus semaglutide 2.4 mg.
Bimagrumab was given intravenously at weeks 4, 16, 28, and 40; subcutaneous semaglutide was given weekly.
The primary treatment period was 48 weeks, followed by an open-label extension to 72 weeks with both the placebo and bimagrumab 10 mg/kg groups switching to bimagrumab 30 mg/kg. Body composition was assessed with DEXA.
At week 72, body weight was reduced by 22.1% from baseline in the combined bimagrumab 30 mg/kg plus semaglutide 2.4 mg group (highest of both doses), compared with reductions of 15.7% with semaglutide 2.4 mg alone and 10.8% with bimagrumab 30 mg/kg alone.
Loss of fat mass was 45.7% with the high-dose combination vs 27.8% with semaglutide 2.4 mg and 28.5% with bimagrumab 30 mg/kg alone.
Lean mass loss was 2.9% with the high-dose combination, compared with a loss of 7.4% with semaglutide 2.4 mg and a gain of 2.5% with bimagrumab 30 mg/kg alone.
The percentage of weight loss that was due to fat mass at week 48 was 92.9% for the high-dose combination, 71.5% for semaglutide alone, and 100% for bimagrumab alone.
The proportions of participants achieving weight loss of 20% or more were 69.8% with the combination versus 25.0% with semaglutide, and 10.9% with bimagrumab. And, the proportions achieving 30% or greater fat mass reduction were 94.0%, 36.4%, and 50.0%, respectively, Heymsfield reported.
Visceral adipose tissue decreased more with bimagrumab alone or in combination compared with semaglutide alone, with parallel changes from baseline in waist circumference. High-sensitivity C-reactive protein, a key inflammatory biomarker, decreased by 83% in the high-dose combination group by week 48, Aronne said.
Adiponectin also increased more with bimagrumab alone or in combination compared with semaglutide alone.
Both total and LDL cholesterol rose in the bimagrumab groups and then returned to baseline in the combination groups containing semaglutide 2.4 mg by week 72. Baseline LDL was 114.3 mg/dL, rising by about 15%-30% in the bimagrumab groups by 12-24 weeks. The combination groups returned to baseline by 72 weeks, whereas the bimagrumab-only group dropped, but not back to baseline.
When asked about that, Aronne said 'We believe that the route of administration might be a reason for that observation. I think we need more research to figure this out.'
Increased LDL Cholesterol: Is It a Concern?
Asked to comment, Simeon Taylor, MD, PhD, professor of medicine and director of the Institutional Research Training Program in Diabetes & Obesity at the University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, told Medscape Medical News that the efficacy data were 'amazing,' and that the combination 'delivered unprecedented efficacy as judged by biomarkers, specifically the combination of loss of fat mass plus the increase in lean mass. These changes were accompanied by clinically meaningful improvements in blood pressure and glycemic indices. It will be critical to understand the impact on 'hard' clinical endpoints such as cardiovascular outcomes.'
However, Taylor added that the trial raised some safety concerns, particularly an increase in LDL cholesterol that the investigators said was transient, but they didn't present data about what measures might have been used by the individual clinicians in the study to mitigate that rise.
'It will be important for the investigators to clarify how statin doses were managed. If the adverse effects of bimagrumab were transient, that could be a favorable scenario. If the LDL cholesterol returned toward baseline because statin doses were increased, that would have different implications,' he said.
Obesity expert Amy E. Rothberg, MD, clinical professor of internal medicine and of nutritional sciences at the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, agreed, and also cited other missing information, such as muscle quality. 'There were no biopsies done. They were doing DEXA. That tells us about distribution and volume, but it doesn't tell us anything about quality.'
Rothberg also noted that the only objective functional measure was hand grip, while the rest were self-administered survey instruments. 'There are a lot of unknowns, but impressive data just the same.'
Hard to Predict Safety Concerns
Common adverse events with bimagrumab-containing groups included muscle spasms (ranging from 46.4% with 10 mg to 63.6% with the high-dose combination), diarrhea, and acne, while semaglutide was associated with the typical nausea, diarrhea, constipation, and fatigue.
Similar events occurred in the four combination groups, in which 9% of those treated discontinued due to adverse events over 72 weeks. There were no deaths.
The bimagrumab-containing groups showed early and transient increases in alanine aminotransferase and lipase, while semaglutide-containing groups had sustained increases in lipase.
'The biology of activin receptors is extremely complex. It is hard to predict all of the possible safety concerns. Phase 3 studies and pharmacovigilance will provide better understanding,' Taylor told Medscape Medical News .
'Some potential safety issues only become apparent when large numbers of people have taken the drug for long periods of time, he said, adding that 'obesity drugs are understandably required to have a very 'clean' safety profile.'
The BELIEVE phase 2 study was essentially proof-of-concept, said Heymsfield.
Semaglutide is a product of Lilly competitor Novo Nordisk. This unusual situation came about because the study was initiated in 2023 by Versanis Bio, which Lilly later acquired.
Lilly is now conducting phase 2 trials of bimagrumab with its own GLP-1-based drug tirzepatide, this time co-formulated with bimagrumab in a subcutaneous injection.
Heymsfield has a contract with Lilly for clinical trials (institutional support). He has received honoraria for serving on medical advisory boards of Tanita Corporation, Novo Nordisk, Lilly, Regeneron, Abbott, and Medifast. He is on the Data Safety Monitoring Committee for Novo Nordisk.
Aronne receives consulting fees from/and serving on advisory boards for Altimmune, Atria, Eli Lilly, Jamieson Wellness, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Juvena Therapeutics, Kallyope, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Pfizer, Prosciento, Senda Biosciences, Versanis, Veru Pharmaceuticals, and Zealand Pharmaceuticals; receives research funding from AstraZeneca, United Kingdom, Eli Lilly, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Belgium, and Novo Nordisk, Denmark; having equity interests in ERX Pharmaceuticals, Intellihealth, Jamieson Wellness, Kallyope, Myos Corp, and Veru Pharmaceuticals; and serves on a board of directors for ERX Pharmaceuticals, Intellihealth, and Jamieson Wellness.
Taylor has reported receiving payments from the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases for an inventor's share of a patent covering metreleptin as a treatment for generalized lipodystrophy. He was employed by Eli Lilly in 2000-2002 and Bristol Myers Squibb in 2002-2013.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
12 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Introducing Our Latest Guide: 10 Tips to Create a Trauma Response Toolkit
LONG BEACH, CA - June 25, 2025 (NEWMEDIAWIRE) - Pacific Mind Health, a California-based provider of outpatient psychiatry and therapy, has released a new resource during PTSD Awareness Month: a guide featuring 10 grounding techniques to help individuals manage flashbacks caused by trauma. Developed by medical director and chief psychiatrist Joshua Flatow, MD, the guide offers practical, clinician-recommended tools for regaining control during these intense episodes, which are a hallmark of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). "Flashbacks are a sign that the brain and the body are struggling to process and heal from past trauma," says Flatow. "Flashbacks can be extremely frightening, and some people can lose all sense of awareness of their surroundings as they are seemingly transported back to a past event." PTSD is a condition that affects 3.5% of the adult population.1 Left untreated, PTSD symptoms can compound and lead to long-term physical problems, like cardiovascular and gastrointestinal issues, sleep disorders, substance use and addiction, suicidal thoughts, and more. 10 clinician-recommended grounding techniques to help a person manage flashbacks and stay in touch with the present moment: 5-4-3-2-1 sensory method: Name five things you can see, four you can feel, three you can hear, two you can smell, and one you can taste. Box breathing: Inhale for four seconds, hold for four, exhale for four, and hold for four. Repeat until you feel calmer. Cold water or ice: Splashing water on your face or holding an ice cube re-engages the brain's prefrontal cortex, the seat of reasoning, decision-making, and self-control. Touch texture: Run your fingers over something bumpy, soft, or rough to engage your senses. Orient to the present: Say out loud where you are, what day it is, and that you are safe. Move your body: Stretch, walk, stomp, or swap. Movement signals to your brain that you don't need to freeze in fear. Repeat a soothing phrase: Try saying, "I am safe right now" or "This will pass." Use a grounding object: Carry a small, familiar item you can hold during high-stress moments. Smell something familiar: Essential oils, citrus, or a favorite lotion can calm emotional flashbacks. Sing or hum: Sound and vibration help activate the vagus nerve, which plays a huge role in the mind-body connection in terms of stress and emotional regulation. Why do flashbacks happen? Flashbacks can occur after experiencing or witnessing a traumatic event such as abuse, violence, accidents, or natural disasters. They can cause intense feelings of fear, helplessness, or horror and may leave a lasting imprint on a person, echoing across the brain and body for years, especially when left untreated. A flashback can trigger the same stress responses as the original trauma. Just like during a traumatic event, a flashback engages the brain in a hormonal chain reaction to prepare the body for fight or flight. Even though there is no present danger, a person can still be gripped by same overwhelming feelings of panic, fear, or disconnection as the original event. Cortisol and adrenaline, hormones that alert and prepare the body to danger, suppress a number of the body's systems, including digestion, reproductive, immune, and brain functioning. Over time, this can lead to even bigger mental and physical health challenges. Many people may avoid getting help for PTSD. They may feel shame, stigma, or believe they will heal on their own. Thankfully, PTSD is highly treatable. Therapy, medication, transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS), and Spravato(R) (esketamine) are highly effective in helping patients manage symptoms and even experience full remission. Living with PTSD can feel exhausting and unpredictable, but it's important to remember that no one is alone in their mental health journey. Asking for help is the ultimate sign of strength. Download and print our free Trauma Response Toolkit, and read our full article Practical Tips to Healing After Trauma on our website. References 1 National Alliance on Mental Illness. (n.d.). Posttraumatic stress disorder. NAMI. Retrieved May 15, 2025, from About Pacific Mind Health is a provider of outpatient psychiatry and therapy services in California. With a blend of science and compassion, we create personalized treatment plans to optimize mental health and well-being. Social LinksX | Instagram | Facebook | LinkedIn Media ContactFull Name: Kim CrossTitle: Vice President of MarketingCompany Name: Pacific Mind HealthEmail: Number: 510-366-4263Website: Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data


Medscape
26 minutes ago
- Medscape
FDA Extends Ruxolitinib Cream Review Period for Pediatric AD
The FDA has extended the Prescription Drug User Fee Act (PDUFA) action date for the topical formulation of the JAK inhibitor ruxolitinib as a treatment of atopic dermatitis (AD) in children aged 2-11 years, according to a press release from the manufacturer. The new PDUFA date is September 19, 2025, according to the company, Incyte. The review period for the supplemental New Drug Application (sNDA) for ruxolitinib cream (Opzelura) was extended to provide time for the FDA to review additional data on chemistry, manufacturing, and controls related to the 0.75% formulation, according to the press release. Topical ruxolitinib cream (1.5%) is approved by the FDA for short-term and noncontinuous chronic treatment of mild-to-moderate AD in patients aged 12 years or older who are not immunocompromised for whom topical prescription therapies are contraindicated or insufficient for disease control. Topical ruxolitinib also is approved for nonsegmental vitiligo in patients aged 12 years or older in the US. The sNDA for the AD indication in younger children is based on data from a phase 3 study known as TRuE-AD3, in which children aged 2-12 years with mild-to-moderate AD were randomly assigned to 0.75% or 1.5% ruxolitinib cream or a vehicle. In the study, significantly more children treated with ruxolitinib compared with placebo met the primary endpoint of treatment success based on the Investigator's Global Assessment-Treatment Success measure. Treatment was well-tolerated overall, consistent with previous studies of topical ruxolitinib, with no new safety signals noted. The most common treatment-related adverse event in ruxolitinib-treated patients was application site pain, but no treatment-related events prompted discontinuation, according to the press release. The TRuE-AD3 study was funded by Incyte.


Medscape
36 minutes ago
- Medscape
Cancer Survivors Are Skipping the Primary Care Doctor
Fewer than half of cancer survivors visit a primary care clinician during their fifth through seventh years following their diagnosis, according to a new study published in JCO Oncology Practice . 'Primary care providers' engagement with cancer survivors is viewed as really important, not just for detection of a recurrence or a new cancer but to manage chronic diseases that are not cancer-related, like diabetes, and diseases caused or complicated by cancer treatment, like cardiovascular disease,' said Sarah Birken, PhD, associate professor at the Wake Forest University School of Medicine in Winston-Salem, North Carolina, and an author of the study. Previous research found cancer survivors have improved health outcomes for comorbid conditions when primary care clinicians are involved in their care. The study included 516 survivors of breast, colorectal, or uterine cancer treated at the Wake Forest Baptist Comprehensive Cancer Center, Winston-Salem. Birken and her colleagues linked cancer registry data to outpatient visits with a physician, nurse practitioner, or physician assistant working in family or internal medicine. Fewer than half (43%) of patients had one of these visits in years 5, 6, and 7 following their initial diagnosis, defined as 'sustained' engagement. Those with sustained engagement were 4.6 years older, on average, than those who did not have these visits. The odds of engaging with a primary care clinician rose by 36% for every decade older a person was at the time of cancer diagnosis. Previous Research Birken said the findings reinforce those of a 2023 study which found 40% of patients diagnosed with breast cancer reported communicating with primary care clinicians less over time. Kevin Oeffinger, MD, professor at the Duke University School of Medicine and founding director of the Duke Cancer Institute Center for Onco-Primary Care, Durham, North Carolina, said he was surprised by the findings because of the research showing the importance of primary care in the follow-up of cancer survivors. 'The study highlights the need for better collaboration between primary care providers and oncologists,' Oeffinger, author of an editorial accompanying the journal article, told Medscape Medical News . A 2005 report by the Institute of Medicine recommended clinicians who coordinate oncology treatment provide patients a survivorship care plan. Despite 20 years of work since the report, 'there does not appear to be an overall improvement in the quality transition of survivors from the oncology team to the primary care team or evidence that shared care is becoming the norm,' Oeffinger and his coauthors wrote in the editorial. Going Forward Birken and her colleagues said their findings should be used to promote engagement of primary care clinicians in long-term care of these patients. However, she cited some challenges to achieving this goal. Oncologists must have connections with a large number of primary care clinicians for referrals. Primary care clinicians are also often disconnected from patient care during cancer treatments. Birken said one of the notable findings in the study younger patients were less likely to have visits with primary care clinicians. 'We know that people are being diagnosed with cancer at younger and younger ages, and so an implication of this study could be that we're setting ourselves up for things to worsen with respect to primary care engagement,' Birken said. 'Younger people tend to be less engaged in healthcare; after so many oncology visits following a cancer diagnosis, primary care my feel like yet another unwanted provider visit.' The study was supported by a grant from the National Cancer Institute's Cancer Center. Oeffinger reported being a consultant for and having stock and other ownership interests in Maia Oncology and receiving research funding from GRAIL.