{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.04325169359041167, 'fraction_numerical': 0.028139656070870246, 'mean_word_length': 5.018808777429467, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 3, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Crossover Clinical Trial Assessing Patient PREFERence between the Dulaglutide Pen and the Semaglutide Pen (PREFER).

AIMS
When selecting treatments for type 2 diabetes (T2D), it is important to consider not only efficacy and safety, but also other treatment attributes that have an impact on patient preference. The objective of this study was to examine preference between injection devices used for two weekly GLP-1 receptor agonists.


MATERIALS AND METHODS
The PREFER study was an open-label, multicenter, randomized, crossover trial assessing patient preference for the dulaglutide and semaglutide injection devices among injection-naïve patients receiving oral medication for T2D. After being trained to use each device, participants performed all steps of injection preparation and administered mock injections into an injection pad. Time-to-train (TTT) for each device was assessed in a subset.


RESULTS
There were 310 evaluable participants (48.4% female; mean age = 60.0; 78 participants in the TTT subgroup). More participants preferred the dulaglutide device than the semaglutide device (84.2% vs. 12.3%; p<0.0001). More participants also perceived the dulaglutide device to have greater ease-of-use (86.8% vs. 6.8%; p<0.0001). After preparing and using the devices, more participants were willing to use the dulaglutide device (93.5%) than the semaglutide device (45.8%). Training participants to use the dulaglutide device required less time than the semaglutide device (3.38 vs. 8.14 minutes; p<0.0001).


CONCLUSIONS
Participants with T2D preferred the dulaglutide injection device over the semaglutide device. If patients prefer a device, they may be more willing to use the medication, which could result in better health outcomes. Furthermore, shorter training time for injection devices may be helpful in busy clinical practice settings. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.