P5823 - Familiarity with Glucagon, GLP-1, and GIP Receptor Agonists and Dual Agonists Among Hepatology/Gastroenterology, Primary Care, and Endocrinology Specialists
1Louisville Metabolic and Atherosclerosis Research Center Louisville, KY
Harold E. Bays, MD1, Diana Canseco, PhD, MBA, HSM2, Jonathan Pak, PharmD, MBA2, Teresa Oliveria, PharmD2, A. Sidney Barrett, MD, MSCR3 11Louisville Metabolic and Atherosclerosis Research Center, Louisville, KY; 2Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Ridgefield, CT; 3Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC Introduction: Ongoing clinical trials are evaluating mono, dual, and triple agonists of the glucagon receptor (GCGR), glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide receptor (GIPR), and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor (GLP-1R) for the treatment of metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD) and steatohepatitis (MASH). We compared the perception of these mechanisms of action (MOA) among hepatologists/gastroenterologists (HEP/GASTRO), endocrinologists (ENDO), and primary care physicians (PCP) treating people with MASLD/MASH, including advanced practice providers within each specialty, to identify potential knowledge gaps. Methods: From November 2024 to January 2025, an online survey was completed by US clinicians treating people with MASLD/MASH to assess their knowledge of GCGR, GLP-1R and GIPR agonists. Results: A total of 760 clinicians responded: HEP/GASTRO (n=256), ENDO (n=252), PCP (n=252), managing an average of 23, 18, and 15 patients per week with MASLD/MASH, respectively. Ultrasound imaging was commonly used to diagnose MASH across specialty, but less so by HEP/GASTRO (67.2%) or ENDO (62.8%) than PCP (79.4%, p< 0.01), while vibration-controlled transient elastography was more commonly used by HEP/GASTRO (71.9%, p< 0.01) than ENDO (43.6%) or PCP (34.9%). For biomarker tests, liver enzymes were commonly used across specialty (HEP/GASTRO 76.2%; ENDO 81.7%; PCP 81.3%), but FIB-4 was more commonly used by HEP/GASTRO (72.7%, p< 0.01) than ENDO (56.7%) or PCP (37.7%). Fewer HEP/GASTRO (66.0%) and PCP (67.1%) were “very” or “extremely familiar” with GLP-1R than ENDO (97.6%). Fewer specialists were “very” or “extremely familiar” with GCGR (HEP/GASTRO 25.4%, ENDO 49.2%, PCP 15.9%) and GIPR (HEP/GASTRO 37.1%, ENDO 86.5%, PCP 38.5%). All specialties were less familiar with the effects of activation of GCGR and GIPR than GLP-1R. All specialties expected GCGR, GIPR, and GLP-1R agonists to benefit people with cardiometabolic (CM) conditions including MASH. Fewer HEP/GASTRO than ENDO and PCP expected dual GCGR/GLP-1R agonists to be better than GLP-1R mono-agonists for control of hypertension, dyslipidemia, and type 2 diabetes (Fig 1). Discussion: All specialists were more familiar with GLP-1R than with GCGR and GIPR. HEP/GASTRO and PCP were less familiar with GLP-1R, GCGR, and GIPR than ENDO, highlighting potential opportunities for education as these MOA become available. Specialists anticipate that dual GCGR/GLP-1R agonists will benefit the treatment of MASLD/MASH and other CM conditions.
Figure: Figure 1. Perceived benefits of dual GCGR/GLP-1R agonists compared with mono agonists by specialty
Figure: Figure 1. Perceived benefits of dual GCGR/GLP-1R agonists compared with mono agonists by specialty
Harold E. Bays, MD1, Diana Canseco, PhD, MBA, HSM2, Jonathan Pak, PharmD, MBA2, Teresa Oliveria, PharmD2, A. Sidney Barrett, MD, MSCR3. P5823 - Familiarity with Glucagon, GLP-1, and GIP Receptor Agonists and Dual Agonists Among Hepatology/Gastroenterology, Primary Care, and Endocrinology Specialists, ACG 2025 Annual Scientific Meeting Abstracts. Phoenix, AZ: American College of Gastroenterology.
