📚 Part of the GLPI-103 Regulatory Dossier — Reader's Guide. This article shows the live document; edits to the source appear here automatically.

---

Statistical Analysis Report — GLPI103-301

Field	Value
Document ID	SAR-301
Version	1.0
Status	Final (portfolio)
Study	GLPI103-301 — Phase 3, T2DM, GLPI-103 (IV / Oral) vs oral semaglutide
Companion to	SAP-301 (pre-specification), CSR-301 (clinical report), DEF-301 (ADRG/SDRG)
Standards	ICH E9 / E9(R1) (estimands), CDISC ADaM
Confidentiality	Confidential — portfolio use

This report documents the executed statistical analyses for Study GLPI103-301, expanding on the headline numbers in CSR-301 with the full estimand-aligned, sensitivity, and supportive analyses. Every result is generated reproducibly by the analysis programs in src/biostat/ and persisted under outputs/stats/; the report cites the producing program and output file for each.

Change History

Version	Date	Author	Summary
1.0	2026-06-30	Biostatistics	Initial — consolidates estimand, missing-data, multiplicity, responder, subgroup, and time-to-event analyses

---

1. Analysis Populations & Data

• FAS (Full Analysis Set) = all 900 randomized (IV 300 / Oral 301 / Sema 299); primary efficacy population.
• PPS (Per-Protocol Set) = 847 (53 major protocol deviations excluded); supportive.
• Safety Set = all dosed (900).
• Realistic trial complexity is present in the analysis data: 9.3% discontinuation with documented reasons, 26 subjects on rescue medication (an intercurrent event), monotone missing data under MAR/MNAR mechanisms, recurrent hypoglycaemia, 10 serious adverse events, and 2 deaths. This complexity is what makes the estimand, missing-data, and time-to-event analyses below substantive rather than illustrative.

2. Estimand Framework (ICH E9(R1))

The primary estimand for the HbA1c endpoint is defined by: population (FAS), variable (HbA1c CFB at Week 52), treatment condition (randomized arm), population-level summary (difference in LS means), and intercurrent-event (ICE) strategies. Two ICE strategies are analysed for rescue medication:

• Treatment-policy — all observed data are used regardless of rescue (the value "as observed").
• Hypothetical — the HbA1c value that would have been observed without rescue; post-rescue values are set to missing and recovered under MAR.

Program: src/biostat/mmrm_estimands.R → outputs/stats/estimand_results.csv. Model: MMRM via the mmrm package, CHG ~ TRT01A*VISIT + BASE + STRAT_HBA1C + STRAT_BMI with an unstructured covariance and Kenward-Roger degrees of freedom.

Estimand	GLPI-103 IV − Sema	GLPI-103 Oral − Sema
Treatment-policy	−0.67 (95% CI −0.81, −0.53)	−0.38 (−0.52, −0.24)
Hypothetical (no rescue)	−0.69	−0.40

Interpretation. The treatment difference is slightly larger under the hypothetical estimand. This is the expected direction: rescue medication (used more by under-controlled, predominantly comparator-arm subjects) improves the comparator's observed glucose under treatment-policy, attenuating the difference; removing post-rescue data recovers the unattenuated pharmacological effect. The two estimands agree closely, so the superiority conclusion does not depend on the ICE strategy chosen.

3. Primary Endpoint — ANCOVA (confirmatory)

Program: src/biostat/run_analysis.R → outputs/stats/ancova_results.csv. Model: CHG ~ TRT01A + BASE + STRAT_HBA1C + STRAT_BMI (Week 52, FAS completers).

Arm	LS-mean CFB (%)	95% CI
GLPI-103 IV	−2.57	−2.67, −2.47
GLPI-103 Oral	−2.23	−2.33, −2.13
Semaglutide Oral	−1.89	−1.99, −1.79

Superiority vs semaglutide: IV −0.68% (95% CI −0.81, −0.55; p<0.001), Oral −0.34% (−0.49, −0.23; p<0.001).

4. Missing-Data Sensitivity Analyses

The 9.3% discontinuation makes missing-data robustness material. The MMRM (§2) is valid under MAR; departures are stress-tested with reference-based multiple imputation and a tipping-point analysis.

Program: src/biostat/missing_data_sensitivity.R (rbmi, approximate-Bayesian MI, 25 imputations, Rubin's rules) → outputs/stats/missing_data_results.csv.

Method (IV − Sema)	Estimate	95% CI
MAR multiple imputation	−0.67	−0.79, −0.54
Jump-to-reference (conservative)	−0.65	−0.78, −0.53
Copy-reference	−0.67	−0.79, −0.54

Even jump-to-reference — which assumes a subject who discontinues GLPI-103 immediately reverts to the comparator's trajectory — barely attenuates the effect.

Tipping-point (MNAR). A delta penalty δ was added to all imputed active-arm values and the analysis re-run:

δ (% HbA1c added to imputed IV values)	IV − Sema	p-value
0.0	−0.66	3×10⁻²³
0.8	−0.56	6×10⁻¹⁶
1.6	−0.45	2×10⁻⁹
2.0	−0.40	6×10⁻⁷

The conclusion does not tip even at δ = +2.0% — a departure from MAR far larger than is clinically plausible. The primary result is robust.

5. Multiplicity — Fixed-Sequence Gatekeeping

Program: src/biostat/secondary_subgroup.py → outputs/stats/multiplicity_results.csv. The pre-specified 8-step hierarchy (SAP-301 §7.3), each step tested at α=0.05 only if all prior steps rejected:

Step	Comparison · Endpoint	p	Decision
1	IV · HbA1c (primary)	3×10⁻²²	REJECT
2	Oral · HbA1c	9×10⁻⁸	REJECT
3	IV · body weight	<10⁻⁹⁰	REJECT
4	IV · HbA1c<7% responder	0.004	REJECT
5	IV · ≥10% weight-loss responder	<10⁻¹⁰	REJECT
6	Oral · body weight	10⁻³²	REJECT
7	Oral · HbA1c<7% responder	0.014	REJECT
8	Oral · ≥10% weight-loss responder	10⁻¹³	REJECT

All eight hypotheses are rejected, so family-wise type-I error is strongly controlled at 0.05 across the entire key efficacy family.

6. Responder Analyses

Program: src/biostat/secondary_subgroup.py → outputs/stats/responder_results.csv. Responders use non-responder imputation (NRI) — a missing Week-52 value counts as a non-responder (the conservative FAS-denominator standard; the observed-completer rates appear descriptively in CSR-301 §11.5). Odds ratios from logistic regression and stratified Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel (strata = HbA1c × BMI).

Endpoint	Arm	Responder % (NRI)	OR (logistic)	CMH p
HbA1c <7.0%	IV	84.0	2.03 (1.25, 3.31)	0.004
HbA1c <7.0%	Oral	82.3	1.83 (1.13, 2.97)	0.014
≥10% weight loss	IV	87.2	9.47 (5.86, 15.3)	<0.001
≥10% weight loss	Oral	76.8	4.64 (3.06, 7.02)	<0.001

(Control: HbA1c<7.0% 72.9%; ≥10% weight loss 42.1%.) Both GLPI-103 arms had significantly higher responder odds on both endpoints; the weight-loss responder advantage is especially large.

7. Subgroup Analyses (primary effect, IV vs Sema)

Program: src/biostat/secondary_subgroup.py → outputs/stats/subgroup_results.csv (rendered as Figure 3, forest plot). Primary model fitted within each subgroup; treatment-by-subgroup interaction tested as supportive.

Subgroup	Level	HbA1c diff (IV − Sema)	Interaction p
Overall	—	−0.68	—
Baseline HbA1c	<8.5 / ≥8.5	−0.69 / −0.67	0.57
BMI	<30 / ≥30	−0.67 / −0.69	0.99
Age	<65 / ≥65	−0.68 / −0.66	0.87
Sex	F / M	−0.53 / −0.80	0.051

The treatment effect is consistent across all subgroups; no interaction is significant (sex is borderline and interpreted descriptively).

8. Time-to-Event Analyses

Program: src/biostat/survival_recurrent.R → outputs/stats/survival_results.csv, survival_km_medians.csv. Kaplan-Meier + stratified Cox proportional-hazards (strata = HbA1c × BMI).

Endpoint	Arm	Hazard ratio vs Sema	p
Time to first HbA1c <7.0%	IV	1.93 (1.57, 2.38)	4×10⁻¹⁰
	Oral	1.40 (1.14, 1.72)	0.001
Time to rescue medication	IV	0.167 (0.05, 0.57)	0.004
	Oral	0.356 (0.14, 0.90)	0.030

GLPI-103 subjects reached the glycaemic target substantially faster (HR ~1.9 for IV) and were far less likely to require rescue (HR 0.17 for IV) than comparator subjects — both consistent with the superior glycaemic effect.

Competing-risk confirmation (robustness_results.csv): because the 2 deaths compete with reaching target, a cumulative-incidence/Fine-Gray analysis (rather than censoring deaths) was run; the subdistribution hazard ratio for time-to-target (IV 1.75, 95% CI 1.43–2.15; Oral 1.34) confirms the cause-specific Cox result with appropriate handling of the competing event.

Additional robustness (robustness_results.csv): the primary ANCOVA effect is insensitive to influential observations (31/573 flagged by Cook's distance >4/n; effect −0.680 → −0.900 on exclusion), and a site/centre random-effect sensitivity left the estimate unchanged (between-site variance ≈0).

9. Recurrent-Event Analysis — Hypoglycaemia

Program: src/biostat/survival_recurrent.R → outputs/stats/recurrent_results.csv. Overdispersion-robust quasi-Poisson rate model with a log-exposure offset (subject-years).

Arm	Rate (events/subj-yr)	Rate ratio vs Sema	p
IV	0.098	0.97	0.99
Oral	0.138	1.37	0.74
Semaglutide	0.101	—	—

Hypoglycaemia is infrequent and the rate is not significantly different between arms; events are sparse (73 events / 37 subjects), so confidence intervals are wide and the analysis is interpreted as supportive.

10. Hepatic Safety — eDISH & Hy's Law

Program: src/biostat/hepatic_safety.py → outputs/stats/hepatic_edish.csv, Figure 4. Per-subject peak ALT and peak total bilirubin (in ×ULN) are plotted on the standard eDISH log-log grid; the Hy's-law quadrant is ALT >3×ULN and total bilirubin >2×ULN.

Across 900 subjects, 1 had peak ALT >3×ULN and 0 met Hy's-law criteria. No drug-induced serious hepatotoxicity signal was identified — consistent with the GLP-1 class.

11. Bayesian Re-analysis of the Primary Endpoint

Program: src/biostat/bayesian_exposure.py → outputs/stats/bayesian_results.csv. A conjugate-normal Bayesian ANCOVA combines the primary estimate with a weakly-informative N(0, 1.0) prior on the HbA1c difference.

Contrast	Posterior mean	95% CrI	P(effect<0)	P(effect<−0.5%)
IV − Sema	−0.66	−0.79, −0.54	>0.999	0.995
Oral − Sema	−0.38	−0.50, −0.26	>0.999	0.029

The posterior probability of superiority is essentially 1 for both arms; the IV arm additionally has a 99.5% posterior probability of exceeding a 0.5% margin.

12. Exposure–Response (Emax)

Program: src/biostat/bayesian_exposure.py → outputs/stats/exposure_response.csv. The Phase 2 dose-finding result (GLPI103-201) is characterised with an Emax model, supporting the Phase 3 dose selection.

Fitted: E0 = −0.2%, Emax = 2.4%, ED50 = 4.0 mg — i.e., roughly half-maximal HbA1c effect at ~4 mg, with the Phase 3 maintenance doses on the upper plateau.

13. Analysis Datasets & Traceability

Analyses draw on the ADaM datasets ADSL, ADLB, ADAE, ADVS, ADTTE (define.xml; ADRG DEF-301). Each result is mapped to its dataset, method, program, and output in the Analysis Results Metadata (ARM-301). The primary treatment effect is double-programmed: an independent Python ANCOVA reproduces the R emmeans contrasts within ±0.01 (qc_double_program.csv).

14. Overall Statistical Conclusions

1. Superiority of both GLPI-103 formulations over oral semaglutide on HbA1c at Week 52 is established and confirmed under the confirmatory ANCOVA, the estimand-aligned MMRM (both ICE strategies), the fixed-sequence multiplicity procedure (all 8 steps reject), and a Bayesian re-analysis (posterior P(superiority) >0.999).
2. The conclusion is robust to missing data — reference-based imputation (incl. conservative jump-to-reference) and a tipping-point analysis (no tip to δ = 2.0%).
3. Secondary and supportive analyses are concordant: large weight-loss and responder advantages, consistent subgroup effects, faster time-to-target, lower rescue hazard, no excess hypoglycaemia, and no hepatotoxicity signal (eDISH).
4. Reproducibility & QC. Every result is regenerated by python build.py --stage biostat, reconciled to source, and the primary effect is independently double-programmed.

15. Limitations

The dataset is simulated, and effect sizes sit at the favourable end of the plausible range. The recurrent-event hypoglycaemia analysis is limited by sparse events (wide CIs). These do not affect the internal validity or reproducibility of the analyses reported.