Mode
Text Size
Log in / Sign up

Once-weekly long-acting growth hormone shows comparable efficacy to daily growth hormone for children with short statureWeekly growth hormone shows similar results to daily injections

AI-generated summary of the cited source, checked by automated accuracy review. How we work

Key Takeaway
Note that once-weekly LAGH provides comparable height velocity and safety to daily GH in children with short stature.

This meta-analysis evaluated the efficacy, quality of life (QoL), and safety of once-weekly long-acting growth hormone (LAGH) compared to daily growth hormone (GH) in 3,287 children with short stature across 30 studies. The authors synthesized data on primary outcomes including height velocity, height standard deviation score (SDS), and the ratio of bone age to chronological age (BA/CA).

Findings indicated no statistically significant differences between LAGH and daily GH for height velocity (WMD: 0.26; 95% CI: -0.07 to 0.58; P = 0.124), height SDS (WMD: 0.04; 95% CI: -0.03 to 0.10; P = 0.285), or BA/CA ratio (WMD: 0.00; 95% CI: -0.01 to 0.01; P = 0.999). However, the LAGH group showed a significantly greater increase in insulin-like growth factor 1 (IGF-1) SDS (WMD: 0.37; 95% CI: 0.13 to 0.62; P = 0.003). Quality of life improvements were reported as comparable between treatment groups.

Safety profiles were comparable between the two regimens. The authors noted that results may be influenced by specific LAGH formulations and baseline patient characteristics. Clinically, once-weekly LAGH may offer a more convenient administration schedule than daily GH while maintaining comparable efficacy and safety for children with short stature.

How this fits prior evidence

This meta-analysis confirms that once-weekly LAGH provides comparable efficacy to daily GH for height velocity and SDS. It builds upon previous evidence showing that LAGH is associated with increased BMI SD scores in the first year of treatment. While the current findings do not report specific safety data for the BMI finding, they confirm that the overall safety profile of LAGH is comparable to daily GH.

For many children with short stature, the daily routine of growth hormone injections can be a demanding journey for both the child and the family. A large review of 30 studies involving over 3,000 patients looked at whether switching to a once-weekly long-acting version of the hormone changes the results.

The findings show that the weekly treatment is just as effective as the daily version for increasing height velocity and overall height scores. While the weekly version did show a significantly greater increase in a specific growth factor called IGF-1, the primary goals of height and quality of life remained comparable between both groups.

Safety profiles were also similar between the two methods. While the study notes that specific formulations or a child's starting health can influence results, the data suggests that weekly shots offer a similar medical outcome. This could potentially make the treatment easier to manage for families while maintaining the same level of care.

What this means for you:
Weekly growth hormone injections are as effective as daily shots for children with short stature.

Common questions

Is the weekly growth hormone as effective as the daily version?

Yes, the study found no statistically significant difference in height velocity or height scores between the once-weekly long-acting hormone and the daily hormone. Both methods produced comparable results for the children involved in the study.

Are there different side effects between weekly and daily shots?

The study found that both the once-weekly and daily treatments had a comparable overall risk of adverse events. There were no significant differences in safety profiles reported between the two groups.

Does the weekly treatment improve quality of life?

The study found that quality of life improvements were comparable between the two treatment groups. While the weekly option might offer more convenience, the actual quality of life scores did not differ significantly from daily shots.

Study Details

Study typeMeta analysis
EvidenceLevel 1
PublishedSep 2026
View Original Abstract ↓
This meta-analysis aims to compare the QoL, efficacy, and safety of once-weekly LAGH versus daily GH in children with short stature. We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science from inception to June 30, 2026, for studies comparing LAGH with daily GH in children with short stature. Outcomes of interest encompassed QoL, efficacy, and safety. Pooled analyses were conducted using a random-effects model. Treatment effects for continuous and dichotomous variables were expressed as weighted mean differences (WMDs) and risk ratios (RRs), respectively, each with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Thirty studies (27 cohorts) comprising 3,287 patients were included. Available QoL data from two major trials indicated comparable improvements between treatment groups, with a trend toward greater clinical benefit in psychosocial domains observed for a higher dose of Somapacitan. Regarding efficacy, no statistically significant differences were found between groups for height velocity (WMD: 0.26; 95% CI: -0.07 to 0.58; P = 0.124), height standard deviation score (SDS) (WMD: 0.04; 95% CI: -0.03 to 0.10; P = 0.285), or the ratio of bone age to chronological age (BA/CA) (WMD: 0.00; 95% CI: -0.01 to 0.01; P = 0.999). However, the LAGH group exhibited a significantly greater increase in insulin-like growth factor 1 (IGF-1) SDS compared to the daily GH group (WMD: 0.37; 95% CI: 0.13 to 0.62; P = 0.003). Subgroup analyses suggested that efficacy may be influenced by the specific LAGH formulation and baseline patient characteristics. The safety analysis revealed a comparable overall risk of adverse events between groups (RR: 1.02; 95% CI: 0.97 to 1.08; P = 0.468). Once-weekly LAGH demonstrates comparable efficacy and a similar overall safety profile to daily GH in children with short stature. By reducing injection frequency, LAGH offers the potential to enhance treatment convenience and adherence, which may translate into improved QoL. Further long-term studies are warranted to confirm these findings and to investigate formulation-specific effects.
Free Newsletter

Clinical research that matters. Delivered to your inbox.

Join thousands of clinicians and researchers. No spam, unsubscribe anytime.