Head-to-head evidence
Alogliptin vs Linagliptin
Same mechanism, same race: design-graded trial evidence for both assets, with the grading rationale shown. Grades describe the quality of the evidence, never the merits of either security.
Type 2 Diabetes
Shared mechanism: DPP-4 · full Type 2 Diabetes pipeline
Alogliptin · Nesina
Marketed by Takeda Pharmaceutical Company
NCT00286429 · Phase 3 · completed
The 390-participant trial was randomized, quadruple-blind, and placebo-controlled, with 130, 131, and 129 participants assigned to placebo, alogliptin 12.5 mg, and alogliptin 25 mg, respectively. Both primary HbA1c comparisons were statistically significant in favor of alogliptin, but HbA1c is a surrogate measure, so the evidence does not establish a strong clinical-outcome grade.
Next expected readout: December 2026 · NCT07093476 (registry estimate)
Linagliptin · Tradjenta
Marketed by Boehringer Ingelheim and partners
NCT00602472 · Phase 3 · completed
This was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial with 1,058 participants, and its primary endpoint was met: adjusted HbA1c change was −0.72% with linagliptin versus −0.10% with placebo (p<0.0001). The evidence is considered moderate because HbA1c is a surrogate measure rather than a hard clinical endpoint.
The full competitive landscape for each asset (every same-race competitor with aligned evidence, sortable) is on the asset pages: Alogliptin's landscape · Linagliptin's landscape