Acute pancreatitis due to different semaglutide regimens: An updated meta-analysis
Abstract
Objectives Some concerns persist regarding the safety of semaglutide. The objective of this updated meta-analysis is to assess the risk of acute pancreatitis with the use of semaglutide, assessing the results according to the different administration regimens. Methods We performed an updated meta-analysis of randomised, placebo-controlled studies of semaglutide therapy that report acute pancreatitis. This meta-analysis was performed in line with PRISMA guidelines. A global and stratified analysis according to the therapeutic scheme used was performed using the fixed-effects model. Results Twenty-one eligible trials of semaglutide, including 34,721 patients, were identified and considered eligible for the analyses. Globally, semaglutide therapy was not associated with an increased risk of acute pancreatitis (OR 0.7; 95% CI 0.5-1.2, I 2 0%). When we analysed the studies according to the different schemes used, the results were similar (group with oral semaglutide: OR 0.40; 95% CI 0.10-1.60, I 2 0%; group with low subcutaneous doses of semaglutide: OR 0.80; 95% CI 0.40-1.90, I 2 0%; group with high subcutaneous doses of semaglutide: OR 0.70; 95% CI 0.50-1.20, I 2 0%; interaction p-value=0.689). Conclusion This updated meta-analysis demonstrates that the use of semaglutide is not associated with an increased risk of acute pancreatitis compared to placebo. In the stratified analysis, the results were similar with the different semaglutide regimens analysed.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Meta-analyses of RCTs in either T2D or weight loss have found no increased risk of pancreatitis.
“Of note, meta‐analyses of RCTs in either T2D or weight loss have found no increased risk of pancreatitis. 74 , 103”
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 54 · Cited by 22
- Authors
- Masson, W., Lobo, M., Barbagelata, L., Lavalle-Cobo, A., & Nogueira, J. P.
- Affiliations
- Hospital Italiano de Buenos Aires (AR)
- Universidad Internacional de las Américas (CR)
- Corresponding author
- Masson, Walter
- Venue
- Endocrinología, Diabetes y Nutrición (English ed.)
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2024-03
- Volume
- 71
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 124-132
- ISSN
- 2530-0180 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W4393255833
- Cited by
- 22
- References
- 54
- Citations by year
- 2026: 9 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 4
- FWCI
- 1.29
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Endocrinología Diabetes y Nutrición (English ed ) (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Treatment and Management
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Pancreatitis Pathology and Treatment
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Pancreatic and Hepatic Oncology Research
- Keywords
- semaglutide, acute pancreatitis, drug safety, GLP-1 receptor agonists, subcutaneous dosing, oral semaglutide, type 2 diabetes
- MeSH terms
- Semaglutide, Acute Disease, Glucagon-Like Peptides, Humans, Pancreatitis, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Treatment Outcome
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review