Cited by 599Diabetes Treatment and ManagementHeart Failure Treatment and ManagementDiabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and Lipoproteins

Cardiovascular outcomes with glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists in patients with type 2 diabetes: a meta-analysis

Open access
Bethel, M Angelyn, Patel, Rishi A, Merrill, Peter, Lokhnygina, Yuliya, Buse, John B, Mentz, Robert J, Pagidipati, Neha J, Chan, Juliana C +9 more·2018·The Lancet Diabetes & Endocrinology

Abstract

Background Glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists are effective glucose-lowering drugs. Findings from cardiovascular outcome trials showed cardiovascular safety of GLP-1 receptor agonists, but results for cardiovascular efficacy were varied. We aimed to examine overall cardiovascular efficacy for lixisenatide, liraglutide, semaglutide, and extended-release exenatide.Methods In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we analysed data from eligible trials that assessed the safety and efficacy of GLP-1 receptor agonists compared with placebo in adult patients (aged 18 years or older) with type 2 diabetes and had a primary outcome including, but not limited to, cardiovascular mortality, non-fatal myocardial infarction, and non-fatal stroke. We searched PubMed and MEDLINE without language restrictions up to Sept 18, 2017, for eligible trials. We did a meta-analysis of available trial data using a random-effects model to calculate overall hazard ratios (HRs) for cardiovascular efficacy outcomes and odds ratios for key safety outcomes.Findings Of 12 articles identified in our search and screened for eligibility, four trials of cardiovascular outcomes of GLP-1 receptor agonists were identified: ELIXA (lixisenatide), LEADER (liraglutide), SUSTAIN 6 (semaglutide), and EXSCEL (extended-release exenatide). Compared with placebo, GLP-1 receptor agonist treatment showed a significant 10% relative risk reduction in the three-point major adverse cardiovascular event primary outcome (cardiovascular mortality, non-fatal myocardial infarction, and non-fatal stroke; HR 0·90, 95% CI 0·82-0·99; p=0·033), a 13% RRR in cardiovascular mortality (0·87, 0·79-0·96; p=0·007), and a 12% relative risk reduction in all-cause mortality (0·88, 0·81-0·95; p=0·002), with low-to-moderate between-trial statistical heterogeneity. No significant effect of GLP-1 receptor agonists was identified on fatal and non-fatal myocardial infarction, fatal and non-fatal stroke, hospital admission for unstable angina, or hospital admission for heart failure. Overall, no significant differences were seen in severe hypoglycaemia, pancreatitis, pancreatic cancer, or medullary thyroid cancer reported between GLP-1 receptor agonist treatment and placebo.Interpretation Our findings show cardiovascular safety across all GLP-1 receptor agonist cardiovascular outcome trials and suggest that drugs in this class can reduce three-point major adverse cardiovascular events, cardiovascular mortality, and all-cause mortality risk, albeit to varying degrees for individual drugs, without significant safety concerns. GLP-1 receptor agonists have a favourable risk-benefit balance overall, which should allow the choice of drug to be individualised to each patient's needs.Funding Amylin Pharmaceuticals (AstraZeneca).

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s2213-8587(17)30412-6

Cites

8 of 8 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • GLP-1 RAs are indicated for the treatment of type 2 diabetes (all) and obesity (liraglutide and semaglutide only) and have beneficial effects on patient-important outcomes such as weight loss, cardiovascular and kidney events, hepatic steatosis, and mortality.

    “Clinically, GLP-1 RAs are indicated for the treatment of type 2 diabetes (all) and obesity (liraglutide and semaglutide only) and have beneficial effects on patient-important outcomes such as weight loss, cardiovascular and kidney events, hepatic steatosis, and mortality.5,7–9,11,30”
  • Pharmaceutical interventions of 1.5 to 3 years duration report HbA1c reductions of 0.2 to 1.0% with DPP-4 inhibitors, SGLT-2 inhibitors and GLP-1 agonists.

    “Pharmaceutical interventions of 1.5 to 3 years duration report HbA1c reductions of 0.2 to 1.0% with DPP-4 inhibitors, SGLT-2 inhibitors and GLP-1 agonists (6, 7, 49).”
  • The cardioprotective impact of GLP-1RA therapy is established with several large cardiovascular outcome trials demonstrating clear benefits and suggest a class effect.

    “The cardioprotective impact of GLP-1RA therapy is now established with several large cardiovascular outcome trials demonstrating clear benefits and together strongly suggest a class effect of GLP-1RA therapy.11,12”
  • Some animal models have demonstrated that GLP1 might have a direct impact on the hypothalamus-pituitary-testicular axis beyond weight reduction.

    “Furthermore, some animal models have demonstrated that GLP1 might even have a direct impact on HPT that is beyond WR (10, 11, 12, 13, 14).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Bethel, M. A., Patel, R. A., Merrill, P., Lokhnygina, Y., Buse, J. B., Mentz, R. J., Pagidipati, N. J., Chan, J. C., Gustavson, S. M., Iqbal, N., Maggioni, A. P., Öhman, P., Poulter, N. R., Ramachandran, A., Zinman, B., Hernandez, A. F., & Holman, R. R.
Affiliations
  • University of Oxford (GB)
  • Duke University (US)
  • University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (US)
  • Chinese University of Hong Kong (HK)
  • AstraZeneca (United States) (US)
  • Associazione Nazionale Medici Cardiologi Ospedalieri (IT)
  • Imperial College London (GB)
  • India Diabetes Research Foundation (IN)
  • Mount Sinai Hospital (CA)
Corresponding author
Bethel, M Angelyn
Venue
The Lancet Diabetes & Endocrinology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2018-02
Volume
6
Issue
2
Pages
105-113
ISSN
2213-8587 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2773969925
Cited by
599
References
8
Citations by year
2026: 36 · 2025: 50 · 2024: 39 · 2023: 52 · 2022: 58 · 2021: 73 · 2020: 102 · 2019: 112 · 2018: 74 · 2017: 2
FWCI
62.64
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The Lancet Diabetes & Endocrinology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Spiral (Imperial College London) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Funders
Amylin Pharmaceuticals
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Treatment and Management
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Heart Failure Treatment and Management
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and Lipoproteins
Keywords
GLP-1 receptor agonists, type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular outcomes, cardiovascular mortality, myocardial infarction, stroke, lixisenatide, liraglutide, semaglutide, major adverse cardiovascular events, all-cause mortality, hypoglycemia, heart failure, unstable angina, drug safety
MeSH terms
Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonists, Cardiovascular Diseases, Cardiovascular System, Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2, Humans, Hypoglycemic Agents, Prognosis, Survival Rate

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