Cited by 24Diabetes Treatment and ManagementPharmacology and Obesity TreatmentDiabetes Management and Research

Safety and tolerability of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists: unresolved and emerging issues

Raccah, Denis·2016·Expert Opinion on Drug Safety

Abstract

Introduction Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) are a mainstay of treatment options for type 2 diabetes. They contribute to lowering blood glucose levels, generally have a favorable tolerability profile, and can be used alone or in combination with other antidiabetic agents. Based on the duration of their effects, GLP-1 RAs can be divided into two classes: short-acting and long-acting. Differences exist between these sub-classes, and between each drug, in terms of pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic profiles. Therefore, prescribers cannot necessarily assume GLP-1 RA 'class effects', especially in terms of tolerability. Areas covered: This article reviews the published data on the safety and tolerability of currently available GLP-1 RAs and, recognizing the importance of safety profiles when selecting the appropriate treatment for each patient, examines the clinical implications of the differences between the drugs in this class. Cardiovascular safety, gastrointestinal tolerability, and tolerability in elderly patients are discussed as specific areas of interest to prescribers selecting between GLP-1 RAs for their patients. Expert opinion: Although further research is needed, the current evidence offers the potential to tailor treatment more accurately to each patient. Ultimately, this may improve adherence and persistence, thereby improving glycemic control and, in turn, reducing the risk of macro- and micro-vascular complications.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/14740338.2017.1268598

Cites

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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?

No citation lists for this paper

No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.

References 46 · Cited by 24

Authors
Raccah, D.
Affiliations
Hôpital Sainte-Marguerite (FR)
Corresponding author
Raccah, Denis
Venue
Expert Opinion on Drug Safety
Published
2016-12-11
Volume
16
Issue
2
Pages
1-10
ISSN
  • 1474-0338 (ISSN-L)
  • 1744-764X
OpenAlex
W2560670991
Cited by
24
References
46
Citations by year
2025: 2 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 1
FWCI
0.39
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Expert Opinion on Drug Safety (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Sanofi (NA)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Treatment and Management
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Pharmacology and Obesity Treatment
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Research
Keywords
GLP-1 receptor agonists, type 2 diabetes, drug safety, tolerability, cardiovascular safety, gastrointestinal tolerance, elderly patients, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, treatment selection, glycemic control
MeSH terms
Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonists, Aged, Blood Glucose, Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2, Humans, Hypoglycemic Agents, Time Factors, Medication Adherence

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