MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409119298 · doi:10.1007/s40120-025-00724-y

Are Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 (GLP-1) Receptor Agonists Central Nervous System (CNS) Penetrant: A Narrative Review

2025· review· en· W4409119298 on OpenAlexaff
Maggie Li, Sabrina Wong, Gia Han Le, Kayla M. Teopiz, Kyle Valentino, Christine E. Dri, Roger S. McIntyre

Bibliographic record

VenueNeurology and Therapy · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetes Treatment and Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health NetworkBrain and Cognition Discovery Foundation
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLiraglutideExenatideMedicineSemaglutideNeuroprotectionGlucagon-like peptide 1 receptorPharmacologyInternal medicineEndocrinologyDiabetes mellitusReceptorType 2 diabetesAgonist

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) is an incretin hormone that modulates glucose metabolism and insulin secretion. Recent translational and clinical research has evaluated the effects of GLP-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs), a class of drugs that mimic the action of native GLP-1 in the central nervous system (CNS). In addition to the efficacy of GLP-1 for the treatment of diabetes mellitus and obesity, preliminary evidence indicates GLP-1s have neuroprotective, therapeutic, and disease modification effects for select neurodegenerative disorders (e.g. Parkinson's disease, Alzheimer's disease). Among the available GLP-1 RAs, relatively few have been shown to be CNS penetrant. This article synthesizes extant literature reporting on CNS penetrants of GLP-1 RAs as proxied by brain imaging studies. Where available, studies that reported on the bioavailability of GLP-1 RAs in the CNS were identified. METHODS: A comprehensive search of PubMed, Ovid, and Web of Science from database inception to July 2024 was conducted. Inclusion criteria were English language publications with no date restrictions, preclinical and clinical studies with participants aged 18-80 and studies which focused on GLP-1 RAs including: "Semaglutide" or "Ozempic" or "Rybelsus" or "Wegovy" or "Dulaglutide" or "Trulicity" or "Exenatide" or "Byetta" or "Bydureon" or "Liraglutide" or "Lixisenatide" or "Tirzepatide" or "Mounjaro" or "Zepbound" or "Bydureon BCise" or "Adlyxin" or "Victoza" or "Saxenda". RESULTS: We identified 14 studies that were included in this synthesis. Preclinical studies suggest that select GLP-1 RAs cross the blood-brain barrier (BBB) (i.e. liraglutide, semaglutide, and exenatide). Replicated evidence suggests that CNS penetration of GLP-1 RAs can be proxied by reported effects of GLP-1 RAs on brain connectivity in human participants. CONCLUSION: Preclinical studies indicate that select GLP-1 RAs are CNS penetrant; whether GLP-1 RAs reproducibly engage neural targets hypothesized to subserve dimensions of psychopathology (e.g., general cognitive functions) remains incompletely characterized.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0080.010
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.280 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations39
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeurology and TherapySame topicDiabetes Treatment and ManagementFrench-language works237,207