Safety considerations of semaglutide in the potential treatment of Alzheimer's disease: A pooled analysis of semaglutide in adults aged ≥ 65 years
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The evoke/evoke+ trials are investigating semaglutide in a population with early Alzheimer's disease (AD). Specific analyses of semaglutide safety data in older adults are limited; therefore, in the current analysis, we aimed to evaluate safety considerations with semaglutide in adults ≥ 65 years. METHODS: Adverse event (AE) data from three semaglutide phase 3a programs in participants ≥ 65 years with type 2 diabetes and/or overweight/obesity were pooled. Change in body weight was also assessed in a smaller subset of participants ≥ 65 years. RESULTS: in the overall population. AEs with semaglutide occurred in 73.6% to 92.4% of participants ≥ 65 years versus 73.2% to 90.8% of the overall population. AEs with semaglutide leading to permanent discontinuation appeared to be more frequent in participants ≥ 65 years (9.3%-12.4%) versus the overall population (5.7%-8.7%). Gastrointestinal disorders were the most frequently reported AEs with semaglutide in participants ≥ 65 years (44.6%-73.8%) and in the overall population (39.1%-73.4%). Participants aged ≥ 65 years receiving semaglutide had an estimated weight loss of 3.8% at week 52 compared to 0.1% with placebo. DISCUSSION: Age ≥ 65 years did not appear to affect the safety considerations of semaglutide. The ongoing evoke/evoke+ trials will elucidate the balance of efficacy and safety in the treatment of early AD with semaglutide. Highlights: This was a post hoc analysis evaluating adverse event (AE) data of semaglutide in people ≥ 65 years.The most common AE with semaglutide was gastrointestinal (GI).GI event rates were similar in people ≥ 65 years and the overall study populations.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.022 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.017 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".