MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410435287 · doi:10.1016/j.ajo.2025.05.007

Association of Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonists With Optic Nerve and Retinal Adverse Events: A Population-Based Observational Study Across 180 Countries

2025· article· en· W4410435287 on OpenAlexafffund
Moiz Lakhani, Angela T.H. Kwan, Andrew Mihalache, Marko M. Popovic, Keean Nanji, Jim Shenchu Xie, Alessandro Feo, David Rabinovitch, Reut Shor, Srinivas R. Sadda, David Sarraf, Bernard Hurley, Edward Margolin, Peter J. Kertes, Varun Chaudhary, Rajeev H. Muni

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Ophthalmology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetes Treatment and Management
Canadian institutionsSunnybrook Health Science CentreSt. Michael's HospitalMcMaster UniversityKensington HealthUniversity of TorontoUniversity of Ottawa
FundersPfizerAmgenBausch HealthAllerganApellis PharmaceuticalsResearch to Prevent Blindness
KeywordsObservational studyMedicineRetinalAdverse effectAssociation (psychology)OphthalmologyOptic nerveGlucagon-like peptide 1 receptorReceptorEndocrinologyInternal medicineAgonistPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose : Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) are important therapeutic options for type 2 diabetes and obesity; however, concerns about ophthalmic safety persist. This study examined associations between GLP-1 RAs and ocular adverse events (AEs). Design : Global observational pharmacovigilance study. Methods : We searched the US FAERS database (via OpenVigil 2.1) and WHO's VigiBase (via VigiAccess) for optic nerve and retinal AEs associated with semaglutide and tirzepatide, covering the period from their respective approval dates—December 2017 for semaglutide and May 2022 for tirzepatide—through September 2024. In FAERS, all other drugs were compared, while in VigiBase, metformin, empagliflozin, dulaglutide, and insulin served as controls. Disproportionality metrics included reporting odds ratios (RORs) with 95% confidence intervals. Results : Semaglutide and tirzepatide accounted for 76,444 cases (0.59%) in FAERS ( n =12,936,341) and 118,639 cases (0.34%) in VigiBase ( n >35,000,000). Semaglutide showed significantly higher odds of ischemic optic neuropathy (ION) (FAERS: ROR=11.12, 95%CI=8.15-15.16; VigiBase: ROR=68.58, 95%CI=16.75-280.67), diabetic retinopathy (DR) (FAERS: ROR=17.28, 95%CI=13.62-21.91; VigiBase: ROR=7.81, 95%CI=5.60-10.90), as well as retinal/vitreous detachment, retinal/vitreous hemorrhage, and retinal tear (FAERS: ROR=2.44–5.89, 95%CI=1.70–8.97, all p<0.001, IC 025 =0.49, compared to all other drugs. VigiBase: ROR=5.49-20.91, 95%CI=2.71-90.11, all p≤0.0001, IC 025 ≥0.53, compared to metformin). Unique to VigiBase were macular edema (ROR=3.87, 95%CI=1.89-7.92), macular hole (ROR=20.90, 95%CI=2.65-165.01), and papilledema (ROR=6.97, 95%CI=2.53-19.17) (all p≤0.004, IC 025 ≥0.27, compared to metformin). Sensitivity analyses using empagliflozin and dulaglutide revealed significant associations with ION and DR, while vitreous detachment and hemorrhage were significant when compared to dulaglutide. Additionally, when insulin was used as a comparator, semaglutide showed a higher ROR for ION (ROR=9.84, 95%CI=4.25–22.81, P<0.0001, IC025=0.42). However, tirzepatide was only significantly associated with DR in FAERS. Conclusions Given the widespread use of semaglutide, its association with ocular AEs highlight the need for global pharmacovigilance and post-marketing surveillance.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.300 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations52
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of OphthalmologySame topicDiabetes Treatment and ManagementFrench-language works237,207