MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413440628 · doi:10.1186/s12876-025-04211-4

Association between GLP-1 receptor agonists as a class and colorectal cancer risk: a meta-analysis of retrospective cohort studies

2025· review· en· W4413440628 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ying Zhong, Tingting Wu, Najeeb Ullah Khan

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Gastroenterology · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetes Treatment and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineInternal medicineColorectal cancerMeta-analysisCohort studyCochrane LibraryExenatideCohortOncologyRetrospective cohort studyType 2 diabetesCancerDiabetes mellitusEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) are extensively used in the management of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and obesity. While these medications offer glycemic control and cardiovascular benefits, the risks have increased because of their potential impact on cancer risk, particularly colorectal cancer (CRC). This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the association between GLP-1 RAs and CRC risk in patients receiving GLP-1 RAs. METHODS: This study was conducted the PRISMA guidelines. Electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov) were searched from inception to December 2024. The inclusion criteria encompassed Studies analyzing the effects of GLP-1 RA on CRC risk in patients with T2DM. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used for the quality assessment of the included cohort studies. Random-effects models were employed for the pooled analysis, and heterogeneity was evaluated using the I2 statistic. RESULTS: Seven retrospective cohort studies involving 5,066,681 patients were included. The pooled analysis revealed a significantly increased risk of CRC among patients receiving GLP-1 RAs (RR, 2.31; 95% CI, 1.82-2.93; I2 = 36%; p < 0.0001). However, the incidence of CRC was not significantly associated with GLP-1 RA use compared with other drugs (OR, 1.73; 95% CI: 0.21-14.18, p = 0.61; I2 = 100%). Quality assessment indicated a low-to-moderate risk of bias across the included studies. CONCLUSION: Overall, this study suggests a significantly increased risk of colorectal cancer associated with GLP-1 RA use in patients receiving GLP-1 RAs. However, the incidence of CRC is not considerably high. These findings highlight the need for further long-term, large-scale clinical trials to elucidate the relationship between GLP-1 RAs and cancer risk. Clinicians should consider these results when prescribing GLP-1 RAs, particularly in patients with CRC risk factors.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.388
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0080.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.367
Teacher spread0.312 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designMeta-analysis
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

Citations6
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC GastroenterologySame topicDiabetes Treatment and ManagementFrench-language works237,207