MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Abstract 4365415: Comparative Efficacy of Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonists and Co-Agonists for Weight Loss Among Patients Without Diabetes: A Network Meta-Analysis

2025· article· en· W4415789269 on OpenAlexaff
Areesha Moiz, Kristian B. Filion, Audrey Lelièvre, Helia Toutounchi, Michael A. Tsoukas, Oriana Hoi Yun Yu, Tricia M. Peters, Mark J. Eisenberg

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetes Treatment and Management
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityJewish General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWeight lossConfidence intervalRandomized controlled trialMeta-analysisFrequentist inferenceAgonistAdverse effect

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Multiple glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) and newer dual/triple co-agonists promote weight loss in adults without diabetes, yet comparative efficacy across agents remains uncertain. Aim: To compare and rank the efficacy of GLP-1 RAs and co-agonists for weight loss using network meta-analysis (NMA). Methods: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane CENTRAL from inception to May 2025 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) enrolling adults with overweight/obesity without diabetes. Each agent was analyzed at its highest tested (pre-market) or approved dose. We synthesized relative weight change using a frequentist random-effects NMA at approximately 6 months and 1-1.5 years, and ranked treatments using surface under the cumulative ranking curves (SUCRA; the probability that an agent is the best, scaled 0-1). Results: We identified 25 RCTs (n=15 913) evaluating 11 agents (3 commercially available for weight management [liraglutide, weekly semaglutide, and tirzepatide] and 8 pre-market). At 6 months, all agents significantly reduced weight versus placebo; retatrutide ranked highest (mean difference [MD]: -15.8%, 95% confidence interval [CI] -17.6 to -14.1; SUCRA 1.00), followed by mazdutide (MD: -12.3%, 95% CI -14.1 to -10.5; SUCRA 0.89) and orforglipron (MD: -10.6%, 95% CI -12.8 to -8.4; SUCRA 0.75). Among the commercially available agents, tirzepatide ranked highest (MD: -9.6%, 95% CI -10.1 to -9.1; SUCRA 0.64). No head-to-head trials were available at this timepoint, so all active-to-active estimates were indirect. At 1-1.5 years, retatrutide remained top-ranked (SUCRA 0.99) and outperformed all currently marketed agents, achieving 3.2% greater weight loss than tirzepatide (95% CI -0.4 to 6.8; SUCRA 0.86), 9.9% more than weekly semaglutide (95% CI 6.5 to 13.3; SUCRA 0.47), and 17.2% more than liraglutide (95% CI 13.8 to 20.7; SUCRA 0.14). Conclusions: Among adults without diabetes, dual- and triple-agonists, particularly tirzepatide and retatrutide, achieve the greatest weight reductions, while conventional single GLP-1 RAs yield smaller effects. These findings can guide clinicians and policymakers as novel agents progress toward regulatory approval.

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)0.028
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.050
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.147

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0280.050
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0160.052
Bibliometrics0.0060.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.273 · 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 designMeta-analysis
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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCirculation→Same topicDiabetes Treatment and Management→French-language works237,207→