MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Semaglutide effects on incidence and reoccurrence of atrial fibrillation in the SELECT trial

2025· article· en· W7127915220 on OpenAlexaff
J Plutzky, H M Colhoun, J E Deanfield, G K Hovingh, I Lingvay, Michael Maeng, S Rasmussen, D H Ryan, S Stensen, S Verma, P E Weeke, A M Lincoff

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Heart Journal · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAtrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsSt. Michael's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAtrial fibrillationSemaglutideHeart failureIncidence (geometry)Cumulative incidenceOverweightMyocardial infarctionMedical history

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Atrial fibrillation (AF) is associated with substantial cardiovascular (CV) complications including stroke and worsening heart failure (HF). Obesity is an established risk factor for initial and recurrent AF, whereas weight loss is reported to reduce recurrent AF after successful interventions. SELECT was a double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in 17,604 patients aged ≥45 years with atherosclerotic CV disease (ASCVD) and overweight or obesity without diabetes randomised to once-weekly semaglutide or placebo. In SELECT, semaglutide-treated patients had a 20% reduced risk of major adverse CV events (MACE: CV death, nonfatal myocardial infarction or nonfatal stroke) and placebo-corrected weight loss of 8.5%. Purpose To analyse AF and clinical outcomes among those with/without a medical history of AF in SELECT. Methods SELECT patients were identified as having a history of AF (defined as medical history of AF [or atrial flutter] or AF at baseline), as determined by medical history form query obtained at enrolment and under the site investigator’s discretion. Time from randomisation to first MACE, HF outcome (CV death or HF hospitalisation/urgent HF visit) or AF event (recorded as an adverse event) were analysed among those with and without a history of AF. Cumulative incidence rates were calculated using the Aalen–Johansen estimator. Results Among SELECT patients, 1614 (9%) had a history of AF at baseline. Those with a history of AF were older (median age 67 vs 61 years) and had higher body weight (mean 98.1 vs 94.0 kg) versus those without AF, respectively. Patients with a history of AF had a higher incidence of first MACE than those without a history of AF, with similar treatment effect of semaglutide versus placebo in both groups (HR 0.76; 95% CI 0.57–1.02 and HR 0.81; 95% CI 0.72–0.91, respectively; p for interaction not significant [NS]; Fig. 1). The risk of first AF event in the entire cohort, independent of AF history, was less in semaglutide versus placebo groups (HR 0.83; 95% CI 0.70–0.99; p=0.040). Patients with a history of AF had a higher incidence of AF events during the trial, which was reduced by semaglutide versus placebo (HR 0.73; 95% CI 0.54–0.96), as compared with those without a history of AF (HR 0.93; 95% CI 0.74–1.16; p for interaction NS; Fig. 2). Patients with a history of AF also had a higher incidence of a first HF outcome, which was reduced by semaglutide versus placebo (HR 0.68; 95% CI 0.40–1.12) as compared with those without a history of AF (HR 0.85; 95% CI 0.62–1.16; p for interaction NS). Conclusions In SELECT, patients with a history of AF had increased incidences of MACE, AF events and HF outcomes compared with those without a history of AF. Patients on semaglutide had a reduced risk of MACE, AF events and HF outcomes versus placebo, irrespective of history of AF status.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 spread0.311 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Heart Journal→Same topicAtrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes→French-language works237,207→