Evidence map›GLP-1 receptor agonists × adverse events & safety›PMID 32127832›Full record

SynthesisAfrican health sciences2019

The efficacy and safety of liraglutide in the obese, non-diabetic individuals: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Pei Zhang, Yu Liu, Yuan Ren, Jie Bai, Guangzhen Zhang, Yuanshan Cui

Open access · diamondAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in African health sciences, 2019. The graph read 1 number from its abstract, feeding 1 cell of the map, but none could be read as for or against, so it casts no vote. Cited by 16 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

1number the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 12% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

Read, but not usablea number the graph found but could not read as for or against

Adverse events & safetycomparator not stated · obesityfeeds one cell of the map
OR 2.850.84 to 9.62p=0.009
Safety assessments included the proportion of individuals who were withdrawn due to AE (OR = 2.85, 95% CI= 0.84 to 9.62, p=0.009), and nausea indicated that liraglutide was well tolerated.
FeedsGLP-1 receptor agonists×adverse events & safety

clause the extractor read what became the number

2 · Its place on the map

Where it lands on the map

Rows are treatments, columns are outcomes. The coloured squares are the cells this paper feeds, coloured by the vote it casts there. Click one to jump to what this paper adds to it.

supports the treatmentfavours the comparatorno clear differenceread, but no usable result
3 · What it changes

What it adds to each cell

For every cell the paper feeds: the belief in the claim with and without this paper, and this paper's estimate drawn against every other readable study in the cell. The ringed dot is this paper.

GLP-1 receptor agonists×adverse events & safety

No readable resultOpen on the map →What to test next →

40 readable studies in this cell: 45 favour the treatment, 14 find no difference, 2 favour the comparator.

Belief with this paper
0.00contested · 0 families support, 39 contradict · against placebo
Without itNot a counted family in this claim, so removing it changes nothing.
← favours the treatmentfavours the comparator →
0 · no effect
NCT017204463,297 enrolled · 2013
Δ -0.66-0.80 to -0.52
NCT036893742,274 enrolled · 2018
Δ -0.29-0.38 to -0.20
NCT013360231,663 enrolled · 2011
Treatment contrast -0.64-0.75 to -0.53
NCT040178321,441 enrolled · 2019
Δ -0.20-0.30 to -0.10
NCT018365231,398 enrolled · 2013
Δ -0.20-0.32 to -0.07
NCT019301881,231 enrolled · 2013
Δ -1.06-1.21 to -0.91
NCT007344741,202 enrolled · 2008
Δ -0.71-0.87 to -0.55
NCT008389031,049 enrolled · 2009
Δ -0.91-1.16 to -0.65
NCT009606611,036 enrolled · 2009
Δ -0.04-0.18 to 0.11
NCT050350821,018 enrolled · 2021
Δ -0.24-0.44 to -0.04
NCT01064687978 enrolled · 2010
Δ -1.05-1.22 to -0.88
NCT01117350978 enrolled · 2010
Δ 2.54-3.88 to 8.93

This paper's own estimate is on a different scale from the rest of the cell, so it is not drawn here.

4 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

5 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 37 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Editorial.African health sciences · 2019
    Article
6 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

7 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Pei ZhangDepartment of Endocrinology, Liaocheng People's Hospital, NO.67 West Dongchang Road, 252000 Liaocheng, China.
Yu LiuDepartment of Endocrinology, Liaocheng People's Hospital, NO.67 West Dongchang Road, 252000 Liaocheng, China.
Yuan RenDepartment of Endocrinology, Liaocheng People's Hospital, NO.67 West Dongchang Road, 252000 Liaocheng, China.
Jie BaiDepartment of Endocrinology, Liaocheng People's Hospital, NO.67 West Dongchang Road, 252000 Liaocheng, China.
Guangzhen ZhangDepartment of Endocrinology, Liaocheng People's Hospital, NO.67 West Dongchang Road, 252000 Liaocheng, China.
Yuanshan CuiDepartment of Urology, Yantai Yuhuangding Hospital, NO.20 East Yuhuangding Road, 264000 Yantai, China.
Capital Medical University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

8 · The paper itself

Abstract

The marked sentences are the ones the graph read a number from.

backgroundLiraglutide has been shown to improve glucose tolerance and lose weight in individuals with type 2 diabetes. To date, no meta-analysis of liraglutide's safety and efficacy in individuals without diabetes has been conducted.

objectivesThe aim of this study is to carry out a meta-analysis to assess the efficacy and safety of liraglutide in the obese, non-diabetic individuals.

methodsA literature review was performed to identify all published randomised control trials (RCT) of liraglutide for the treatment of obesity in non-diabetic individuals. The search included the following databases: EMBASE, MEDLINE and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register.

resultsWe included five publications involving a total of 4,754 patients that compared liraglutide with placebo and found that liraglutide to be an effective and safe treatment for weight loss in individuals without diabetes. Primary efficacy end points: mean weight loss (MD = -5.52, 95% CI = -5.93 to -5.11, p<0.00001); lost more than 5% of body weight (OR = 5.46, 95% CI=3.57 to 8.34, p<0.00001) and key secondary efficacy end points: SBP decreased (the MD = -2.56, 95% CI = -3.28 to -1.84, p<0.00001). Safety assessments included the proportion of individuals who were withdrawn due to AE (OR = 2.85, 95% CI= 0.84 to 9.62, p=0.009), and nausea indicated that liraglutide was well tolerated.

conclusionThis systematic review and meta-analysis indicates that liraglutide to be an effective and safe treatment for weight loss in the obese, non-diabetic individuals.

Indexed as

HumansHypoglycemic AgentsLiraglutideObesityRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicWeight LossHypoglycemic AgentsLiraglutideliraglutidemeta-analysisweight loss

Identifiers

PMID32127832
PMCPMC7040262
OpenAlexW2989030054

What OpenQuestion holds

Texttitle and abstract
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.