ArticleFrontiers in endocrinology2024
Effectiveness and safety of glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists in patients with type 2 diabetes: evidence from a retrospective real-world study.
Article in Frontiers in endocrinology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Efficacy of 12-week treatment with polyethylene glycol loxenatide in obesity or overweight patients with type 2 diabetes: a multicenter, prospective cohort study based on the flash glucose monitoring system.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2026Trial
- Article
- Advances in GLP-1 receptor agonists delivery systems for obesity and diabetes.Acta pharmaceutica Sinica. B · 2026Review
- Effectiveness of GLP-1RA according to different type 2 diabetes phenotypes: A retrospective study.Diabetes, obesity & metabolism · 2025Article
- Effect of Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonists on Renal and Cardiovascular Risk Factors in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: A Retrospective Study.Journal of diabetes research · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Global phase III clinical trials have shown superior hypoglycemic efficacy to insulin and other oral hypoglycemic agents. However, there is a scarcity of real-world data comparing different glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist (GLP-1RA) directly. This study aimed to assess the safety and effectiveness of various GLP-1RA in treating type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) in a real-world clinical setting and identify predictive factors for favorable treatment outcomes. Methods: This was a retrospective, single-center, real-world study. The changes in HbA1c, fasting plasma glucose (FPG), body weight, systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP), and the percentage of participants who achieved HbA1c of <7%, 7%-8%, and ≥ 8% after GLP-1RA treatment was analyzed. The clinical factors that affect the effectiveness of GLP-1RA were analyzed. Results: At baseline, the 249 participants had a mean baseline HbA1c of 8.7 ± 1.1%. After at least three months of follow-up, the change in HbA1c was -0.89 ± 1.3% from baseline. Dulaglutide exerted a more significant hypoglycemic effect than immediate-release exenatide. The percentage of participants who achieved HbA1c<7% was substantial, from 6.0% at baseline to 28.9%. Average body weight decreased by 2.02 ± 3.8 kg compared to baseline. After GLP-1RA treatment, the reduction in SBP was 2.4 ± 7.1 mmHg from baseline. A shorter duration of diabetes and a higher baseline HbA1c level were more likely to achieve a good response in blood glucose reduction. Conclusions: This study provided real-world evidence showing that GLP-1RA significantly improved HbA1c, body weight, and SBP. The results can inform the decision-making about GLP-1RA treatment in daily clinical practice.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.