ArticleDiabetes, obesity & metabolism2026
Comparison of cardiovascular outcomes between once-weekly semaglutide and dulaglutide in adults with type 2 diabetes and established atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease in the United States.
Article in Diabetes, obesity & metabolism, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
Abstract
aimsThis study aims to compare the risk of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) among United States individuals with type 2 diabetes (T2D) and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) treated with once-weekly semaglutide vs. dulaglutide. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis was a retrospective cohort study using Optum's de-identified Clinformatics Data Mart (Optum CDM) from 1 January 2007 through 30 September 2024. New initiators of semaglutide or dulaglutide ≥18 years with both T2D and ASCVD were included. The index date was the first date of a prescription claim for semaglutide or dulaglutide within the index medication identification period (1 January 2018 through 31 March 2024). The primary outcome was 3-point MACE (stroke, myocardial infarction [MI], cardiovascular [CV]-related death). Entropy balancing was applied to balance baseline characteristics. Weighted incidence rates per 1000 person-years and doubly robust Cox proportional hazard ratios were reported.
resultsThere were 75 243 enrolees included (semaglutide, 42 007; dulaglutide, 33 236). The mean age was 68.2 and 69.3 years (unweighted) in the semaglutide and dulaglutide cohorts, respectively. After balancing, standardized mean differences were <0.1 for all variables. The incidence rates of the primary outcome, 3-point MACE, were 25.7 and 33.0 in the semaglutide and dulaglutide cohorts, respectively. Compared with the dulaglutide cohort, the semaglutide cohort had a 22% lower risk of 3-point MACE (hazard ratio, 0.78 [95% CI, 0.70-0.87]; p < 0.001).
conclusionsAmong United States Medicare Optum CDM enrolees with T2D and ASCVD, semaglutide was associated with reduced risks of CV outcomes compared with dulaglutide. These results help to address an important evidence gap in selecting glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists for this high-risk population.
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.