ArticleDigestive diseases and sciences2026
Differential Biliary Adverse Event Signals Among Glp-1 Receptor Agonists: A FAERS Disproportionality Analysis.
Article in Digestive diseases and sciences, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundBiliary adverse events (AEs) have been reported with glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs), but within-class differences remain unclear.
methodsWe conducted a disproportionality analysis of FAERS comparing biliary outcomes (cholelithiasis, cholecystitis, biliary colic, bile duct stone, and cholangitis) across semaglutide, tirzepatide, liraglutide, exenatide, and dulaglutide; semaglutide was used as the reference agent. Proportional reporting ratios (PRR), reporting odds ratios (ROR), 95% confidence intervals, and Fisher exact tests were calculated. Subgroup analyses and sensitivity analyses were performed.
resultsAfter deduplication, 3460 reports were analyzed: semaglutide 1797, tirzepatide 1363, liraglutide 1033, exenatide 999, and dulaglutide 574. Compared with semaglutide, exenatide and tirzepatide showed lower reporting for bile duct stone (PRR 0.39 and 0.58), while exenatide and dulaglutide showed lower reporting for biliary colic (PRR 0.30 and 0.50). Dulaglutide showed higher reporting for cholangitis (PRR 1.65). Exenatide, liraglutide, and tirzepatide showed higher reporting for cholecystitis (PRR 1.12, 1.07, and 1.05) and cholelithiasis (PRR 1.33, 1.21, and 1.15). Subgroup findings were consistent with heterogeneity mainly observed for bile duct stone and biliary colic. Sensitivity analyses was largely concordant, although rarer outcomes lost significance.
conclusionsBiliary AE reporting varies across GLP-1RAs, highlighting agent-specific differences within class and the need for individualized prescribing and counseling.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42207410What 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.