ReviewCureus2026
Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonists Across the Heart Failure Spectrum: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Review in Cureus, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) have shown cardiovascular (CV) benefits, but their effects across the heart failure (HF) spectrum remain uncertain. We synthesized randomized evidence comparing GLP-1 RAs with placebo in adults with HF across ejection fraction phenotypes by searching PubMed, Cochrane CENTRAL, and ClinicalTrials.gov through February 2026. The primary outcome was the composite of CV death and first HF hospitalization, and random-effects meta-analysis used restricted maximum likelihood (REML) estimation with the Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman (HKSJ) adjustment. We included 14 studies (six dedicated HF trials and eight cardiovascular outcomes trials (CVOT) HF subgroup analyses) encompassing 18,184 patients. The primary composite outcome was not statistically significant (hazard ratio (HR) 0.86, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.73-1.01; P=0.067; I²=47%). GLP-1 RAs reduced all-cause mortality (ACM; HR 0.86, 95% CI 0.79-0.95; P=0.008; low certainty according to Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE)) and major adverse CV events (MACE; HR 0.80, 95% CI 0.69-0.93), and improved Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire Clinical Summary Score (KCCQ-CSS) by 7.4 points and 6-minute walk distance (6MWD) by 17.6 m. However, the mortality benefit was driven by CVOT subgroups, whereas dedicated HF trials showed directional harm. GLP-1 RAs did not significantly reduce the primary composite outcome but improved quality of life and functional capacity in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) and obesity. The pooled mortality reduction should be interpreted cautiously, given the divergence between indirect and direct evidence.
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.