Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42292722›Full record

ReviewCureus2026

Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonists Across the Heart Failure Spectrum: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Vicky Muller Ferreira, Victor Ayres Muller

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

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.

2 · 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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

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

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Vicky Muller FerreiraCardiology, Independent Research, Rio de Janeiro, BRA.
Victor Ayres MullerInternal Medicine, Hospital Universitario De Vassouras, Rio de Janeiro, BRA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

cardiovascular outcomesglucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonistsheart failurehfpefmeta-analysissemaglutidesystematic reviewtirzepatide

Identifiers

PMID42292722
PMCPMC13254196

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.