ArticleCureus2026
Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonists, Semaglutide, and Atrial Fibrillation: An Umbrella Review With Methodological Appraisal of Overlapping Meta-Analyses.
Article 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMultiple meta-analyses report that glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs), and semaglutide in particular, are associated with lower incident atrial fibrillation (AF) and reduced post-ablation AF recurrence. These reviews have appeared in rapid succession, often drawing on the same trials.
objectiveTo systematically identify, appraise, and reconcile the published meta-analyses examining GLP-1 RAs/semaglutide and AF across two clinical questions-incident AF and post-ablation AF recurrence.
methodsWe conducted an umbrella review following Preferred Reporting Items for Overviews of Reviews (PRIOR) reporting guidance. Eligible units were systematic reviews with meta-analysis reporting a pooled AF estimate for GLP-1 RA/semaglutide versus comparator. Each review was independently appraised in duplicate with A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews 2 (AMSTAR-2); overlap of included primary studies was quantified with the corrected covered area (CCA) within clinical domains; certainty was summarized using a Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE)-informed framework. Between-review discordance was examined against pre-specified analytic features (comparator, statistical model, population, and pivotal-trial inclusion).
resultsTen meta-analyses were included, comprising seven evaluating incident AF and three assessing post-ablation AF recurrence. One meta-analysis of incident AF was available only as a conference abstract and was reserved for sensitivity analysis. For incident AF, pooled effect estimates ranged from an odds ratio (OR) of 0.54 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.39-0.77) to 0.83 (95% CI 0.70-0.98). For post-ablation recurrence, hazard ratios (HRs) ranged from 0.58 (95% CI 0.42-0.79) to 0.78 (95% CI 0.61-0.99). AMSTAR 2 ratings indicated low confidence in five reviews and critically low confidence in four; none achieved moderate or high confidence. Primary study overlap was substantial, with CCA values of 34.1% across the five semaglutide-only reviews of incident AF, 22.5% across all six incident AF reviews, and 43.8% across the three recurrence reviews. Two recurrence reviews shared an identical six-study base (pairwise CCA 100%) yet reported different pooled HRs (0.58 vs 0.78). The incident-AF effect gradient tracked comparator (active < placebo), statistical model (fixed < random), and population (type 2 diabetes < obesity).
conclusionsThe current evidence comprises numerous but low-confidence, substantially overlapping meta-analyses whose consistency partly reflects a shared set of primary trials rather than independent replication. GLP-1 RAs/semaglutide are plausibly associated with lower AF burden, but certainty is low (incident AF) to very low (recurrence). Adequately powered randomized trials with adjudicated, systematically monitored AF endpoints are required.
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.