ArticleBMJ medicine2026
Comparative efficacy and safety of glucagon-like peptide 1 based drugs for weight loss in adults with overweight or obesity without diabetes: network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.
Article in BMJ medicine, 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
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To compare the efficacy and safety of glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP-1) based drug treatments for weight loss in adults with overweight or obesity without diabetes. Design: Network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. Data sources: Embase, PubMed (Medline), and Web of Science, 1 January 2000 to 6 March 2026. Eligibility criteria for selecting studies: Randomised controlled trials that enrolled adults with overweight or obesity, comparing GLP-1 receptor agonists or related co-agonists with placebo or active comparators, with a minimum intervention duration of 12 weeks. Excluded were trials that enrolled participants with diabetes, or where diabetes status could not be clearly determined. Results: 58 trials of 24 214 participants were analysed. Compared with placebo, weight loss was greatest with retatrutide (-22.10%, 95% confidence interval -25.60% to -18.60%), followed by tirzepatide (-19.28%, -20.39% to -18.16%), and CagriSema (a combination of cagrilintide and semaglutide, -17.32%, -19.32% to -15.32%). Conventional GLP-1 receptor agonists showed more modest effects. Similar patterns were seen for waist circumference and lipid outcomes. Treatment rankings suggested a probabilistic hierarchy favouring next generation incretin based treatments, although confidence intervals overlapped for several comparisons. Low certainty evidence suggested higher rates for discontinuing treatment with danuglipron and retatrutide, whereas mazdutide showed better tolerability. Conclusions: In adults with overweight or obesity without diabetes, next generation incretin based treatments achieved greater weight loss than conventional GLP-1 receptor agonists. Differences in tolerability, limited head-to-head evidence, and residual uncertainty, however, should be considered when interpreting comparative treatment effects. Study registration: PROSPERO CRD420261279841.
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.