ReviewFrontiers in pharmacology2026
Availability of age-stratified evidence for GLP1 receptor agonists and SGLT2 inhibitors: an analysis of European public assessment reports with a focus on older patients.
Review in Frontiers in pharmacology, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: GLP1 receptor agonists and SGLT2 inhibitors are widely prescribed and their use is increasingly frequent in older patient populations. We evaluated the extent to which older patients were represented in clinical trials of liraglutide, dulaglutide, semaglutide, tirzepatide, dapagliflozin and empagliflozin. Methods: To identify relevant trials, we screened the respective European Public Assessment Reports (n = 28) and the European Summaries of Product Characteristics (n = 9) for each of the six approved medicines. Further information was retrieved from the original publications of the identified trials and from the ClinicalTrials.gov database (n = 40). Overall, we analyzed n = 185 sources for 106 trial populations. Results: For 46% of the 106 analyzed trial populations, data for patients ≥65 years were identified. Where age distributions were reported, patients aged 75 years or older were markedly underrepresented in nearly all trials, and subgroup analyses of efficacy and safety by age were rarely published. Especially in cardiovascular outcome trials and trials including patients with chronic kidney disease or chronic heart failure, older patients were better represented and analyses of primary outcomes in different age groups were published more frequently. Safety data on different age groups were mainly identified in the European Public Assessment Reports. Whereas increasing numbers of adverse events with older age were observed in several trials, this increase typically affected all trial arms, independent of the drug treatment. Conclusion: Data availability for patients with older age is insufficient from pivotal trials to properly describe efficacy or safety of liraglutide, dulaglutide, semaglutide, tirzepatide, dapagliflozin, or empagliflozin.
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.