ReviewCureus2026
Effects of Incretin-Based Pharmacotherapies on Lean Body Mass in Adults With Overweight, Obesity, or Type 2 Diabetes: A Systematic Review With Prespecified Network Meta-Analysis Feasibility Assessment.
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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Incretin-based pharmacotherapies produce substantial weight loss, but their comparative effects on lean tissue remain incompletely characterized. We systematically reviewed randomized controlled trials in adults with overweight, obesity, and/or type 2 diabetes. The prospectively registered primary outcome was the between-group difference in relative percentage change from baseline in total lean body mass measured by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) at 48 to <80 weeks; absolute DXA change in kilograms was the key secondary outcome. The auditable record-level dataset comprised 6,526 imported records from PubMed and ClinicalTrials.gov; after the removal of 250 within-PubMed duplicates, 6,276 records were screened, and 52 trial families met review-level eligibility. Three direct contrasts had defensible precision for the registered primary outcome: pooled tirzepatide versus placebo, -8.3 percentage points (95% confidence interval {CI}: -10.6 to -6.1); semaglutide 1.0 mg versus placebo, -3.81 (-6.57 to -1.06); and semaglutide 2.4 mg versus placebo, -6.06 (-8.79 to -3.33). Because the two BELIEVE semaglutide contrasts shared a placebo group and their joint covariance was unavailable, they were not treated as independent edges in a single dose-specific network meta-analysis (NMA). Separate placebo-anchored sensitivity comparisons of pooled tirzepatide versus semaglutide were -4.49 percentage points (95% CI: -8.05 to -0.93) for semaglutide 1.0 mg and -2.24 (-5.78 to 1.30) for semaglutide 2.4 mg; both were graded very low confidence. For the key secondary absolute DXA outcome, mean differences versus placebo were -3.43 kg (95% CI: -4.74 to -2.13) for semaglutide 2.4 mg, -4.40 kg (-5.60 to -3.20) for pooled tirzepatide, and -5.90 kg (-7.28 to -4.52) for mazdutide 9 mg. DXA-derived lean mass is not synonymous with skeletal-muscle mass or function, and these reductions should not by themselves be interpreted as evidence of sarcopenia or clinically harmful muscle loss. Randomized evidence therefore supports measurable lean-mass loss during incretin-associated weight reduction, but sparse network geometry, heterogeneous estimands, selected body-composition substudies, and incomplete reporting preclude a reliable comparative treatment ranking.
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.