Background: The cardiovascular outcome trials (CVOTs) have shown that glucagon like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP1RAs) have varying degrees of cardiovascular (CV) safety in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM.) The lack of any head-to-head comparative trials among GLP1RAs urged the need for an indirect comparison of these agents. Therefore, this study was conducted to indirectly compare the CV safety and mortality effects among different GLP1RAs in patients with T2DM using network meta-analysis (NMA). Methods: Medline was searched to identify GLP1RA CVOTs to date. The outcomes of interest were CV death, myocardial infarction (IM), stroke, and death from any cause. An NMA with binomial likelihood logit link model was used for the binary outcomes. We conducted both fixed effects and random effects models for each outcome, and selected the best model based on the deviance information and the average posterior residual deviance. This NMA was reported in accordance with the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA-NMA). Results: A total of seven GLP1RA CVOTs were included having 56,004 patients. The NMA results showed that oral semaglutide was statistically better than exenatide (OR 0.47, 95% CI 0.21-0.99), dulaglutide (OR 0.46, 95% CI 0.20-0.97), albiglutide (OR 0.45, 95% CI 0.19-0.97), lixisenatide (OR 0.43, 95% CI 0.19-0.92) in reducing CV death events. No significant differences were detected between most of the treatments regarding reducing death from any cause, MI and stroke events. The ranking results showed that oral semaglutide had the highest probability to be ranked first (> 90%) in reducing CV death and death from any cause. Moreover, once weekly semaglutide had the highest probability to be ranked first in reducing MI and stroke events. Conclusion: The GLP1RAs have shown significant benefits in terms of CV safety. The indirect comparison and ranking probability results have shown that one weekly semaglutide and oral semaglutide seems to be the preferred option in patients with T2DM and established or at high risk of CVD. This result can aid health care providers, pharmacy and therapeutics committees in hospitals, and insurance companies when deciding which GLP1RA to start or add to their formulary.

Background: Whether time-in-target range (TTR) for systolic blood pressure (SBP) associates with adverse kidney and cardiovascular events remains unknown. Methods: This study included participants in 2 clinical trials that compared intensive (<120 mm Hg) and standard (<140 mm Hg) SBP lowering. SBP-TTR for months 0 to 3 was calculated using therapeutic ranges of 110 to 130 mm Hg and 120 to 140 mm Hg for the intensive and standard arms, respectively. Adverse kidney events included the composite of dialysis, kidney transplant, serum creatinine >3.3 mg/dL, sustained eGFR <15 mL/(min·1.73 m 2 ), or sustained eGFR decline >40%. Adverse cardiovascular events included myocardial infarction, stroke, heart failure, and cardiovascular death. Adjusted Cox proportional hazards regression models were used to estimate the association between SBP-TTR and kidney and cardiovascular events. Results: Participants with higher TTR were younger and less likely to have preexisting cardiovascular disease. Compared with participants with TTR of 0%, the risk of adverse kidney events was lower for participants with TTR of >0% to 43% (hazard ratio [95% CI], 0.57 [0.42–0.76]; P <0.001), 43% to <70% (0.57 [0.42–0.78]; P =0.001), 70% to <100% (0.53 [0.38–0.74]; P <0.001), and 100% (0.33 [0.20–0.57]; P <0.001) in fully adjusted models. The risk of major adverse cardiovascular events was lower for participants with TTR of >0% to 43% (0.66 [0.52–0.83]; P =0.001), 43% to <70% (0.70 [0.55–0.90]; P =0.005), 70% to <100% (0.65 [0.50–0.84]; P =0.001), or 100% (0.56 [0.39–0.80]; P =0.001) compared with those with TTR of 0%. Conclusions: Higher SBP-TTR associates with lower risks of adverse kidney and cardiovascular events in adults with hypertension. SBP-TTR may be a potential therapeutic target and quality metric.

Tirzepatide is a new glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1RA) that has shown promising results for weight loss. A Bayesian network meta-analysis was conducted to compare the efficacy and safety of GLP-1RAs for obesity management. Embase and MEDLINE were searched looking for randomized clinical trials (RCTs) that evaluated the efficacy of GLP-1RAs for weight loss in patients without diabetes. The main efficacy outcomes evaluated were the mean change in actual and percentage weight loss and the proportion of patients with weight loss of ≥5%-20%. Main safety outcomes evaluated include nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, constipation, loss of appetite, pancreatitis, gallbladder-related disorders, and withdrawal due to adverse events. Seven RCTs with more than 12,300 patients were analyzed, including patients with body mass index (BMI) ≥ 30 kg/m 2 , or BMI ≥ 27 kg/m 2 with comorbidities. Weekly tirzepatide 10 and 15 mg resulted in more weight loss than weekly semaglutide 2.4 mg, daily semaglutide 0.4 mg, or liraglutide 3 mg. Tirzepatide and weekly semaglutide demonstrated comparable results but with significantly higher odds of achieving ≥5%-20% weight loss compared with liraglutide.GLP-1RAs triggered more gastrointestinal adverse events than placebo, with no in-between difference. Although all GLP-1RAs lead to significant weight reduction, tirzepatide was associated with better efficacy outcomes while having a comparable safety profile.