Evidence Hub

Effects of GLP-1 Receptor Agonists and Dual GIP/GLP-1 Receptor Agonists on Inflammatory and Metabolic Biomarkers in Type 2 Diabetes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Kanbay M, Shah E, AlShiab R, Ozbek L, Ay S, Rustamov A, Covic A, Mallamaci F et al.

Diabetes, obesity & metabolism, 2026

1,327 participants · 2 citations

Abstract

Background: Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) and dual GIP/GLP-1 receptor agonists improve cardiovascular outcomes in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), but their effects on inflammatory and oxidative biomarkers are not fully defined.

Materials and methods: We searched PubMed, Ovid MEDLINE, Scopus, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library from inception to 19 February 2026 for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in adults with T2DM comparing a GLP-1RA or dual GIP/GLP-1 agonist with placebo or active therapy, and reporting C-reactive protein (CRP or high-sensitivity CRP [hs-CRP]), interleukin-6 (IL-6), tumour necrosis factor-α (TNF-α), monocyte chemoattractant protein-1 (MCP-1), malondialdehyde (MDA) or adiponectin. Random-effects meta-analyses were conducted using standardised mean differences (SMDs).

Results: Forty-one RCTs were included. GLP-1RAs significantly reduced CRP/hs-CRP (27 studies, 1991 participants; SMD -0.37, 95% CI -0.59 to -0.14) and MDA (3 studies, 272 participants; SMD -0.98, 95% CI -1.65 to -0.30), and increased adiponectin (16 studies, 1327 participants; SMD 0.30, 95% CI 0.13 to 0.46). Pooled effects on IL-6 (17 studies, 1068 participants; SMD -0.14, 95% CI -0.37 to 0.10), TNF-α (16 studies, 1164 participants; SMD -0.25, 95% CI -0.61 to 0.12) and MCP-1 (7 studies, 450 participants; SMD -0.27, 95% CI -0.58 to 0.03) were not statistically significant, although MCP-1 decreased in sensitivity analyses. Across biomarkers, heterogeneity was…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 1,327 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free