Evidence Hub

Comparative cardiovascular effectiveness of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists and sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors in atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease phenotypes: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Lin YM, Wu JY, Lee MC, Su CL, Toh HS, Chang WT, Chen SY, Kuo FH et al.

European heart journal. Cardiovascular pharmacotherapy, 2025

151 participants · 12 citations

Abstract

Background: Atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) encompasses various phenotypes with elevated risks of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs). This study aimed to assess the comparative cardiovascular effectiveness of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) and sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2is) across diverse ASCVD phenotypes.

Methods and results: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials evaluating GLP-1 RAs or SGLT2is against placebo or standard care in ASCVD patients. Primary outcomes included MACE, defined as cardiovascular mortality, non-fatal myocardial infarction, and non-fatal stroke. Risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated using a random-effects model.Twenty-six trials (151 789 patients) were included. Both GLP-1 RAs and SGLT2is significantly reduced MACE rates in ASCVD patients (RR 0.85; 95% CI 0.80-0.91 for both). GLP-1 RAs showed significant effectiveness in peripheral artery disease (RR 0.86; 95% CI 0.76-0.98) and post-acute cardiovascular events (RR 0.90; 95% CI 0.83-0.97). In ASCVD with heart failure, both drug classes reduced MACE (GLP-1 RAs: RR 0.73; 95% CI 0.63-0.84; SGLT2is: RR 0.86; 95% CI 0.78-0.95). SGLT2is significantly reduced MACE in ASCVD with chronic kidney disease (RR 0.84; 95% CI 0.72-0.99), particularly in severe albuminuria (RR 0.61; 95% CI 0.37-0.99).

Conclusion: GLP-1 RAs and SGLT2is exhibit distinct cardiovascular effectiveness…

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: 151 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