Evidence Hub

Updating the MASH pharmacotherapy landscape: a network meta-analysis incorporating SGLT2 inhibitors and emerging combination therapies

Tang M, Ma Y, Wang Y

Frontiers in endocrinology, 2026

1 citation

Abstract

Background: Multiple pharmacological agents targeting distinct pathways (e.g., GLP-1, FGF21, THR-β) show promise for metabolic dysfunction-associated steatohepatitis (MASH). However, while recent meta-analyses have established the efficacy of GLP-1 RAs and FGF21 analogs, they largely predate critical histological trials on SGLT2 inhibitors, leaving the comparative position of this highly accessible oral therapy undefined. We aimed to systematically rank the efficacy and tolerability of distinct pharmacological mechanisms for MASH and characterize their benefit-risk profiles through cluster analysis.

Methods: We searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, and Cochrane Library for Phase II/III randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving adults with biopsy-proven MASH. The primary outcome was fibrosis improvement (≥1 stage reduction without MASH worsening). Secondary outcomes included MASH resolution and safety (discontinuation due to adverse events). A frequentist network meta-analysis (NMA) was performed.

Results: We included 34 studies from 33 unique publications. For fibrosis improvement, FGF21 analogs (RR 2.22, 95% CI 1.40-3.54) and SGLT2 inhibitors (RR 2.27, 95% CI 1.22-4.17) ranked highest. Notably, SGLT2 inhibitors numerically outperformed the FDA-approved THR-β agonist (RR 1.61) and GLP-1 RAs (RR 1.51, 95% CI 1.09-2.10). For MASH resolution, GLP-1/GIP dual agonists (RR 5.21) and FGF21 analogs (RR 3.52) showed the highest efficacy, while SGLT2 inhibitors also…

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.

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