Evidence Hub

Comparative efficacy of THR-β agonists, FGF-21 analogues, GLP-1R agonists, GLP-1-based polyagonists, and Pan-PPAR agonists for MASLD: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

Ru-Tao Lin, Qin-mei Sun, Xin Xin, Cheng-Han Ng, Luca Valenti, Yi-Yang Hu, Ming-Hua Zheng, Qin Feng

Metabolism: Clinical and Experimental, 2024

5,357 participants · 62 citations

Abstract

AIMS

To compare the efficacy of thyroid hormone receptor beta (THR-β) agonists, fibroblast growth factor 21 (FGF-21) analogues, glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs), GLP-1-based polyagonists, and pan-peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor (Pan-PPAR) agonists in the treatment of metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD).

METHODS

A database search for relevant randomized double-blind controlled trials published until July 11, 2024, was conducted. Primary outcomes were the relative change in hepatic fat fraction (HFF) and liver stiffness assessed non-invasively by magnetic resonance imaging proton density fat fraction and elastography. Secondary outcomes included histology, liver injury index, lipid profile, glucose metabolism, blood pressure, and body weight.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven trials (5357 patients with MASLD) were identified. For HFF reduction, GLP-1-based polyagonists were most potentially effective (mean difference [MD] -51.47; 95 % confidence interval [CI]: -68.25 to -34.68; surface under the cumulative ranking curve [SUCRA] 84.9) vs. placebo, followed by FGF-21 analogues (MD -47.08; 95 % CI: -58.83 to -35.34; SUCRA 75.5), GLP-1R agonists (MD -37.36; 95 % CI: -69.52 to -5.21; SUCRA 52.3) and THR-β agonists (MD -33.20; 95 % CI: -43.90 to -22.51; SUCRA 36.9). For liver stiffness, FGF-21 analogues were most potentially effective (MD -9.65; 95 % CI: -19.28 to -0.01; SUCRA 82.2) vs. placebo, followed by THR-β agonists (MD -5.79; 95…

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: 5,357 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