Evidence Hub

GLP‐1 receptor agonists and the risk for cancer: A meta‐analysis of randomized controlled trials

G. Silverii, Christian Marinelli, Costanza Bettarini, Gloria Giovanna Del Vescovo, Matteo Monami, E. Mannucci

Diabetes, obesity and metabolism, 2025

51 citations

Abstract

Aims: To assess if there is a difference in the oncogenic risk between GLP-1 RA and comparators in randomized controlled trials.

Materials and methods: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing GLP-1RA to any comparators for diabetes and/or obesity, lasting at least 52 weeks. The endpoints included the incidence of overall cancers and single malignancies.

Results: Fifty trials were included. GLP-1RA treatment was not associated with a significant difference in risk for overall cancer (MH-OR 1.05, 95% confidence interval [CI] [0.98, 1.13]). Uterine cancer was significantly reduced in the GLP-1RA arm in trials performed in subjects with obesity (MH-OR 0.24, 95% CI [0.06, 0.94]), but not in those aimed at diabetes treatment (MH-OR 0.92, [0.58, 1.47]). We detected an increase in the risk for thyroid cancer (MH-OR 1.55, [1.05, 2.27]), more evident in longer-term trials, and in the risk for colorectal cancer (MH-OR 1.27 [1.03, 1.57]), which, conversely, was significant only in shorter-term trials. No significant difference in the risk was detected for any other cancer.

Conclusions: GLP-1 RA do not appear to produce an effect on most malignancies in clinical trials. A reduction of very close obesity-associated cancers seems possible, whereas a risk signal for thyroid cancer was observed, prompting the need for further specific studies. On the other hand, the small increase observed in colorectal cancer in shorter-term trials may be the effect of a disproportionate…

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