Evidence Hub

Kidney and Cardiovascular Outcomes Among Patients With CKD Receiving GLP-1 Receptor Agonists: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials

Jui-Yi Chen, Tsuen-Wei Hsu, Jungang Liu, Heng-Chih Pan, Chun-Fu Lai, Shao-Yu Yang, Vin-Cent Wu

American Journal of Kidney Diseases, 2025

17,996 participants · 48 citations

Abstract

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE

Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) improve cardiac and kidney outcomes in patients with diabetes; however their efficacy in individuals with reduced estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) is uncertain. This study evaluated the effects of GLP-1RAs on kidney and cardiovascular (CV) outcomes in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD).

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) reported through May 25, 2024.

SETTING & STUDY POPULATIONS

Adult participants in RCTs with baseline eGFR <60 mL/min/1.73 m2.

SELECTION CRITERIA FOR STUDIES

RCTs including adults (≥18 years old) with varying degrees of kidney function, including individuals with CKD characterized by a baseline eGFR of less than 60 mL/min/1.73 m2, that compared GLP-1RAs with control treatments with respect to a composite kidney outcome, all-cause mortality, or a composite CV disease outcome. From among 212 screened studies, 12 trials involving that included participants with baseline eGFR <60 mL/min/1.73 m2 were included.

DATA EXTRACTION

Two independent investigators extracted the data.

ANALYTICAL APPROACH

Pooled odds ratios (ORs) for composite kidney outcome, all-cause mortality, and composite CV outcome were estimated using random-effects models. Evidence certainty was assessed using the GRADE system.

RESULTS

17,996 RCT participants with baseline eGFR 30% eGFR decline (OR: 0.78, p=0.004), a >40% decline (OR: 0.76, p=0.01), and a…

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: 17,996 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