Evidence Hub

Cardiovascular Outcomes With Tirzepatide Versus GLP-1 Receptor Agonists in Overweight or Obesity: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Silva JPMRJ, Nogueira BV, Sartori DL, da Silva JRC, Sciota LBA, de Mendonça Bisneto OI, Gomes WF

Diabetes, obesity & metabolism, 2026

323 participants · 1 citation

Abstract

Aims: To compare cardiovascular outcomes associated with tirzepatide versus glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) in adults with overweight or obesity.

Materials and methods: PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched through 30 March 2026. The study was registered in PROSPERO (CRD420261354941). Randomized and observational studies comparing tirzepatide with GLP-1 receptor agonists and reporting cardiovascular outcomes were included. Data were extracted on study characteristics and outcomes using adjusted hazard ratios when available. Risk of bias was assessed using RoB 2 and ROBINS-I.

Results: Eight studies (one randomized and seven observational) including 323 439 patients were analysed. Tirzepatide was not associated with a statistically significant reduction in major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) compared with GLP-1 receptor agonists (HR 0.85, 95% CI 0.70-1.04; I 2 = 90.4%). Substantial heterogeneity was observed. Effect estimates were directionally consistent across secondary outcomes, including all-cause mortality (HR 0.90, 95% CI 0.79-1.02) and cardiovascular mortality (HR 0.88, 95% CI 0.76-1.00). In exploratory subgroup analyses, patients with type 2 diabetes showed lower estimated risks of all-cause mortality (HR 0.85, 95% CI 0.76-0.94) and heart failure (HR 0.75, 95% CI 0.58-0.97).

Conclusions: Tirzepatide was not associated with a statistically significant reduction in MACEs. Although effect…

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: 323 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