Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonists and Liver Outcomes in Patients With MASLD and Type 2 Diabetes
- PMID: 39791391
- DOI: 10.1111/apt.18502
Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonists and Liver Outcomes in Patients With MASLD and Type 2 Diabetes
Abstract
Background and aims: Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) and sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2is) have demonstrated long-term liver benefits in patients with metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD) and type 2 diabetes (T2D). However, no direct comparison between these therapies has been conducted. This study aimed to compare major adverse liver outcomes (MALOs) between GLP-1 RAs and SGLT2is in patients with MASLD and T2D.
Methods: Using the TriNetX Research Network, a multinational and multi-institutional database, we identified adults with MASLD and T2D who received their first prescription for either a GLP-1 RA or an SGLT2i between January 2010 and June 2023. We conducted a propensity score-matched (PSM) cohort study comparing new users of GLP-1 RAs and SGLT2is. The primary outcome was the risk of MALOs, a composite endpoint consisting of decompensated cirrhosis events, hepatocellular carcinoma, and liver transplantation. Secondary outcomes included all-cause mortality and individual components of the primary outcome.
Results: This study included 15,176 pairs of patients treated with either a GLP-1 RA or a SGLT2i. The adjusted hazard ratio (HR) for MALO associated with GLP-1 RAs relative to SGLT2is was 0.84 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.73-0.97; incidence rate: 88.9 versus 105.3 events per 10,000 person-years), primarily driven by reduction in decompensated cirrhosis events (adjusted HR: 0.83, 95% CI: 0.71-0.96). GLP-1 RAs were associated with lower all-cause mortality (adjusted HR: 0.84, 95% CI: 0.75-0.94).
Conclusion: GLP-1 RAs are associated with better long-term liver outcomes compared to SGLT2is in patients with MASLD and T2D.
Keywords: GLP‐1 receptor agonist; MASLD; SGLT‐2 inhibitor; major adverse liver outcomes.
© 2025 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
References
-
- D. Q. Huang, H. B. El‐Serag, and R. Loomba, “Global Epidemiology of NAFLD‐Related HCC: Trends, Predictions, Risk Factors and Prevention,” Nature Reviews. Gastroenterology & Hepatology 18, no. 4 (2021): 223–238, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41575‐020‐00381‐6.
-
- A. C. Sheka, O. Adeyi, J. Thompson, B. Hameed, P. A. Crawford, and S. Ikramuddin, “Nonalcoholic Steatohepatitis: A Review,” Journal of the American Medical Association 323, no. 12 (2020): 1175–1183, https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2020.2298.
-
- E. Harris, “FDA Okays First Drug for Scarring From Fatty Liver Disease,” Journal of the American Medical Association 331, no. 17 (2024): 1439, https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2024.5154.
-
- Z. M. Younossi, P. Golabi, L. de Avila, et al., “The Global Epidemiology of NAFLD and NASH in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis,” Journal of Hepatology 71, no. 4 (2019): 793–801, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhep.2019.06.021.
-
- Z. M. Younossi, A. B. Koenig, D. Abdelatif, Y. Fazel, L. Henry, and M. Wymer, “Global Epidemiology of Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease: Meta‐Analytic Assessment of Prevalence, Incidence, and Outcomes,” Hepatology 64, no. 1 (2016): 73–84, https://doi.org/10.1002/hep.28431.
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
Miscellaneous