Trial reportDiabetes & vascular disease research2018

Cardiovascular outcomes in patients who experienced a myocardial infarction while treated with liraglutide versus placebo in the LEADER trial.

Michael A Nauck, Karen Tornøe, Søren Rasmussen, Marianne Bach Treppendahl, Steven P Marso, LEADER Publication Committee on behalf of the LEADER Trial Investigators

Registry-linked trialOpen access · hybridAbstract readMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Diabetes & vascular disease research, 2018. The graph read 1 number from its abstract, feeding 1 cell of the map: it finds no clear difference in 1. It reports registered trial NCT01179048. Cited by 12 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

1number the graph read from it
1cell of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.8field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

← favours the treatmentfavours the comparator →
1 · no effect
Cardiovascular eventsno clear difference · against placebo · t2d, heart_failurefeeds one cell of the map
HR 0.910.66 to 1.26
The risk of the composite endpoint after myocardial infarction was not significantly lower in the liraglutide group ( n = 63, 23.0%) compared with placebo ( n = 85, 26.7%; hazard ratio: 0.91; 95% confidence interval: 0.66, 1.26).

clause the extractor read what became the number

2 · Its place on the map

Where it lands on the map

Rows are treatments, columns are outcomes. The coloured squares are the cells this paper feeds, coloured by the vote it casts there. Click one to jump to what this paper adds to it.

supports the treatmentfavours the comparatorno clear differenceread, but no usable result
3 · What it changes

What it adds to each cell

For every cell the paper feeds: the belief in the claim with and without this paper, and this paper's estimate drawn against every other readable study in the cell. The ringed dot is this paper.

GLP-1 receptor agonists×cardiovascular events

InconclusiveOpen on the map →What to test next →

13 readable studies in this cell: 6 favour the treatment, 3 find no difference, 4 favour the comparator.

Belief with this paper
0.50contested · 7 families support, 3 contradict · against placebo
Without it
0.50This paper does not move the number.
← favours the treatmentfavours the comparator →
1 · no effect
This paper9,341 enrolled · 2010
HR 0.910.66 to 1.26
NCT0399313226,774 enrolled · 2018
HR 1.010.91 to 1.11
NCT0357459717,604 enrolled · 2018
HR 0.800.72 to 0.89
NCT013949529,901 enrolled · 2011
HR 0.880.79 to 0.99
NCT039143269,651 enrolled · 2019
HR 0.860.77 to 0.96
NCT038191533,533 enrolled · 2019
HR 0.760.66 to 0.88
NCT017204463,297 enrolled · 2013
HR 0.740.58 to 0.95
NCT026927163,183 enrolled · 2017
HR 0.790.57 to 1.11
OR 1.951.28 to 3.00
NCT05564039282 enrolled · 2022
OR 20.48.40 to 49.8
4 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT01179048 phase3completed

A Long-term, Multi-centre, International, Randomised Double-blind, Placebo-controlled Trial to Determine Liraglutide Effects on Cardiovascular Events

Ran2010Enrolled9,341Registered outcomes6Posted comparisons20ConditionsDiabetes, Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2Armsliraglutide, Placebo
Open the trial in the graph
5 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 28 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Review
  5. Emerging role of GLP-1 agonists in cardio-metabolic therapy - Focus on Semaglutide.American heart journal plus : cardiology research and practice · 2025
    Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Cardiovascular Outcome Trials in Type 2 Diabetes: What Do They Mean for Clinical Practice?Clinical diabetes : a publication of the American Diabetes Association · 2019
    Article
  12. The Discovery and Development of Liraglutide and Semaglutide.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2019 · on this map
    Review
6 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

7 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Michael A Nauck1 Diabetes Center Bochum-Hattingen, Medical Department I, St. Josef-Hospital, Ruhr-University Bochum, Bochum, Germany.
Karen Tornøe2 Novo Nordisk A/S, Søborg, Denmark.
Søren Rasmussen2 Novo Nordisk A/S, Søborg, Denmark.
Marianne Bach Treppendahl2 Novo Nordisk A/S, Søborg, Denmark.
Steven P Marso3 Heart & Vascular Institute, HCA Midwest Health, Kansas City, MO, USA.
LEADER Publication Committee on behalf of the LEADER Trial Investigators
Novo Nordisk (Denmark) · DKHCA Midwest Division · USSt. Josef-Hospital · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

8 · The paper itself

Abstract

The marked sentences are the ones the graph read a number from.

objectiveAnimal studies demonstrated that glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists reduce myocardial necrosis following regional ischaemia induction. This effect may improve cardiovascular outcomes after myocardial infarction. Risk of cardiovascular death or hospitalisation for heart failure after myocardial infarction was evaluated in patients with type 2 diabetes at high cardiovascular risk in the LEADER trial.

methodsData from patients randomised to liraglutide or placebo, in addition to standard of care, in Liraglutide Effect and Action in Diabetes: Evaluation of Cardiovascular Outcome Results (LEADER) (NCT01179048) were analysed post hoc. Cox regression, with myocardial infarction as a time-dependent covariate, was used to analyse time from randomisation to a composite of cardiovascular death or hospitalisation for heart failure.

resultsPatients who experienced myocardial infarction had a sevenfold higher risk of the composite endpoint (with myocardial infarction: n = 148, 25.0%; without myocardial infarction: n = 716, 8.2%; hazard ratio: 7.0; 95% confidence interval: 5.8, 8.4). The risk of the composite endpoint after myocardial infarction was not significantly lower in the liraglutide group ( n = 63, 23.0%) compared with placebo ( n = 85, 26.7%; hazard ratio: 0.91; 95% confidence interval: 0.66, 1.26).

conclusionThe data demonstrated that having myocardial infarction significantly increased the risk of subsequent cardiovascular death or hospitalisation for heart failure. However, we did not find evidence for a reduced risk in these cardiovascular outcomes following myocardial infarction in patients treated with liraglutide versus placebo.

Indexed as

Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2Double-Blind MethodHeart FailureHospitalizationHumansHypoglycemic AgentsIncretinsLiraglutideMyocardial InfarctionProportional Hazards ModelsRisk FactorsTime FactorsTreatment OutcomeHypoglycemic AgentsIncretinsLiraglutidecardiovascular deathcardiovascular outcomesGlucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonistsheart failuremyocardial infarction

Identifiers

PMID29947247
PMCPMC6130125
OpenAlexW2810933398

What Socratic holds

Texttitle and abstract
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.