Trial reportDiabetologia2020

Placebo-controlled randomised trial with liraglutide on magnetic resonance endpoints in individuals with type 2 diabetes: a pre-specified secondary study on ectopic fat accumulation.

Maurice B Bizino, Ingrid M Jazet, Paul de Heer, Huub J van Eyk, Ilona A Dekkers, Patrick C N Rensen, Elisabeth H M Paiman, Hildebrandus J Lamb, Johannes W Smit

Registry-linked trialFull text readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Diabetologia, 2020. The graph read 2 numbers from its abstract, feeding 2 cells of the map, but it casts no vote: it is a later paper about NCT01761318, whose primary report (PMID 31039778) speaks for the trial. It reports registered trial NCT01761318. Cited by 63 papers, 12 of them syntheses that pooled it.

2numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
63citing papers in PubMed, 12 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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 →
-6.400.040 · no effect
Body weightliraglutide vs placebofavours the treatment · t2d, obesityfeeds one cell of the map
estimated treatment effect -4.50-6.40 to -2.60
Liraglutide (n = 23) vs placebo (n = 26) significantly reduced body weight (liraglutide 98.4 ± 13.8 kg to 94.3 ± 14.9 kg; placebo 94.5 ± 13.1 kg to 93.9 ± 13.2 kg; estimated treatment effect -4.5 [95% CI -6.4, -2.6] kg).
Liver & MASLDno clear difference · against placebo · t2d, obesityfeeds one cell of the map
estimated mean treatment effect 0.03-0.09 to 0.04p  = 0.43
The between-group changes in the VAT:SAT ratio were not different (estimated mean treatment effect 0.03 [95% CI -0.09, 0.04], p  = 0.43). 1 H-MRS of the liver was technically not successful on two occasions (one baseline measurement; one follow-up measurement in a different participant), and one participant in the placebo group displayed a biologically implausible rise in HTGC from 1.7% at baseline to 39.5% at follow-up without changes in serum liver enzymes.

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×body weight & composition

Does not voteOpen on the map →What to test next →

40 readable studies in this cell: 74 favour the treatment, 15 find no difference, 10 favour the comparator.

Belief with this paper
0.91replicated · 59 families support, 6 contradict · against placebo
Without itNot a counted family in this claim, so removing it changes nothing.
← favours the treatmentfavours the comparator →
0 · no effect
NCT012722193,731 enrolled · 2011
Δ -5.39-5.82 to -4.95
Δ -17.3-18.1 to -16.6
NCT017204463,297 enrolled · 2013
Δ -2.95-3.47 to -2.44
NCT035489351,961 enrolled · 2018
Δ -12.4-13.4 to -11.5
NCT039879191,879 enrolled · 2019
Δ -1.70-2.60 to -0.70
NCT026078651,864 enrolled · 2016
Δ -2.50-3.00 to -2.00
NCT056467061,407 enrolled · 2023
Δ -14.8-16.2 to -13.4
NCT018365231,398 enrolled · 2013
Δ -4.90-5.65 to -4.16
NCT035527571,210 enrolled · 2018
Δ -6.21-7.28 to -5.15
NCT007344741,202 enrolled · 2008
Δ -1.50-2.08 to -0.92
Δ -10.4-11.2 to -9.50
NCT020581471,170 enrolled · 2014
Δ 14.38.37 to 20.3

This paper's own estimate is on a different scale from the rest of the cell, so it is not drawn here.

GLP-1 receptor agonists×liver & masld

Does not voteOpen on the map →What to test next →

3 readable studies in this cell: 0 favour the treatment, 2 find no difference, 1 favour the comparator.

Belief with this paper
0.25no deciding trial · 0 families support, 0 contradict · against placebo
Without itNot a counted family in this claim, so removing it changes nothing.
← favours the comparatorfavours the treatment →
0 · no effect
NCT04019197108 enrolled · 2019
β coefficient 3.55-0.30 to 7.41
NCT0355599451 enrolled · 2018
Δ -22.0-34.5 to -9.43

This paper's own estimate is on a different scale from the rest of the cell, so it is not drawn here.

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.

NCT01761318 phase4completed

Magnetic Resonance Assessment of Victoza Efficacy in the Regression of Cardiovascular Dysfunction In Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus

Ran2013Enrolled50Registered outcomes48Posted comparisons0ConditionsCardiovascular Disease, Diabetes Mellitus Type 2, Diastolic Dysfunction, Fatty LiverArmsliraglutide, Liraglutide - Placebo
Open the trial in the graph
5 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

63 citing papers in PubMed, 12 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Efficacy of Weight-Lowering Agents on Fat Distribution: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.Obesity reviews : an official journal of the International Association for the Study of Obesity · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Guideline
  3. Pooled it
  4. Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonists Improve MASH and Liver Fibrosis: A Meta-Analysis of Randomised Controlled Trials.Liver international : official journal of the International Association for the Study of the Liver · 2025
    Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Guideline
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Pooled it
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article

3 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

9 authors.

Maurice B BizinoDepartment of Radiology, Leiden University Medical Center, LUMC postzone C2S, Albinusdreef 2, 2333 ZA, Leiden, the Netherlands. m.b.bizino@lumc.nl.ORCID 0000-0002-7347-5010
Ingrid M JazetDepartment of Medicine, Division of Endocrinology, Leiden University Medical Center, LUMC post zone C7Q, Albinusdreef 2, 2333 ZA, Leiden, the Netherlands.
Paul de HeerDepartment of Radiology, Leiden University Medical Center, LUMC postzone C2S, Albinusdreef 2, 2333 ZA, Leiden, the Netherlands.
Huub J van EykDepartment of Medicine, Division of Endocrinology, Leiden University Medical Center, LUMC post zone C7Q, Albinusdreef 2, 2333 ZA, Leiden, the Netherlands.
Ilona A DekkersDepartment of Radiology, Leiden University Medical Center, LUMC postzone C2S, Albinusdreef 2, 2333 ZA, Leiden, the Netherlands.
Patrick C N RensenDepartment of Medicine, Division of Endocrinology, Leiden University Medical Center, LUMC post zone C7Q, Albinusdreef 2, 2333 ZA, Leiden, the Netherlands.
Elisabeth H M PaimanDepartment of Radiology, Leiden University Medical Center, LUMC postzone C2S, Albinusdreef 2, 2333 ZA, Leiden, the Netherlands.
Hildebrandus J LambDepartment of Radiology, Leiden University Medical Center, LUMC postzone C2S, Albinusdreef 2, 2333 ZA, Leiden, the Netherlands.
Johannes W SmitDepartment of Medicine, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.

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.

aims/hypothesisThe aim of this work was to assess the effect of liraglutide on ectopic fat accumulation in individuals with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

methodsThis study is a pre-specified subanalysis of the MAGNetic resonance Assessment of VICTOza efficacy in the Regression of cardiovascular dysfunction In type 2 diAbetes mellitus (MAGNA VICTORIA) study, with primary endpoints being the effects of liraglutide on left ventricular diastolic and systolic function. The MAGNA VICTORIA study was a single-centre, parallel-group trial in 50 individuals with type 2 diabetes mellitus (BMI >25 kg/m

resultsThe trial was completed in 2016. Twenty-four participants were randomised to receive liraglutide and 26 to receive placebo. One patient in the liraglutide group withdrew consent before having received the study drug and was not included in the intention-to-treat analysis. Liraglutide (n = 23) vs placebo (n = 26) significantly reduced body weight (liraglutide 98.4 ± 13.8 kg to 94.3 ± 14.9 kg; placebo 94.5 ± 13.1 kg to 93.9 ± 13.2 kg; estimated treatment effect -4.5 [95% CI -6.4, -2.6] kg). HbA CONCLUSIONS/

interpretationCompared with placebo, liraglutide-treated participants lost significantly more body weight. Liraglutide primarily reduced subcutaneous fat but not visceral, hepatic, myocardial or epicardial fat. Future larger studies are needed to confirm the results of this secondary endpoint study.

trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT01761318.

fundingThis study was funded by Novo Nordisk A/S (Bagsvaerd, Denmark).

Indexed as

AgedAnthropometryDiabetes Mellitus, Type 2Double-Blind MethodFemaleHumansLipid MetabolismLiraglutideLiverMaleMiddle AgedMyocardiumPlacebo EffectSubcutaneous FatTriglyceridesLiraglutideTriglyceridesEctopic fatGlucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonistHepatic steatosisLiraglutideMyocardial steatosisNon-alcoholic fatty liver diseaseType 2 diabetes mellitus

Identifiers

PMID31690988
PMCPMC6890592

What Socratic holds

Textfull text, public
LicenceCC BY
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.