Evidence mapPaperPMID 38079178Full record

Observational studyJAMA internal medicine2024

Safety of GLP-1 Receptor Agonists and Other Second-Line Antidiabetics in Early Pregnancy.

Carolyn E Cesta, Ran Rotem, Brian T Bateman, Gabriel Chodick, Jacqueline M Cohen, Kari Furu, Mika Gissler, Krista F Huybrechts, Lars J Kjerpeseth, Maarit K Leinonen and 5 more

Open access · hybridAbstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in JAMA internal medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 75 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
75citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
38.4field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

75 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 130 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Guideline
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Observational
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review

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

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

15 authors at 9 institutions in 7 countries.

Carolyn E CestaCentre for Pharmacoepidemiology, Department of Medicine Solna, Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden.
Ran RotemDepartment of Epidemiology, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts.
Brian T BatemanDepartment of Anesthesiology, Perioperative and Pain Medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California.
Gabriel ChodickMaccabitech Institute for Research and Innovation, Maccabi Healthcare Services.
Jacqueline M CohenDepartment of Chronic Diseases, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo, Norway.
Kari FuruDepartment of Chronic Diseases, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo, Norway.
Mika GisslerDepartment of Knowledge Brokers Finnish Institute for Health and Welfare, Helsinki, Finland.
Krista F HuybrechtsDivision of Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacoeconomics, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.
Lars J KjerpesethDepartment of Chronic Diseases, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo, Norway.
Maarit K LeinonenDepartment of Knowledge Brokers Finnish Institute for Health and Welfare, Helsinki, Finland.
Laura PazzagliClinical Epidemiology Division, Department of Medicine Solna, Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden.
Helga ZoegaSchool of Population Health, Faculty of Medicine & Health, UNSW Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Ellen W SeelyEndocrinology, Diabetes and Hypertension, Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.
Elisabetta PatornoDivision of Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacoeconomics, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.
Sonia Hernández-DíazDepartment of Epidemiology, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts.
Norwegian Institute of Public Health · NOBrigham and Women's Hospital · USHarvard University · USKarolinska Institutet · SEMaccabi Institute for Health Services Research · ILFinnish Institute for Health and Welfare · FIStanford University · USStockholm Health Care Services · SEUniversity of Iceland · IS

Funding

Impact of obesity treatments on subsequent pregnancy outcomesR01HD097778 · HARVARD UNIVERSITY D/B/A HARVARD SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH · 2025 to 2025
$659k
NICHD NIH HHS R01 HD097778
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Increasing use of second-line noninsulin antidiabetic medication (ADM) in pregnant individuals with type 2 diabetes (T2D) may result in fetal exposure, but their teratogenic risk is unknown. Objective: To evaluate periconceptional use of second-line noninsulin ADMs and whether it is associated with increased risk of major congenital malformations (MCMs) in the infant. Design, Setting, and Participants: This observational population-based cohort study used data from 4 Nordic countries (2009-2020), the US MarketScan Database (2012-2021), and the Israeli Maccabi Health Services database (2009-2020). Pregnant women with T2D were identified and their live-born infants were followed until up to 1 year after birth. Exposure: Periconceptional exposure was defined as 1 or more prescription fill of sulfonylureas, dipeptidyl peptidase 4 (DPP-4) inhibitors, glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists, and sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors, or insulin (active comparator) from 90 days before pregnancy to end of first trimester. Main Outcomes and Measures: Relative risks (RRs) and 95% CIs for MCMs were estimated using log-binomial regression models, adjusting for key confounders in each cohort and meta-analyzed. Results: Periconceptional exposure to second-line noninsulin ADMs differed between countries (32, 295, and 73 per 100 000 pregnancies in the Nordics, US, and Israel, respectively), and increased over the study period, especially in the US. The standardized prevalence of MCMs was 3.7% in all infants (n = 3 514 865), 5.3% in the infants born to women with T2D (n = 51 826), and among infants exposed to sulfonylureas was 9.7% (n = 1362); DPP-4 inhibitors, 6.1% (n = 687); GLP-1 receptor agonists, 8.3% (n = 938); SGLT2 inhibitors, 7.0% (n = 335); and insulin, 7.8% (n = 5078). Compared with insulin, adjusted RRs for MCMs were 1.18 (95% CI, 0.94-1.48), 0.83 (95% CI, 0.64-1.06), 0.95 (95% CI, 0.72-1.26), and 0.98 (95% CI, 0.65-1.46) for infants exposed to sulfonylureas, DPP-4 inhibitors, GLP-1 receptor agonists, and SGLT2 inhibitors, respectively. Conclusions and Relevance: Use of second-line noninsulin ADMs is rapidly increasing for treatment of T2D and other indications, resulting in an increasing number of exposed pregnancies. Although some estimates were imprecise, results did not indicate a large increased risk of MCMs above the risk conferred by maternal T2D requiring second-line treatment. Although reassuring, confirmation from other studies is needed, and continuous monitoring will provide more precise estimates as data accumulate.

Indexed as

Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2Dipeptidyl-Peptidase IV InhibitorsSodium-Glucose Transporter 2 InhibitorsCohort StudiesFemaleGlucagon-Like Peptide-1 Receptor AgonistsHumansHypoglycemic AgentsInsulinPregnancySulfonylurea CompoundsDipeptidyl-Peptidase IV InhibitorsGlucagon-Like Peptide-1 Receptor AgonistsHypoglycemic AgentsInsulinSodium-Glucose Transporter 2 InhibitorsSulfonylurea Compounds

Identifiers

PMID38079178
PMCPMC10714281
OpenAlexW4389553854

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.