Trial reportBritish journal of clinical pharmacology2026
An experimental medicine protocol for exploring the haemodynamic effects of dual agonism at the glucagon-like peptide-1 and glucagon receptor in healthy subjects.
Trial report in British journal of clinical pharmacology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- An experimental medicine protocol for exploring the haemodynamic effects of dual agonism at the glucagon-like peptide-1 and glucagon receptor in healthy subjects.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2026Trial
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
aimsGlucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) and glucagon dual receptor agonists are in clinical development for a range of metabolic conditions, including type 2 diabetes and obesity. The cardiovascular actions at these receptors are well studied, but less is known about their combination. The aim was to explore the acute haemodynamic effects of dual agonism at the GLP-1 and glucagon receptor.
methodsHealthy male participants attended randomized, saline-controlled intravenous infusion studies using glucagon (low, 25 ng/kg/min), glucagon (high, 50 ng/kg/min), exenatide (loading dose 50 ng/min for 30 min then 25 ng/min) and exenatide:glucagon co-infusion for 120 min in Part A (glucagon dose-comparison study) and 60 min in Part B (dual-agonism study).
resultsIn Part A (n = 7, median age 21 years, interquartile range 21-32 years), glucagon (high) increased heart rate by 11 beats per minute (bpm) (95% confidence interval [CI] 4-17 bpm, P < .01). In Part B (n = 12, median age 24 years, interquartile range 22-26 years), exenatide increased heart rate by 4 bpm (95% CI 2-6 bpm, P < .001). Glucagon (low) increased heart rate by 4 bpm (95% CI 1-7 bpm, P < .001). Co-infusion of glucagon (low) and exenatide increased heart rate by 7 bpm (95% CI 4-9 bpm, P < .001) and the rate pressure product by 793 mmHg*bpm (95% CI 460-1127 mmHg*bpm, P < .001). There were no differences in cardiac output, blood pressure or heart rate variability.
conclusionsIn healthy males, exenatide and glucagon co-infusion acutely increases the rate pressure product, an indirect measure of cardiac work. This increase is driven by an increase in heart rate, rather than any change in systolic blood pressure.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
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.