Observational studyJournal of diabetes investigation2026
Retrospective comparison of the clinical effects of oral semaglutide and SGLT2 inhibitors treatment in patients with type 2 diabetes.
Observational study in Journal of diabetes investigation, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionRecent studies have demonstrated that both oral semaglutide and sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2is) have beneficial effects on glycemic and weight management as well as providing renal and cardiovascular protection. However, direct comparisons of the effects of these two drugs in clinical practice remain limited. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis study is a single-center, retrospective, observational study. Patients with type 2 diabetes who were initiated on oral semaglutide or SGLT2is and continued treatment for 6 months or more were retrospectively analyzed and compared.
resultsThe semaglutide group (84 patients) and the SGLT2is group (231 patients) showed similar, significant reductions in glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) (semaglutide: -0.88 ± 0.14%; P < 0.01, and SGLT2is: -0.86 ± 0.06%; P < 0.01, at 6 months), body weight (semaglutide: -2.58 ± 0.37 kg; P < 0.01, and SGLT2is: -2.30 ± 0.18 kg; P < 0.01, at 6 months), and fat mass (semaglutide: -2.20 ± 0.50 kg; P < 0.01, and SGLT2is: -1.93 ± 0.44 kg; P < 0.01, at 6 months), being decreased similarly and significantly in both groups. On the other hand, there was a significant reduction in skeletal muscle mass only in the SGLT2is group (semaglutide: -0.10 ± 0.30 kg; P = 0.74, and SGLT2is: -0.40 ± 0.14 kg; P < 0.01 at 6 months).
conclusionsWhile both drugs elicited comparable effects on glycemic management and body weight reduction in patients with type 2 diabetes, caution is needed when using SGLT2is in patients at potential risk for sarcopenia, as they may lead to less favorable changes in skeletal muscle mass compared to oral semaglutide.
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.