Evidence mapPaperPMID 41877758Full record

ArticleBMJ medicine2026

Glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist discontinuation and risks of major adverse cardiovascular events in adults with type 2 diabetes: target trial emulation.

Yan Xie, Taeyoung Choi, Ziyad Al-Aly

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed, 1 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.

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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

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

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Yan XieClinical Epidemiology Center, Veterans Affairs Saint Louis Health Care System, St Louis, MO, USA.
Taeyoung ChoiClinical Epidemiology Center, Veterans Affairs Saint Louis Health Care System, St Louis, MO, USA.
Ziyad Al-AlyClinical Epidemiology Center, Veterans Affairs Saint Louis Health Care System, St Louis, MO, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2600-0434

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objectives: To characterise patterns of use of glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) and assess the associations between various GLP-1RA treatment scenarios and the risk of major adverse cardiovascular events. Design: Target trial emulation. Setting: Electronic healthcare databases of US Department of Veterans Affairs, 1 January 2017 to 31 December 2023. Data obtained from domains in the Veterans Affairs Corporate Data Warehouse. Participants: Veterans Affairs users with type 2 diabetes who started treatment with GLP-1RAs (n=132 551) or sulfonylureas (n=201 136), followed up for three years. Veterans Affairs users were defined as having at least two visits to Veterans Affairs and having used the Veterans Affairs outpatient pharmacy within a year before receiving treatment with GLP-1RAs or sulfonylureas. Interventions: GLP-1RAs or sulfonylureas. In the GLP-1RA arm, treatment status was reassigned every six months, generating 16 prespecified treatment strategies that varied in length of continued use, discontinuation, or interruption. Main outcome measures: Three year cumulative incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events (myocardial infarction, stroke, or all cause death). Results: The cohort included 132 551 incident users of GLP-1RAs and 201 136 incident users of sulfonylureas (defined as no prescription for GLP-1RAs or sulfonylureas within a year of the first prescription). A duration dependent association was found between the use of GLP-1RAs and the cumulative three year risk of major adverse cardiovascular events. Compared with the sulfonylurea reference group, participants who used GLP-1RAs for 0.5, 1, or 1.5 years, before discontinuing for the remainder of the three years, showed incidence risk ratios close to 1.0, with no significant reduction in the risk of major adverse cardiovascular events at three years. Compared with the sulfonylurea group, the reduction in the risk of major adverse cardiovascular events was significant in people who continued to use GLP-1RAs for 2 and 2.5 years, before discontinuing for the remainder of the three years (incidence risk ratio 0.93, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.88 to 0.98 and 0.85, 0.81 to 0.90, respectively). Participants who continued to use GLP-1RAs for the whole three year follow-up period had the most pronounced risk reduction (incidence risk ratio 0.82, 95% CI 0.78 to 0.85) compared with the sulfonylurea group. Compared with continued use of GLP-1RA, discontinuing treatment for 0.5 years was associated with an increased risk of major adverse cardiovascular events (incidence risk ratio 1.04, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.08); the risk increased progressively with a longer duration of discontinuation, with an incidence risk ratio of 1.14 (1.09 to 1.18) and 1.22 (1.16 to 1.27) for one and two years of discontinuation, respectively. Compared with continued use of GLP-1RA, 0.5 years of interruption was associated with an increased risk of major adverse cardiovascular events; longer durations of interruption were progressively associated with a higher risk of major adverse cardiovascular events, with an incidence risk ratio of 1.12 (95% CI 1.06 to 1.19) and 1.16 (1.11 to 1.22) for one and two years of interrupted use, respectively. Conclusions: The cardiovascular benefit of GLP-1RAs accumulated with continuous use, but even brief periods of discontinuations or interruptions might progressively erode and could ultimately reverse this protection, increasing the risk of cardiovascular events.

Indexed as

Diabetes mellitusEpidemiologyMyocardial infarctionPharmacology, clinical

Identifiers

PMID41877758
PMCPMC13007077

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.