Systematic review and meta-analysis finds GLP-1 receptor agonists reduce weight and improve metabolic markers in inflammatory bowel disease without worsening inflammation, suggesting favorable safety.
Introduction: This study aimed to investigate the effects of GLP-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) on weight, metabolic, and inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) activity parameters in patients with IBD. Methods: We conducted a systematic search for studies using GLP-1 RAs in IBD patients. The primary outcomes included weight (body mass index, total body weight, total weight loss percentage [TWL%], and >5 and >10 weight loss [WL]) and metabolic parameters (lipid panel and glycated hemoglobin [HbA1c]), while IBD-activity parameters and adverse events were secondary outcomes. Results: Ten studies were included (n = 7,831). Weight parameters showed reductions, with a TWL% of −7.55% (95% confidence interval [CI]: −3.99 to −11.12), with 60% achieving WL >5% (95% CI: 53 to 67) and 40% achieving WL >10% (95% CI: 33 to 47). Metabolic parameters showed improved and stabilized levels, of which LDL decreased from 94.96 mg/dL (95% CI: 79.91 to 110.00) to 90.45 mg/dL (95% CI: 81.58 to 99.33), and HbA1c, in diabetics, from 7.11% (95% CI: 6.62 to 7.59) to 6.76% (95% CI: 6.35 to 7.16). GLP-1 RAs seem not to exacerbate IBD activity, with improved fecal calprotectin from 289.46 μg/g (95% CI: 62.88 to 516.04) to 210.59 μg/g (95% CI: 75.45 to 345.73), with 11% and 6% requiring IV steroids and advanced therapy, respectively. Adverse events occurred at lower rates, with nausea/vomiting being the most common. Conclusion: Our findings suggest that GLP-1 RAs may be promising for reducing weight and improving metabolic parameters without exacerbating activity, and may be a safe option for IBD patients. However, larger randomized controlled trials are needed to assess causal inference and long-term effects.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Khasawneh et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: