Comparative real-world outcomes of tirzepatide vs semaglutide in patients with obesity and type2 diabetes: A retrospective propensity-matched cohort study.
Abdul Qadeer, Marwah Bintay Khalid, Ridwan Syed, Samiksha Jain, Faiza Zakaria, Muhammad Huzaifa Ahmed Khan, Najam Gohar, Ashraf Shoukat, Ibrahim Mortada, Izhan Hamza, Afaq Motiwala, Muhammad Waheed Raja, Thomas Blackwell, Hani Jneid
{"title":"Comparative real-world outcomes of tirzepatide vs semaglutide in patients with obesity and type2 diabetes: A retrospective propensity-matched cohort study.","authors":"Abdul Qadeer, Marwah Bintay Khalid, Ridwan Syed, Samiksha Jain, Faiza Zakaria, Muhammad Huzaifa Ahmed Khan, Najam Gohar, Ashraf Shoukat, Ibrahim Mortada, Izhan Hamza, Afaq Motiwala, Muhammad Waheed Raja, Thomas Blackwell, Hani Jneid","doi":"10.1177/14791641261465360","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>BackgroundWith the increasing use of GLP-1 receptor agonists and dual GIP/GLP-1 agonists for managing obesity and type 2 diabetes, understanding their real-world effectiveness and safety is essential. This TriNetX analysis directly compares clinical outcomes among patients treated with tirzepatide vs semaglutide.MethodWe utilized data from the TriNetX Research Network, identifying patients aged > 40 years or with obesity (\"BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2\") and type 2 diabetes (HbA1c ≥ 6.5% or fasting glucose.≥ 125 mg/dL). Qualifying events were restricted to May 1, 2022, through November 21, 2024. We established two cohorts: one initiating tirzepatide and another semaglutide, ensuring each patient had at least three prescriptions and no prior exposure to the comparator drug or other GLP-1 receptor agonists. The index date was defined as the first co-occurrence of the obesity/diabetes criteria and the respective drug prescription. To ensure comparability, we performed 1:1 propensity matching, resulting in 47,804 patients in each cohort. Outcomes, including all-cause mortality, MACE, heart failure exacerbation, ischemic stroke/TIA, hospitalization/ED use, dementia, UTI, adverse Gastrointestinal (GI) effects, and changes in HbA1c, were assessed within a 1-year window after the index date.ResultsOur matched cohort had a mean age of 75 years, with 45% male patients and 74% identified as white. Patients treated with tirzepatide experienced a significantly lower incidence of MACE at \"(\"3.7% vs 4.1% (RR 0.918, 95% CI 0.862-0.978). All-cause mortality was also lower with tirzepatide (0.2% vs. 0.4%; Risk Ratio 0.436, 95% CI 0.338-0.562). The tirzapetide group achieved better glycemic control with a lower mean HbA1c (6.565% vs. 6.848%; p < 0.001) during the follow-up. There was no significant difference in heart failure exacerbation or UTI incidence. GI side effects were slightly less frequent in the tirzepatide cohort (9.8% vs. 10.2%; Risk Ratio 0.959, 95% CI 0.924-0.997), while hospitalization or emergency visits were comparable between the two groups.ConclusionIn this propensity matched cohort of patients with obesity and type 2 diabetes, tirzepatide demonstrated improved cardiometabolic outcomes compared to semaglutide, including lower all-cause mortality and lower HbA1c. These findings support the cardiovascular safety and efficacy of tirzapetide and highlight the need for further studies to evaluate its effectiveness in broader clinical populations.</p>","PeriodicalId":93978,"journal":{"name":"Diabetes & vascular disease research","volume":"23 3","pages":"14791641261465360"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2026-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13319829/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Diabetes & vascular disease research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14791641261465360","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/6/30 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
BackgroundWith the increasing use of GLP-1 receptor agonists and dual GIP/GLP-1 agonists for managing obesity and type 2 diabetes, understanding their real-world effectiveness and safety is essential. This TriNetX analysis directly compares clinical outcomes among patients treated with tirzepatide vs semaglutide.MethodWe utilized data from the TriNetX Research Network, identifying patients aged > 40 years or with obesity ("BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2") and type 2 diabetes (HbA1c ≥ 6.5% or fasting glucose.≥ 125 mg/dL). Qualifying events were restricted to May 1, 2022, through November 21, 2024. We established two cohorts: one initiating tirzepatide and another semaglutide, ensuring each patient had at least three prescriptions and no prior exposure to the comparator drug or other GLP-1 receptor agonists. The index date was defined as the first co-occurrence of the obesity/diabetes criteria and the respective drug prescription. To ensure comparability, we performed 1:1 propensity matching, resulting in 47,804 patients in each cohort. Outcomes, including all-cause mortality, MACE, heart failure exacerbation, ischemic stroke/TIA, hospitalization/ED use, dementia, UTI, adverse Gastrointestinal (GI) effects, and changes in HbA1c, were assessed within a 1-year window after the index date.ResultsOur matched cohort had a mean age of 75 years, with 45% male patients and 74% identified as white. Patients treated with tirzepatide experienced a significantly lower incidence of MACE at "("3.7% vs 4.1% (RR 0.918, 95% CI 0.862-0.978). All-cause mortality was also lower with tirzepatide (0.2% vs. 0.4%; Risk Ratio 0.436, 95% CI 0.338-0.562). The tirzapetide group achieved better glycemic control with a lower mean HbA1c (6.565% vs. 6.848%; p < 0.001) during the follow-up. There was no significant difference in heart failure exacerbation or UTI incidence. GI side effects were slightly less frequent in the tirzepatide cohort (9.8% vs. 10.2%; Risk Ratio 0.959, 95% CI 0.924-0.997), while hospitalization or emergency visits were comparable between the two groups.ConclusionIn this propensity matched cohort of patients with obesity and type 2 diabetes, tirzepatide demonstrated improved cardiometabolic outcomes compared to semaglutide, including lower all-cause mortality and lower HbA1c. These findings support the cardiovascular safety and efficacy of tirzapetide and highlight the need for further studies to evaluate its effectiveness in broader clinical populations.
随着GLP-1受体激动剂和双GIP/GLP-1激动剂用于治疗肥胖和2型糖尿病的使用越来越多,了解它们的实际有效性和安全性至关重要。TriNetX分析直接比较了替西帕肽与西马鲁肽治疗患者的临床结果。方法:我们利用TriNetX研究网络的数据,确定年龄在50 - 40岁之间或肥胖(“BMI≥30 kg/m2”)和2型糖尿病(HbA1c≥6.5%或空腹血糖)的患者。≥125 mg/dL)。资格赛仅限于2022年5月1日至2024年11月21日。我们建立了两个队列:一个是替西帕肽,另一个是西马鲁肽,确保每个患者至少有三个处方,并且之前没有接触过比较药物或其他GLP-1受体激动剂。指标日期定义为肥胖/糖尿病标准和各自的药物处方首次同时出现的日期。为了确保可比性,我们进行了1:1的倾向匹配,每个队列中有47,804例患者。结果,包括全因死亡率、MACE、心力衰竭加重、缺血性卒中/TIA、住院/ED使用、痴呆、UTI、不良胃肠道(GI)效应和HbA1c变化,在指标日期后的1年内进行评估。结果我们匹配的队列平均年龄为75岁,男性患者占45%,白人患者占74%。接受替西肽治疗的患者MACE发生率显著降低,为3.7% vs 4.1% (RR 0.918, 95% CI 0.862-0.978)。替西帕肽的全因死亡率也较低(0.2% vs. 0.4%;风险比0.436,95% CI 0.338-0.562)。在随访期间,替沙肽组血糖控制效果较好,平均HbA1c较低(6.565% vs. 6.848%; p < 0.001)。两组在心力衰竭加重和尿路感染发生率方面无显著差异。替西帕肽组胃肠道副作用发生率略低(9.8% vs 10.2%;风险比0.959,95% CI 0.924-0.997),两组住院或急诊次数相当。结论:在这个倾向匹配的肥胖和2型糖尿病患者队列中,与西马鲁肽相比,替西帕肽显示出改善的心脏代谢结果,包括更低的全因死亡率和更低的HbA1c。这些发现支持了替沙肽的心血管安全性和有效性,并强调需要进一步的研究来评估其在更广泛的临床人群中的有效性。