Home › Research › Drug development
The pharmacodynamics-based prophylactic benefits of GLP-1 receptor agonists and SGLT2 inhibitors on neurodegenerative diseases: evidence from a network meta-analysis
Ping-Tao Tseng, Bing-Yan Zeng, Chih-Wei Hsu, Chao-Ming Hung, Andre F Carvalho, Brendon Stubbs, Yen-Wen Chen, Tien-Yu Chen et al.. BMC medicine, 2025-04-07
Topic: Drug trials: efficacy and safety
Our analysis encompassed 22 RCTs involving 138,282 participants (mean age 64.8 years, 36.4% female). Among all investigated medications, only dapagliflozin demonstrated significant prophylactic benefits, specifically in preventing Parkinson's disease (odds ratio = 0.28, 95% confidence intervals = 0.09 to 0.93) compared to controls. Neither GLP-1 receptor agonists nor other SGLT2 inhibitors showed significant preventive effects for any of the investigated neurodegenerative conditions. Drop-out rates were comparable across all treatments. This comprehensive NMA reveals a novel and specific prophylactic effect of dapagliflozin against Parkinson's disease, representing a potential breakthrough in preventive neurology. The specificity of dapagliflozin's protective effect to Parkinson's disease might rely on its highly selective inhibition to SGLT2. These findings provide important direction for future research and could inform preventive strategies for populations at risk of Parkinson's disease. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42021252381.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Tseng, P.-T., Zeng, B.-Y., Hsu, C.-W., Hung, C.-M., Carvalho, A. F., Stubbs, B., et al. (2025). The pharmacodynamics-based prophylactic benefits of GLP-1 receptor agonists and SGLT2 inhibitors on neurodegenerative diseases: evidence from a network meta-analysis. BMC medicine. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-025-04018-w
Vancouver
Tseng P.-T, Zeng B.-Y, Hsu C.-W, Hung C.-M, Carvalho AF, Stubbs B, et al. The pharmacodynamics-based prophylactic benefits of GLP-1 receptor agonists and SGLT2 inhibitors on neurodegenerative diseases: evidence from a network meta-analysis. BMC medicine. 2025. doi:10.1186/s12916-025-04018-w. PMID: 40189519.
BibTeX
@article{tseng2025-40189519,
author = {Tseng, Ping-Tao and Zeng, Bing-Yan and Hsu, Chih-Wei and Hung, Chao-Ming and Carvalho, Andre F and Stubbs, Brendon and Chen, Yen-Wen and Chen, Tien-Yu and others},
title = {{The pharmacodynamics-based prophylactic benefits of GLP-1 receptor agonists and SGLT2 inhibitors on neurodegenerative diseases: evidence from a network meta-analysis}},
journal = {BMC medicine},
year = {2025},
doi = {10.1186/s12916-025-04018-w},
pmid = {40189519},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-025-04018-w}
}
Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. The record's author list ends in “et al.”, so not every author is named. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
Key findings
- Our analysis encompassed 22 RCTs involving 138,282 participants (mean age 64.8 years, 36.4% female).
- Among all investigated medications, only dapagliflozin demonstrated significant prophylactic benefits, specifically in preventing Parkinson's disease (odds ratio = 0.28, 95% confidence intervals = 0.09 to 0.93) compared to controls.
- Neither GLP-1 receptor agonists nor other SGLT2 inhibitors showed significant preventive effects for any of the investigated neurodegenerative conditions.
- Drop-out rates were comparable across all treatments.
- This comprehensive NMA reveals a novel and specific prophylactic effect of dapagliflozin against Parkinson's disease, representing a potential breakthrough in preventive neurology.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Treatments →
Study details
- Study designmeta-analysis
- Participants138,282
- Effect size36.4%
- Evidence strengthHigh
How this study scored 88/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal, and it is a meta-analysis pooling many studies. We have no data on journal's citation record, times cited, citations per year, impact for its field and year, cited by studies here, still being cited, senior author's track record, institution's track record, multicenter collaboration and free to read, so those were left out: it earned 49 of the 56 points we could judge it on, which is 88 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (BMC medicine) |
| Journal's citation record | — / 4 | No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Study design | 12 / 12 | A meta-analysis pooling many studies |
| Strength of evidence | 5 / 5 | Rated “high” in our summary |
| Peer-review validation | 10 / 10 | Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal. |
| How recent | 4 / 5 | 2025 — within 3 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 4 / 4 | 138,282 participants |
| Effect reported | 2 / 3 | Effect reported as a number, without an interval or test |
| Studied in people | 3 / 3 | Studied in people (participant count stated) |
| Randomized / blinded | 0 / 2 | A review of other studies — randomization is not credited here |
| Times cited | — / 7 | No citation count (not found in OpenAlex) — left out of this score |
| Citations per year | — / 5 | No citation count or no year — left out of this score |
| Impact for its field and year | — / 6 | No field-weighted citation impact (OpenAlex has none yet) — left out of this score |
| Cited by studies here | — / 6 | Not yet checked against this library's citation graph — left out of this score |
| Still being cited | — / 4 | No yearly citation counts — left out of this score |
| Senior author's track record | — / 4 | Senior author's record not available — left out of this score |
| Institution's track record | — / 3 | No institution listed in OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Multicenter collaboration | — / 3 | Institutions not listed — left out of this score |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 40189519) |
| Free to read | — / 2 | Access not recorded — left out of this score |
| Points | 49 / 56 | Scored on 10 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 49 of the 56 points we could judge it on is 88 out of 100. |
| Total | 88 / 100 | — |
What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →
Read the original
Free copy unknown: no free-copy check has an answer for this record yet. That does not mean it is paywalled.
Related
Studies in the library that share something with this one. The line above each title says what.
Related studies in Drug development
Also tagged “glp-1”
285 studies in the library carry the topic tag “glp-1”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 285 tagged studies.